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

Most Security Pros Expect to Suffer Cyberattacks via Unsecured IoT

A new report shows the majority of security professionals believe within the next two years they will be victims of DDoS and other attacks due to unsecured IoT devices.

IT security professionals expect their companies' wireless printers to wireless thermostats and other IoT devices in the next two years to rebel against them in a big way as cyber attackers take advantage of vulnerabilities in the software and devices, according to a report released today by the Ponemon Institute.

The Internet of Things (IoT): A New Era of Third Party Risk report, which surveyed 553 risk management professionals, found that 94% of these security pros believe that in the next two years unsecured IoT devices and IoT applications will likely lead to a catastrophic event; data loss or theft (78%); DDoS attack (76%); and a cyberattack (76%).

As a result, companies need to track third-party IoT devices and IoT software connecting to their network and provide a way to centrally monitor their activities, according to Larry Ponemon, chairman and founder of the Ponemon Institute and the report's author, and Charlie Miller, senior vice president of Shared Assessments, which sponsored the report.

But less than half of the survey respondents say they monitor the risk of IoT devices used in the workplace. 

Source: Ponemon Institute

Ponemon Institute

[Charts Source: Ponemon Institute and The Santa Fe Group, Shared Assessments Program] 

As for holding IoT third-party vendors accountable, Miller suggests it should be addressed in the vendor contract. But he admits that isn't easy: "Many rely on a contractual relationship for security. It is easy to say, but can be difficult to manage."

Ponemon suggests CISOs take several steps toward managing the security risks around IoT third-party devices and software.

"Currently, there are no standards, or processes, or checklists to reduce the risk of IoT," Ponemon says. "One of the first steps is around governance and figuring out who should own the responsibility of unsecured IoT devices and working with the third parties who bring in IoT."

The second step is to take inventory of all IoT tools and relationships that have business risks - like wireless printers or wireless security cameras - and establish IoT categories such as security that would include security cameras, rather than every camera.

And lastly, CISOs should consider creating specific policies and procedures for each category of IoT, Ponemon says. An IoT refrigerator poses a different security risk than an IoT printer, for example.

Ponemon Institute

[Charts Source: Ponemon Institute and The Santa Fe Group, Shared Assessments Program] 

The report also shows that a vast majority of companies use traditional network firewalls and anti-malware software to guard their network from unsecured IoT devices and IoT applications:

Ponemon Institute

[Charts Source: Ponemon Institute and The Santa Fe Group, Shared Assessments Program] 

Ponemon says while protecting the enterprise running IoT devices and applications, organizations also must avoid making security so difficult that it stops innovation or interferes with operations. 

Related Content:

Dawn Kawamoto is an Associate Editor for Dark Reading, where she covers cybersecurity news and trends. She is an award-winning journalist who has written and edited technology, management, leadership, career, finance, and innovation stories for such publications as CNET's ... View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Navigating Security in the Cloud
Diya Jolly, Chief Product Officer, Okta,  12/4/2019
SOC 2s & Third-Party Assessments: How to Prevent Them from Being Used in a Data Breach Lawsuit
Beth Burgin Waller, Chair, Cybersecurity & Data Privacy Practice , Woods Rogers PLC,  12/5/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
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-2019-19645
PUBLISHED: 2019-12-09
alter.c in SQLite through 3.30.1 allows attackers to trigger infinite recursion via certain types of self-referential views in conjunction with ALTER TABLE statements.
CVE-2019-19678
PUBLISHED: 2019-12-09
In "Xray Test Management for Jira" prior to version 3.5.5, remote authenticated attackers can cause XSS in the generic field entry point via the Generic Test Definition field of a new Generic Test issue.
CVE-2019-19679
PUBLISHED: 2019-12-09
In "Xray Test Management for Jira" prior to version 3.5.5, remote authenticated attackers can cause XSS in the Pre-Condition Summary entry point via the summary field of a Create Pre-Condition action for a new Test Issue.
CVE-2019-19647
PUBLISHED: 2019-12-09
radare2 through 4.0.0 lacks validation of the content variable in the function r_asm_pseudo_incbin at libr/asm/asm.c, ultimately leading to an arbitrary write. This allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (application crash) or possibly have unspecified other impact via crafted input.
CVE-2019-19648
PUBLISHED: 2019-12-09
In the macho_parse_file functionality in macho/macho.c of YARA 3.11.0, command_size may be inconsistent with the real size. A specially crafted MachO file can cause an out-of-bounds memory access, resulting in Denial of Service (application crash) or potential code execution.