Category: threat

In today’s digital landscape, cybersecurity has become an ongoing concern for organizations and individuals alike. As cyberattacks evolve in sophistication, one of the most significant vulnerabilities remains the traditional password-based authentication system. Passwords, once a cornerstone of online security, are increasingly being targeted by cybercriminals through techniques like phishing, brute force attacks, and credential stuffing. In response, many organizations are shifting towards passwordless authentication methods. But can these passwordless tactics truly thwart major cyber threats? Let’s explore the potential and limitations.

Understanding Passwordless Authentication

Passwordless authentication refers to systems and methods that allow users to access accounts or services without needing to enter a password. Instead, it relies on other factors such as biometric identification (fingerprints, facial recognition), one-time codes sent via email or SMS, or authentication apps like Google Authenticator. The ultimate goal is to eliminate passwords altogether, reducing the risk of traditional security weaknesses.

 

Strengthening Security: A Step Forward

One of the most compelling reasons for adopting passwordless methods is to directly address the major security flaws associated with passwords:

1. Phishing Prevention: Phishing attacks remain one of the most common and effective ways for cybercriminals to steal passwords. With passwordless authentication, attackers have no passwords to steal. Biometric data, hardware tokens, and cryptographic keys provide a much higher level of security, as they are far more difficult to fake or harvest.

2. Eliminating Password Reuse: Many users reuse passwords across multiple sites, making it easier for attackers to compromise multiple accounts when one password is breached. Passwordless methods, such as biometrics or hardware tokens, are unique to each device or individual, greatly reducing the risk of this widespread issue.

3. Reducing the Impact of Data Breaches: In a traditional password system, once an attacker obtains a set of credentials, they can often access sensitive data without being detected. In contrast, passwordless systems rely on cryptographic authentication or multi-factor systems, which offer a more secure verification process that’s harder to bypass, even in the event of a breach.

4. Simplified User Experience: While this may not directly tie into security, a seamless user experience encourages better adoption and fewer mistakes. Users are often more likely to adopt stronger security habits when they can quickly and easily authenticate without needing to remember complex passwords.

Limitations and Challenges

Despite the clear advantages, passwordless authentication is not without its challenges. Transitioning from traditional password systems to passwordless methods requires overcoming several hurdles:

1. Implementation Costs and Complexity: For organizations, implementing passwordless authentication requires significant investment in infrastructure and technology. Setting up biometric systems or integrating hardware security keys can be costly, and rolling out these systems across large organizations can be complex.

 2. Dependence on Devices: Passwordless methods often rely on specific devices (smartphones, biometric scanners, hardware tokens) for authentication. This introduces potential vulnerabilities if these devices are lost, stolen, or compromised. If an individual loses access to their authentication device, it can lead to service disruptions unless backup options are available.

 3. User Resistance to New Technology: While some users may welcome the ease and security of passwordless login, others may be hesitant to adopt new methods due to concerns about privacy or lack of familiarity with the technology. Overcoming this resistance is crucial for widespread adoption.

 4. Potential for New Attack Vectors: While passwordless authentication can mitigate many traditional attack vectors, it introduces new ones. For instance, attackers may target the authentication devices themselves or attempt to bypass biometric checks using high-tech tools. There’s also the risk of identity theft, as hackers might try to spoof biometric data, although such techniques are currently difficult to execute.

Combining Passwordless Authentication with Traditional Methods

One of the most effective ways to thwart cyber threats using passwordless tactics is to implement a hybrid approach that combines passwordless technologies with other security layers, such as multi-factor authentication (MFA). For instance, even if a user is authenticated through a fingerprint or facial recognition scan, the system could require a one-time code sent to a separate device for an added layer of security.

Moreover, companies can implement passwordless solutions incrementally, starting with high-risk areas such as sensitive transactions or system access, before rolling it out organization-wide. This staged approach helps balance security, user convenience, and cost considerations.

Conclusion

Passwordless authentication has the potential to be a game-changer in the fight against major cyber threats. By eliminating the reliance on passwords, one of the most vulnerable elements in digital security, organizations can significantly reduce the risk of phishing, credential stuffing, and other password-related attacks. However, as with any new technology, it’s not without its challenges. Implementing a passwordless system requires investment in infrastructure, overcoming user resistance, and understanding new attack vectors.

Ultimately, passwordless tactics are not a magic bullet for cybersecurity but rather a crucial part of a multi-layered defense strategy. When combined with other best practices like multi-factor authentication, endpoint security, and continuous monitoring, passwordless authentication can play a key role in helping organizations better protect themselves from evolving cyber threats.

