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
Visa: EMV Cards Drove 70% Decline in Fraud
Oldest First  |  Newest First  |  Threaded View
Joe Stanganelli
50%
50%
Joe Stanganelli,
User Rank: Ninja
2/25/2018 | 9:33:52 PM
EMV
Expect this figure to spike back up once there is broader use/acceptance/deployment of EMV tech. Hackers and attackers go for low-hanging fruit -- but EMV is hardly an impenetrable technology, security-wise.
Dr.T
50%
50%
Dr.T,
User Rank: Ninja
2/26/2018 | 7:59:31 PM
chip cards
Glad to hear chip card utilization going up in US, we are way behind Europe on this.
Dr.T
50%
50%
Dr.T,
User Rank: Ninja
2/26/2018 | 8:01:21 PM
Re: EMV
Expect this figure to spike back up once there is broader use/acceptance/deployment of EMV tech. That is my hope too, they need to stop providing magnetic cards to speed this adaption.
Dr.T
50%
50%
Dr.T,
User Rank: Ninja
2/26/2018 | 8:04:46 PM
96%?
Nearly all (96%) of US payments in December were done with EMV chip cards. 96% is a surprisingly high. Some of these cards have both magnetic strip and chip, they may still be using swipe.
Joe Stanganelli
50%
50%
Joe Stanganelli,
User Rank: Ninja
2/26/2018 | 9:28:03 PM
Re: EMV
@Dr.T: Why do you hope this?

What I'm trying to communicate is that EMV is not invulnerable and bears its own vulnerabilty issues and potential exploits. Once you have much more broader penetration of EMV overall, you'll start seeing a greater focus on EMV attacks.
Joe Stanganelli
0%
100%
Joe Stanganelli,
User Rank: Ninja
2/26/2018 | 9:30:22 PM
Re: 96%?
@Dr.T: Because (1) many consumers are still confused about EMV technology and (2) the processing of EMV chips takes much longer than standard swipe-card technology, many retailers have purposely declined to activate their EMV setups so as to keep their business moving more smoothly and more quickly. Even some major retailers purposely delayed their rollouts until such a time as consumers became more used to chip-insertion, letting consumers figure things out and scratch their heads on other retailers' time.


Commentary
What the FedEx Logo Taught Me About Cybersecurity
Matt Shea, Head of Federal @ MixMode,  6/4/2021
Edge-DRsplash-10-edge-articles
A View From Inside a Deception
Sara Peters, Senior Editor at Dark Reading,  6/2/2021
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-2021-32552
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-12
It was discovered that read_file() in apport/hookutils.py would follow symbolic links or open FIFOs. When this function is used by the openjdk-16 package apport hooks, it could expose private data to other local users.
CVE-2021-32553
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-12
It was discovered that read_file() in apport/hookutils.py would follow symbolic links or open FIFOs. When this function is used by the openjdk-17 package apport hooks, it could expose private data to other local users.
CVE-2021-32554
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-12
It was discovered that read_file() in apport/hookutils.py would follow symbolic links or open FIFOs. When this function is used by the xorg package apport hooks, it could expose private data to other local users.
CVE-2021-32555
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-12
It was discovered that read_file() in apport/hookutils.py would follow symbolic links or open FIFOs. When this function is used by the xorg-hwe-18.04 package apport hooks, it could expose private data to other local users.
CVE-2021-32556
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-12
It was discovered that the get_modified_conffiles() function in backends/packaging-apt-dpkg.py allowed injecting modified package names in a manner that would confuse the dpkg(1) call.