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
Nigerian 419 Scammers Evolving Into Malware Pushers (But Not Very Good Ones)
Oldest First  |  Newest First  |  Threaded View
RyanSepe
50%
50%
RyanSepe,
User Rank: Ninja
7/23/2014 | 8:47:16 AM
Executables in Emails?
Some of this was actually quite comical. But on a serious note, to confirm with your article, they are sending .exe's in the email attachment? Just to be clear, I am unsure as to why anyone would use an executable from an email. 
Manos Chatzikyriakos
50%
50%
Manos Chatzikyriakos,
User Rank: Apprentice
7/24/2014 | 10:00:01 AM
Re: Executables in Emails?
Unfortunately you would be surprised by how many people would actually do that. It doesn't take more than poor social enginnering skills and a .exe file named "picture.exe.jpg"
RyanSepe
50%
50%
RyanSepe,
User Rank: Ninja
7/24/2014 | 10:30:24 AM
Re: Executables in Emails?
Understood, does anyone know if there is an age demographic that shows those who respond to phishing attacks? I am just curious because I know a large percentage of exploited individuals are elderly in terms of technology/financial scams. I would be interested to see if they are the largest group who open unknown attachements.
Manos Chatzikyriakos
50%
50%
Manos Chatzikyriakos,
User Rank: Apprentice
7/24/2014 | 10:56:02 AM
Re: Executables in Emails?
You might find this paper interesting. It's about a study on the subject you mentioned, different factors that might have an impact someone's behaviour susceptibility to falling victims of phising attacks. 

http://lorrie.cranor.org/pubs/pap1162-sheng.pdf

The paper is a derivative of a thesis which you can find online if you need the full information.
RyanSepe
50%
50%
RyanSepe,
User Rank: Ninja
7/25/2014 | 8:46:13 AM
Re: Executables in Emails?
Very interesting thanks for the reply. Some of the most interesting pieces from that article was that ages 18-25 are the most susceptible age bracking for phishing attacks. I thought it would be the opposite.

Also, that women are more susceptible than men statistically. The article attributes this to less technical training however I am not convinced. In the study was half women and half men with men receiving 48% training materials and women receiving 52% which is pretty much even. So I don't think the results support their hypothesis. But I cannot think of other reasoning as to why this would be true. 
Marilyn Cohodas
50%
50%
Marilyn Cohodas,
User Rank: Strategist
7/25/2014 | 9:56:53 AM
Re: Executables in Emails?
As the parent of a 24-year old (who probably should know better), I'm not surprised that that demographic is more susceptiable to a phishing attack. That's a very impulsive age at which point the "judgement" brain cells have not fully matured. The rental car industry figured that out a long time ago when they set 26 as the minimum age that people can rent a car without a big  surcharge.
RyanSepe
50%
50%
RyanSepe,
User Rank: Ninja
7/28/2014 | 12:20:04 PM
Re: Executables in Emails?
This does make sense from an impulse perspective but then what are the action items? Educating people at a younger age to protect against phisihing? My high school had CISCO Networking classes and basic computer classes but I have not seen a InfoSec related class or one that taught InfoSec related principles. 

Or would this be better projected at the university level which comprises the age most susceptible for exploitation?
Marilyn Cohodas
50%
50%
Marilyn Cohodas,
User Rank: Strategist
7/28/2014 | 12:23:32 PM
Re: Executables in Emails?
My thinking is that the earlier good practices can be drummed in the better. I've seen many tweens with smartphones! Then by the time the judgement kicks in in the mid 20s, presumaby some of the basics will be already baked in...
Marilyn Cohodas
50%
50%
Marilyn Cohodas,
User Rank: Strategist
7/28/2014 | 12:23:37 PM
Re: Executables in Emails?
My thinking is that the earlier good practices can be drummed in the better. I've seen many tweens with smartphones! Then by the time the judgement kicks in in the mid 20s, presumaby some of the basics will be already baked in...
Marilyn Cohodas
50%
50%
Marilyn Cohodas,
User Rank: Strategist
7/28/2014 | 12:23:42 PM
Re: Executables in Emails?
My thinking is that the earlier good practices can be drummed in the better. I've seen many tweens with smartphones! Then by the time the judgement kicks in in the mid 20s, presumaby some of the basics will be already baked in...


Cybersecurity Industry: It's Time to Stop the Victim Blame Game
Jessica Smith, Senior Vice President, The Crypsis Group,  2/25/2020
5 Ways to Up Your Threat Management Game
Wayne Reynolds, Advisory CISO, Kudelski Security,  2/26/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
6 Emerging Cyber Threats That Enterprises Face in 2020
This Tech Digest gives an in-depth look at six emerging cyber threats that enterprises could face in 2020. Download your copy today!
Flash Poll
How Enterprises Are Developing and Maintaining Secure Applications
How Enterprises Are Developing and Maintaining Secure Applications
The concept of application security is well known, but application security testing and remediation processes remain unbalanced. Most organizations are confident in their approach to AppSec, although others seem to have no approach at all. Read this report to find out more.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-9431
PUBLISHED: 2020-02-27
In Wireshark 3.2.0 to 3.2.1, 3.0.0 to 3.0.8, and 2.6.0 to 2.6.14, the LTE RRC dissector could leak memory. This was addressed in epan/dissectors/packet-lte-rrc.c by adjusting certain append operations.
CVE-2020-9432
PUBLISHED: 2020-02-27
openssl_x509_check_host in lua-openssl 0.7.7-1 mishandles X.509 certificate validation because it uses lua_pushboolean for certain non-boolean return values.
CVE-2020-9433
PUBLISHED: 2020-02-27
openssl_x509_check_email in lua-openssl 0.7.7-1 mishandles X.509 certificate validation because it uses lua_pushboolean for certain non-boolean return values.
CVE-2020-9434
PUBLISHED: 2020-02-27
openssl_x509_check_ip_asc in lua-openssl 0.7.7-1 mishandles X.509 certificate validation because it uses lua_pushboolean for certain non-boolean return values.
CVE-2020-6383
PUBLISHED: 2020-02-27
Type confusion in V8 in Google Chrome prior to 80.0.3987.116 allowed a remote attacker to potentially exploit heap corruption via a crafted HTML page.