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.

Threat Intelligence

6/14/2017
09:00 PM
Connect Directly
Twitter
LinkedIn
Google+
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Hospital Email Security in Critical Condition as DMARC Adoption Lags

Healthcare providers put patient data at risk by failing to protect their email domains with DMARC adoption.

Healthcare providers are slow to adopt Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting and Conformance (DMARC) protocol, and it's dangerously compromising their email security, according to new research by the Global Cyber Alliance (GCA).

The GCA scanned nearly 100 hospitals, half for-profit and half public, to evaluate the extent of DMARC adoption. Nearly all (99%) of the largest public and private hospitals have failed to secure their email domains from threat actors.

DMARC protects against phishing attacks by verifying whether an email is truly from the domain it claims to be from. It's designed to help businesses stop spammers from using an email domain to trick customers, partners, and employees into sharing data. DMARC discloses attempts to spam, phish, or spearphish a business brand or name.

"This is particularly critical for hospitals and healthcare companies," says GCA president and CEO Philip Reitinger, of DMARC. "Your health data is actually much more valuable to someone who wants to spoof your identity than your credit data or username."

Attackers target healthcare organizations by using phishing emails with malicious attachments to target medical data stored on hospital networks. These records contain personally identifiable information like home addresses, Social Security numbers, etc.

"Most intrusions still start with email," says Reitinger. "It's still the weapon of choice for bad guys to get things they shouldn't get."

Black Hat USA returns to the fabulous Mandalay Bay in Las Vegas, Nevada, July 22-27, 2017. Click for information on the conference schedule and to register.

Verizon's 2017 Data Breach Investigations Report (DBIR) found 15% of data breaches in the last year involved healthcare businesses. Two-thirds of malware installed on healthcare networks arrived via email attachment, sent by hackers looking for personal data.

Researchers found only one of the hospitals using DMARC has deployed to a level that prevents spam from arriving in users' inboxes. Twenty-two of the 48 largest private hospitals, and six of the 50 largest public hospitals, have deployed DMARC "in a limited capacity," says Reitinger.

There are multiple levels of DMARC adoption. "Limited capacity" indicates deployment at the monitor level, which tells organizations someone is trying to spoof their customers with a fake domain name but does not block spam delivery. This is a sign hospitals want to know whether they have correctly deployed DMARC, he explains. It means they are headed in the right direction.

Reitinger cites several reasons for slow DMARC adoption. "Part of the problem is awareness, part of it is incentive," he says, noting that some people aren't aware of DMARC at all.

Incentive is a powerful motivator for CEOs and CFOs worried about customer trust. CISOs and CIOs can deploy DMARC and prevent customers from getting phished, but they aren't the executives interacting with consumers. The CEO relies on emails going through and therefore has more incentive to ensure DMARC is deployed effectively.

"Email is still the main way businesses communicate online and you want to make sure you do it right," says Reitinger. Many organizations are worried they will make mistakes and prevent emails from going through.

"DMARC, at least for small and medium-sized businesses, is not that complicated to deploy," he explains. "It's more complicated, and takes more effort, for bigger entities. It depends on how complicated the infrastructure you use to send mail is."

Healthcare isn't the only industry lagging in DMARC adoption, he continues. Most businesses are still in monitoring mode. Reitinger's statements echo findings from the Federal Trade Commission, which conducted research on 500 businesses to evaluate usage of DMARC, Sender Policy Framework (SPF), and DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM).

The FTC discovered most (86%) of organizations use SPF to verify IP addresses and DKIM for digital signatures. Only one-third use DMARC, and less than 10% are using the strongest available setting, which tells recipients to reject unauthenticated messages.

Related Content:

Kelly Sheridan is the Staff Editor at Dark Reading, where she focuses on cybersecurity news and analysis. She is a business technology journalist who previously reported for InformationWeek, where she covered Microsoft, and Insurance & Technology, where she covered financial ... View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
AI Is Everywhere, but Don't Ignore the Basics
Howie Xu, Vice President of AI and Machine Learning at Zscaler,  9/10/2019
Fed Kaspersky Ban Made Permanent by New Rules
Dark Reading Staff 9/11/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Current Issue
7 Threats & Disruptive Forces Changing the Face of Cybersecurity
This Dark Reading Tech Digest gives an in-depth look at the biggest emerging threats and disruptive forces that are changing the face of cybersecurity today.
Flash Poll
The State of IT Operations and Cybersecurity Operations
The State of IT Operations and Cybersecurity Operations
Your enterprise's cyber risk may depend upon the relationship between the IT team and the security team. Heres some insight on what's working and what isn't in the data center.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-4147
PUBLISHED: 2019-09-16
IBM Sterling File Gateway 2.2.0.0 through 6.0.1.0 is vulnerable to SQL injection. A remote attacker could send specially-crafted SQL statements, which could allow the attacker to view, add, modify or delete information in the back-end database. IBM X-Force ID: 158413.
CVE-2019-5481
PUBLISHED: 2019-09-16
Double-free vulnerability in the FTP-kerberos code in cURL 7.52.0 to 7.65.3.
CVE-2019-5482
PUBLISHED: 2019-09-16
Heap buffer overflow in the TFTP protocol handler in cURL 7.19.4 to 7.65.3.
CVE-2019-15741
PUBLISHED: 2019-09-16
An issue was discovered in GitLab Omnibus 7.4 through 12.2.1. An unsafe interaction with logrotate could result in a privilege escalation
CVE-2019-16370
PUBLISHED: 2019-09-16
The PGP signing plugin in Gradle before 6.0 relies on the SHA-1 algorithm, which might allow an attacker to replace an artifact with a different one that has the same SHA-1 message digest, a related issue to CVE-2005-4900.