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
2/10/2020
11:40 AM
Connect Directly
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

6 Factors That Raise the Stakes for IoT Security

Developments that exacerbate the risk and complicate making Internet of Things devices more secure.
Previous
1 of 7
Next


The enterprise is finally coming to realize 
just how risky Internet of Things (IoT) devices are to their security postures. Whether it comes from unencrypted communication with devices, hard-coded passwords, vulnerability-ridden unmanaged devices, or insecure configurations, a huge flaw always seems to be lurking around the corner with regard to IoT deployments.
 
It's only natural for new-ish technology. IoT is following a common progression in security maturation that's happened so many times in everything from Wi-Fi to Web apps.
 
However, as IoT progresses, a number of factors add a greater depth to the IoT problem. Some up the ante considerably by putting way more at risk -- either in consequence or cost -- when an IoT device is compromised. Other factors expand the risk surface by exacerbating already extant vulnerabilities in the IoT ecosystem.
 
Either way, read on for some of the most common factors that raise the stakes for IoT and make the problem more acute within the enterprise.

 

Ericka Chickowski specializes in coverage of information technology and business innovation. She has focused on information security for the better part of a decade and regularly writes about the security industry as a contributor to Dark Reading.  View Full Bio
 

Recommended Reading:

Previous
1 of 7
Next
Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
DavidS950U01
50%
50%
DavidS950U01,
User Rank: Apprentice
3/2/2020 | 1:08:42 AM
Question about IoT and smart communities; government duty to regulate and protect.
The article names deployments that could be attcked, such as factories, hospitals or body-connected IoT devices, and facilities. I am curious about the negative potentials presented in the smart communities scenarios. What are the dangers? Paralysis of IoT-dependent traffic control and surveillance, for example? And if not paralysis, what about misdirection (a la Stuxnet)?

Next: it's nice that government regulations will role out in 2020--but where? In this country? With the vaunted repeal of 1200 (and counting) "job-killing" regulations that were originally created to protect public health and safety, exactly which competent agency employees remain to do the regulating? (Think State Department, EPA, CDC, etc.) I think it prudent to write to our elected representatives and make the case for, let's say, following the European example.
When It Comes To Security Tools, More Isn't More
Lamont Orange, Chief Information Security Officer at Netskope,  1/11/2021
US Capitol Attack a Wake-up Call for the Integration of Physical & IT Security
Seth Rosenblatt, Contributing Writer,  1/11/2021
IoT Vendor Ubiquiti Suffers Data Breach
Dark Reading Staff 1/11/2021
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
2020: The Year in Security
Download this Tech Digest for a look at the biggest security stories that - so far - have shaped a very strange and stressful year.
Flash Poll
Assessing Cybersecurity Risk in Today's Enterprises
Assessing Cybersecurity Risk in Today's Enterprises
COVID-19 has created a new IT paradigm in the enterprise -- and a new level of cybersecurity risk. This report offers a look at how enterprises are assessing and managing cyber-risk under the new normal.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-25533
PUBLISHED: 2021-01-15
An issue was discovered in Malwarebytes before 4.0 on macOS. A malicious application was able to perform a privileged action within the Malwarebytes launch daemon. The privileged service improperly validated XPC connections by relying on the PID instead of the audit token. An attacker can construct ...
CVE-2021-3162
PUBLISHED: 2021-01-15
Docker Desktop Community before 2.5.0.0 on macOS mishandles certificate checking, leading to local privilege escalation.
CVE-2021-21242
PUBLISHED: 2021-01-15
OneDev is an all-in-one devops platform. In OneDev before version 4.0.3, there is a critical vulnerability which can lead to pre-auth remote code execution. AttachmentUploadServlet deserializes untrusted data from the `Attachment-Support` header. This Servlet does not enforce any authentication or a...
CVE-2021-21245
PUBLISHED: 2021-01-15
OneDev is an all-in-one devops platform. In OneDev before version 4.0.3, AttachmentUploadServlet also saves user controlled data (`request.getInputStream()`) to a user specified location (`request.getHeader("File-Name")`). This issue may lead to arbitrary file upload which can be used to u...
CVE-2021-21246
PUBLISHED: 2021-01-15
OneDev is an all-in-one devops platform. In OneDev before version 4.0.3, the REST UserResource endpoint performs a security check to make sure that only administrators can list user details. However for the `/users/` endpoint there are no security checks enforced so it is possible to retrieve ar...