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

7/16/2018
04:50 PM
Connect Directly
Twitter
LinkedIn
Google+
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Less Than Half of Cyberattacks Detected via Antivirus: SANS

Companies are buying next-gen antivirus and fileless attack detection tools but few have the resources to use them, researchers report.

Businesses are investing in more advanced endpoint security tools but don't have the means to properly implement and use them, according to a new report from the SANS Institute.

The SANS 2018 Survey on Endpoint Protection and Response polled 277 IT professionals on endpoint security concerns and practices. In this year's survey, 42% of respondents reported endpoint exploits, down from 53% in 2017. However, the number of those who didn't know they had been breached jumped from 10% in 2017 to 20% in 2018.

Traditional tools are no longer sufficient to detect cyberattacks, the data shows: Antivirus systems only detected endpoint compromise 47% of the time; other attacks were caught through automated SIEM alerts (32%) and endpoint detection and response platforms (26%).

Most endpoint attacks are intended to exploit users. More than 50% of respondents reported Web drive-by incidents, 53% pointed to social engineering and phishing attacks, and half cited ransomware. Credential theft was used in 40% of compromises reported, researchers state.

The majority (84%) of endpoint breaches involve more than one device, experts report. Desktops and laptops are still the top devices of concern, but attackers are also compromising server endpoints, cloud-based endpoints, SCADA, and other industrial IoT devices. Cloud-based endpoints are increasingly popular, going from just over 40% in 2017 to 60% in 2018.

Given the commonality and effectiveness of user-targeted attacks, it's worth noting that detection technologies designed to look at user and system behavior, or provide context awareness, were less involved in detecting breaches. Only 23% of breaches were found with attack behavior-modeling and only 11% were detected with behavior analytics.

Businesses aren't using these technologies as often because they lack the means, SANS reports. Many IT and security pros report investing in next-gen capabilities but not installing them. For example, half have acquired next-gen AV tools but 37% have not implemented them. Forty-nine percent have fileless attack detection tools but 38% haven't implemented the tech.

When breaches do occur it seems many businesses can trace them to the source. Nearly 80% of respondents report they can tie a user to endpoints and servers at least half the time (34% always, 45% at least half), which adds an identity when making decisions about user behavior.

Data collection makes a major difference in data breach remediation, but  organizations don't always have access to the data they needed. Most (84%) respondents want more network access and user data, 74% want more network security data from firewall/IPS/unified threat management systems, and 69% want better network traffic analysis.

Related Content:

 

 

 

Black Hat USA returns to Las Vegas with hands-on technical Trainings, cutting-edge Briefings, Arsenal open-source tool demonstrations, top-tier security solutions and service providers in the Business Hall. Click for information on the conference and to register.

Kelly Sheridan is the Staff Editor at Dark Reading, where she focuses on cybersecurity news and analysis. She is a business technology journalist who previously reported for InformationWeek, where she covered Microsoft, and Insurance & Technology, where she covered financial ... View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
7 Tips for Infosec Pros Considering A Lateral Career Move
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  1/21/2020
For Mismanaged SOCs, The Price Is Not Right
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  1/22/2020
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
IT 2020: A Look Ahead
Are you ready for the critical changes that will occur in 2020? We've compiled editor insights from the best of our network (Dark Reading, Data Center Knowledge, InformationWeek, ITPro Today and Network Computing) to deliver to you a look at the trends, technologies, and threats that are emerging in the coming year. Download it today!
Flash Poll
How Enterprises are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
How Enterprises are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
Organizations have invested in a sweeping array of security technologies to address challenges associated with the growing number of cybersecurity attacks. However, the complexity involved in managing these technologies is emerging as a major problem. Read this report to find out what your peers biggest security challenges are and the technologies they are using to address them.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-8003
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-27
A double-free vulnerability in vrend_renderer.c in virglrenderer through 0.8.1 allows attackers to cause a denial of service by triggering texture allocation failure, because vrend_renderer_resource_allocated_texture is not an appropriate place for a free.
CVE-2019-20427
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-27
In the Lustre file system before 2.12.3, the ptlrpc module has a buffer overflow and panic, and possibly remote code execution, due to the lack of validation for specific fields of packets sent by a client. Interaction between req_capsule_get_size and tgt_brw_write leads to a tgt_shortio2pages integ...
CVE-2019-20428
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-27
In the Lustre file system before 2.12.3, the ptlrpc module has an out-of-bounds read and panic due to the lack of validation for specific fields of packets sent by a client. The ldl_request_cancel function mishandles a large lock_count parameter.
CVE-2019-20429
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-27
In the Lustre file system before 2.12.3, the ptlrpc module has an out-of-bounds read and panic (via a modified lm_bufcount field) due to the lack of validation for specific fields of packets sent by a client. This is caused by interaction between sptlrpc_svc_unwrap_request and lustre_msg_hdr_size_v2...
CVE-2019-20430
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-27
In the Lustre file system before 2.12.3, the mdt module has an LBUG panic (via a large MDT Body eadatasize field) due to the lack of validation for specific fields of packets sent by a client.