Tag Archives: Data Breach

Для тех, кто интересуется безопасным доступом к онлайн-играм, наш партнер предлагает зеркало Вавады, которое позволяет обходить любые блокировки и сохранять доступ ко всем функциям казино.

How Phishing Emails Can Threaten Your Company

Posted on by

Impostor emails, dubbed “business email compromise” by the FBI, are increasing and targeting companies of every size, in every part of the world. Unfortunately, victims often do not realize they have been had until it’s too late. There are no security tool alarms and there is no ransom note. But because systems appear to be running as normal, everything seems like business as usual. And that is the point, according to Proofpoint’s study, “The Imposter in the Machine.”
PP1

From New Zealand to Belgium, companies from every industry have suffered losses, the study found. Here is a small sampling of recent impostor attacks during the last year:

  • A Hong Kong subsidiary at Ubiquiti Networks Inc. discovered that it had made more than $45 million in payments over an extended period to attackers using impostor emails to pose as a supplier.
  • Crelan, a Belgian bank recently lost more than $70 million due to impostor emails, discovering the fraud only after the company conducted an internal audit.
  • In New Zealand, a higher education provider, TWoA, lost more than $100,000 when their CFO fell victim to an impostor email, believing the payment request came from the organization’s president.
  • Luminant Corp., an electric utility company in Dallas, Texas sent a little over $98,000 in response to an email request that they thought was coming from a company executive. Later it was learned that attackers sent an impostor email from a domain name with just two letters transposed.

PP2

Most often, company executives are targeted, with two common angles. In one case, the always-traveling executive is studied by attackers, who use every resource available to understand the target’s schedule, familiar language, peers and direct reports. Because the executive is frequently on the road, direct reports who routinely process payments can easily be victimized.

Another ploy involves suppliers and how they invoice.

online pharmacy vibramycin with best prices today in the USA

For example, the supplier’s language, forms and procedures are used to change bank account information for an upcoming payment. If the attackers are successful, a company may find that they have been making payments to them for months without knowing it.

online pharmacy augmentin with best prices today in the USA

PP3

For more about the risks of phishing, check out “The Devil in the Details” and “6 Tips to Reduce the Risk of Social Engineering Fraud” from Risk Management.

Travelers Must Cover Inadvertent Data Disclosures, Court Rules

Posted on by

A recent Fourth Circuit case affirmed a Virginia district court ruling that insurer Travelers Indemnity Company of America had a duty to defend a class action brought against its insured, Portal Healthcare Solutions, LLC, under a cyber liability insurance policy providing coverage for the electronic publication of certain materials. Portal Healthcare provided “electronic storage and maintenance of certain medical records” as a service to its healthcare provider clients.

buy rifadin online www.handrehab.us/images/patterns/jpg/rifadin.html no prescription pharmacy

The class action suit alleged that Portal Healthcare negligently failed to provide services when a wrong security setting on a web access portal was selected, allowing internet search engines to scoop up not only the login page as a search result, but also the underlying sub-pages containing medical records.

Travelers argued that it had neither a duty to defend nor indemnify under the 2012 and 2013 policies acquired by Portal Healthcare. The 2012 policy included a “Web Xtend Liability Endorsement” applicable to coverage for “Personal Injury, Advertising Injury and Web Site Injury Liability.” The 2013 Policy contained a Commercial General Liability Coverage Form applicable to “Personal and Advertising Injury Liability.” The applicable definitions included:

  • “Advertising injury” means injury, arising out of one or more of the following offenses: … electronic publication of material that … gives unreasonable publicity to a person’s private life
  • “Personal injury” means injury, other than “bodily injury,” arising out of one or more of the following offenses: … electronic publication of material that … gives unreasonable publicity to a person’s private life
  • “Web site injury” means injury, other than “personal injury” or “advertising injury” arising out of one or more of the following offenses: … electronic publication of material that … gives unreasonable publicity to a person’s private life …”

Travelers asserted that it owed a duty to defend Portal Healthcare only if the underlying class action complaint alleged “(1) injury arising out of the offense of “electronic publication of material that … gives unreasonable publicity to a person’s private life” (2012 Policy) or (2) injury caused by the offense of “electronic publication of material that … discloses information about a person’s private life” (2013 Policy).”

The Fourth Circuit, however, held that the Eastern District Court of Virginia correctly analyzed the matter under the “Eight Corners” rule, where the court must look first to the four corners of the contract (the insurance policy) and then the four corners of the complaint. The policy provided coverage for “publication” of electronic materials which either gave “unreasonable publicity” to or “disclosed” information about an individual’s private life.

