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.

Comments
Michaels Data Breach Response: 7 Facts
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Duane T
50%
50%
Duane T,
User Rank: Apprentice
4/23/2014 | 12:01:44 PM
Irony of sharing
While the point made about sharing is valid, the article also states that the malware had never been seen before. Unfortunately, you can't share what you don't know.

On the other hand, there was little information on any lessons about how the undetected malware was found or identified. The follow up on that is that once the malware was found, was that information shared, and how widely is that information available to help other firms avoid a similar breach.

 
Drew Conry-Murray
50%
50%
Drew Conry-Murray,
User Rank: Ninja
4/23/2014 | 10:39:37 AM
Re: Should Michaels have done more?
Presumably Michael's was required to meet PCI standards, which means regular vulnerability assessments were conducted and IDS/IPS systems were in place. But as the article notes, we'll get more bang for the buck by overhauling the payment card system itself rather than trying to get thousands and thousands of retailers to run rock-solid security programs.
Marilyn Cohodas
50%
50%
Marilyn Cohodas,
User Rank: Strategist
4/23/2014 | 8:44:49 AM
Re: Should Michaels have done more?
Great questions. I hope the answers will be brought to light overtime & help provide a blueprint for the future.. We know from the Target breach that were both ommissions and commissions of best security practices  (See Be Careful Beating Up Target). But the retail industry can learn a lot from the post mortems. 
Robert McDougal
100%
0%
Robert McDougal,
User Rank: Ninja
4/22/2014 | 9:49:05 PM
Should Michaels have done more?
The article quotes Gartner researcher Avivah Litan stating that it is not fair to expect retailers to have expert forensic teams on call at all times.  While I agree with that statement, (forensic teams, if not part of the in house security personnel should be on retainer for incident response) I do think there is a minimum due diligence to which they should be held accountable.  Did Michael's have a CISO in place, security staff, IDS/IPS, vulnerability management, etc?  Did they follow secure coding practices?  Were risk assessments routinely performed on the POS systems?  These are the questions I would like to see answered.

 


News
A Startup With NSA Roots Wants Silently Disarming Cyberattacks on the Wire to Become the Norm
Kelly Jackson Higgins, Executive Editor at Dark Reading,  5/11/2021
Edge-DRsplash-10-edge-articles
Cybersecurity: What Is Truly Essential?
Joshua Goldfarb, Director of Product Management at F5,  5/12/2021
Commentary
3 Cybersecurity Myths to Bust
Etay Maor, Sr. Director Security Strategy at Cato Networks,  5/11/2021
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win an Amazon Gift Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: Google Maps is taking "interactive" to a whole new level!
Current Issue
2021 Top Enterprise IT Trends
We've identified the key trends that are poised to impact the IT landscape in 2021. Find out why they're important and how they will affect you today!
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-21830
PUBLISHED: 2021-05-17
A heap based buffer overflow vulneraibility exists in GNU LibreDWG 0.10 via bit_calc_CRC ../../src/bits.c:2213.
CVE-2020-21832
PUBLISHED: 2021-05-17
A heap based buffer overflow vulnerability exists in GNU LibreDWG 0.10 via read_2004_compressed_section ../../src/decode.c:2417.
CVE-2020-21833
PUBLISHED: 2021-05-17
A heap based buffer overflow vulnerability exits in GNU LibreDWG 0.10 via: read_2004_section_classes ../../src/decode.c:2440.
CVE-2020-21834
PUBLISHED: 2021-05-17
A null pointer deference issue exists in GNU LibreDWG 0.10 via get_bmp ../../programs/dwgbmp.c:164.
CVE-2020-21835
PUBLISHED: 2021-05-17
A null pointer deference issue exists in GNU LibreDWG 0.10 via read_2004_compressed_section ../../src/decode.c:2337.