Vulnerabilities / Threats

8/13/2010
02:26 PM
Dark Reading
Dark Reading
Slideshows
50%
50%

Strategic Security Survey: Global Threat, Local Pain

Highlights of exclusive InformationWeek Analytics research as it appears in "Global Threat, Local Pain," our report assessing whether the high-profile infiltration of corporate networks worldwide (Google China leaps to mind) is forcing execs to reconsider their security strategies and pony up related resources.
Previous
1 of 6
Next


Operation Aurora, the massive cyberassault on Google, Adobe, Juniper, Rackspace and others, proved that intellectual property is as much a target as credit-card data and other customer info, so perhaps it's no coincidence that more than 90% of the 1,002 business technology and security professionals who responded to our survey expressed concern that such an exploit could affect their organizations. Nearly one-third are "very concerned" that it could happen to them.

As we watched the news and read the coverage in both technical and mainstream media outlets, we saw people finally waking up. CISOs everywhere got copies of the venerable, "Could this happen to us?" email from management and had to answer questions about how they could hope to fend off these attacks if Google, which employs hundreds of security pros, had to withdraw from the largest emerging market and leave millions on the table.

Security researchers group these attacks under the category of advanced persistent threat, or APT. We see APT as shorthand for a targeted assault, where the attacker’s skill level and resources are advanced. When they get in, often via social engineering, they seek to stay undetected and tunnel deeper into the network, then quietly export valuable data. Cleaning up the mess is an expensive nightmare. As we said, government entities have been using this terminology for some time, but this was the first major announcement of a successful zero-day attack being conducted against a private company. The fact is, after several years of both our budgets and our data being under siege, few organizations have the means to fight off world-class attackers. But putting your head in the sand is a bad plan, as is throwing up your hands and blaming upper management. As we’ve said before, in every security survey we deploy, a healthy percentage of commenters say they long for a major breach to wake business leaders up.


Learn more about InformationWeek Analytics' Global Threat, Local Pain: 2010 Strategic Security Survey.

Previous
1 of 6
Next
Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Want Your Daughter to Succeed in Cyber? Call Her John
John De Santis, CEO, HyTrust,  5/16/2018
New Mexico Man Sentenced on DDoS, Gun Charges
Dark Reading Staff 5/18/2018
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
Flash Poll
[Strategic Security Report] Navigating the Threat Intelligence Maze
[Strategic Security Report] Navigating the Threat Intelligence Maze
Most enterprises are using threat intel services, but many are still figuring out how to use the data they're collecting. In this Dark Reading survey we give you a look at what they're doing today - and where they hope to go.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2018-11354
PUBLISHED: 2018-05-22
In Wireshark 2.6.0, the IEEE 1905.1a dissector could crash. This was addressed in epan/dissectors/packet-ieee1905.c by making a certain correction to string handling.
CVE-2018-11355
PUBLISHED: 2018-05-22
In Wireshark 2.6.0, the RTCP dissector could crash. This was addressed in epan/dissectors/packet-rtcp.c by avoiding a buffer overflow for packet status chunks.
CVE-2018-11356
PUBLISHED: 2018-05-22
In Wireshark 2.6.0, 2.4.0 to 2.4.6, and 2.2.0 to 2.2.14, the DNS dissector could crash. This was addressed in epan/dissectors/packet-dns.c by avoiding a NULL pointer dereference for an empty name in an SRV record.
CVE-2018-11357
PUBLISHED: 2018-05-22
In Wireshark 2.6.0, 2.4.0 to 2.4.6, and 2.2.0 to 2.2.14, the LTP dissector and other dissectors could consume excessive memory. This was addressed in epan/tvbuff.c by rejecting negative lengths.
CVE-2018-11358
PUBLISHED: 2018-05-22
In Wireshark 2.6.0, 2.4.0 to 2.4.6, and 2.2.0 to 2.2.14, the Q.931 dissector could crash. This was addressed in epan/dissectors/packet-q931.c by avoiding a use-after-free after a malformed packet prevented certain cleanup.