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
What We Talk About When We Talk About Risk
Threaded  |  Newest First  |  Oldest First
RetiredUser
50%
50%
RetiredUser,
User Rank: Ninja
7/11/2018 | 11:43:29 AM
Cybersecurity Risk Taxonomy
These are excellent points - in fact, the very list of risks you noted that are typically raised when asked are the ones I tend to see in initial project documents that relate to security.

Cybersecurity Risk Taxonomy (A. M. Rea-Guaman, T. San Feliu, J. A. Calvo-Manzano, I. D. Sanchez-Garcia) is a paper published under the International Conference on Software Process Improvement, 2017. It covers an interesting deep dive into studies published from 1990 to 2017. They found "132 papers and some of them mention some risk taxonomies within the scope of IT (information technologies) cybersecurity, although only five primary elements were selected, identifying the main risk taxonomies."

The perspectives covered include Asset, Attacks, Service, Business and External, with papers covering a wide range of combinations of taxonomy descriptions. Some of the items in the taxonomies include Business objects and dynamics models, Social engineering, Systems and technology failures, Failed internal processes, Resource or target information and Actions of people.

Your example InfoSec risks make sense upon more reading of studies like the one above, which is a great piece indicating this conversation of risk in InfoSec has been going on for some time.
jonesj26
50%
50%
jonesj26,
User Rank: Author
7/11/2018 | 1:44:13 PM
Re: Cybersecurity Risk Taxonomy
Thanks, Christian.  You're absolutely right about this problem being discussed for some time now.  Unfortunately, I don't believe it's broadly recognized yet as a foundational Achilles Heel for our profession.  Hopefully we can elevate it within the minds of our colleagues and accelerate the evolution of our profession.

Cheers

Jack
REISEN1955
50%
50%
REISEN1955,
User Rank: Ninja
7/11/2018 | 2:59:02 PM
Re: Cybersecurity Risk Taxonomy
Small Business - general rule is that a small business (I guess 50 emps or less) can live for only 2 weeks following a major crash of systems.  I supported such shops and always had a backup-restore plan in working place and used it on several critical cases inclusive of server drive failure and ransomware attack.   Measure THAT!!!   (Lesson - always ask for a large check for services in such cases).


Mobile Banking Malware Up 50% in First Half of 2019
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  1/17/2020
Active Directory Needs an Update: Here's Why
Raz Rafaeli, CEO and Co-Founder at Secret Double Octopus,  1/16/2020
New Attack Campaigns Suggest Emotet Threat Is Far From Over
Jai Vijayan, Contributing Writer,  1/16/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Current Issue
The Year in Security: 2019
This Tech Digest provides a wrap up and overview of the year's top cybersecurity news stories. It was a year of new twists on old threats, with fears of another WannaCry-type worm and of a possible botnet army of Wi-Fi routers. But 2019 also underscored the risk of firmware and trusted security tools harboring dangerous holes that cybercriminals and nation-state hackers could readily abuse. Read more.
Flash Poll
How Enterprises are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
How Enterprises are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
Organizations have invested in a sweeping array of security technologies to address challenges associated with the growing number of cybersecurity attacks. However, the complexity involved in managing these technologies is emerging as a major problem. Read this report to find out what your peers biggest security challenges are and the technologies they are using to address them.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-20391
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-22
An invalid memory access flaw is present in libyang before v1.0-r3 in the function resolve_feature_value() when an if-feature statement is used inside a bit. Applications that use libyang to parse untrusted input yang files may crash.
CVE-2019-20392
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-22
An invalid memory access flaw is present in libyang before v1.0-r1 in the function resolve_feature_value() when an if-feature statement is used inside a list key node, and the feature used is not defined. Applications that use libyang to parse untrusted input yang files may crash.
CVE-2019-20393
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-22
A double-free is present in libyang before v1.0-r1 in the function yyparse() when an empty description is used. Applications that use libyang to parse untrusted input yang files may be vulnerable to this flaw, which would cause a crash or potentially code execution.
CVE-2019-20394
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-22
A double-free is present in libyang before v1.0-r3 in the function yyparse() when a type statement in used in a notification statement. Applications that use libyang to parse untrusted input yang files may be vulnerable to this flaw, which would cause a crash or potentially code execution.
CVE-2019-20395
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-22
A stack consumption issue is present in libyang before v1.0-r1 due to the self-referential union type containing leafrefs. Applications that use libyang to parse untrusted input yang files may crash.