DOCSLIB.ORG

Check-Point-2015-Security-Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Check-Point-2015-Security-Report 2015 SECURITY REPORT CHECK POINT 2015 SECURITY REPORT 01 INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY 04 02 UNKNOWN MALWARE: THE VAST UNKNOWN 10 03 KNOWN MALWARE: KNOWN AND DANGEROUS 18 04 MOBILE SECURITY: DON’T FENCE ME IN 32 05 APPLICATIONS: GETTING YOU WHERE IT HURTS 40 06 DATA LOSS: LIKE SAND THROUGH THE HOUR GLASS 48 07 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS: 56 THE PATH TO PROTECTION REFERENCES 60 CHECK POINT - 2015 SECURITY REPORT | 3 01 INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY “The first time you do something, it’s science. The second time you do something, it’s engineering.” 1 –Clifford Stoll, astronomer, author, digital forensics pioneer CHECKINTRODUCTION POINT - 2015 AND SECURITY METHODOLOGY REPORT | 4 THE EVOLUTION OF MALWARE THE SECURITY LANDSCAPE | ACCELERATION OF OF MALWARE 25 YEARS AGO 20 YEARS AGO 15 YEARS AGO 10 YEARS AGO 5 YEARS AGO NOW Invention of Invention of Prevalent Use URL Filtering, NGFW Threat Intelligence, Firewall Stateful of Anti-Virus, UTM Threat Prevention, Inspection VPN, IPS Mobile Security > 1988 1994 1998 2003 2006 2010 2014 2020 Morris Worm Green Card Lottery Melissa Anonymous WikiLeaks DDoS Bitcoin IoT Everywhere Formed Attacks: Stuxnet SCADA 2000 2007 2013 2017 I Love You Zeus Trojan Dragonfly Driverless Cars Hacked? 2011 Stolen Authentication 2012 Information Flame Malware In science, it’s all about discovery—studying cause other mobile devices might not be tools, per se, but and effect. Once something is understood and can be they can be hijacked to give hackers the ability to predicted, it then becomes a process of engineering, penetrate corporate networks. to replicate. In the world of cyber threats, it’s the same. Cyber criminals are studying structures During 2014, Check Point saw significant and thinking through how certain factors can spur exploits of vulnerabilities in open source software, desired outcomes. Once they have a predictive as well as in common applications by Adobe model, they set about engineering how to unleash and Microsoft. what they’ve designed, for the greatest effect. Known malware remained steady, continuing to What are their tools? be pervasive and inflicting damage. But with the 1. Malware—malicious software code that hackers creation of signatures to help identify, filter, and develop to either create disruption or to steal block subsequent deployment attempts of known data. When malware becomes known, signatures malware, the focus among hackers changed. They are created to help identify, filter, and block it in looked to something easier and more rewarding: subsequent deployment attempts. And that’s when launching new attacks with unknown malware by they turn to tampering with the code to create fresh slightly modifying what already existed—enabling unknown malware. it to evade detection. It’s this area—unknown 2. Vulnerabilities—defects in software or operating malware—that exploded and caught most people’s systems that hackers seek to exploit, which exist in attention during 2014. Launching at unprecedented almost all applications. rates, new malware seemed to have a singular 3. Mobile Devices—smartphones, Fitbits, iPads, and purpose: stealing data. INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY | 5 AN AVERAGE DAY AT AN ENTERPRISE ORGANIZATION EVERY 24 SECONDS a host accesses a malicious website EVERY 34 SECONDS an unknown malware is downloaded EVERY 1 MINUTE a bot communicates with its command and control center EVERY 5 MINUTES a high-risk application is used EVERY 6 MINUTES a known malware is downloaded EVERY 36 MINUTES sensitive data are sent outside the organization 1.1 SOURCE: Check Point Software Technologies INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY | 6 “The first computer viruses hit computers in the early 1980s, and essentially we’ve been in a cyber arms race ever since. We design new defenses, and then hackers and criminals design new ways to penetrate them….We’ve got to be just as fast and flexible and nimble in constantly evolving our defenses.” 