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.
9/14/2016
03:00 PM
Torry Campbell
Torry Campbell
Partner Perspectives
50%
50%

Password Reuse: Dont Mix Business With Personal

Employee education, password managers, and multifactor authentication can reduce the risk of a personal breach becoming a corporate security event.

You join a social network, file-sharing service, or other online service, and of course get asked for a password. You’re busy, so you quickly type in one of your existing passwords, maybe even planning to change it later. The risk of a data breach at your company just increased dramatically.

In 2012, criminals managed to steal 112 million login credentials from LinkedIn. The account of someone who worked at Dropbox was one of those stolen, and that person had reused a password from a corporate account as the LinkedIn password. Using that info, criminals then stole over 68 million login credentials from Dropbox. The effort required for cybercriminals to pivot from a personal data breach to an attack against an organization is trivial when personal and business passwords are reused.

We did an internal survey asking employees about their password behaviors. Just over 16% said they use the same or similar passwords for both personal and corporate accounts. While this number may not seem significant, a closer look at the number involved paints a different picture.

If 16% of people reusing passwords is the average for the workforce, there will be 10.9 million examples of password reuse out of 68 million stolen credentials. As an attacker, I would start with people who have used their corporate email address as their username to identify potential targets. Then I might google some of the other names to see if I can determine where they work. For example, if I find [email protected], it is easy to presume that I work for Intel, and that the corporate email address schema is [email protected] I would then go to other popular web services and file-sharing sites (Office 365, Google Drive, Box, etc.) and attempt to gain access. Even if I only get hits on 5% of the 11.5 million who reused their passwords, that is almost 600,000 accounts I potentially now have access to. 

We asked a few more questions in our survey. Almost 25% of respondents reported that they had been notified of a breach on a personal account in the last 12 months, meaning that 4% of our surveyed group who reused passwords had also been breached. If that applies to the entire Intel Security workforce, that is 4,000 accounts throughout the company that offer potential entry points. I don’t like those odds.

Of course, part of the challenge with passwords is remembering them. To help make this easier, more than half of those surveyed rely on a set of less than 10 passwords across the myriad sites they use. Password managers have been developed to address this problem, but unfortunately almost 65% of the group say they’re not using a password manager. The good news is that almost 60% of them use multifactor authentication for some of their personal accounts -- most likely banking- and healthcare-related ones -- which provides extra protection in the event their credentials are stolen.

Passwords continue to be the weakest link in cybersecurity, and reusing passwords makes attacks much easier for cybercriminals. Employee education, password managers, and multifactor authentication are the top three tools that can be used to reduce the risk of a personal breach becoming a corporate security event. 

Torry Campbell is the Chief Technology Officer for Endpoint and Management technologies for Intel Security, formerly McAfee. From a decade at McAfee, he couples his security operations background with product management, development, and customer implementation experience to ... View Full Bio
Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
sillieabbe
50%
50%
sillieabbe,
User Rank: Apprentice
9/14/2016 | 9:55:24 PM
Password Headache
At the root of the password headache is the cognitive phenomena called "interference of memory", by which we cannot firmly remember more than 5 text passwords on average.  What worries us is not the password, but the textual password.  The textual memory is only a small part of what we remember.  We could think of making use of the larger part of our memory that is less subject to interference of memory.  More attention could be paid to the efforts of expanding the password system to include images, particularly KNOWN images, as well as conventional texts.

 

Are you aware of this?

https://youtu.be/-KEE2VdDnY0
COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 9/25/2020
Hacking Yourself: Marie Moe and Pacemaker Security
Gary McGraw Ph.D., Co-founder Berryville Institute of Machine Learning,  9/21/2020
Startup Aims to Map and Track All the IT and Security Things
Kelly Jackson Higgins, Executive Editor at Dark Reading,  9/22/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
Special Report: Computing's New Normal
This special report examines how IT security organizations have adapted to the "new normal" of computing and what the long-term effects will be. Read it and get a unique set of perspectives on issues ranging from new threats & vulnerabilities as a result of remote working to how enterprise security strategy will be affected long term.
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-15208
PUBLISHED: 2020-09-25
In tensorflow-lite before versions 1.15.4, 2.0.3, 2.1.2, 2.2.1 and 2.3.1, when determining the common dimension size of two tensors, TFLite uses a `DCHECK` which is no-op outside of debug compilation modes. Since the function always returns the dimension of the first tensor, malicious attackers can ...
CVE-2020-15209
PUBLISHED: 2020-09-25
In tensorflow-lite before versions 1.15.4, 2.0.3, 2.1.2, 2.2.1 and 2.3.1, a crafted TFLite model can force a node to have as input a tensor backed by a `nullptr` buffer. This can be achieved by changing a buffer index in the flatbuffer serialization to convert a read-only tensor to a read-write one....
CVE-2020-15210
PUBLISHED: 2020-09-25
In tensorflow-lite before versions 1.15.4, 2.0.3, 2.1.2, 2.2.1 and 2.3.1, if a TFLite saved model uses the same tensor as both input and output of an operator, then, depending on the operator, we can observe a segmentation fault or just memory corruption. We have patched the issue in d58c96946b and ...
CVE-2020-15211
PUBLISHED: 2020-09-25
In TensorFlow Lite before versions 1.15.4, 2.0.3, 2.1.2, 2.2.1 and 2.3.1, saved models in the flatbuffer format use a double indexing scheme: a model has a set of subgraphs, each subgraph has a set of operators and each operator has a set of input/output tensors. The flatbuffer format uses indices f...
CVE-2020-15212
PUBLISHED: 2020-09-25
In TensorFlow Lite before versions 2.2.1 and 2.3.1, models using segment sum can trigger writes outside of bounds of heap allocated buffers by inserting negative elements in the segment ids tensor. Users having access to `segment_ids_data` can alter `output_index` and then write to outside of `outpu...