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
Why Are We So Slow To Detect Data Breaches?
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Clerkendweller
50%
50%
Clerkendweller,
User Rank: Apprentice
7/9/2013 | 10:26:44 AM
re: Why Are We So Slow To Detect Data Breaches?
And remember real-time attack detection and adaptive response within applications themselves where there is knowledge of the user context. Like this http://www.crosstalkonline.org...
douglasmow
50%
50%
douglasmow,
User Rank: Apprentice
6/24/2013 | 8:51:55 PM
re: Why Are We So Slow To Detect Data Breaches?
Erika - The 2013 Verizon Data Breach Report you point to
also highlights how innocent a data breach can appear. Three out of four
intrusions exploit weak or stolen (but otherwise legitimate) credentials, and
another 13 percent result from misuse of information by privileged users,
according to the Report. Organizations need new ways to detect misuse of
information systems. While an account may be legitimate, generally the action
taken is not which can provide early detection of a potential breach.



This is why we see the security industry focusing on the
need for real-time security intelligence and big data, particularly related to
identities, their access, and behavior data to reveal patterns that look risky.
By having a way to analyze risk associated with user access on a continuous
basis, organizations will be able to better protect themselves against internal
and external threats.
James McCabe
50%
50%
James McCabe,
User Rank: Apprentice
6/24/2013 | 2:29:58 PM
re: Why Are We So Slow To Detect Data Breaches?
Ericka makes some well thought out points regarding detection of data breaches. But she misses a major point. Detection is a reactionary response! I think it's great that we can do all this tuning to our sensors and SIEMS, but we're still not PROTECTING the data! You must put protection controls closer to the target - the DATA itself. It must have strong usage policies and encryption. It must restrict who the data is decrypted for. Data should never be decrypted for Administrators/superusers/Root level users. They need to administer the environment in which the data runs in. They are not paid to "look"at data. Having these types of controls in place will go a long way in reducing the attack surface! Let's get our heads out of sand and start thinking about controls closer to the target. We need a paradigm shift in our security thinking.


US Turning Up the Heat on North Korea's Cyber Threat Operations
Jai Vijayan, Contributing Writer,  9/16/2019
MITRE Releases 2019 List of Top 25 Software Weaknesses
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  9/17/2019
Preventing PTSD and Burnout for Cybersecurity Professionals
Craig Hinkley, CEO, WhiteHat Security,  9/16/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Current Issue
7 Threats & Disruptive Forces Changing the Face of Cybersecurity
This Dark Reading Tech Digest gives an in-depth look at the biggest emerging threats and disruptive forces that are changing the face of cybersecurity today.
Flash Poll
The State of IT Operations and Cybersecurity Operations
The State of IT Operations and Cybersecurity Operations
Your enterprise's cyber risk may depend upon the relationship between the IT team and the security team. Heres some insight on what's working and what isn't in the data center.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-9717
PUBLISHED: 2019-09-19
In Libav 12.3, a denial of service in the subtitle decoder allows attackers to hog the CPU via a crafted video file in Matroska format, because srt_to_ass in libavcodec/srtdec.c has a complex format argument to sscanf.
CVE-2019-9719
PUBLISHED: 2019-09-19
A stack-based buffer overflow in the subtitle decoder in Libav 12.3 allows attackers to corrupt the stack via a crafted video file in Matroska format, because srt_to_ass in libavcodec/srtdec.c misuses snprintf.
CVE-2019-9720
PUBLISHED: 2019-09-19
A stack-based buffer overflow in the subtitle decoder in Libav 12.3 allows attackers to corrupt the stack via a crafted video file in Matroska format, because srt_to_ass in libavcodec/srtdec.c misuses snprintf.
CVE-2019-16525
PUBLISHED: 2019-09-19
An XSS issue was discovered in the checklist plugin before 1.1.9 for WordPress. The fill parameter is not correctly filtered in the checklist-icon.php file, and it is possible to inject JavaScript code.
CVE-2019-9619
PUBLISHED: 2019-09-19
** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was withdrawn by its CNA. Further investigation showed that it was not a security issue. Notes: none.