2 -President Barack Obama Contributing to the problem: cultural shifts. Between the frequency of the breaches and Mobility, virtualization and other new technologies the high profiles of the businesses targeted, have changed the way we work. And in the 2014 sent all organizations a clear message: process, businesses have rushed to adopt Everyone is at risk. these tools to boost productivity and efficiency. But they’ve done so without considering the And when world leaders choose to focus on security implications. While they are quite focused cyber security as they address their nations, on stability and uptime, they don’t realize that it seems clear that cybercrime has reached a better-secured environments have higher uptimes. critical point. METHODOLOGY During 2014, Check Point collected event data from ThreatCloud®, which is connected to security three different sources around the world to shine a gateways of more than 16,000 organizations. light on security trends, and identify issues that are 3. From more than 3,000 gateways connected to on the rise or, in some cases, in decline. our ThreatCloud Emulation Services. Sources of Check Point Research: What did we look at? 1. From security events found during more than Unknown Malware 1,300 organizations’ Security Checkups.3 This Known Malware information hailed from businesses from all Intrusion Prevention industries around the globe. High-Risk Applications 2. From events discovered through Check Point Data Loss Incidents Almost every organization that was studied experienced 81% attacks due to high-risk of the organizations sampled had suffered a data applications loss incident INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY | 7 CHECK POINT RESEARCH CROSSED ALL INDUSTRIES 46 Looking at the vertical markets that participated in our research, manufacturing led the way at 46 percent, with representation across the board by finance, government, retail and wholesale, telco, and consulting. 17 15 12 4 3 2 PERCENT OF ORGANIZATIONS BY INDUSTRY BY PERCENT OF ORGANIZATIONS MANUFACTURING FINANCE GOVERNMENT RETAIL AND TELCO CONSULTING OTHER WHOLESALE 1.2 SOURCE: Check Point Software Technologies INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY | 8 Security Statistics in 2014 • New malware increased 71%.4 • 106 downloads of unknown malware occurred per hour. • 86% of organizations accessed a malicious site. • 83% of organizations had existing bot infections. • 42% of businesses suffered mobile security incidents costing more than $250,000 to remediate. • 96% of organizations used at least one high-risk application. • 81% of organizations suffered a data loss incident. • Loss of proprietary information increased 71% over the past three years. In the following pages, Check Point reveals the security and business leaders understand the findings of our in-depth analysis of security threats threat landscape and how to create the strongest and trends uncovered in 2014. Our aim is to help security posture possible. “Hackers don’t take realities of the world for granted; they seek to break and rebuild what they don’t like. They seek to outsmart the world.” 5 -Sarah Lacy, journalist and author INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY | 9 02 UNKNOWN MALWARE: THE VAST UNKNOWN “There’s always the risk that there are unknown unknowns.” 6 –Nate Silver, statistician, journalist 10 | INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY CHECKINTRODUCTION POINT - 2015 AND SECURITY METHODOLOGY REPORT | 10 unknown malware hit an 106 organization every hour Unknown malware is malware typically not organizations downloaded at least one infected recognized or known by anti-virus systems. Each file with unknown malware—almost a 25 percent new unknown malware variant, even if it only increase from the previous year. has minor alterations, is potentially capable of bypassing the most current anti-virus and virtual Worse is the speed at which this is occurring. sandbox protections. Check Point’s research showed that on a daily basis, 106 unknown malware downloads were While we saw an explosion of unknown malware occurring per hour. That staggering figure is 48 last year, it was merely the tip of the iceberg, times bigger than last year’s mere 2.2 downloads when viewed through today’s lens. Now, the rate of per hour. zero-day and unknown malware is massive. From 2013 to 2014, new malware jumped just over 71 Incredibly, only one percent of enterprises use percent from 83M to 142M, according to AV-Test, technologies to prevent zero-day attacks. And, an independent service provider of anti-virus only one tenth of enterprises consume threat research. And, more malware was found in the past intelligence services. Looking at the volume of two years than in the previous 10 years combined. unknown malware that was downloaded, 52 percent of infected files were PDFs, while 3 percent were During 2014, Check Point analyzed more than Office files. 