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
IoT Botnets by the Numbers
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
BrianN060
50%
50%
BrianN060,
User Rank: Ninja
2/5/2018 | 7:18:27 PM
Re: Frightening? Gets worse
@REISEN: I wouldn't put implanted medical devices in the same risk category as "smart" home appliances.  You have a couple of layers of added safeguard protection.

Your doctors and the device maker are responsible (in both senses of the word).  It's also probable that your device can't be reprogrammed remotely.  Interception and misuse of your device's sensor data is technically possible; but hard to imagine anyone wanting to.  Contact your doctor, if you need more reasons not to worry about it.  -- Wish you well.  
REISEN1955
50%
50%
REISEN1955,
User Rank: Ninja
2/5/2018 | 2:12:23 PM
Frightening? Gets worse
I am the owner of an internal defibulator (could be a pacemaker for arguments sake) and it has a wireless output to a small box in my kitchen to transmit data and box by phone to hospital.  Now I wonder about that? 
BrianN060
50%
50%
BrianN060,
User Rank: Ninja
2/5/2018 | 11:53:57 AM
Re: Why is anybody surprised?
"...computer systems have proven to be vulnerable, why should we trust IOT personal items to be any different?"  In some ways IOT is worse - principally, in that compromise is less noticeable, until it's painfully obvious.  Even when attackers make no special effort to remain undetected, IoT device processing is generally not user interactive, and a hack doesn't have to be disruptive: "Ah! The fridge door located at this address hasn't been opened in 3 days; I bet they're out of town."
rjones2818
50%
50%
rjones2818,
User Rank: Strategist
2/5/2018 | 10:40:09 AM
Why is anybody surprised?
The fault lies with the companies who have unleashed an immature technology upon the world in a rush to grub for more money.  Many regular computer systems have proven to be vulnerable, why should we trust IOT personal items to be any different?
jenshadus
50%
50%
jenshadus,
User Rank: Strategist
2/5/2018 | 9:23:43 AM
Don't want no IoT
It's hard to find appliances, cars, office equipment without IoT anymore.  And it's frightening.  I have a pretty old kitchen, so I'm not worred about it, but when things break down will anything I choose include IoT comms on it?  Will I have the choice of turning off any communication?  How will this affect self driving cars.  This really is could become very scary.

I agree with the 1st post.  We've reared of a generation of me, dependent, and spoiled.  Far in between there are golden nuggets, but they may not be easy to find.
BrianN060
50%
50%
BrianN060,
User Rank: Ninja
1/31/2018 | 3:36:30 PM
Brought to justice?
"...three creators of Mirai come to justice..."  5 years and $250k fines are a lot for people that didn't kill anyone; but trivial compared to the economic damage they  caused.  I hope we all realize that economic damage can severely damage lives - even fataly. 

"...developed Mirai in their dorm room."  That highlights the culture component of the problem.  Solutions there will be difficult and generational. 


News
Inside the Ransomware Campaigns Targeting Exchange Servers
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  4/2/2021
Commentary
Beyond MITRE ATT&CK: The Case for a New Cyber Kill Chain
Rik Turner, Principal Analyst, Infrastructure Solutions, Omdia,  3/30/2021
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
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-2021-23381
PUBLISHED: 2021-04-18
This affects all versions of package killing. If attacker-controlled user input is given, it is possible for an attacker to execute arbitrary commands. This is due to use of the child_process exec function without input sanitization.
CVE-2021-23374
PUBLISHED: 2021-04-18
This affects all versions of package ps-visitor. If attacker-controlled user input is given to the kill function, it is possible for an attacker to execute arbitrary commands. This is due to use of the child_process exec function without input sanitization.
CVE-2021-23375
PUBLISHED: 2021-04-18
This affects all versions of package psnode. If attacker-controlled user input is given to the kill function, it is possible for an attacker to execute arbitrary commands. This is due to use of the child_process exec function without input sanitization.
CVE-2021-23376
PUBLISHED: 2021-04-18
This affects all versions of package ffmpegdotjs. If attacker-controlled user input is given to the trimvideo function, it is possible for an attacker to execute arbitrary commands. This is due to use of the child_process exec function without input sanitization.
CVE-2021-23377
PUBLISHED: 2021-04-18
This affects all versions of package onion-oled-js. If attacker-controlled user input is given to the scroll function, it is possible for an attacker to execute arbitrary commands. This is due to use of the child_process exec function without input sanitization.