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.

IoT/Embedded Security

// // //
8/31/2017
04:15 PM
Terry Young
Terry Young
News Analysis-Security Now

Big IoT Security Benefits From Service Providers Thinking Small

It doesn't take many bad devices to wreck a network. Concentrating on a small number of miscreants can reap huge benefits for service providers.

Industry discussions about the Internet of Things (IoT) usually quote big numbers -- e.g., 30 billion connected devices by 2022 and a global IoT market valued at $14.4 trillion. For service providers, there is an urgent need to scale up, meet those new network requirements, and capture their share of the IoT market opportunity.

But big-scale strategies alone don't work when applied to IoT security. Mobile network operators in the IoT space, such as Telenor Connexion, have already identified that a very small number of misbehaving devices (less than 0.01 percent of the base) can create a signaling storm, resulting in significant congestion that can cascade to other networks. Hackers deploy the same tactics because, unlike service providers, hacker economics do not depend on large-scale success. Malicious actors only need a few successful infections to be economically viable or to disrupt critical service.

Hacker infrastructure investment and cost barriers are quite low. Bad actors use inexpensive, mass-scale techniques (e.g., email, automated bots, off-the-shelf exploit kits) to canvass large quantities of networked devices and locate vulnerable targets, but only need to infect a small number of devices or network elements (or even just one) in the right location or network to be economically viable or launch a successful network attack.

Finding those relatively "few" infected devices, and the malicious traffic associated with them, needs to be the primary objective of service provider network security strategies.

Hunting for "the few" may seem counterintuitive to service providers, where high performance and throughput are critical criteria in infrastructure equipment decisions. But a successful security posture for billions of IoT devices requires just that -- accurate and rapid identification of that small percentage of the total traffic attempting to infect devices, and of those devices already infected. Higher performance, without a truly effective threat prevention approach, simply gives malware a high-speed "free ride." And malware doesn't need a high "adoption rate" to create damage.

In a published example, researchers demonstrated that malware infection rates of less than 0.1 percent of the population focused on specific 911 centers can severely impair the availability of critical emergency services. In the research model, the malware caused infected devices to generate "false" calls to the 911 center. The added "false" calls, which require a longer response time, tie up call center resources and effectively make the service unavailable for other genuine emergency calls.

So how can service providers locate and stop the "few" when there will be billions of devices connecting to their networks -- most of which they have little control over? Endpoint protection alone (such as anti-malware software on cellphones) is insufficient -- most mobile subscribers simply won't use it, and it's not feasible for the majority of IoT devices.

A network-based prevention program is a more realistic solution. Service providers must be able to "see" and inspect their traffic to determine whether it is malicious and identify already-infected devices on their network to prevent hacker success. By thinking small -- that is, focusing on the minor percentage of traffic that is malicious, or identifying infected devices -- can service providers offer their subscribers and IoT providers a safe network free from infected devices and security breaches.

Related posts:

Terry Young is Senior Manager of Service Provider Product Marketing at Palo Alto Networks, where she is responsible for developing programming to communicate the business value of security for mobile network operators and other service providers.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Edge-DRsplash-10-edge-articles
I Smell a RAT! New Cybersecurity Threats for the Crypto Industry
David Trepp, Partner, IT Assurance with accounting and advisory firm BPM LLP,  7/9/2021
News
Attacks on Kaseya Servers Led to Ransomware in Less Than 2 Hours
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  7/7/2021
Commentary
It's in the Game (but It Shouldn't Be)
Tal Memran, Cybersecurity Expert, CYE,  7/9/2021
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
How Machine Learning, AI & Deep Learning Improve Cybersecurity
Machine intelligence is influencing all aspects of cybersecurity. Organizations are implementing AI-based security to analyze event data using ML models that identify attack patterns and increase automation. Before security teams can take advantage of AI and ML tools, they need to know what is possible. This report covers: -How to assess the vendor's AI/ML claims -Defining success criteria for AI/ML implementations -Challenges when implementing AI
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2022-42003
PUBLISHED: 2022-10-02
In FasterXML jackson-databind before 2.14.0-rc1, resource exhaustion can occur because of a lack of a check in primitive value deserializers to avoid deep wrapper array nesting, when the UNWRAP_SINGLE_VALUE_ARRAYS feature is enabled.
CVE-2022-42004
PUBLISHED: 2022-10-02
In FasterXML jackson-databind before 2.13.4, resource exhaustion can occur because of a lack of a check in BeanDeserializer._deserializeFromArray to prevent use of deeply nested arrays. An application is vulnerable only with certain customized choices for deserialization.
CVE-2022-42002
PUBLISHED: 2022-10-01
SonicJS through 0.6.0 allows file overwrite. It has the following mutations that are used for updating files: fileCreate and fileUpdate. Both of these mutations can be called without any authentication to overwrite any files on a SonicJS application, leading to Arbitrary File Write and Delete.
CVE-2022-39268
PUBLISHED: 2022-09-30
### Impact In a CSRF attack, an innocent end user is tricked by an attacker into submitting a web request that they did not intend. This may cause actions to be performed on the website that can include inadvertent client or server data leakage, change of session state, or manipulation of an end use...
CVE-2022-34428
PUBLISHED: 2022-09-30
Dell Hybrid Client prior to version 1.8 contains a Regular Expression Denial of Service Vulnerability in the UI. An adversary with WMS group admin access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to temporary denial-of-service.