3,000 gateways and found that 41 percent of UNKNOWN MALWARE: THE VAST UNKNOWN | 11 142M 2014 83M 2013 34M 2012 18.5M 2011 142M 18M 2010 NEW MALWARE IN 2014 AND A 2009 71% INCREASE VERSUS 2013 12M 2.1 SOURCE: AV-Test How Bad Is it, Really? It’s bad. Without a recognized malware signature to to test the speed and catch rate at which malware catch, the typical preventive tools can’t do their job. could be blocked. To turn the known into unknown The new face of malware is fast and stealthy thanks to malware, they simply added a null to the end of obfuscation tools that help attacks slip past the most each PDF and DOC file (e.g. “echo’0000’>>1.doc). In sophisticated anti-malware solutions. For hackers, addition, an unused header section was modified on working with unknown malware has become the each executable file. Next, they opened and ran each go-to tool because it’s easy and it’s efficient to create file to validate that the original behavior remained variants from existing malware. In fact, it’s so easy unchanged. In a nutshell, by taking existing malware that even someone who is not technical could do it. and making slight modifications to it, you very quickly have something that won’t be recognized.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Alcatel-Lucent Security Advisory Sa0xx
    Alcatel-Lucent Security Advisory No. SA0053 Ed. 04 Information about Poodle vulnerability Summary POODLE stands for Padding Oracle On Downgraded Legacy Encryption. The POODLE has been reported in October 14th 2014 allowing a man-in-the-middle attacker to decrypt ciphertext via a padding oracle side-channel attack. The severity is not considered as the same for Heartbleed and/or bash shellshock vulnerabilities. The official risk is currently rated Medium. The classification levels are: Very High, High, Medium, and Low. The SSLv3 protocol is only impacted while TLSv1.0 and TLSv1.2 are not. This vulnerability is identified CVE- 2014-3566. Alcatel-Lucent Enterprise voice products using protocol SSLv3 are concerned by this security alert. Openssl versions concerned by the vulnerability: OpenSSL 1.0.1 through 1.0.1i (inclusive) OpenSSL 1.0.0 through 1.0.0n (inclusive) OpenSSL 0.9.8 through 0.9.8zb (inclusive) The Alcatel-Lucent Enterprise Security Team is currently investigating implications of this security flaw and working on a corrective measure, for OpenTouch 2.1.1 planned in Q4 2015, to prevent using SSLv3 that must be considered as vulnerable. This note is for informational purpose about the padding-oracle attack identified as “POODLE”. References CVE-2014-3566 http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2014-3566 Advisory severity CVSS Base score : 4.3 (MEDIUM) - AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:N https://www.openssl.org/news/secadv_20141015.txt https://www.openssl.org/~bodo/ssl-poodle.pdf Description of the vulnerabilities Information about Poodle vulnerability (CVE-2014-3566).
    [Show full text]
  • Internet Security Threat Report VOLUME 21, APRIL 2016 TABLE of CONTENTS 2016 Internet Security Threat Report 2
    Internet Security Threat Report VOLUME 21, APRIL 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS 2016 Internet Security Threat Report 2 CONTENTS 4 Introduction 21 Tech Support Scams Go Nuclear, 39 Infographic: A New Zero-Day Vulnerability Spreading Ransomware Discovered Every Week in 2015 5 Executive Summary 22 Malvertising 39 Infographic: A New Zero-Day Vulnerability Discovered Every Week in 2015 8 BIG NUMBERS 23 Cybersecurity Challenges For Website Owners 40 Spear Phishing 10 MOBILE DEVICES & THE 23 Put Your Money Where Your Mouse Is 43 Active Attack Groups in 2015 INTERNET OF THINGS 23 Websites Are Still Vulnerable to Attacks 44 Infographic: Attackers Target Both Large and Small Businesses 10 Smartphones Leading to Malware and Data Breaches and Mobile Devices 23 Moving to Stronger Authentication 45 Profiting from High-Level Corporate Attacks and the Butterfly Effect 10 