Travelers argued that there could not be “publication” when the insured’s business was the protection of information and there was no evidence that a third party actually viewed the information.

buy lariam online www.handrehab.us/images/patterns/jpg/lariam.html no prescription pharmacy

The District Court determined in the first instance that “publication” does not refer to intent (whether intentionally or unintentionally disclosed) so that argument was rejected. As to the second element, the court noted that publication occurs when placed “before the public,” without reference to whether the public actually reads the information.

Under the second requirement for coverage, Travelers maintained that “publicity” required a proactive step to “attract” interest, and “disclosure” requires a third party to actually view. The District Court held that publicity was unreasonable due to the nature of the sensitive information contained in the medical records and there was no requirement that the insured take overt action to attract attention to the information.

buy minocin online www.handrehab.us/images/patterns/jpg/minocin.html no prescription pharmacy

As to the “disclosure” argument, the District Court held that disclosure occurred when the possibility of viewing by a third party happened, not when or if a third party actually viewed the information.

The District Court also addressed the fact that there was no express exclusion of the actual security failure involved and at a minimum the insurance carrier would have to defend (although it could still later argue it had no duty to indemnify) based on the law that such an ambiguity is decided in favor of the insured.

This makes it clear that it is critical to pay attention to the type of coverage purchased and to the fine print. It may also be helpful to have an insurance agent review the types of coverage you have, to look for gaps based on your business and possible risks, since each policy type includes those risks which are intentionally covered and others which are expressly excluded. Although the types of policies continue to expand to cover new technologies and new risks, depending on the carrier and the policy’s exclusion language, the coverage may not be what you think it is.

Top Obama Administration Officials, Law Enforcement Reach Out at RSA Conference

Posted on by
loretta lynch at RSA

Attorney General Loretta Lynch addresses RSA Conference 2016

SAN FRANCISCO—Many of the Obama administration’s top brass are here in force, addressing some 40,000 practitioners from every part of the technology and information security industry at the annual RSA Conference. Set against the backdrop of the ongoing fight over between Apple and the FBI encryption and backdoors, the tension ebbed and flowed during sessions with Attorney General Loretta Lynch, Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter, and Admiral Mike Rogers, U.S. Navy Commander, U.S. Cyber Command, and director of the NSA. While many speakers will not address the issue directly, the subtext is clear throughout the show, particularly as the public battle brings considerable interest to the privacy and security issues the RSA has centered on for 25 years.

Indeed, in his keynote address, RSA President Amit Yoran called law enforcement’s current stance on encryption “so misguided as to boggle the mind.” Brad Smith, president and chief legal officer of Microsoft, chimed in as well, asserting that we cannot keep people safe in the real world unless we can keep them safe in the virtual world. He lauded Apple and pledged that the tech giant would stand with Apple in its resistance.

Ash Carter at RSA

Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter in Conversation with Ted Schlein of Kleiner Perkins at RSA

While the gravity of the issue and the massive potential impact for many in the sector are boggling many minds here, the administration officials’ sessions also offered more broadly positive comments for businesses outside the tech sector. The conciliatory tone Lynch and Carter often struck centered on the critical need for partnerships between technology and government. They tried to emphasize the ways the administration is reaching out to private entities, both within Silicon Valley and across corporate America at large.

According to Sec. Carter, for example, the United States Cyber Command has three core missions: defending the Department of Defense’s network; helping American companies, the economy and critical infrastructure; and engaging in offensive cyber missions. The second is a key pillar, he said, as the DoD must keep in perspective that the strength of American entities is the strength of the nation. From threat intelligence to the Defense Innovation Unit Experimental he announced yesterday, to be helmed by Google’s Eric Schmidt, Carter believes there is considerable need for industry to engage with government on cyberrisk, and both parties have valuable assets to contribute. “Data security is a necessity, and we must help our companies harden themselves,” Carter said. Indeed, he wants both help for and from the industry. In closing, he said, “We are you. You pay us. We represent you and our job is to protect you, and we’d love to have your help.”

He also noted that the DoD is trying to learn a bit about managing its cyberrisk from the commercial sector’s best practices. “We do grade ourselves and we’re not getting good grades across the enterprise,” Carter told reporters Wednesday, according to Defense News. “I have these meetings where I call everyone in and we have these metrics which tell us how we’re doing [and] if you don’t score well, that is evident to the Secretary of Defense at those meetings.

“We don’t assume for a minute that we’re doing a perfect job at this,” he added. “That’s the whole reason for me to be here and the whole reason for me to be engaging with this community here at this conference.”

Carter also announced that the Department of Defense will be hosting “Hack the Pentagon,” a bug bounty program offering white hat hackers cash for finding and reporting vulnerabilities in the Pentagon’s websites. Many companies have been offering these programs to try to discover their exposure in a controlled setting, without the risk of reputation damage, personal information exposure and business interruption that accompany an unknown hacker finding them instead. Carter called these a “business best practice” to gauge preparedness.

