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.

Network Security

11/6/2019
11:00 AM
Larry Loeb
Larry Loeb
Larry Loeb
50%
50%

Study Finds Customer Data to Be Most at Risk From Insiders

Companies say that they are somewhat more worried about inadvertent insider breaches and negligent data breaches than they are about malicious intent by bad actors.

Securonix, a vendor of security monitoring products, has come up with an Insider Threat Report 2019that was conducted by Cybersecurity Insiders, a 400,000 member community for information security professionals. The report is based on the results of an online survey that was conducted in June of 2019. The respondents are said to range from technical executives to managers and IT security practitioners, representing a balanced cross-section of organizations of varying sizes across multiple industries.

In this year's survey, companies say that they are somewhat more worried about inadvertent insider breaches (70%) and negligent data breaches (66%) than they are about malicious intent by bad actors (62%). For this question, inadvertent means a careless user causing accidental breach while negligent means a user willfully ignoring policy (but not malicious) and malicious is defined as the user willfully causing harm.

Malicious insiders are thought to be motivated by fraud (57%) and monetary gain (50%) as the biggest factors that drive their actions, followed by theft of intellectual property (43%).

That doesn't mean that organizations are doing well at defusing this threat. A majority of organizations surveyed consider themselves only somewhat effective or worse (56%) when it comes to monitoring, detecting and responding to insider threats.

Respondents think that privileged IT users (59%) pose the biggest insider security risk to organizations, followed by contractors (52%), regular employees and privileged business users (tied at 49%). They also see phishing attempts (43%) as the biggest vulnerability for accidental insider threats.

As far as the apps most vulnerable to insider threats, cloud storage and file sharing apps (such as Dropbox, OneDrive, etc.) rise to the top (39%). This is closely followed by collaboration and communications apps (such as email, messaging, etc.) (38%), and productivity apps (35%).

The type of data at risk has different forms. Survey respondents think that customer data (63%) takes the top spot as they type of data most vulnerable to insider attacks, followed by intellectual property (55%) and financial data (52%).

Organizations think the problem is growing. Seventy percent observed that insider attacks have become more frequent over the last 12 months. In fact, 60% have experienced one or more insider attacks within the last 12 months.

A majority of organizations utilize some form of analytics to determine what constitutes an insider threat. This can include activity management and summary reports (32%), user behavior analytics (29%), and data access and movement analytics (28%).

But only 40% of organizations say that they monitor user behavior across their cloud footprint. Perhaps this is because user privacy is a significant concern in the context of insider threat monitoring for seven out of ten organizations that were surveyed.

Combined with the proliferation of data sharing apps (46%) and more data leaving the traditional network perimeter (45%), the conditions that lead to successful insider attacks may be becoming more difficult to centrally control in the future.

— Larry Loeb has written for many of the last century's major "dead tree" computer magazines, having been, among other things, a consulting editor for BYTE magazine and senior editor for the launch of WebWeek.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 11/19/2020
New Proposed DNS Security Features Released
Kelly Jackson Higgins, Executive Editor at Dark Reading,  11/19/2020
How to Identify Cobalt Strike on Your Network
Zohar Buber, Security Analyst,  11/18/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win an Amazon Gift Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: This comment is waiting for review by our moderators.
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-2020-25159
PUBLISHED: 2020-11-24
499ES EtherNet/IP (ENIP) Adaptor Source Code is vulnerable to a stack-based buffer overflow, which may allow an attacker to send a specially crafted packet that may result in a denial-of-service condition or code execution.
CVE-2020-25654
PUBLISHED: 2020-11-24
An ACL bypass flaw was found in pacemaker before 1.1.24-rc1 and 2.0.5-rc2. An attacker having a local account on the cluster and in the haclient group could use IPC communication with various daemons directly to perform certain tasks that they would be prevented by ACLs from doing if they went throu...
CVE-2020-28329
PUBLISHED: 2020-11-24
Barco wePresent WiPG-1600W firmware includes a hardcoded API account and password that is discoverable by inspecting the firmware image. A malicious actor could use this password to access authenticated, administrative functions in the API. Affected Version(s): 2.5.1.8, 2.5.0.25, 2.5.0.24, 2.4.1.19.
CVE-2020-29053
PUBLISHED: 2020-11-24
HRSALE 2.0.0 allows XSS via the admin/project/projects_calendar set_date parameter.
CVE-2020-25640
PUBLISHED: 2020-11-24
A flaw was discovered in WildFly before 21.0.0.Final where, Resource adapter logs plain text JMS password at warning level on connection error, inserting sensitive information in the log file.