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.

News

4/15/2015
11:30 AM
Connect Directly
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Youth, Apathy, And Salary Dictate Mobile Threats To Business

Mobile cyberattacks may not be a thing today, but a new study shows how vulnerable businesses are via user smartphones and tablets.

Hackers may not be going after mobile devices en masse just yet, but if and when they do, it will be way too easy, a new study shows.

A worldwide survey by Aruba Networks of more than 11,500 employees spanning 23 countries found some disheartening mindset and behavior trends in the business user space:  more than half of employees share work and personal devices regularly, nearly 20% don’t password-protect their mobile devices, 22% forgo security measures for easier device-sharing, and 56% say they would disobey their superiors if necessary to get work done via their devices.

"While you think users are doing the right thing, they are [instead] doing what they want to do," says Trent Fierro, senior product manager for Aruba, which published its findings yesterday. "Password-sharing and device-sharing is very common."

Even more alarming was that the financial services and technology sectors didn't fare well when it came to protecting data and their devices: nearly 40% of workers at financial institutions say they lost corporate data via misuse of a mobile device. High-tech workers are twice as likely to hand over their device password if IT asks for it, than users in the hospitality or education sectors.

And here's a data point to stir a little lively debate over dinner: men are 20% more likely to lose personal or client data via smartphone misuse, and 40% more likely to be identity theft victims, the study found.

Younger people are more likely to suffer identity theft and loss of data than those 55 and over, with the 25-34-year-old age bracket the most likely. The 55-and over set is half as likely to suffer ID theft or data loss.

Employees who make more than $60,000 a year are twice as much at risk of losing company data than those who make less than $18,000 via mobile misuse. "If you're going to target somebody, you'd have the potential to access better information" from a higher-paid employee, Fierro notes.

Kelly Jackson Higgins is the Executive Editor of Dark Reading. She is an award-winning veteran technology and business journalist with more than two decades of experience in reporting and editing for various publications, including Network Computing, Secure Enterprise ... View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
RyanSepe
50%
50%
RyanSepe,
User Rank: Ninja
4/16/2015 | 2:32:52 PM
Re: If you run android 5 you can share safely
Ah ok, I am less familiar with Android. Good, I am glad that this functionality exists in that environment. Its a step in the right direction that I will look into further. Thanks,
RyanSepe
50%
50%
RyanSepe,
User Rank: Ninja
4/16/2015 | 2:31:43 PM
Re: Accountability
That's what I am trying to get at. Is that functionality available from a mobile perspective? If so I was not aware and could you elaborate as to how this is accomplished (The method to which you are referring)?
Dr.T
50%
50%
Dr.T,
User Rank: Ninja
4/16/2015 | 2:30:20 PM
Re: If you run android 5 you can share safely
True, you can enable Multiple User Accounts on Android. That is good but unfortunate not the case in iOS.
RyanSepe
50%
50%
RyanSepe,
User Rank: Ninja
4/16/2015 | 2:29:48 PM
Re: Accountability
Very true. But lets make a connection that if you are sharing a device its normally on the premise that you trust the person and are most likely making it so they can leverage your device as well. At that point you could add your own fingerprint to ensure repeated access. Considering that the sharing of the device is deliberate I think the only way to ensure a means of restriction is segmented user access. IE to build on your example, if you have 2 people and I sign in with my fingerprint I end up getting my own security settings whereas another persons fingerprint will log them in yielding different security settings.
Dr.T
50%
50%
Dr.T,
User Rank: Ninja
4/16/2015 | 2:26:52 PM
Re: Accountability
I think you can still out certain restrictions on mobile device for your kids.
Dr.T
50%
50%
Dr.T,
User Rank: Ninja
4/16/2015 | 2:25:19 PM
Re: Accountability
If you share device you are basically sharing password too, fingerprint scanner is a good way to overcome that problem.
Dr.T
50%
50%
Dr.T,
User Rank: Ninja
4/16/2015 | 2:22:55 PM
Mobile device hacking?
 

I would like to take it in this sense, it may be the fact that not everything runs on mobile devices such as Java, Flash, .... and that actually crates a level of security where the hackers need to find out a different ways of hacking and that is basically too much work.
SgS125
50%
50%
SgS125,
User Rank: Ninja
4/16/2015 | 9:30:13 AM
If you run android 5 you can share safely
From the Lollipop site:
  • Device Sharing


    More flexible sharing with family and friends
    • Multiple users for phones. If you forget your phone, you still can call any of your friends (or access any of your messages, photos etc.) by simply logging into another Android phone running Lollipop. Also perfect for families who want to share a phone, but not their stuff
    • Guest user for phones and tablets means you can lend your device and not your info
    • Screen pinning: pin your screen so another user can access just that content without messing with your other stuff 
RyanSepe
50%
50%
RyanSepe,
User Rank: Ninja
4/16/2015 | 8:35:14 AM
Re: Accountability
Ah thats a good point. I am not sure, besides not letting your children play with the device, how to lock that down. On PC's you can set non-administrative users so they have minimal capabilities but that functionality doesn't really carry over into the mobile realm.
Kelly Jackson Higgins
50%
50%
Kelly Jackson Higgins,
User Rank: Strategist
4/15/2015 | 3:39:05 PM
Re: Accountability
I was a little confused about the device-sharing thing, but one example Aruba gave was letting your kids play on your smartphone or tablet. 
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
News
Inside the Ransomware Campaigns Targeting Exchange Servers
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  4/2/2021
Commentary
Beyond MITRE ATT&CK: The Case for a New Cyber Kill Chain
Rik Turner, Principal Analyst, Infrastructure Solutions, Omdia,  3/30/2021
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
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
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2015-20001
PUBLISHED: 2021-04-11
In the standard library in Rust before 1.2.0, BinaryHeap is not panic-safe. The binary heap is left in an inconsistent state when the comparison of generic elements inside sift_up or sift_down_range panics. This bug leads to a drop of zeroed memory as an arbitrary type, which can result in a memory ...
CVE-2020-36317
PUBLISHED: 2021-04-11
In the standard library in Rust before 1.49.0, String::retain() function has a panic safety problem. It allows creation of a non-UTF-8 Rust string when the provided closure panics. This bug could result in a memory safety violation when other string APIs assume that UTF-8 encoding is used on the sam...
CVE-2020-36318
PUBLISHED: 2021-04-11
In the standard library in Rust before 1.49.0, VecDeque::make_contiguous has a bug that pops the same element more than once under certain condition. This bug could result in a use-after-free or double free.
CVE-2021-28875
PUBLISHED: 2021-04-11
In the standard library in Rust before 1.50.0, read_to_end() does not validate the return value from Read in an unsafe context. This bug could lead to a buffer overflow.
CVE-2021-28876
PUBLISHED: 2021-04-11
In the standard library in Rust before 1.52.0, the Zip implementation has a panic safety issue. It calls __iterator_get_unchecked() more than once for the same index when the underlying iterator panics (in certain conditions). This bug could lead to a memory safety violation due to an unmet safety r...