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.

Risk

11/17/2011
09:35 AM
50%
50%

GAO Rips IRS Taxpayer Data Security

Auditors find holes in the federal revenue agency's database access control and security.

A new report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) ripped into the IRS once again for insufficient access controls, database maintenance, and monitoring necessary to keep taxpayer information safe. The report's findings echo many of the issues seen in database and application security across many large enterprises today, experts say. Released last week, the GAO's financial audit (PDF) reported that during the past fiscal year, the IRS still had glaring holes in internal controls over information security, in spite of initiating efforts to address concerns levied by the GAO in past years.

"IRS improved several system-level controls, including the encryption of data transferred between some accounting systems, upgrades to critical network devices on the agency's internal network, and strengthening of the architecture of an important financial system to eliminate identified areas of weakness," the report read. "However, despite these efforts and enhanced management attention toward controls, a majority of the known weaknesses in the agency's systems and internal network and physical security controls remained unresolved in fiscal year 2011."

According to Don Gray, chief security strategist for Solutionary, an Omaha-based managed security service provider, the IRS isn't special in the fact that it hasn't been able to keep up with regulator demands.

"They've partially addressed the findings that were found before, and they've somewhat implemented some controls. Quite frankly, we see that a lot in large organizations," he says. "For instance, the IRS has this system it was supposed to put in place to collect and analyze user activity. They've got it in a couple of applications, but they don't have it in all the key financial applications. That is something we see time and time again at the corporate level."

Gray says he often sees organizations incorporate monitoring, for instance, on network devices and platforms, but then fail to monitor applications and databases.

"On network devices and platforms, that's easy. Everybody can do it on a Cisco device or a Windows OS," he says. "It's when you actually get down to wanting to tailor that and give yourself visibility on the applications and database side that it gets hard."

Read the rest of this article on Dark Reading.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Oldest First  |  Newest First  |  Threaded View
Why Cyber-Risk Is a C-Suite Issue
Marc Wilczek, Digital Strategist & CIO Advisor,  11/12/2019
6 Small-Business Password Managers
Curtis Franklin Jr., Senior Editor at Dark Reading,  11/8/2019
Unreasonable Security Best Practices vs. Good Risk Management
Jack Freund, Director, Risk Science at RiskLens,  11/13/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: This comment is waiting for review by our moderators.
Current Issue
Navigating the Deluge of Security Data
In this Tech Digest, Dark Reading shares the experiences of some top security practitioners as they navigate volumes of security data. We examine some examples of how enterprises can cull this data to find the clues they need.
Flash Poll
Rethinking Enterprise Data Defense
Rethinking Enterprise Data Defense
Frustrated with recurring intrusions and breaches, cybersecurity professionals are questioning some of the industrys conventional wisdom. Heres a look at what theyre thinking about.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-18885
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-14
fs/btrfs/volumes.c in the Linux kernel before 5.1 allows a btrfs_verify_dev_extents NULL pointer dereference via a crafted btrfs image because fs_devices->devices is mishandled within find_device, aka CID-09ba3bc9dd15.
CVE-2019-18895
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-14
Scanguard through 2019-11-12 on Windows has Insecure Permissions for the installation directory, leading to privilege escalation via a Trojan horse executable file.
CVE-2019-18957
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-14
Microstrategy Library in MicroStrategy before 2019 before 11.1.3 has reflected XSS.
CVE-2019-16863
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-14
STMicroelectronics ST33TPHF2ESPI TPM devices before 2019-09-12 allow attackers to extract the ECDSA private key via a side-channel timing attack because ECDSA scalar multiplication is mishandled, aka TPM-FAIL.
CVE-2019-18949
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-14
SnowHaze before 2.6.6 is sometimes too late to honor a per-site JavaScript blocking setting, which leads to unintended JavaScript execution via a chain of webpage redirections targeted to the user's browser configuration.