Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Endpoint

IT Pros Worried About IoT But Not Prepared to Secure It

Few organizations have a security policy in place for Internet of Things devices, new survey shows.

Some 85% of IT professionals believe their country will suffer a major critical infrastructure cyberattack in the next five years and 64% say they're more concerned this year than last about connected device threats in their organizations - and slightly fewer are actually doing anything about Internet of Things security.

The 2018 Internet of Evil Things Report, sponsored by Pwnie Express, surveyed more than 700 IT professionals who took the online survey via SurveyMonkey. Those responding have felt the effects of cybercrime, with more than 60% saying that their organization was hit by malware last year.

When it comes to future worries, 80% listed connected devices, from industrial control to employee wearables, as their major source of concern. But less than half say that they have technology in place to monitor and secure them. "Security has been traditional devices in traditional implementations, though BYOD stretched it a bit. But now, things that might have been air-gapped are being exposed to the Internet," says Todd DeSisto, CEO of Pwnie Express.

"It's a non-traditional solution stack. It's not one hardware or software company; there aren't standards, there are proprietary protocols, and the life-cycles are much different," DeSisto explains, noting that many devices may be in place for decades rather than the three- to five years of a usual IT replacement cycle. And when the time for replacement rolls around, almost two-thirds of security professionals are often left out of the process.

"That doesn't make sense," he says.

Indeed, according to the report, 75% of organizations have a security policy in place for purchasing traditional IT devices, and nearly half have some sort of policy governing BYOD for the enterprise. When it comes to IoT devices, though, that number drops to one-third or less, depending on the nature of the connected device.

The responsibility for the security of all these devices falls squarely on the shoulders of IT security, according to the respondents, with 61% saying that the burden rests with professionals like themselves. Only 13% say that it should be up to manufacturers to make sure that the devices they design and sell should be secure from vulnerability to attack.

Related Content:

Curtis Franklin Jr. is Senior Editor at Dark Reading. In this role he focuses on product and technology coverage for the publication. In addition he works on audio and video programming for Dark Reading and contributes to activities at Interop ITX, Black Hat, INsecurity, and ... View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
REISEN1955
50%
50%
REISEN1955,
User Rank: Ninja
5/17/2018 | 8:09:19 AM
The Numbers!!!
What we have here is a failure to communicate --- so said Strother Martin.   Actually a failure of sheer numbers as they are literally THOUSANDS OF DIFFERENT IoT devices around any network and I am including my wireless internal defibulator.   A recent story told of hacking a network through an IoT thermostat in a fish tank of all things and how IT can address THAT endpoint is a miracle.  We can secure alot of stuff and generally do but the bulk of these odd, strange devices works against success.  Multiple layers and multiple firewalls is about the best i can come up with right now - 2 layer identification too.  
Windows 10 Migration: Getting It Right
Kevin Alexandra, Principal Solutions Engineer at BeyondTrust,  5/15/2019
Artist Uses Malware in Installation
Dark Reading Staff 5/17/2019
Baltimore Ransomware Attack Takes Strange Twist
Kelly Jackson Higgins, Executive Editor at Dark Reading,  5/14/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: This comment is waiting for review by our moderators.
Current Issue
Building and Managing an IT Security Operations Program
As cyber threats grow, many organizations are building security operations centers (SOCs) to improve their defenses. In this Tech Digest you will learn tips on how to get the most out of a SOC in your organization - and what to do if you can't afford to build one.
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-12184
PUBLISHED: 2019-05-19
There is XSS in browser/components/MarkdownPreview.js in BoostIO Boostnote 0.11.15 via a label named flowchart, sequence, gallery, or chart, as demonstrated by a crafted SRC attribute of an IFRAME element, a different vulnerability than CVE-2019-12136.
CVE-2019-12173
PUBLISHED: 2019-05-18
MacDown 0.7.1 (870) allows remote code execution via a file:\\\ URI, with a .app pathname, in the HREF attribute of an A element. This is different from CVE-2019-12138.
CVE-2019-12172
PUBLISHED: 2019-05-17
Typora 0.9.9.21.1 (1913) allows arbitrary code execution via a modified file: URL syntax in the HREF attribute of an AREA element, as demonstrated by file:\\\ on macOS or Linux, or file://C| on Windows. This is different from CVE-2019-12137.
CVE-2019-12168
PUBLISHED: 2019-05-17
Four-Faith Wireless Mobile Router F3x24 v1.0 devices allow remote code execution via the Command Shell (aka Administration > Commands) screen.
CVE-2019-12170
PUBLISHED: 2019-05-17
ATutor through 2.2.4 is vulnerable to arbitrary file uploads via the mods/_core/backups/upload.php (aka backup) component. This may result in remote command execution. An attacker can use the instructor account to fully compromise the system using a crafted backup ZIP archive. This will allow for PH...