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.

Partner Perspectives  Connecting marketers to our tech communities.
02:08 PM
Vincent Weafer
Vincent Weafer
Partner Perspectives

McAfee Labs’ 2016-2020 Threat Predictions, Part 2

Previewing 2020 to inform long-term security strategies.

My last post previewed the threat trends and developments likely to shape the cybersecurity space in 2016. This post revisits the McAfee Labs Threat Predictions Report to preview the 2020 threat landscape and the likely cybersecurity industry responses to it.

The Intel Security report reflects the insights of 21 cybersecurity thought leaders within our McAfee Labs, Office of the CTO, Foundstone Professional Services, and Advanced Threat Research teams. The resulting look ahead attempts to predict how the types of threat actors will change, how attackers’ behaviors and targets will change, and how the industry will meet these challenges over the next five years.

If there’s one underlying message, it is that the future, more than ever, will require security technologies that enable rather than hinder their businesses, and collaboration that helps them better understand and preempt the threats confronting them over the long term.

Here are some key threat predictions from the report through 2020:

  • Below-the-OS attacks. Attackers could look for weaknesses in firmware and hardware as applications and operating systems are hardened against conventional attacks. The lure would be the broad control attackers can potentially gain through these attacks, as they can conceivably access any number of resources and commandeer administration and control capabilities.
  • Detection evasion. Attackers will attempt to avoid detection by targeting new attack surfaces, employing sophisticated attack methods, and actively evading security technology. Difficult-to-detect attack styles could include fileless threats, encrypted infiltrations, sandbox evasion malware, exploits of remote shell and remote control protocols, and the aforementioned below-the-OS attacks targeting and exploiting master boot records (MBR), BIOS, and firmware.
  • New devices, new attack surfaces. The ease and affordable cost of developing connected devices will fuel an explosion of new products. While there has not yet been a surge in IoT and wearable technology, by 2020 we may see installed bases of these systems reach substantial enough penetration levels that they will attract attackers. To ensure that security and privacy aren’t playing catchup to innovation, technology vendors and vertical-solution providers will work to establish user education and industry best practices, as well as build security controls into device architectures where appropriate.
  • Cyber espionage goes corporate. As is the case in so many other areas of crime-ware, the dark market for malware code and hacking services could enable cyber espionage malware used in public sector and corporate attacks to be used at scale for financial intelligence-gathering and the manipulation of markets in favor of attackers’ financial interests.
  • Security industry response. The security industry will develop more effective tools to detect and correct sophisticated attacks. Behavioral analytics could be developed to detect irregular user activities that might indicate compromised accounts. Shared threat intelligence is likely to deliver faster and better protection of systems. Automated detection and correction technology promises to protect enterprises from the most common attacks, freeing up IT security staff to focus on the most critical security incidents.

Anticipating and preempting adversary attacks requires that we match the intelligence exchange, cloud computing and delivery power, platform agility, and human resource assets that cyber criminals regularly leverage on the dark Web. To win the battles against future threats, organizations must see more, learn more, detect and respond faster, and fully utilize all the technical and human resources at their disposal.

Long viewed as a security liability, the cloud, together with on-premises defenses, will allow organizations to leverage the power and scale of shared threat intelligence, behavioral analytics, and machine-learning capabilities that would otherwise be beyond their reach.

In our next post, my colleague Michael Sentonas will discuss the cloud’s cybersecurity “silver lining.” This prospect of matching and eclipsing adversaries’ capabilities through cloud-based capabilities is one of many things that have my peers and I optimistically looking forward to 2016, 2020, and beyond. 

Vincent Weafer is Senior Vice President of Intel Security, managing more than 350 researchers across 30 countries. He's also responsible for managing millions of sensors across the globe, all dedicated to protecting our customers from the latest cyber threats. Vincent's team ... View Full Bio
Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
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
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win an Amazon Gift Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: A GONG is as good as a cyber attack.
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
PUBLISHED: 2020-11-23
A flaw was found in the Cephx authentication protocol in versions before 15.2.6 and before 14.2.14, where it does not verify Ceph clients correctly and is then vulnerable to replay attacks in Nautilus. This flaw allows an attacker with access to the Ceph cluster network to authenticate with the Ceph...
PUBLISHED: 2020-11-23
A flaw was found in rhacm versions before 2.0.5 and before 2.1.0. Two internal service APIs were incorrectly provisioned using a test certificate from the source repository. This would result in all installations using the same certificates. If an attacker could observe network traffic internal to a...
PUBLISHED: 2020-11-23
A flaw was found in the psql interactive terminal of PostgreSQL in versions before 13.1, before 12.5, before 11.10, before 10.15, before 9.6.20 and before 9.5.24. If an interactive psql session uses \gset when querying a compromised server, the attacker can execute arbitrary code as the operating sy...
PUBLISHED: 2020-11-23
TYPO3 is an open source PHP based web content management system. In TYPO3 from version 10.4.0, and before version 10.4.10, RSS widgets are susceptible to XML external entity processing. This vulnerability is reasonable, but is theoretical - it was not possible to actually reproduce the vulnerability...
PUBLISHED: 2020-11-23
prive/formulaires/configurer_preferences.php in SPIP before 3.2.8 does not properly validate the couleur, display, display_navigation, display_outils, imessage, and spip_ecran parameters.