The post Can Passwordless Tactics Help Thwart Major Cyber Threats? appeared first on Cybersecurity Insiders.

Since they first appeared in the 1990s, quick response (QR) codes have rapidly become intertwined in our daily lives. Used today for everything from ordering food to paying for parking or undertaking virtual tours at a museum exhibition, QR codes make it convenient and easy to access digital information using a smartphone camera. However, just as with any other widespread technology, it’s no surprise that cybercriminals have now begun to exploit them.

News stories about members of the public who have been scammed when they scanned a malicious QR code in public spaces are becoming commonplace. However, this type of fraud is relatively small compared to the more targeted types of cyber fraud now being directed at UK businesses.

As cybercriminals hone and evolve their phishing tactics, they have begun sending out emails with phony QR codes designed to trick people into providing sensitive information or downloading malware. With these so-called quishing attacks on the rise, organisations will need to take steps to counter this sophisticated new attack trend.

What is ‘quishing’ and what is it being used for?

QR phishing, or quishing, works like a standard phishing attack except that the malicious link is hidden in a QR code rather than a ‘click through’ email link. When the recipient scans the QR code with their phone or a QR code reader, they are re-directed to a malicious website that may request sensitive information or download malware. The QR code links used in quishing attacks can also initiate actions on a smartphone, including the composition and distribution of phishing emails to the user’s contacts. All of this further compromises the victim and the organisation they work with.

As with phishing attacks, quishing attacks use social engineering tactics to establish a degree of trust while impressing the need for urgent action. An email could feature an urgent message stating that an employee will be unable to access their data or applications unless they scan and confirm their identity. Alternatively, printed leaflets and brochures featuring offers that can be accessed with a quick scan of a QR code can be sent through to an organisation for distribution or collection from the front desk.

What’s prompting scammers and hackers to use quishing?

Cybercriminals have become adept at exploiting everyday tools to convince employees to reveal confidential information or execute fraudulent transactions and this new attack strategy is fast gaining in popularity for a number of reasons.

Interpreted as harmless images, digital QR codes are sometimes capable of bypassing a number of basic email scanners and firewalls. Added to this, users will typically scan QR codes using their own personal devices which will lack the enterprise cyber security tools that can detect potential compromises.

Cybercriminals also don’t really need to write complex code to deliver a QR code link. In some instances, they can simply stick a fake QR code over an existing piece of physical content.

Finally, the general public is so used to using phones on a day to day basis, most will think nothing of using a phone to scan a QR code and then log into services without feeling the need to exercise caution; people seem to see a phone as a safety blanket when it comes to security, one which is somehow immune to traditional attack vectors. 

A versatile attack method

Capable of being delivered via email, texts, WhatsApp messages, social media posts, and websites, as well as printed copy, the sheer versatility of QR codes is making them the attack vector of choice for a growing number of cybercriminals. 

In recent months, attackers have become increasingly inventive and are now perpetrating quishing attacks via video conferencing apps. They are also using attacker-in-the-middle/impersonation token attacks in a bid to outmanoeuvre multi-factor authentication techniques.

Aware that general knowledge or awareness around quishing attacks means that few employees will be on their guard, attackers are keen to leverage people’s inherent trust in QR codes to swerve cyber security defences and perpetrate their malevolent activities.

Key mitigation steps

Personnel across the enterprise need to be alerted to this new threat, and organisations need to deliver education and training on what quishing is and the importance of treating QR codes with the same degree of suspicion and caution as dubious looking email links. They should also be informed of the risks they face outside work, whenever they scan a QR code in a public place. Using a scanning app to preview a QR code link before accessing it is an essential precautionary step that will help prevent malicious QR codes from automatically downloading malware when scanned.

Organisations should also review their email filtering, URL filtering, and endpoint protection to ensure it is up to date and is capable of blocking phishing emails with suspect QR codes before they reach a recipient. Should a user open a malicious link, endpoint protection should ensure that QR codes are prevented from launching a malware attack and virus scanners and checkers can be used to identify and remove active or dormant malware.

To mitigate the risk of physical codes sent in the post, ensure that processes are in place to support anyone responsible for opening mail to report and check any mail received containing QR codes. Digital mailrooms should also have systems in place to spot potentially malicious QR codes.

As cybercriminals adapt their methods, organisations should review and adjust their defence strategies and make sure they deliver security training that ensures everyone stays vigilant. Doing so will enhance the ability of the organisation to withstand quishing attacks and prevent cybercriminals gaining direct access into the company’s systems.