One Phone Per Person 24 Accelerating to Always-On Encryption 45 Cybersecurity, Cybersabotage, and Coping 11 Cross-Over Threats 24 Reinforced Reassurance with Black Swan Events 11 Android Attacks Become More Stealthy 25 Websites Need to Become Harder to 46 Cybersabotage and 12 How Malicious Video Messages Could Attack the Threat of “Hybrid Warfare” Lead to Stagefright and Stagefright 2.0 25 SSL/TLS and The 46 Small Business and the Dirty Linen Attack Industry’s Response 13 Android Users under Fire with Phishing 47 Industrial Control Systems and Ransomware 25 The Evolution of Encryption Vulnerable to Attacks 13 Apple iOS Users Now More at Risk than 25 Strength in Numbers 47 Obscurity is No Defense
    [Show full text]
  • Combat Top Security Vulnerabilities: HPE Tippingpoint Intrusion
    Business white paper Combat top security vulnerabilities HPE TippingPoint intrusion prevention system Business white paper Page 2 The year 2014 marked a new pinnacle for hackers. Vulnerabilities were uncovered in some of the most widely deployed software in the world—some of it in systems actually intended to make you more secure. HPE TippingPoint next-generation intrusion prevention system (IPS) and next-generation firewall (NGFW) customers rely on us to keep their networks safe. And when it comes to cyber threats, every second matters. So how did HPE TippingPoint do? This brief highlights the top security vulnerabilities of 2014—the ones that sent corporate security executives scrambling to protect their businesses. And it describes how HPE TippingPoint responded to keep our customers safe. Heartbleed—HPE TippingPoint intrusion prevention system stops blood flow early Any vulnerability is concerning, but when a vulnerability is discovered in software designed to assure security, it leaves businesses exposed and vulnerable. That was the case with the Heartbleed vulnerability disclosed by the OpenSSL project on April 7, 2014. They found the vulnerability in versions of OpenSSL—the open-source cryptographic library widely used to encrypt Internet traffic. Heartbleed grew from a coding error that allowed remote attackers to read information from process memory by sending heartbeat packets that trigger a buffer over-read. As a demonstration of the vulnerability, the OpenSSL Project created a sample exploit that successfully stole private cryptography keys, user names and passwords, instant messages, emails, and business-critical documents and communications. We responded within hours to protect TippingPoint customers. On April 8, we released a custom filter package to defend against the vulnerability.
    [Show full text]
  • IBM X-Force Threat Intelligence Quarterly, 1Q 2015
    IBM Security Systems March 2015 IBM X-Force Threat Intelligence Quarterly, 1Q 2015 Explore the latest security trends—from “designer vulns” to mutations in malware— based on 2014 year-end data and ongoing research 2 IBM X-Force Threat Intelligence Quarterly 1Q 2015 Contents Executive overview 2 Executive overview When we look back in history to review and understand the past year, you can be assured it will be remembered as a year of 4 Roundup of security incidents in 2014 significant change. 11 Citadel, the financial malware that continues to adapt In early January 2014, companies large and small scrambled to Are mobile application developers for Android putting their 14 better understand and analyze a major retail breach that left users at risk? them asking whether or not their own security measures would 17 Shaking the foundation: Vulnerability disclosures in 2014 survive the next storm. Before spring was barely in motion, we had our first taste of the “designer vuln”—a critical 21 About X-Force vulnerability that not only proved lethal for targeted attacks, 22 Contributors but also had a cleverly branded logo, website and call-name (or handle) that would forever identify the disclosure. 22 For more information 23 Footnotes These designer vulns appeared within long-held foundational frameworks used by the majority of websites, and they continued throughout 2014, garnering catchy name after catchy name—Heartbleed, Shellshock, POODLE, and into 2015, Ghost and FREAK. This in and of itself raises the question of what it takes for a vulnerability to merit a marketing push, PR and logo design, while the other thousands discovered throughout the year do not.
