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
5 Tips For Preventing IoT Hacks
Threaded  |  Newest First  |  Oldest First
UmeshKTiwari
100%
0%
UmeshKTiwari,
User Rank: Strategist
10/24/2016 | 2:30:34 PM
...Preventing IoT Hacks
Cyber security profession is and has been so enamoured by the cool and cutting edge technology things that can be deployed to technically fortify the enterprise or cloud assets that they tend to leave behind the most important aspect, the people/consumer aspect of cyber security every single time, for, it ain't as sexy as geeking out in some cool looking data center devices.

Individual users of internet, which includes everyone, your five year old, your grandma and adults who are PhDs or high school drop outs are involved and active stakeholders as smartphone, laptop or IoT users and can very seriously impact cyber defenses of shared infrastructure, examples of which we have seen recently.

Basic internet protection education should be part of elementary school education.

 
DavidR927
50%
50%
DavidR927,
User Rank: Apprentice
10/25/2016 | 4:46:10 AM
Re: ...Preventing IoT Hacks
This Blog is the most top geek blog sites in Computerworld to retrieve your any type of compatible issues related private are issues.

 
Dr.T
50%
50%
Dr.T,
User Rank: Ninja
10/25/2016 | 8:06:49 PM
Re: ...Preventing IoT Hacks
"... This Blog is the most top geek blog sites  ..."

I think article is well written, covering most aspect of it.
Dr.T
50%
50%
Dr.T,
User Rank: Ninja
10/25/2016 | 8:04:41 PM
Re: ...Preventing IoT Hacks
"... Basic internet protection education should be part of elementary school education ..."

I think it is alrady. I also think we migth be expeting to much out of consumers. 
Dr.T
50%
50%
Dr.T,
User Rank: Ninja
10/25/2016 | 8:15:19 PM
Re: ...Preventing IoT Hacks
"... impact cyber defenses of shared infrastructure ..."

This is a good point, cab it be shared and isolated infrastructure?
dfronck222
50%
50%
dfronck222,
User Rank: Apprentice
10/25/2016 | 9:30:34 AM
Step 1: Hilarious!
"Consumers need to protect their IoT devices the same way they would their smartphones, tablets and home computers."

But they already do! That's the problem.

Actually, that's not the problem. The problem is that we've accepted shitty security for too long and blame the end user. It's not the user's fault, it's the vendor's. It seems that security isn't even a consideration for them. It's all about ease of use.

I'm sorry, you can't just say, "stupid user, when you get this new web cam, you're going to have to telnet or maybe ssh into it and change the root password. It's hidden and there are no instructions but you has the googles so you can do it! I'm sure."

No, the vendor needs to fix that.
Dr.T
50%
50%
Dr.T,
User Rank: Ninja
10/25/2016 | 8:09:55 PM
Re: Step 1: Hilarious!
"... Consumers need to protect their IoT devices  ..."

Agree but they can not, too much to deal with.
Dr.T
50%
50%
Dr.T,
User Rank: Ninja
10/25/2016 | 8:11:47 PM
Re: Step 1: Hilarious!
"...  It's not the user's fault, it's the vendor's ..."

It makes sense but I would say neither. Overall system should not be letting IoT device be source of downtime, I would day.
Dr.T
50%
50%
Dr.T,
User Rank: Ninja
10/25/2016 | 8:13:42 PM
Re: Step 1: Hilarious!
"... telnet or maybe ssh ..."

Agree. Asking too much of consumers all they want is turning their lights on with their voice.
Dr.T
50%
50%
Dr.T,
User Rank: Ninja
10/25/2016 | 8:19:14 PM
Re: Step 1: Hilarious!
"... It's all about ease of use ..."

I think this is an important point. Otherwise we would not be seeing wide spear user of IoT devices, which would be sad.
Dr.T
50%
50%
Dr.T,
User Rank: Ninja
10/25/2016 | 8:02:56 PM
DDoS was not done by IoT consumers
 

When we start listing course of action that IoT consumers should be taking to prevent from a DDoS attack I know we are not close to a solution.
Joe Stanganelli
50%
50%
Joe Stanganelli,
User Rank: Ninja
10/26/2016 | 9:03:50 AM
Re: DDoS was not done by IoT consumers
The enterprise and manufacturer perspectives of IoT security are important, but I think the point here is that while the IoT consumers themselves were not responsible, their IoT devices were -- because they were hacked and made part of a botnet.