The post Is quishing the new phishing? Protecting your business against the next threat vector appeared first on Cybersecurity Insiders.

Whitehall, a term that refers both to the British government administration and a specific geographic location in central London, has recently garnered attention for its vulnerability to cyberattacks. This issue stems primarily from the reliance on outdated IT infrastructure, a problem that has left critical government departments exposed to potential breaches. The findings were outlined in a report by the National Audit Office (NAO), which highlighted the serious risks posed by outdated systems and a lack of skilled personnel within Whitehall departments.

According to the NAO, every department within Whitehall is susceptible to cyber threats due to a combination of obsolete IT systems and the inability to attract or retain qualified professionals. This is not a unique issue to the UK; governments around the world face similar challenges, often tied to limited budgets and competing priorities. However, the British situation is particularly alarming given the central role these departments play in national security and governance.

The question arises: Is the UK truly vulnerable to the growing cyber threats that are increasingly dominating the global landscape? The NAO report stresses that the government is indeed at risk, primarily because many key technical roles remain vacant. Without the necessary in-house talent, these departments are ill-equipped to defend against sophisticated cyberattacks, leaving critical infrastructure exposed.

Recent incidents have only underscored these concerns. For example, in 2023, both the National Health Service (NHS) and the British Library suffered data breaches that were directly linked to outdated systems and a lack of cybersecurity expertise. In the case of the NHS, the use of Windows 8—an operating system that is no longer supported—made it vulnerable to threats such as the WannaCry ransomware attack. Similarly, the British Library experienced information leaks, highlighting the consequences of failing to modernize IT infrastructure and secure sensitive data.

While some Whitehall departments have started to take action by overhauling their IT resources and bolstering cybersecurity measures, these efforts are struggling to keep up with the increasing sophistication of cybercriminals. Experts argue that despite these improvements, the pace at which hackers are evolving their tactics means that the government’s current defenses are often inadequate.

Ironically, a report from the NAO published in April 2024 served as a stark warning to the government, yet it arrived during a period of political instability. At the time, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s government was facing significant political challenges, and public disillusionment was growing. In this context, adequate funding for cybersecurity and IT infrastructure improvements failed to be prioritized. As a result, the UK government has struggled to secure the financial resources necessary to build robust cybersecurity resilience across Whitehall.

This situation underscores the need for a more proactive and long-term approach to cybersecurity, particularly in an era where cyber threats are becoming more complex and widespread. For the UK to safeguard its national interests, it will need to address the underlying issues of outdated technology, staffing shortages, and underinvestment in its cybersecurity infrastructure. Only then can it hope to mitigate the risks posed by the rapidly evolving cyber threat landscape.

The post Whitehall vulnerable to Cyber Attacks and malware threats appeared first on Cybersecurity Insiders.

The rise of deepfakes, artificial media that use AI to create hyper-realistic yet entirely fabricated images, videos, or audio, has created a new wave of cyber threats. While the technology behind deepfakes offers creative and entertainment potential, it has also opened up significant security vulnerabilities for individuals, businesses, and even governments. Deepfakes can be used maliciously to deceive, manipulate, and cause harm. As these AI-generated tools continue to evolve, so too must our strategies for defending against them.

What Are Deepfakes?

Deepfakes leverage deep learning algorithms, particularly generative adversarial networks (GANs), to manipulate or generate human images, speech, and video content. By training these models on large datasets, AI systems can mimic someone’s voice, likeness, and even specific mannerisms in a highly convincing way. This makes the technology particularly dangerous for digital security, as malicious actors can impersonate individuals to commit fraud, steal sensitive information, or damage reputations.

The Threat Landscape

Deepfake technology has vast implications for cybersecurity, as it can be exploited for a range of malicious activities:

1. Financial Fraud and Social Engineering: Cybercriminals can use deepfakes to impersonate CEOs or high-level executives, authorizing fraudulent transactions or issuing fake directives to lower-level employees. This tactic is particularly concerning for businesses with high-value financial operations.

2. Identity Theft: Attackers can use deepfakes to bypass security protocols that rely on biometric data, such as voice recognition or facial recognition. This makes personal information, such as login credentials or even biometric data, vulnerable to exploitation.

3. Political Manipulation and Disinformation: Deepfakes have been used in various disinformation campaigns, where they are used to create fake statements, speeches, or videos of public figures. The ability to create realistic content can sway public opinion or damage political reputations, destabilizing societies and fostering distrust.

