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
Sacramento Bee Databases Hit with Ransomware Attack
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
alphaa10
50%
50%
alphaa10,
User Rank: Strategist
2/17/2018 | 12:23:13 AM
Re: Profound solution?
The measure announced was not to recover the lost data, but to frustrate inevitable future attempts to make the same threat, perhaps with more damage. Once a ransom demand is met, there is nothing to dissuade the same or similar groups from another attack.

Did the newspaper promise a return to paper records? Not at all, but simply a more layered and distributed system, with multiple checkpoints.

Under the circumstances, the Bee declaration helps the newspaper isolate itself from further extortion attempts.

 
BrianN060
50%
50%
BrianN060,
User Rank: Ninja
2/12/2018 | 6:07:58 PM
Looking for correlations
@DR staff: Elements of this story are repeated in any number of cybersecurity articles, surveys, reports, etc..  What I haven't seen is analysis on how specific data storage choices correlate with attack frequency, type, detection, and other characteristics and metrics. 

In this story "...its databases, both on a third-party server...", raises the above questions as regards to use of third party servers; but also leads to questions about attacks and the specifics of type, location, infrastructure, etc.., of such servers. 

Perhaps what I'm looking for is a multidimensional map showing just what particular dangers are known to inhabit various (metaphorical as well as actual), regions.  In other words, are there safer places and containers to bury your treasure? 

I realize this is far from a simple question.  For starters, a single vendor might offer several types of relational and non-relational patterns and management options; and might have options for restricting use to certain geo-located datacenters - and a single organization might use different options, from different vendors, as well as combine public-cloud with in-house storage options. 

Is anyone work on this type of multi-factor threat assessment for data storage choices? 
REISEN1955
50%
50%
REISEN1955,
User Rank: Ninja
2/12/2018 | 3:14:51 PM
Profound solution?
The database data is deleted to prevent future theft.  Wow!!!!   What an idea.  Lock the barn door after the theft is done.  Brilliant.  Of course, the data is already out there so who ares about deletion.  Hey, shore up the walls would be a good idea too.  


Commentary
Cyberattacks Are Tailored to Employees ... Why Isn't Security Training?
Tim Sadler, CEO and co-founder of Tessian,  6/17/2021
Edge-DRsplash-10-edge-articles
7 Powerful Cybersecurity Skills the Energy Sector Needs Most
Pam Baker, Contributing Writer,  6/22/2021
News
Microsoft Disrupts Large-Scale BEC Campaign Across Web Services
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  6/15/2021
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
The State of Cybersecurity Incident Response
In this report learn how enterprises are building their incident response teams and processes, how they research potential compromises, how they respond to new breaches, and what tools and processes they use to remediate problems and improve their cyber defenses for the future.
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2021-22382
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-22
Huawei LTE USB Dongle products have an improper permission assignment vulnerability. An attacker can locally access and log in to a PC to induce a user to install a specially crafted application. After successfully exploiting this vulnerability, the attacker can perform unauthenticated operations. A...
CVE-2021-22383
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-22
There is an out-of-bounds read vulnerability in eCNS280_TD V100R005C10 and eSE620X vESS V100R001C10SPC200, V100R001C20SPC200, V200R001C00SPC300. The vulnerability is due to a message-handling function that contains an out-of-bounds read vulnerability. An attacker can exploit this vulnerability by se...
CVE-2021-22342
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-22
There is an information leak vulnerability in Huawei products. A module does not deal with specific input sufficiently. High privilege attackers can exploit this vulnerability by performing some operations. This can lead to information leak. Affected product versions include: IPS Module versions V50...
CVE-2021-22363
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-22
There is a resource management error vulnerability in eCNS280_TD V100R005C10SPC650. An attacker needs to perform specific operations to exploit the vulnerability on the affected device. Due to improper resource management of the function, the vulnerability can be exploited to cause service abnormal ...
CVE-2021-22377
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-22
There is a command injection vulnerability in S12700 V200R019C00SPC500, S2700 V200R019C00SPC500, S5700 V200R019C00SPC500, S6700 V200R019C00SPC500 and S7700 V200R019C00SPC500. A module does not verify specific input sufficiently. Attackers can exploit this vulnerability by sending malicious parameter...