As such, if people don't want their favorite sites or online services to be disrupted, they better make sure their own systems are secure.  It takes a village -- and a chain is only as strong as its weakest link.

Dr.T
50%
50%
Dr.T,
User Rank: Ninja
10/25/2016 | 8:08:07 PM
Re: scalp psoriasis
"... I really like the dear information you offer in your article ..."

Agree. Especially statistics very informative.
Dr.T
50%
50%
Dr.T,
User Rank: Ninja
10/25/2016 | 8:19:54 PM
IoT and consumers
 

We want our IoT device is easily accessible to us, we do not care weather that will be source of a DDoS attack or not as consumers. My question is why Dyn is the only DNS provider for these big companies that were not accessible?
SteveM654
50%
50%
SteveM654,
User Rank: Apprentice
10/28/2016 | 11:21:14 AM
IOT Security Time-bomb
While last week's DYN DDoS attack using a botnet of hijacked Webcams has rightly been trending across the blogsphere, most of the comments and advice I have seen have focussed on how to prevent the same thing happening again. However what is more worrying is what else could these insecure Web cams and the other IOT devices be used for? If it is so easy for the hackers to take control of our Web cams without our knowledge, think of the potential threat posed by smart meters, connected TVs and fridges that are sharing the same conection as our laptops and tablets. 

We might not be too concerned when these devices are being used to attack one the Internet beomoths but it is a different story when it comes to protecting our banking details falling into the hands of a cyber-thief.

If nothing else this event should be a wake-up call for everyone to start taking their home/online security more seriously. There are new IPS based systems out there capable of detecting compromised IOT devices, which would be a good starting point. 

 
Joe Stanganelli
50%
50%
Joe Stanganelli,
User Rank: Ninja
10/29/2016 | 4:45:13 PM
Re: IOT Security Time-bomb
With all due respect to my fellow citizens who are actively contributing to our economy with their clearly disposable income, I think those who decide that they need "smart" lightbulbs (along with a plethora of other "smart" devices for the home) probably aren't the brightest bulbs in the bunch themselves (and, thereby, probably not much for InfoSec awareness/mitigation).

IoT makes a great deal of sense for the enterprise.  For the individual, at the consumer level, where most (not all, but certainly most) consumer devices are concerned, it's nifty but runs into the law of diminishing returns rather quickly.


Edge-DRsplash-10-edge-articles
I Smell a RAT! New Cybersecurity Threats for the Crypto Industry
David Trepp, Partner, IT Assurance with accounting and advisory firm BPM LLP,  7/9/2021
News
Attacks on Kaseya Servers Led to Ransomware in Less Than 2 Hours
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  7/7/2021
Commentary
It's in the Game (but It Shouldn't Be)
Tal Memran, Cybersecurity Expert, CYE,  7/9/2021
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
How Enterprises are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
Concerns over supply chain vulnerabilities and attack visibility drove some significant changes in enterprise cybersecurity strategies over the past year. Dark Reading's 2021 Strategic Security Survey showed that many organizations are staying the course regarding the use of a mix of attack prevention and threat detection technologies and practices for dealing with cyber threats.
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2021-0652
PUBLISHED: 2021-10-22
In VectorDrawable::VectorDrawable of VectorDrawable.java, there is a possible way to introduce a memory corruption due to sharing of not thread-safe objects. This could lead to local escalation of privilege with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitati...
CVE-2021-0702
PUBLISHED: 2021-10-22
In RevertActiveSessions of apexd.cpp, there is a possible way to share the wrong file due to an unintentional MediaStore downgrade. This could lead to local information disclosure with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is needed for exploitation.Product: AndroidVersions: An...
CVE-2021-0703
PUBLISHED: 2021-10-22
In SecondStageMain of init.cpp, there is a possible use after free due to incorrect shared_ptr usage. This could lead to local escalation of privilege if the attacker has physical access to the device, with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation.Pr...
CVE-2021-0705
PUBLISHED: 2021-10-22
In sanitizeSbn of NotificationManagerService.java, there is a possible way to keep service running in foreground and keep granted permissions due to Bypass of Background Service Restrictions. This could lead to local escalation of privilege with no additional execution privileges needed. User intera...
CVE-2021-0706
PUBLISHED: 2021-10-22
In startListening of PluginManagerImpl.java, there is a possible way to disable arbitrary app components due to a missing permission check. This could lead to local denial of service with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation.Product: AndroidVersi...