4. Reputation Damage and Harassment: Deepfake technology has been used to create non-consensual explicit content or falsely attribute harmful actions to individuals. The emotional and reputational damage caused can be devastating to victims.

Strategies for Protecting Against Deepfake Threats

To defend against the growing threat of deepfakes, individuals and organizations need to adopt a multifaceted approach that combines technological solutions, awareness, and proactive cybersecurity measures.

1. AI-Powered Deepfake Detection Tools

As deepfakes become more sophisticated, so do the tools designed to detect them. Various companies and researchers have developed AI algorithms that can analyze images, videos, and audio for telltale signs of manipulation. These detection systems focus on identifying artifacts left by AI, such as inconsistencies in lighting, eye movement, and facial expressions, or unnatural voice patterns. For instance, detecting anomalies in a person’s blink rate or lip synchronization can serve as red flags for a deepfake video.

Organizations can implement deepfake detection software to scan incoming communications, videos, and social media content, alerting them to any suspicious or tampered media.

2. Biometric and Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA)

Relying on biometric systems for identity verification is becoming increasingly common, but it is also one of the methods most vulnerable to deepfakes. To strengthen security, organizations should implement multi-factor authentication (MFA) alongside biometric systems. MFA can combine something you know (like a password), something you have (like a phone or smart card), and something you are (biometric recognition) to provide an added layer of defense.

While deepfakes can be used to spoof facial recognition or voice biometrics, incorporating additional forms of authentication can make it much harder for cybercriminals to impersonate users.

3. Awareness and Training

One of the most effective ways to protect against deepfakes is through awareness. Employees and individuals should be trained to identify suspicious content. Key areas for education include recognizing manipulated media, understanding the limitations of technology, and spotting warning signs in communications or media. For example, inconsistencies in a video’s lighting, odd background noises, or unnatural pauses in speech can be red flags that the media has been altered.

4. Monitoring and Digital Forensics

Digital forensics is the practice of recovering and analyzing digital data, often to investigate cybercrimes or identify malicious activity. Organizations can benefit from having a team of experts dedicated to digital forensics to monitor and examine potential deepfake threats. Forensic tools can identify the origin of digital files, detect alterations in content, and track malicious behavior. In cases of high-stakes threats (such as high-level fraud or political disinformation), this can be a crucial part of the response.

5. Blockchain and Digital Signatures

To combat the manipulation of media, digital signatures and blockchain technology offer a promising solution. Blockchain technology allows for the creation of an immutable and verifiable record of digital assets. By using blockchain to timestamp and track the creation and modification of digital media, it becomes much easier to verify the authenticity of an image or video. This could be particularly useful in industries where media authenticity is critical, such as journalism, legal sectors, and digital marketing.

6. Legislation and Ethical Standards

As the threat of deepfakes continues to grow, legislation will need to catch up with technology. Many jurisdictions are already introducing laws aimed at curbing the malicious use of deepfakes, particularly in relation to harassment, defamation, and fraud. While legal frameworks will play a significant role in combating deepfake threats, ethical guidelines for the use of AI should also be established, ensuring that the technology is used responsibly and not exploited for harmful purposes.

In Future

The rapid development of AI and deepfake technology will likely continue to outpace traditional cybersecurity measures. As a result, businesses, governments, and individuals must stay vigilant and continuously evolve their defense mechanisms. By combining AI-powered detection tools, multi-layered authentication systems, employee training, and strong legal frameworks, we can minimize the risks posed by deepfake threats.

The battle against deepfake cyber threats will require collaboration across industries, from cybersecurity experts and AI researchers to lawmakers and business leaders. The more proactive we are in addressing these challenges, the better equipped we will be to safeguard our digital lives in the age of hyper-realistic media manipulation.

The post Protection Against Deepfake Cyber Threats: Navigating the Future of Digital Security appeared first on Cybersecurity Insiders.

For some time, Cybersecurity Insiders have been alerting readers to the various cyber threats, such as ransomware, malware, crypto-mining software, and DDoS attacks. However, a new and unusual trend has recently gained momentum, rapidly trending on search engines.

A woman named Bonnie Blue has claimed to have participated in a “S@# marathon” in a London mansion, allegedly engaging with over 1,000 men. Not long after, another woman, Lilly Phillips, a well-known figure on the OnlyFans platform, announced that she plans to break this record soon.

