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

10/26/2009
05:22 PM
George V. Hulme
George V. Hulme
Commentary
50%
50%

UK Jobs Website Hacked

The news site Guardian is warning members of its UK jobs site that the site has been breached, and that personal data may been snagged.

The news site Guardian is warning members of its UK jobs site that the site has been breached, and that personal data may been snagged.Thanks to a police request (because the incident is under investigation), according to a statement posted by the Guardian, we don't yet know how the breach occurred, or what information was stolen. Here's from the statement over the weekend:

We can confirm that we are investigating a breach of security to the guardian jobs site that we were alerted to yesterday. We have been assured by our provider that the system is now secure and we have identified and contacted everyone who may have been affected. That statement was later updated to explain that about 500,000 users were contacted.
What's liable to have to have been stolen? It's probably a safe assumption that users affected by the breach had their resumes accessed, and contact information. Let's hope no log-on credentials or any credit card information was accessible.

Some will argue that it's no big deal stealing resumes and contact information. But if that's the case, why would cyber thieves engage in what the Guardian described as a "deliberate and sophisticated crime" to anonymously grab data that wouldn't be useful to them?

The only ones who can answer that is the person (or persons) involved in the attack.

There's some reason job sites are being targeted. Earlier this year, job site Monster said it was victimized for the third time in three years.

A reasonable bet is that the data being gleaned from these attacks is for scams, e-mail phishing, voice mail vishing attacks aimed at job seekers.

So, if I had my data held at that site, I'd be on the lookout for some type of targeted attack, or scam, aimed at jobseekers.

Note that this hack only affected the UK jobseekers site, and not the USA Guardian jobs site.

For my security and technology observations throughout the day, consider following me on Twitter.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Threaded  |  Newest First  |  Oldest First
Why Vulnerable Code Is Shipped Knowingly
Chris Eng, Chief Research Officer, Veracode,  11/30/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
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-2020-16123
PUBLISHED: 2020-12-04
An Ubuntu-specific patch in PulseAudio created a race condition where the snap policy module would fail to identify a client connection from a snap as coming from a snap if SCM_CREDENTIALS were missing, allowing the snap to connect to PulseAudio without proper confinement. This could be exploited by...
CVE-2018-21270
PUBLISHED: 2020-12-03
Versions less than 0.0.6 of the Node.js stringstream module are vulnerable to an out-of-bounds read because of allocation of uninitialized buffers when a number is passed in the input stream (when using Node.js 4.x).
CVE-2020-26248
PUBLISHED: 2020-12-03
In the PrestaShop module "productcomments" before version 4.2.1, an attacker can use a Blind SQL injection to retrieve data or stop the MySQL service. The problem is fixed in 4.2.1 of the module.
CVE-2020-29529
PUBLISHED: 2020-12-03
HashiCorp go-slug before 0.5.0 does not address attempts at directory traversal involving ../ and symlinks.
CVE-2020-29534
PUBLISHED: 2020-12-03
An issue was discovered in the Linux kernel before 5.9.3. io_uring takes a non-refcounted reference to the files_struct of the process that submitted a request, causing execve() to incorrectly optimize unshare_fd(), aka CID-0f2122045b94.