Vulnerabilities / Threats

8/23/2017
03:24 PM
Connect Directly
Twitter
LinkedIn
Google+
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Phish Bait: DMARC Adoption Failures Leave Companies Exposed

More than 90% of Fortune 500 companies leave customers and brand names vulnerable to domain name spoofing as a result of not fully implementing DMARC.

More than 90% of Fortune 500 companies have not fully adopted Domain-based Message Authentication, Report & Conformance (DMARC), leaving customers, business partners, and brand names exposed to phishing and other attacks that impersonate corporate email domains.

DMARC is a standard technology designed to verify whether an email is from the domain it claims to be from. It creates a whitelist of verified senders, and ensures only authenticated emails are delivered; fake messages are deleted before users see them. It can also be used to see how scammers are misusing corporate information in their attacks.

The email verification standard is the product of a 2007 experiment by Yahoo and PayPal to prevent account-credential phishing. A group of industry organizations including Google, Bank of America, Agari, and others scaled the experiment into what came to be known as DMARC in 2012.

Researchers at Agari recently analyzed public DNS records to learn about corporate DMARC adoption and policies. Their findings, published in the Global DMARC Adoption Report, reflect an overall failure to deploy DMARC across Fortune 500, FTSE 100, and ASX 100 companies.

There are multiple levels of DMARC adoption: Monitor, where unauthenticated messages are monitored but delivered to inboxes; Quarantine, where unauthenticated emails are moved to spam folders; and Reject, which blocks all unauthenticated messages from delivery to any folder

Two-thirds of Fortune 500 companies have not deployed any level of DMARC, according to the report. One-quarter has adopted the Monitor level, 3% have implemented the Quarantine policy, and 5% use Reject.

Monitor level watches for DMARC abuse but does nothing to prevent it, meaning companies can collect information but consumers are vulnerable. DMARC adoption is of little use unless companies use Quarantine or Reject, which is why Agari reports 92% of the Fortune 500 is not protecting customers even though 25% have adopted the Monitor policy.

Patrick Peterson, Agari founder and executive chairman, desecribes DMARC's Monitor level for a healthcare consumer this way: "Until the organization she does business with says 'quarantine the phish' or 'reject the phish,' they're not actually protecting her and she's still vulnerable," he says.

Two-thirds of the Financial Times Stock Exchange (FTSE) 100 have not published any DMARC policy, 26% use Monitor, 1% have adopted Quarantine, and 6% have implemented Reject. Of the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX) 100, 73% have not adopted any level of DMARC, 23% use Monitor, 1% use Quarantine, and 3% have implemented Reject.

"It definitely shocked me," says Peterson of the low DMARC adoption rate.

There are several reasons companies are hesitant to pursue full DMARC adoption or haven't deployed any level of policy. The dominant reason is education, he says. There are many security teams in the Fortune 500 that still don't understand how DMARC works. Oftentimes these companies are wary of new tech and don't want to be the first to try it. This is the case for DMARC, even though the technology has been around for more than five years, Peterson says.

"This is new and different," he explains. "Whether it's easy or hard or there's playbooks or there aren't … any time they have something new and different, a lot of them run for the hills because they tend to be more conservative. They don't like new and different, they like tried and true."

Some security teams understand DMARC but don't fully grasp the harm and abuse going on in company email channels. Business employees see email as their highest ROI form of communicating with customers and prospects, says Peterson, but security teams often don't.

When they learn how widespread email security problems are, they realize how much business process change is necessary before email is "no longer the wild, wild West," he notes. Those without strong leadership will opt to wait on DMARC adoption and say, "let's worry about this later."

It's time for more CISO leaders to "wade into the business" and take control of the situation, says Peterson. The take-charge mentality is necessary to push DMARC implementation, both within the business and across the industry. There is a majority adoption rate in the business services, financial, technology, and transportation sectors.

Peterson points to financial services as a "champion" for DMARC. Industry leaders Bank of America and JP Morgan, both involved in its creation, demonstrated its workability to other businesses and motivated them to use DMARC as well. If other organizations and industries took the same leadership profile, he says, DMARC adoption would increase.

Related Content:

Learn from the industry’s most knowledgeable CISOs and IT security experts in a setting that is conducive to interaction and conversation. Click for more info and to register.

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
What We Talk About When We Talk About Risk
Jack Jones, Chairman, FAIR Institute,  7/11/2018
Ticketmaster Breach Part of Massive Payment Card Hacking Campaign
Jai Vijayan, Freelance writer,  7/10/2018
7 Ways to Keep DNS Safe
Curtis Franklin Jr., Senior Editor at Dark Reading,  7/10/2018
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: Locked device, Ha! I knew there was another way in.
Current Issue
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2017-15137
PUBLISHED: 2018-07-16
The OpenShift image import whitelist failed to enforce restrictions correctly when running commands such as "oc tag", for example. This could allow a user with access to OpenShift to run images from registries that should not be allowed.
CVE-2017-17541
PUBLISHED: 2018-07-16
A Cross-site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Fortinet FortiManager 6.0.0, 5.6.4 and below versions, FortiAnalyzer 6.0.0, 5.6.4 and below versions allows inject Javascript code and HTML tags through the CN value of CA and CRL certificates via the import CA and CRL certificates feature.
CVE-2018-1046
PUBLISHED: 2018-07-16
pdns before version 4.1.2 is vulnerable to a buffer overflow in dnsreplay. In the dnsreplay tool provided with PowerDNS Authoritative, replaying a specially crafted PCAP file can trigger a stack-based buffer overflow, leading to a crash and potentially arbitrary code execution. This buffer overflow ...
CVE-2018-10840
PUBLISHED: 2018-07-16
Linux kernel is vulnerable to a heap-based buffer overflow in the fs/ext4/xattr.c:ext4_xattr_set_entry() function. An attacker could exploit this by operating on a mounted crafted ext4 image.
CVE-2018-10857
PUBLISHED: 2018-07-16
git-annex is vulnerable to a private data exposure and exfiltration attack. It could expose the content of files located outside the git-annex repository, or content from a private web server on localhost or the LAN.