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
Shadow IT: Every Company's 3 Hidden Security Risks
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
dan91266
50%
50%
dan91266,
User Rank: Strategist
9/17/2018 | 7:32:17 PM
Shadow IT Senior Management has to step up
Shadow IT happens when policies and procedures prevent employees from doing their work. The case of the insecure chat app in the article is a perfect example.  Unsanctioned FTP clients and back door local user names and passwords are also symptoms of this.  

This happens when senior management refuses to budget for the tools needed to secure Identity and Access  Management in a way that lets employees work efficiently or when they don't buy into those intitiatives. Finally indadaquate IT and Security staff, or undertrained staff also feeds this evil weed. 

If you make it hard or impossible for employees to work efficiently, or fail to factor your kludgy (read often "budget friendly") infrastructure into performance goals, people will find a way to work efficiently.  And why wouldn't they? If I have to get spreadsheets or reports distributed to my supply chain vendors, and that is a poor, manual process that takes a lot of time, you bet I will find a quicker way.  Nobody EVER got a raise for following policy that requires a slow, inefficient process and no review ever says, this employee did less, but they did it securely so give them a bigger raise than the ones who cheated but were more productive.

If you want your people to adher to secure processes, make those processes MORE efficient than a hacked up back door.  

Start incentivizing good behavior  instead of bad, and you will be amazed how secure things become. 

It's just that simple. 

 
BrianN060
50%
50%
BrianN060,
User Rank: Ninja
8/7/2018 | 6:45:14 PM
Shadow IT by any other name
Fine article from a veteran cybersecurity professional about an aspect that doesn't get enough attention.  Call it shadow IT, or something else, it comes down to data governance. 

Where Adam has "What you don't know can hurt you.", I'd add: You can't protect what you don't know you have.  You can't protect data unless you know you have it, and know where it's stored - EVERYWHERE it's stored: every copy, every version, every device, every service, every B2B partner, even the data which can be reconstituted from disparate stores and sources, even the bio-memory of your knowledge workers, past and present.  Too many places?  Next time, limit the places to where it's needed. 

For vast amounts of data, it's too late to regain control (control which was an illusion to begin with); but new data is generated all the time - you do have a chance to a better job of data governance with that.  However, if you don't have an understanding of the fundamental nature of data and information, you're bound to repeat the old mistakes even if you find new ways (or new ways find you), to do that.  Forget the idea of just protecting your "sensitive" data; in time, someone will find a way to make use of any data you leave unprotected to get at the crown jewels.

You have to start somewhere, start with this: don't put any data in front of anyone or on anything that doesn't need that specific data to do a specific job, and only while they are doing that specific task (not whenever they feel like it).  I mean a specific person, not a job title.   Make sure your authentication and authorization always resolves to an entity - not a type. 


DevSecOps: The Answer to the Cloud Security Skills Gap
Lamont Orange, Chief Information Security Officer at Netskope,  11/15/2019
Attackers' Costs Increasing as Businesses Focus on Security
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  11/15/2019
Human Nature vs. AI: A False Dichotomy?
John McClurg, Sr. VP & CISO, BlackBerry,  11/18/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: -when I told you that our cyber-defense was from another age
Current Issue
Navigating the Deluge of Security Data
In this Tech Digest, Dark Reading shares the experiences of some top security practitioners as they navigate volumes of security data. We examine some examples of how enterprises can cull this data to find the clues they need.
Flash Poll
Rethinking Enterprise Data Defense
Rethinking Enterprise Data Defense
Frustrated with recurring intrusions and breaches, cybersecurity professionals are questioning some of the industrys conventional wisdom. Heres a look at what theyre thinking about.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2011-3350
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-19
masqmail 0.2.21 through 0.2.30 improperly calls seteuid() in src/log.c and src/masqmail.c that results in improper privilege dropping.
CVE-2011-3352
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-19
Zikula 1.3.0 build #3168 and probably prior has XSS flaw due to improper sanitization of the 'themename' parameter by setting default, modifying and deleting themes. A remote attacker with Zikula administrator privilege could use this flaw to execute arbitrary HTML or web script code in the context ...
CVE-2011-3349
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-19
lightdm before 0.9.6 writes in .dmrc and Xauthority files using root permissions while the files are in user controlled folders. A local user can overwrite root-owned files via a symlink, which can allow possible privilege escalation.
CVE-2019-10080
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-19
The XMLFileLookupService in NiFi versions 1.3.0 to 1.9.2 allowed trusted users to inadvertently configure a potentially malicious XML file. The XML file has the ability to make external calls to services (via XXE) and reveal information such as the versions of Java, Jersey, and Apache that the NiFI ...
CVE-2019-10083
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-19
When updating a Process Group via the API in NiFi versions 1.3.0 to 1.9.2, the response to the request includes all of its contents (at the top most level, not recursively). The response included details about processors and controller services which the user may not have had read access to.