    [Show full text]
  • TLS Attacks & DNS Security
    IAIK TLS Attacks & DNS Security Information Security 2019 Johannes Feichtner [email protected] IAIK Outline TCP / IP Model ● Browser Issues Application SSLStrip Transport MITM Attack revisited Network Link layer ● PKI Attacks (Ethernet, WLAN, LTE…) Weaknesses HTTP TLS / SSL FLAME FTP DNS Telnet SSH ● Implementation Attacks ... ● Protocol Attacks ● DNS Security IAIK Review: TLS Services All applications running TLS are provided with three essential services Authentication HTTPS FTPS Verify identity of client and server SMTPS ... Data Integrity Detect message tampering and forgery, TLS e.g. malicious Man-in-the-middle TCP IP Encryption Ensure privacy of exchanged communication Note: Technically, not all services are required to be used Can raise risk for security issues! IAIK Review: TLS Handshake RFC 5246 = Establish parameters for cryptographically secure data channel Full handshake Client Server scenario! Optional: ClientHello 1 Only with ServerHello Client TLS! Certificate 2 ServerKeyExchange Certificate CertificateRequest ClientKeyExchange ServerHelloDone CertificateVerify 3 ChangeCipherSpec Finished ChangeCipherSpec 4 Finished Application Data Application Data IAIK Review: Certificates Source: http://goo.gl/4qYsPz ● Certificate Authority (CA) = Third party, trusted by both the subject (owner) of the certificate and the party (site) relying upon the certificate ● Browsers ship with set of > 130 trust stores (root CAs) IAIK Browser Issues Overview Focus: Relationship between TLS and HTTP Problem? ● Attacker wants to access encrypted data ● Browsers also have to deal with legacy websites Enforcing max. security level would „break“ connectivity to many sites Attack Vectors ● SSLStrip ● MITM Attack …and somehow related: Cookie Stealing due to absent „Secure“ flag… IAIK Review: ARP Poisoning How? Attacker a) Join WLAN, ● Sniff data start ARP Poisoning ● Manipulate data b) Create own AP ● Attack HTTPS connections E.g.
    [Show full text]
  • The Software Vulnerability Ecosystem: Software Development in the Context of Adversarial Behavior
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations 2016 The Software Vulnerability Ecosystem: Software Development In The Context Of Adversarial Behavior Saender Aren Clark University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations Part of the Databases and Information Systems Commons, and the Engineering Commons Recommended Citation Clark, Saender Aren, "The Software Vulnerability Ecosystem: Software Development In The Context Of Adversarial Behavior" (2016). Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations. 2233. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/2233 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/2233 For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Software Vulnerability Ecosystem: Software Development In The Context Of Adversarial Behavior Abstract Software vulnerabilities are the root cause of many computer system security fail- ures. This dissertation addresses software vulnerabilities in the context of a software lifecycle, with a particular focus on three stages: (1) improving software quality dur- ing development; (2) pre- release bug discovery and repair; and (3) revising software as vulnerabilities are found. The question I pose regarding software quality during development is whether long-standing software engineering principles and practices such as code reuse help or hurt with respect to vulnerabilities. Using a novel data-driven analysis of large databases of vulnerabilities, I show the surprising result that software quality and software security are distinct. Most notably, the analysis uncovered a counterintu- itive phenomenon, namely that newly introduced software enjoys a period with no vulnerability discoveries, and further that this “Honeymoon Effect” (a term I coined) is well-explained by the unfamiliarity of the code to malicious actors.
    [Show full text]
  • Exploit Kits, Which Seemed Nearly Dormant Last Year Following the Demise of Illicit Cryptocurrency Mining, the Hot New Thing in 2018, Appear to Be Making a Comeback
    2020 TRUSTWAVE GLOBAL SECURITY REPORT Table of Contents Introduction ........................ 3 Threat Intelligence .................22 Email Threats ......................... 23 Executive Summary ................. 4 Extortion Scams ....................... 25 Data Compromises ..................... 4 Archive Mutant Tricks .................. 28 Email Threats .......................... 6 Multi-Stage Phishing Using Web Attacks ........................... 8 Trusted Cloud Providers ................ 29 Exploits ............................... 8 Office 365 Account Phishing ............30 Malware ............................... 9 Emotet: The Threat is in the Mail ......... 33 Database and Network Security ......... 10 Web Attacks .......................... 36 Database Compromise ...............11 Humans: The Lowest Hanging Fruit ....... 38 Compromise Demographics ..............11 Exploits .............................. 39 Compromises Per Environment ...........14 Finding Insights Through Trustwave Fusion ......................44 Environments Compromised by Industry ............................15 Malware ..............................46 Compromises by Region .................17 More and More Magecart ...............50 Compromise Duration ...................18 The State of Security ............... 51 Methods of Compromise .................19 Data Security ......................... 52 Sources of Detection ...................20 Network Security ...................... 56 Contributors ....................... 59 2 Introduction Welcome to the 2020 Trustwave