While the details of this explicit activity are irrelevant to the broader issue, it’s important to address how these women have become part of a growing cybersecurity threat. Over the past week, numerous LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter users have reported receiving emails containing malicious links, promising access to exclusive content from these two women. However, clicking these links leads to websites completely unrelated to the individuals in question, instead redirecting users to malicious sites designed to distribute malware, including encryption tools and spyware.

Cybercriminals often take advantage of trending celebrities to further their malicious agenda, and that’s precisely what is happening here. Users from countries like South Africa, India, Australia, and the Middle East have reported receiving harmful links via LinkedIn messages, commonly known as InMail. These links not only have the potential to infect individual devices but can also spread to connected networks, compromising all devices within that network.

It’s worth noting that most of the profiles spreading this harmful content are either fake or newly created. On a positive note, LinkedIn’s security team is actively filtering these messages through automated systems that flag suspicious content.

This attack has also extended to WhatsApp, where unknown numbers are using marketing tactics to promote these campaigns. WhatsApp, owned by Meta (formerly Facebook), has become another platform where users could fall victim to this threat.

Cybersecurity experts are urging online users to be cautious about such attacks, as clicking on these links could not only harm their devices but also put their personal reputations at risk. Criminals may use the content viewed to blackmail victims, threatening legal action or demanding money. This type of attack, sometimes referred to as a “digital arrest,” involves criminals locking victims in a prolonged conversation, during which they exploit them for financial gain.

The post Cyber Threat from Bonnie Blue and Lilly Phillips of OnlyFans appeared first on Cybersecurity Insiders.

In the digital age, cyber threats have evolved from isolated incidents to organized, sophisticated attacks that can target governments, corporations, and individuals worldwide. Among these threats are cybercriminal groups, state-sponsored hackers, and hacktivists that operate under various motives—ranging from financial gain to political objectives. Some of these groups have earned infamy due to their highly impactful attacks, complex tactics, and elusive nature. Here’s a look at some of the most notorious cyber threat groups to date.

1. APT28 (Fancy Bear) – Russia’s Cyber Warfare Unit

Country of Origin: Russia
Primary Focus: Espionage, Disruption
Known Targets: U.S. Democratic National Committee, various political entities, military networks

APT28, also known as Fancy Bear, is a Russian cyber espionage group linked to the Russian military intelligence agency, GRU. This group has been active since at least the mid-2000s, and its operations are widely believed to be state-sponsored. APT28 is infamous for its role in high-profile cyberattacks, including the 2016 hack of the U.S. Democratic National Committee (DNC), which exposed emails and communications that caused a major political scandal during the U.S. presidential election.

APT28 is known for its use of sophisticated malware and phishing tactics to infiltrate networks, often targeting government organizations, military institutions, and political groups in Western nations. Their operations are typically motivated by espionage, with the aim of acquiring sensitive political and military data.

2. APT29 (Cozy Bear) – Russia’s Cyber Espionage Group

Country of Origin: Russia
Primary Focus: Espionage, Data Theft
Known Targets: U.S. government agencies, European institutions, research organizations

Another Russian-backed cyber threat group, APT29, also known as Cozy Bear, is widely believed to be associated with Russia’s intelligence agency, the SVR. APT29 is known for its stealth and long-term infiltration strategies. While they are less overt in their methods than APT28, their cyberattacks are no less damaging.

APT29 is most notorious for its involvement in the 2016 U.S. election interference campaign, where they successfully breached U.S. government agencies, including the Department of State and the White House. In addition, Cozy Bear has targeted pharmaceutical companies and research institutions, with a particular focus on stealing intellectual property related to COVID-19 vaccines.

3. Lazarus Group – North Korea’s Cyber Warfare Operative

Country of Origin: North Korea
Primary Focus: Cybercrime, Espionage, Financial Theft
Known Targets: Sony Pictures, South Korean banks, global financial systems

One of the most feared cyber threat groups globally, Lazarus Group, is allegedly sponsored by the North Korean government. Known for its cybercrime and espionage activities, Lazarus has carried out some of the most disruptive attacks in recent history. The group is responsible for the 2014 Sony Pictures hack, where they exposed sensitive internal data, including emails, films, and personal information of executives. The attack was believed to be in retaliation for the release of the movie The Interview, which depicted the assassination of North Korean leader Kim Jong-un.

Beyond Hollywood, Lazarus is notorious for financially motivated cyberattacks, including the WannaCry ransomware attack in 2017, which affected thousands of organizations worldwide, including the UK’s National Health Service. The group has also targeted financial institutions, with the 2016 Bangladesh Bank heist being one of the largest cyberattacks in history, where hackers stole over $81 million from the bank’s account at the Federal Reserve.

