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
8/21/2018
09:00 AM
100%
0%

7 Serious IoT Vulnerabilities

A growing number of employees have various IoT devices in their homes - where they're also connecting to an enterprise network to do their work. And that means significant threats loom.
Previous
1 of 8
Next

The security of Internet of Things (IoT) devices, especially those intended for consumer use, tends to fall on a spectrum between "serious concern" and "industry joke." Yet the fact is that a growing number of employees have various IoT devices in their homes — where they also could be connecting to an enterprise network to do their work. And that means significant threats loom, both to and through the IoT.

Some threats attack the unique nature of IoT devices. Others take aim at the application ecosystem surrounding them. Still others are the result of configuration errors that stem from  user inexperience or system limitation. In any case, each threat can lead to loss of privacy, loss of control, or recruitment of the devices into a network controlled by someone other than the owner.

Industrial IoT devices are subject to the same ills. When considered alongside the IoT systems owned by employees, they represent a second major threat surface.

So how do you protect against this dual front of security risks? Each vulnerability has a particular remediation, but there's one overarching them: Treat IoT devices and systems like the computers they are. When the same expectations and discipline are applied to the IoT as to commercial computing systems, vulnerabilities begin to be closed.

Have you built an IoT system for a residence? How did you secure the devices? Are you dealing with IoT systems at your employees' homes? How much responsibility for security do you take? Share your thoughts in the comments, below.

(Image: metamorworks)

Learn from the industry's most knowledgeable CISOs and IT security experts in a setting that is conducive to interaction and conversation. Early bird rate ends August 31. Click for more info

 

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

Previous
1 of 8
Next
Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
A96.uk
67%
33%
A96.uk,
User Rank: Apprentice
8/22/2018 | 2:44:30 AM
Securing IoT
We don't build IoT with software security anymore, unless we are stupid.

IoT gateways/hubs are the only part that talk to the Internet via TCP/UDP/IP normally with MQTT over HTTPS.

Not only do we use Internet security poor models but also hardware security in the form of SAML11 & Atmel 508a/608a. These chipsets allow public key cryptography in hardware.

We would IDIOT's design a IoT system with poor software security like LoRaWAN.

This system can be cloned on TTN. It uses fixed symmetric keys for each device that they need to store inb a database. IDIOT's designed it.

For education please read up on FIDO/FIOD2 for U2F security tokens for humans also.

Security has been solved, time to hand the keys to the machine.

 

https://www.switchedonscotland.com/

https://a96.uk/

 

 

WAKE UP SHEEP

 
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
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-2015-3154
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-27
CRLF injection vulnerability in Zend\Mail (Zend_Mail) in Zend Framework before 1.12.12, 2.x before 2.3.8, and 2.4.x before 2.4.1 allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary HTTP headers and conduct HTTP response splitting attacks via CRLF sequences in the header of an email.
CVE-2019-17190
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-27
A Local Privilege Escalation issue was discovered in Avast Secure Browser 76.0.1659.101. The vulnerability is due to an insecure ACL set by the AvastBrowserUpdate.exe (which is running as NT AUTHORITY\SYSTEM) when AvastSecureBrowser.exe checks for new updates. When the update check is triggered, the...
CVE-2014-8161
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-27
PostgreSQL before 9.0.19, 9.1.x before 9.1.15, 9.2.x before 9.2.10, 9.3.x before 9.3.6, and 9.4.x before 9.4.1 allows remote authenticated users to obtain sensitive column values by triggering constraint violation and then reading the error message.
CVE-2014-9481
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-27
The Scribunto extension for MediaWiki allows remote attackers to obtain the rollback token and possibly other sensitive information via a crafted module, related to unstripping special page HTML.
CVE-2015-0241
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-27
The to_char function in PostgreSQL before 9.0.19, 9.1.x before 9.1.15, 9.2.x before 9.2.10, 9.3.x before 9.3.6, and 9.4.x before 9.4.1 allows remote authenticated users to cause a denial of service (crash) or possibly execute arbitrary code via a (1) large number of digits when processing a numeric ...