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

 
DevSecOps: The Answer to the Cloud Security Skills Gap
Lamont Orange, Chief Information Security Officer at Netskope,  11/15/2019
Attackers' Costs Increasing as Businesses Focus on Security
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  11/15/2019
Human Nature vs. AI: A False Dichotomy?
John McClurg, Sr. VP & CISO, BlackBerry,  11/18/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: -when I told you that our cyber-defense was from another age
Current Issue
Navigating the Deluge of Security Data
In this Tech Digest, Dark Reading shares the experiences of some top security practitioners as they navigate volumes of security data. We examine some examples of how enterprises can cull this data to find the clues they need.
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-2011-3350
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-19
masqmail 0.2.21 through 0.2.30 improperly calls seteuid() in src/log.c and src/masqmail.c that results in improper privilege dropping.
CVE-2011-3352
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-19
Zikula 1.3.0 build #3168 and probably prior has XSS flaw due to improper sanitization of the 'themename' parameter by setting default, modifying and deleting themes. A remote attacker with Zikula administrator privilege could use this flaw to execute arbitrary HTML or web script code in the context ...
CVE-2011-3349
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-19
lightdm before 0.9.6 writes in .dmrc and Xauthority files using root permissions while the files are in user controlled folders. A local user can overwrite root-owned files via a symlink, which can allow possible privilege escalation.
CVE-2019-10080
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-19
The XMLFileLookupService in NiFi versions 1.3.0 to 1.9.2 allowed trusted users to inadvertently configure a potentially malicious XML file. The XML file has the ability to make external calls to services (via XXE) and reveal information such as the versions of Java, Jersey, and Apache that the NiFI ...
CVE-2019-10083
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-19
When updating a Process Group via the API in NiFi versions 1.3.0 to 1.9.2, the response to the request includes all of its contents (at the top most level, not recursively). The response included details about processors and controller services which the user may not have had read access to.