4. REvil – Ransomware as a Service (RaaS) Syndicate

Country of Origin: Russia (assumed)
Primary Focus: Ransomware Attacks
Known Targets: JBS Foods, Kaseya, multiple healthcare and manufacturing companies

REvil, also known as Sodinokibi, is a notorious ransomware group that operates under the Ransomware-as-a-Service (RaaS) model. While their exact origin remains unclear, many believe that REvil has Russian ties. The group is responsible for some of the largest and most disruptive ransomware attacks in recent years.

In July 2021, REvil carried out an attack on Kaseya, an IT management company, which resulted in over 1,500 businesses worldwide being affected by ransomware. Another significant attack took place in June 2021, when the group targeted JBS Foods, one of the largest meat suppliers in the world, causing a global supply chain disruption. REvil is known for its tactics of demanding high ransoms in exchange for the decryption of critical data and for publishing stolen data if their demands are not met.

In October 2021, the U.S. government reportedly targeted the infrastructure used by REvil in an attempt to dismantle the group. While the group temporarily disappeared, experts believe they may have simply rebranded or regrouped under different names.

5. Anonymous – The Global Hacktivist Collective

Country of Origin: Global (loosely affiliated)
Primary Focus: Activism, Political Causes
Known Targets: Governments, corporations, individuals deemed unethical

Unlike the other groups listed here, Anonymous is not a single, centralized entity, but rather a decentralized collective of hackers. Known for its hacktivist agenda, Anonymous engages in cyberattacks to promote political and social causes. The group first gained attention in the mid-2000s and became widely known for its attacks on organizations that it deemed corrupt, unjust, or unethical.

One of the group’s most significant campaigns was the attack on Scientology in 2008, where Anonymous launched Operation Chanology to protest the church’s controversial practices. Anonymous has also been involved in attacks against government institutions, corporations, and individuals, particularly in response to social issues or government censorship. Most recently, the collective has shown its support for Ukraine, launching cyberattacks against Russian websites in protest of the invasion.

6. China’s APT Groups (e.g., APT10, APT1) – Cyber Espionage for Economic and Political Gain

Country of Origin: China
Primary Focus: Espionage, Intellectual Property Theft
Known Targets: U.S. corporations, global tech companies, academic institutions

China is home to several state-sponsored cyber threat groups, including APT10, APT1, and others, which are believed to be linked to the Chinese government and military. These groups have been involved in cyber espionage and intellectual property theft on an industrial scale.

APT10, also known as Stone Panda, has been particularly active in targeting technology and telecommunications companies worldwide. The group has stolen sensitive intellectual property, research data, and government documents. APT10’s infamous Cloud Hopper campaign focused on breaching managed IT service providers to gain access to their client networks, resulting in widespread global data theft.

APT1, another group believed to be backed by China’s military, has targeted a wide range of industries, including aerospace, energy, and high-tech manufacturing, with the goal of stealing trade secrets and proprietary technologies.

7. DarkSide – Ransomware Group with Political Motives

Country of Origin: Russia (assumed)
Primary Focus: Ransomware and Extortion
Known Targets: Colonial Pipeline, global oil and gas companies

DarkSide is another prominent ransomware group that gained global attention in May 2021 when it launched a ransomware attack against Colonial Pipeline, one of the largest fuel pipeline operators in the U.S. The attack resulted in fuel shortages across the East Coast of the United States, highlighting the serious potential for ransomware to disrupt critical infrastructure.

While DarkSide claims to operate with a “no-politics” stance, their attacks are believed to have political implications. The group is known for demanding large ransoms, usually in the form of cryptocurrency, and for leveraging threats to leak stolen data. In response to U.S. law enforcement efforts, DarkSide announced that it would shut down its operations, though experts believe they may reemerge under a different name or form.

Conclusion

The cyber threat landscape is constantly evolving, with sophisticated groups using a range of tactics to achieve their objectives. Whether motivated by financial gain, political agendas, or national security objectives, these groups have shown the world the devastating potential of cyberattacks. Governments, organizations, and individuals must continue to bolster their cybersecurity defenses to combat these growing threats, while also remaining vigilant to the geopolitical implications of cyber warfare.

 

The post The Most Notorious Cyber Threat Groups: A Global Overview appeared first on Cybersecurity Insiders.

