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
Threaded  |  Newest First  |  Oldest First
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.  
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? 


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
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-2021-33336
PUBLISHED: 2021-08-04
Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the Journal module's add article menu in Liferay Portal 7.3.0 through 7.3.3, and Liferay DXP 7.1 fix pack 18, and 7.2 fix pack 5 through 7, allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via the _com_liferay_journal_web_portlet_JournalPortl...
CVE-2021-33339
PUBLISHED: 2021-08-04
Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the Fragment module in Liferay Portal 7.2.1 through 7.3.4, and Liferay DXP 7.2 before fix pack 9 allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via the _com_liferay_site_admin_web_portlet_SiteAdminPortlet_name parameter.
CVE-2021-3680
PUBLISHED: 2021-08-04
showdoc is vulnerable to Missing Cryptographic Step
CVE-2021-35397
PUBLISHED: 2021-08-04
A path traversal vulnerability in the static router for Drogon from 1.0.0-beta14 to 1.6.0 could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to arbitrarily read files. The vulnerability is due to lack of proper input validation for requested path. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending...
CVE-2021-36483
PUBLISHED: 2021-08-04
DevExpress.XtraReports.UI through v21.1 allows attackers to execute arbitrary code via insecure deserialization.