    [Show full text]
  • Olson's Standard Poodles
    Sun-Golden Kennels STANDARD POODLE PUPPY PURCHASE AGREEMENT LIMITED REGISTRATION BREEDER/Seller: Mike or Sharon Long 7812 N. Longview Ct. Edgerton, WI. 53534 608-884-4000 [email protected] www.sungoldenkennels.com Definitions used herein include: "BUYER" shall herein be define as: ___________________________ BREEDER" or “SELLER” Shall herein be defined as: Mike or Sharon Long "PUPPY" shall herein be defined as “A PUPPY”, registered with the American Kennel Club (AKC) with the registered name of: SHARMIK’S________________________________ AKC Litter registration # PRXXXXXX Sire: AKC #PRXXXXXX Reg Name ____________________________________ Dam: AKC# PRXXXXXX Reg Name ___________________________________ The Sun-Golden Standard Poodle described above is sold for the sum of $1000.00 Payment to be made in full with cash or visa/mc. A pet puppy is defined here to be a Standard Poodle puppy which is in good health at the time of sale, and embodies the characteristics of the Standard Poodle breed. This puppy is purebred and the litter has been (registered) with the American Kennel Club. The Parents of this Puppy have had OFA x-rays to establish that they are free of Hip Dysplasia, Elbow disease, Heart disease and Eye disease The puppy is registered with a limited registration, which will prohibit breeding and registering offspring. The BUYER agrees this PUPPY is to be spayed/neutered at the appropriate age of (9-12 months) allowing for some sexual maturity of the pup which is necessary for their development. Veterinarian confirmation of this procedure must be supplied to the BREEDER by the time the pup is 1year of age or the contract is null and void.
    [Show full text]
  • Mission Accomplished? HTTPS Security After Diginotar
    Mission Accomplished? HTTPS Security after DigiNotar Johanna Amann* ICSI / LBL / Corelight Oliver Gasser* Technical University of Munich Quirin Scheitle* Technical University of Munich Lexi Brent The University of Sydney Georg Carle Technical University of Munich Ralph Holz The University of Sydney * Joint First Authorship Internet Measurement Conference (IMC) 2017 TLS/HTTPS Security Extensions • Certificate Transparency • HSTS (HTTP Strict Transport Security) • HPKP (HTTP Public Key Pinning) • SCSV (TLS Fallback Signaling Cipher Suite Value) • CAA (Certificate Authority Authorization) • DANE-TLSA (DNS Based Authentication of Named Entities) Methodology • Active & passive scans • Shared pipeline where possible • Active measurements from 2 continents • Largest Domain-based TLS scan so far • More than 192 Million domains • Passive measurements on 3 continents • More than 2.4 Billion observed TLS connections Certificate Transparency CA Issues Certificates Provides publicly auditable, append-only Log of certificates CT Log Also provides proof of inclusion Browser Verifies Proof of Inclusion Certificate Transparency CT Log CA Webserver Browser Certificate Transparency CT Log CA Certificate Webserver Browser Certificate Transparency CT Log CA Certificate Certificate Webserver Browser Certificate Transparency CT Log CA SCT Certificate Certificate Webserver Browser Certificate Transparency CT Log CA SCT Certificate Certificate Webserver Browser Certificate, SCT in TLS Ext. Certificate Transparency CT Log CA Webserver Browser Certificate Transparency Precertificate
    [Show full text]
  • Threat Intelligence Report
    THREAT INTELLIGENCE REPORT 2019 REWTERZ – THREAT INTELLIGENCE REPORT 2019 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Rewterz Threat Intelligence Report 2019 includes findings of our Security Operations Centers (SOC) that monitored and identified cyberattacks and analyzed global cyber security threats through our threat intelligence-gathering platform. Our team brings forth this valuable real-time data to equip organizations against cyber-attacks beforehand. Rewterz Threat Intelligence Platform utilizes numerous attack sensors collecting data of malicious events from global threat feeds, making it the most comprehensive and advanced threat intelligence gathering network in the country. With evolution in cybercrimes, safeguarding your sensitive information needs to be prioritized to save the integrity, availability and confidentiality of your organization. To cope with growing techniques of cyber-crimes, our SOC team uses most advanced threat intelligence and manages the real-time data of threat landscape through our Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) platform, SIRP. Our orchestration and automation platform helps reduce the redundant processes of incident handling and lets analysts focus on more complex tasks. SIRP automates the usage of Threat Intelligence data for our SOC teams, equipping them for smooth incident handling, vulnerability management, access control regulation and risk management, meanwhile saving considerable amount of their time. Rewterz has now mastered the art of threat intelligence and is ready to help you proactively fortify your defenses and mitigate threats. Through this report, we aim to share and dissipate knowledge about sophisticated threats and advanced attacker practices in use on the Internet today. This report enables readers to gain clear insight on the nature of the threats currently faced by organizations operating in the cyber world.