The cybersecurity industry is littered with buzzwords, technologies and acronyms that can often be overwhelming for security professionals doing their best to keep up and ensure their organizations are being adequately protected. Naturally, it’s the leading analyst, research and consulting agencies that security practitioners listen to the most when it comes to making decisions regarding what technology investments to make for the business. 

As one of the leading industry consultancy and research firms, Gartner stated that AI risk and security management were the number one strategic technology trends for 2024. Understandable considering the adoption of AI technology within cybersecurity has been rife on both sides of the battlefield with threat actors actively using AI capabilities to cause more digital destruction, while cybersecurity vendors have looked to AI to enhance defenses. 

Gartner’s number two trend from the list was the birth of the Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) ideology to help counter cybersecurity risk. While it may be another acronym to remember, CTEM is here to stay because it is a valuable process to help organizations continually manage cyber hygiene and risk across all digital environments. Given the rapid expansion of modern digital attack surfaces, having automated and ongoing risk management is necessary to aid today’s security departments. 

With CTEM, there are five key stages to this concept which are: scope, discover, prioritize, validate and mobilize. The objective is to break these stages into more manageable components for organizations, allowing security teams to focus on the business-critical aspects first. In fact, the CTEM approach should be considered a priority by organizations because it is estimated they would be three times less likely to experience a breach by 2026, underscoring its critical importance.

What are CTEM’s components? 

At its core, CTEM is defined as “a five-stage approach that continuously exposes an organization’s networks, systems, and assets to simulated attacks to identify vulnerabilities and weaknesses.” It is a proactive approach to cybersecurity that involves continuously assessing and managing an organization’s exposure to cyber threats and is different from traditional vulnerability management approaches which often fail to provide businesses with an efficient detailed plan of action from the findings. 

If anything, security teams are left with long lists of vulnerabilities that need fixing but with blanket remediation guidance, which makes solving the problems and dealing with the real risk even more difficult.

Naturally, many security practitioners will use the CVSS (Common Vulnerability Scoring System) for aid because it offers prioritization and evaluation of vulnerabilities in a consumable manner, but where it fails is in its true description of the potential impact to a company if the vulnerability is not rectified. 

This is where CTEM excels because it will help businesses prioritize vulnerabilities based on their significance level. Such information gives clarity on where the security gaps are, allowing clear and actionable improvement plans to be made accordingly. Security teams will gain a new-level of comprehension as to their external attack surface and how to continuously manage overall threat exposure. CTEM encompasses creating a continuous process of discovery and remediation powered by real-time threat intelligence. With critical risks often hidden within digital infrastructures, continuous monitoring and management are key when following a CTEM blueprint.

Knowing the key stages of CTEM

The CTEM approach consists of five key stages with each playing an important role in protecting an organization:

1.Scope – allows the business to identify and scope its infrastructure for the critical areas that need to be analyzed and protected.

2.Discovery – after scoping, a list of vulnerable assets is revealed.

3.Prioritization – review the risks flagged and their potential impact on the business.

4.Validation – understand how threat actors can exploit these vulnerabilities, how monitoring systems may react, and if further footholds could be gained. 

5.Mobilization – agree on the resolution with actionable goals and objectives while providing effective reporting to convey the urgency to stakeholders. 

While these stages may already be incorporated in an organization’s defense, often they are siloed or not continuously in sync. Security departments that want to take their organization along the CTEM journey, leveraging security platforms that harness the power of External Attack Surface Management (EASM), Risk-based vulnerability Management (RBVM), Threat Intelligence and targeted testing, is necessary. 

By following the CTEM methodology, organizations can bring these critical components together in a structured approach to systematically address vulnerabilities, prioritize risks, effectively reduce the overall attack surface and protect the digital infrastructure. 

 

The post Cybersecurity Strategy: Understanding the Benefits of Continuous Threat Exposure Management appeared first on Cybersecurity Insiders.

The cybersecurity industry is littered with buzzwords, technologies and acronyms that can often be overwhelming for security professionals doing their best to keep up and ensure their organizations are being adequately protected. Naturally, it’s the leading analyst, research and consulting agencies that security practitioners listen to the most when it comes to making decisions regarding what technology investments to make for the business. 

As one of the leading industry consultancy and research firms, Gartner stated that AI risk and security management were the number one strategic technology trends for 2024. Understandable considering the adoption of AI technology within cybersecurity has been rife on both sides of the battlefield with threat actors actively using AI capabilities to cause more digital destruction, while cybersecurity vendors have looked to AI to enhance defenses. 

