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

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
News
Former CISA Director Chris Krebs Discusses Risk Management & Threat Intel
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  2/23/2021
Edge-DRsplash-10-edge-articles
Security + Fraud Protection: Your One-Two Punch Against Cyberattacks
Joshua Goldfarb, Director of Product Management at F5,  2/23/2021
News
Cybercrime Groups More Prolific, Focus on Healthcare in 2020
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  2/22/2021
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win an Amazon Gift Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: This comment is waiting for review by our moderators.
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
Building the SOC of the Future
Building the SOC of the Future
Digital transformation, cloud-focused attacks, and a worldwide pandemic. The past year has changed the way business works and the way security teams operate. There is no going back.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2021-27132
PUBLISHED: 2021-02-27
SerComm AG Combo VD625 AGSOT_2.1.0 devices allow CRLF injection (for HTTP header injection) in the download function via the Content-Disposition header.
CVE-2021-25284
PUBLISHED: 2021-02-27
An issue was discovered in through SaltStack Salt before 3002.5. salt.modules.cmdmod can log credentials to the info or error log level.
CVE-2021-3144
PUBLISHED: 2021-02-27
In SaltStack Salt before 3002.5, eauth tokens can be used once after expiration. (They might be used to run command against the salt master or minions.)
CVE-2021-3148
PUBLISHED: 2021-02-27
An issue was discovered in SaltStack Salt before 3002.5. Sending crafted web requests to the Salt API can result in salt.utils.thin.gen_thin() command injection because of different handling of single versus double quotes. This is related to salt/utils/thin.py.
CVE-2021-3151
PUBLISHED: 2021-02-27
i-doit before 1.16.0 is affected by Stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) issues that could allow remote authenticated attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via C__MONITORING__CONFIG__TITLE, SM2__C__MONITORING__CONFIG__TITLE, C__MONITORING__CONFIG__PATH, SM2__C__MONITORING__CONFIG__PATH, C__M...