    [Show full text]
  • Exploiting Host-Based Vulnerabilities
    Exploiting Host-Based Vulnerabilities • Exploit Windows-Based Vulnerabilities • Exploit *nix-Based Vulnerabilities Copyright (c) 2018 CompTIA Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved. | CompTIA.org 1 Commonalities Among Windows-Based Vulnerabilities (Slide 1 of 2) • OSs and most applications based on C, which has no default bounds-checking. • Susceptible to buffer overflows, arbitrary code execution, and privilege escalation. • Developers need to use security best practices and unit testing. • Proprietary product, so source code is not publicly available. • Fewer reviews open the door for undiscovered weaknesses. • Complexity enables vulnerabilities to remain undetected after release. • Microsoft doesn’t patch all vulnerabilities—they release new versions. • This leaves the vulnerability unaddressed in older installations. Copyright (c) 2018 CompTIA Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved. | CompTIA.org 2 Commonalities Among Windows-Based Vulnerabilities (Slide 2 of 2) • Servers: Network-based vulnerabilities; workstations: Application-based vulnerabilities. • Uses standard protocols and technologies. • Susceptible to cross-platform exploits. • Physical access puts hosts at greater risk. • Connecting cables to administrative console ports. • Booting to a different OS. • Using removable media. • Stealing and damaging hardware. • Social engineering is required to expose certain vulnerabilities. Copyright (c) 2018 CompTIA Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved. | CompTIA.org 3 Windows Operating System Vulnerabilities Category Description Remote code execution Any condition that allows attackers to execute arbitrary code. Buffer or heap overflow A programming error that allows attackers to overwrite allocated memory addresses with malicious code. Denial of service Any condition that allows attackers to use resources so that legitimate requests can’t be served. A programming error that allows attackers to access a program’s memory space and hijack the normal Memory corruption execution flow.
    [Show full text]
  • Bulletin on Migrating from SSL and Early TLS a Resource Guide from the PCI Security Standards Council
    Bulletin on Migrating from SSL and Early TLS A Resource Guide from the PCI Security Standards Council The Payment Card Industry Security Standards Council (PCI SSC) is extending the migration PCI DSS 3.1: completion date to 30 June 2018 for transitioning from Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) and SSL/Early TLS Transport Layer Security (TLS) v1.0 to a secure version of TLS (currently v1.1 or higher). No Longer Secure These dates provided by PCI SSC as of December 2015 supersede the original dates issued in both PCI Data Security Standard v3.1 (PCI DSS 3.1) and in the Migrating from SSL and early TLS Information Supplement in April 2015. Read on for answers to questions about new timelines, requirements and reasons for the SSL adjustments. Thank you to all who have provided feedback on the issue, including members of the National Institute of Standards & Technology (NIST), members of the Financial Services Information Sharing Analysis Center (FS-ISAC), Retail Solution Providers Association, Hotel Technology Next Generation, National Restaurant Association and Retail Industry Leaders Association. EARLY TLS In addition to the answers below, more information can be found by viewing the SSL/ TLS Migration webcast. HOW BIG IS THE RISK? The vulnerabilities within SSL and early TLS are serious. A slew of high-profile breaches caused by POODLE, Heartbleed and Freak are due to weaknesses within the protocols. 18 months after the Heartbleed vulnerability was In November 2015, announced, it was reported that there still was of sites VULNERABLE surveyed had DEVICES 67% 200,000+ INADEQUATE SECURITY on the internet.
    [Show full text]