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.

Vulnerabilities / Threats

Cloud Vendors Punt Security To Users

Nearly 80% of cloud computing providers say customers don't evaluate data security before selecting a vendor, according to a recent Ponemon survey.

10 Massive Security Breaches
(click image for larger view)
Slideshow: 10 Massive Security Breaches
It looks like cloud computing users and vendors are not on the same page when it comes to data security.

Cloud computing vendors and users each say the other group has the primary responsibility for taking charge of data security in the cloud, according to a recent Ponemon survey of 127 cloud computing providers in the United States and Europe.

For example, 69% of cloud providers think that cloud users are most responsible for security, and only 16% think it's a shared responsibility. But according to a Ponemon study conducted last year, 33% of users see cloud security as a shared responsibility, and 32% think that the provider alone is most responsible. Only 35% of cloud users, meanwhile, think that users should be most responsible for cloud security.

Cloud providers' failure to take responsibility for data security is a problem, said John P. Pironti, president of IP Architects, in a phone interview. "Customers are looking for security, but they're expecting that the provider will be addressing it," he said.

Legally speaking, however, cloud providers really aren't responsible for data security, as long as they make some effort, according to their end user license agreements. "When you read the licensing agreements for cloud providers, they don't need to do anything with security--they take 'best effort,'" said Pironti. Best effort means that should a case come to court, "as long as they can show they're doing some effort, and not gross negligence, then they're covering themselves."

According to the Ponemon study, cloud providers make a minimal effort because they don't think that their data security practices will win them customers. Indeed, only 20% of providers think that customers evaluate data security before selecting a vendor. As a result, the report found that most cloud providers are focused on "delivering the features their customers want, such as low-cost solutions with fast deployment that improves customer service and increases the efficiency of the IT function," rather than security.

Perhaps because cloud providers often don't take primary responsibility for data security, they're relatively bullish on the safety of their offerings. For example, 61% of cloud users, versus 50% of cloud providers, think health information is too risky to store in the cloud, and 62% of users versus 47% of providers think financial data is too risky. Furthermore, 68% of users think intellectual property is too risky to store in the cloud, versus just 42% of providers.

As users' cloud perceptions reveal, there's still a great deal of caution over embracing the cloud. "That's why we've seen that most enterprises aren't open to public cloud models, and if enterprises are going for a hybrid model, even then, they're only putting low value-data in the cloud," said Pironti. He said that's the right approach. "We have to try and experiment and innovate, and in innovation comes challenge."

But one of those challenges is that concentrating large amounts of information in one location creates a single point of security failure, not unlike, say, cracking RSA SecurID. "Think of the cloud as concentrated data, assets, information, and the target profile increases dramatically in its attractiveness," said Pironti. "So [cloud providers] can't be doing it as good as everyone else, they need to be doing it exponentially better."

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 8/10/2020
Researcher Finds New Office Macro Attacks for MacOS
Curtis Franklin Jr., Senior Editor at Dark Reading,  8/7/2020
Exploiting Google Cloud Platform With Ease
Dark Reading Staff 8/6/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Current Issue
Special Report: Computing's New Normal, a Dark Reading Perspective
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
The Changing Face of Threat Intelligence
The Changing Face of Threat Intelligence
This special report takes a look at how enterprises are using threat intelligence, as well as emerging best practices for integrating threat intel into security operations and incident response. Download it today!
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-8720
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-13
Buffer overflow in a subsystem for some Intel(R) Server Boards, Server Systems and Compute Modules before version 1.59 may allow a privileged user to potentially enable denial of service via local access.
CVE-2020-12300
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-13
Uninitialized pointer in BIOS firmware for Intel(R) Server Board Families S2600CW, S2600KP, S2600TP, and S2600WT may allow a privileged user to potentially enable escalation of privilege via local access.
CVE-2020-12301
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-13
Improper initialization in BIOS firmware for Intel(R) Server Board Families S2600ST, S2600BP and S2600WF may allow a privileged user to potentially enable escalation of privilege via local access.
CVE-2020-7307
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-13
Unprotected Storage of Credentials vulnerability in McAfee Data Loss Prevention (DLP) for Mac prior to 11.5.2 allows local users to gain access to the RiskDB username and password via unprotected log files containing plain text credentials.
CVE-2020-8679
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-13
Out-of-bounds write in Kernel Mode Driver for some Intel(R) Graphics Drivers before version 26.20.100.7755 may allow an authenticated user to potentially enable denial of service via local access.