Gartner’s number two trend from the list was the birth of the Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) ideology to help counter cybersecurity risk. While it may be another acronym to remember, CTEM is here to stay because it is a valuable process to help organizations continually manage cyber hygiene and risk across all digital environments. Given the rapid expansion of modern digital attack surfaces, having automated and ongoing risk management is necessary to aid today’s security departments. 

With CTEM, there are five key stages to this concept which are: scope, discover, prioritize, validate and mobilize. The objective is to break these stages into more manageable components for organizations, allowing security teams to focus on the business-critical aspects first. In fact, the CTEM approach should be considered a priority by organizations because it is estimated they would be three times less likely to experience a breach by 2026, underscoring its critical importance.

What are CTEM’s components? 

At its core, CTEM is defined as “a five-stage approach that continuously exposes an organization’s networks, systems, and assets to simulated attacks to identify vulnerabilities and weaknesses.” It is a proactive approach to cybersecurity that involves continuously assessing and managing an organization’s exposure to cyber threats and is different from traditional vulnerability management approaches which often fail to provide businesses with an efficient detailed plan of action from the findings. 

If anything, security teams are left with long lists of vulnerabilities that need fixing but with blanket remediation guidance, which makes solving the problems and dealing with the real risk even more difficult.

Naturally, many security practitioners will use the CVSS (Common Vulnerability Scoring System) for aid because it offers prioritization and evaluation of vulnerabilities in a consumable manner, but where it fails is in its true description of the potential impact to a company if the vulnerability is not rectified. 

This is where CTEM excels because it will help businesses prioritize vulnerabilities based on their significance level. Such information gives clarity on where the security gaps are, allowing clear and actionable improvement plans to be made accordingly. Security teams will gain a new-level of comprehension as to their external attack surface and how to continuously manage overall threat exposure. CTEM encompasses creating a continuous process of discovery and remediation powered by real-time threat intelligence. With critical risks often hidden within digital infrastructures, continuous monitoring and management are key when following a CTEM blueprint.

Knowing the key stages of CTEM

The CTEM approach consists of five key stages with each playing an important role in protecting an organization:

1.Scope – allows the business to identify and scope its infrastructure for the critical areas that need to be analyzed and protected.

2.Discovery – after scoping, a list of vulnerable assets is revealed.

3.Prioritization – review the risks flagged and their potential impact on the business.

4.Validation – understand how threat actors can exploit these vulnerabilities, how monitoring systems may react, and if further footholds could be gained. 

5.Mobilization – agree on the resolution with actionable goals and objectives while providing effective reporting to convey the urgency to stakeholders. 

While these stages may already be incorporated in an organization’s defense, often they are siloed or not continuously in sync. Security departments that want to take their organization along the CTEM journey, leveraging security platforms that harness the power of External Attack Surface Management (EASM), Risk-based vulnerability Management (RBVM), Threat Intelligence and targeted testing, is necessary. 

By following the CTEM methodology, organizations can bring these critical components together in a structured approach to systematically address vulnerabilities, prioritize risks, effectively reduce the overall attack surface and protect the digital infrastructure. 

 

The post Cybersecurity Strategy: Understanding the Benefits of Continuous Threat Exposure Management appeared first on Cybersecurity Insiders.

Google is preparing to introduce a new threat detection feature for its Android 14 and 15 operating systems by the end of this year. This innovative feature aims to enhance device security by preventing unauthorized access in the event of theft or snatching. When the device detects suspicious activity, such as being grabbed and the thief running or driving away, it will automatically lock the screen. To regain access, the legitimate user must enter a passcode that was set up during the initial SIM activation.

Details about this threat detection lock tool are still limited. However, according to discussions on various Android tech forums, the system will leverage data from the device’s gyroscope and accelerometer, along with other parameters, to identify unusual movement patterns. Users will be able to unlock their devices using a secret code established during the initial phone setup.

Phone thieves and snatchers should take note: this feature has the potential to block factory resets, a common tactic used by thieves to erase and repurpose stolen phones.

Initially, this feature will be available for devices running Android 15, with a gradual rollout planned for Android 14, 13, 12, and 11 devices in the following months. Starting in April 2024, it will also extend to devices running Android 10.

This remote locking feature represents the second major security enhancement introduced for Android users, now available in its Beta version across all compatible mobile devices.

And this feature will be working in tandem with Find My Device feature that was introduced to all android users in February this year.

The post Google to launch threat detection AI powered feature to all Android phones appeared first on Cybersecurity Insiders.