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
700K Guest Records Stolen in Choice Hotels Breach
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
tdsan
50%
50%
tdsan,
User Rank: Ninja
8/13/2019 | 4:22:56 PM
Re: And the circle goes round and round .....
I am with you buddy, it seems the "SAGA" continues, it seems that companies and people are not familiar with the technology so they are just putting it out there without having a third-party vendor validate their design/implementation.

He also stated that it was a test environment to give Choice a new tool to test out new functionality. If that was the case, then why wasn't the system put in an enclosed network that does not allow Internet access and encrypt the data using AES2048 bit encryption, even if they got the data it would not be any good to them (of course if they happen to get the keys, then that is another story).

Choice Hotels Bitcoin Reply

I am like you, "come on people", and why did they use live data (700,000 records were real-data). Why wasn't the data created in an artificial scripted manner (per another article, they said 5.6 million records were artificial, so it looks like a marketing coverup but oh well, same story, different day)?

Time of Breach

Also, look at the timeline when Diachenko identified the issue:
  • June 30: The exposed database was first indexed by search engine BinaryEdge.
  • July 2: Security researcher Bob Diachenko discovered the database and immediately notified Choice Hotels about the exposure. It already contained the ransom note. Choice Hotels says it unintentionally filtered the email so that it was not read.
  • July 2: Database access was secured.
  • July 28: Diachenko sent a second notification and Choice Hotels began its investigation of the incident.

All I can say is wow.

T

 

 
REISEN1955
50%
50%
REISEN1955,
User Rank: Ninja
8/13/2019 | 1:07:31 PM
And the circle goes round and round .....
External individual discovered the breech - not internal staff.  No passwords - not locked down.  Oh and minimal exposure of data - exactly what most firms say.  Have we not heard this before and before?  Oh and discovered June  but not investigated until June 28????    


I 'Hacked' My Accounts Using My Mobile Number: Here's What I Learned
Nicole Sette, Director in the Cyber Risk practice of Kroll, a division of Duff & Phelps,  11/19/2019
6 Top Nontechnical Degrees for Cybersecurity
Curtis Franklin Jr., Senior Editor at Dark Reading,  11/21/2019
Anatomy of a BEC Scam
Kelly Jackson Higgins, Executive Editor at Dark Reading,  11/21/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
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-2019-11287
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-23
Pivotal RabbitMQ, versions 3.7.x prior to 3.7.21 and 3.8.x prior to 3.8.1, and RabbitMQ for Pivotal Platform, 1.16.x versions prior to 1.16.7 and 1.17.x versions prior to 1.17.4, contain a web management plugin that is vulnerable to a denial of service attack. The "X-Reason" HTTP Header ca...
CVE-2019-11291
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-22
Pivotal RabbitMQ, 3.7 versions prior to v3.7.20 and 3.8 version prior to v3.8.1, and RabbitMQ for PCF, 1.16.x versions prior to 1.16.7 and 1.17.x versions prior to 1.17.4, contain two endpoints, federation and shovel, which do not properly sanitize user input. A remote authenticated malicious user w...
CVE-2019-15593
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-22
GitLab 12.2.3 contains a security vulnerability that allows a user to affect the availability of the service through a Denial of Service attack in Issue Comments.
CVE-2019-16285
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-22
If a local user has been configured and logged in, an unauthenticated attacker with physical access may be able to extract sensitive information onto a local drive.
CVE-2019-16286
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-22
An attacker may be able to bypass the OS application filter meant to restrict applications that can be executed by changing browser preferences to launch a separate process that in turn can execute arbitrary commands.