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.

Application Security //

Database Security

6/9/2016
02:45 PM
Connect Directly
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Cloud Apps Just As Secure As On-Premise Apps, Say InfoSec Pros

Unfortunately, 75% of cloud apps will still fall afoul of the new EU General Data Protection Regulation, according to new studies.

Once studiously avoided by enterprises because of security and compliance concerns, cloud applications have now gained the trust of most infosec professionals, according to a new survey by Bitglass. However, cloud apps' security and compliance concerns are far from over -- the lion's share of them are unprepared for new legislation coming out of Europe, according to a new study by Netskope. 

Black Hat USA returns to the fabulous Mandalay Bay in Las Vegas, Nevada July 30 through Aug. 4, 2016. Click for information on the conference schedule and to register.

Fifty-two percent of respondents to the Bitglass survey of 2,200 information security professionals said they believe cloud apps are at least as secure as on-premise apps (17% say more secure; 35% as secure). Enterprise confidence in cloud apps has increased so much that 61% of respondents have existing or planned Office 365 deployments and 26% have existing or planned Google Apps deployments.

But research from Netskope shows the number of enterprises that found malware in their sanctioned cloud apps nearly tripled from Q4 to Q1 (from 4.1- to 11%), including "many" instances of ransomware; and 73.5% of the threats were considered "high" severity.

Further, three-quarters of cloud apps are not ready to comply with the European Union's new General Data Protection Directive, according to Netskope.  

Our early findings indicate that 75.4 percent of all cloud apps are not ready for the GDPR, meaning they lack proper geography, security, and privacy controls as well as industry certifications to be considered ready to comply with the requirements of GDPR. When assessing cloud apps, enterprises will increasingly have to do the due diligence on cloud apps in use by employees and compensate for the lack of native controls.

The GDPR, which will go into effect in 2018, places rigorous demands on cloud application providers and the organizations that use them. For example, the legislation requires that enterprises can organizations can guarantee that EU citizens' personally identifiable information is kept in datacenters that reside within EU borders. Plus, it requires that EU citizen data be subject to a variety of other security and privacy protections and policies.

Maybe respondents to the Bitglass survey had GDPR on the brain when they were answering questions, because when identifying their "most-desired capabilities" creating data boundaries and setting security policies across multiple cloud apps were top of the wishlist.

Unfortunately, many cloud apps are falling short on these native capabilities, which means that organizations will need to eschew cloud services or find add-on solutions.

One to three respondents to the Bitglass survey state that external sharing is the biggest threat to cloud apps security. Netskope found a sizeable portion -- 26% -- of sanctioned enterprise cloud apps were shared externally; some even publicly.  

Related Content:

 

Sara Peters is Senior Editor at Dark Reading and formerly the editor-in-chief of Enterprise Efficiency. Prior that she was senior editor for the Computer Security Institute, writing and speaking about virtualization, identity management, cybersecurity law, and a myriad ... View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Why Cyber-Risk Is a C-Suite Issue
Marc Wilczek, Digital Strategist & CIO Advisor,  11/12/2019
Black Hat Q&A: Hacking a '90s Sports Car
Black Hat Staff, ,  11/7/2019
The Cold Truth about Cyber Insurance
Chris Kennedy, CISO & VP Customer Success, AttackIQ,  11/7/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Current Issue
7 Threats & Disruptive Forces Changing the Face of Cybersecurity
This Dark Reading Tech Digest gives an in-depth look at the biggest emerging threats and disruptive forces that are changing the face of cybersecurity today.
Flash Poll
Rethinking Enterprise Data Defense
Rethinking Enterprise Data Defense
Frustrated with recurring intrusions and breaches, cybersecurity professionals are questioning some of the industrys conventional wisdom. Heres a look at what theyre thinking about.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-16863
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-14
STMicroelectronics ST33TPHF2ESPI TPM devices before 2019-09-12 allow attackers to extract the ECDSA private key via a side-channel timing attack because ECDSA scalar multiplication is mishandled, aka TPM-FAIL.
CVE-2019-18949
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-14
SnowHaze before 2.6.6 is sometimes too late to honor a per-site JavaScript blocking setting, which leads to unintended JavaScript execution via a chain of webpage redirections targeted to the user's browser configuration.
CVE-2011-1930
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-14
In klibc 1.5.20 and 1.5.21, the DHCP options written by ipconfig to /tmp/net-$DEVICE.conf are not properly escaped. This may allow a remote attacker to send a specially crafted DHCP reply which could execute arbitrary code with the privileges of any process which sources DHCP options.
CVE-2011-1145
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-14
The SQLDriverConnect() function in unixODBC before 2.2.14p2 have a possible buffer overflow condition when specifying a large value for SAVEFILE parameter in the connection string.
CVE-2011-1488
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-14
A memory leak in rsyslog before 5.7.6 was found in the way deamon processed log messages are logged when $RepeatedMsgReduction was enabled. A local attacker could use this flaw to cause a denial of the rsyslogd daemon service by crashing the service via a sequence of repeated log messages sent withi...