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
Is your organisation ready to defend insider threat?
Threaded  |  Newest First  |  Oldest First
henryhon
100%
0%
henryhon,
User Rank: Apprentice
8/31/2020 | 7:58:02 AM
Is your organisation ready to defend insider threat?
Insider threat absolutely is not a new topic, many technical / non-technical people talk about it every day, sometimes people will link it up directly with solutions of user security awareness training and Data Loss Prevention (DLP) implementation. That is not incorrect, but is that all?

Recently, in early August 2020, Tesla occurred an insider threat in one of their Gigafactory, a Russian man allegedly offered to pay $1 million to one of the Tesla's employee to deploy malware into the company network to ransom Telsa's data for millions of dollars. This incident has a happy ending that the Tesla employee notified Tesla instead of accepting the bribe or doing nothing.

Let's us try to simulate the scenario that if the ransomware was successfully installed to one of the file server by a privileged system administrator? Would it become a sad ending eventually? The answer is "It depends."

What if there is anti-malware solution deployed on every applicable hosts, the insider may need to disable the anti-malware solution by using privileged access on a particular host to execute the malware in the first place, which triggered an high alert alarm in Security information and event management (SIEM) system. Is there any separate team or Security Operations Centre to monitor the SIEM alerts and investigate what is happening for the disable of the host level security control?

What if the malware is very sophisticated and could not be detected by host based anti-malware solution and attempt to inject malicious macros into every MS documents and excel spreadsheets stored on the file server. Is there any SIEM logic / event correlation could identify such abnormal file access behaviour?

What if the malware attempt to perform https beaconing to a "legitimate" external destination, e.g. AWS ec2 instance or MS Azure virtual machine. Is there any mechanism to flag out such network connectivity pattern?

What if the malware simply perform data exfiltration during network traffic peak hours to hide its track. Is there any mechanism to detect that?

If your organisation could confidently answer the above questions with proven breach attack simulation results, it could imply your organisation is having a good security control to a certain extend.

There is no one-size-fits-all security solution, implement many expensive security tools does not mean it will become more secure. It is always good to have regular red teaming / purple teaming exercises / breach attack simulation (BAS) to test your cybersecurity readiness of your of your current organisation in detect and respond. Be vigilant!


Edge-DRsplash-10-edge-articles
7 Old IT Things Every New InfoSec Pro Should Know
Joan Goodchild, Staff Editor,  4/20/2021
News
Cloud-Native Businesses Struggle With Security
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  5/6/2021
Commentary
Defending Against Web Scraping Attacks
Rob Simon, Principal Security Consultant at TrustedSec,  5/7/2021
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
2021 Top Enterprise IT Trends
We've identified the key trends that are poised to impact the IT landscape in 2021. Find out why they're important and how they will affect you today!
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-4811
PUBLISHED: 2021-05-14
IBM Cloud Pak for Security (CP4S) 1.4.0.0, 1.5.0.0, 1.5.0.1, 1.6.0.0, and 1.6.0.1 could allow a privileged user to inject inject malicious data using a specially crafted HTTP request due to improper input validation.
CVE-2020-4985
PUBLISHED: 2021-05-14
IBM Planning Analytics Local 2.0 could allow an attacker to obtain sensitive information due to accepting body parameters in a query. IBM X-Force ID: 192642.
CVE-2021-20391
PUBLISHED: 2021-05-14
IBM QRadar User Behavior Analytics 1.0.0 through 4.1.0 allows web pages to be stored locally which can be read by another user on the system. IBM X-Force ID: 195999.
CVE-2021-20392
PUBLISHED: 2021-05-14
IBM QRadar User Behavior Analytics 1.0.0 through 4.0.1 is vulnerable to cross-site scripting. This vulnerability allows users to embed arbitrary JavaScript code in the Web UI thus altering the intended functionality potentially leading to credentials disclosure within a trusted session.
CVE-2021-20393
PUBLISHED: 2021-05-14
IBM QRadar User Behavior Analytics 1.0.0 through 4.1.0 could allow a remote attacker to obtain sensitive information when a detailed technical error message is returned in the browser. This information could be used in further attacks against the system. IBM X-Force ID: 196001.