Federal law enforcement also has a notable presence at RSA and is making a pronounced effort to reach out to businesses regarding cyberrisk, threat intelligence, and managing a cyberattack. Indeed, in one session Tuesday, panelists from the Department of Homeland Security, FBI and the White House urged a call to action for businesses to get serious about proactively building bridges with law enforcement and to make use of the many resources the administration is trying to activate to help private industry fortify against cyber threats. The government is working to make it easier for companies to turn to it for help, they said, and attitudes are shifting to more consistently recognize and respect victimized businesses and minimize business interruption.

Some in the audience expressed skepticism, such as one man who seized upon the Q&A portion of a session on government departments’ specific roles in fighting cyber criminals. He asked how the government can be trusted to help industry when it cannot protect itself. But corporate entities should be taking note, particularly of the services available. While many hesitate to share threat intelligence or even successful attacks, Eric Sporre, deputy assistant director of the FBI’s cyber division, stressed that FBI Director James Comey has made it a directive for FBI field offices to develop relationships with local businesses and to treat businesses as crime victims, not perpetrators. In responding to attacks, he noted, the Bureau sometimes even brings in victim services to holistically approach aiding in the investigation and recovery process.

Andy Ozment, assistant secretary for cybersecurity and communications at the Department of Homeland Security, also highlighted the preventative measures his department offers companies, including personal risk assessment services. In some cases, chief information security officers and other executives engaged in cyberrisk management functions have been getting DHS assessments, using them as a tool to drive investment or otherwise sell cyber upwards with the board or C-suite of their organizations.

65% of Businesses Unprepared For Email-Based Cyber Threats

Posted on by

In a recent threat report, cloud email management company Mimecast warned they had seen a 55% increase in whaling attacks over the past three months. As we reported in this month’s Risk Management cover story “The Devil in the Details,” social engineering fraud schemes like whaling (which is phishing that targets higher-profile employees and executives) resulted in a total losses of more than $1.2 billion worldwide between October 2013 to August 2015. According to the Mimecast Business Email Threat Report 2016, released yesterday, IT security professionals clearly recognize the risk, with 64% of respondents in the new saying they see email as a major cybersecurity threat to their business. Yet only 35% feel confident about their level of preparedness against data breaches, while 65% feel ill-equipped or too out of date to reasonably defend against the risk.

buy sinequan online youngchiropractic.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/jpg/sinequan.html no prescription pharmacy

“Our cyber-security is under attack and we depend on technology, and email in particular, in all aspects of business. So it’s very disconcerting to see that while we might appreciate the danger, many companies are still taking too few measures to defend themselves against email-based threats in particular,” said Peter Bauer, chief executive officer of Mimecast. “As the cyber threat becomes more grave, email attacks will only become more common and more damaging. It’s essential that executives, the C-suite in particular, realize that they may not be as safe as they think and take action. Our research shows there is work still to be done to be safe and we can learn a lot from the experience of those that have learnt the hard way.”

Even the most secure companies feel the most at risk of these scams. Of the top 20% of organizations that feel most secure, 250% are more likely to see email as their biggest vulnerability. Those who feel most confident about guarding against the risk are 2.7 times more likely to have a C-suite that is extremely or very engaged in email security. Among the IT security managers who feel most prepared, five out of six say that their C-suite is engaged with email security, Mimecast reports. However, of all IT security managers who were polled, only 15% say their C-suite is extremely engaged in email security, while 44% say their C-suite is only somewhat engaged, not very engaged, or not engaged at all.

The firm also had some insight on best budgeting against the risks of phishing. Those who feel better prepared to handle email-based threats also allocate higher percentages of their IT security budgets toward email security, the firm found, with these IT security managers allocating 50% more of their budgets to email security compared to managers who were less confident in their readiness. Mimecast found 10.4% of the total IT budget toward email security is the ideal intersection between email security confidence and spend.

To reduce the threat of whaling, Mimecast recommends that companies:

  • Educate your senior management, key staff members and finance teams on this specific type of attack. Don’t include whaling in a general spear-phishing awareness campaign—single out this style of attack for special attention to ensure key staff remain vigilant.
    buy biaxin online youngchiropractic.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/jpg/biaxin.html no prescription pharmacy

  • Carry out tests within your own business. Build your own whaling attack as an exercise to see how vulnerable your staff are.
  • Use technology where possible. Consider an inbound email stationery that marks and alerts readers of emails that have originated outside of the corporate network.
  • Consider subscribing to domain name registration alerting services so you are alerted when domains are created that closely resemble your corporate domain.
    buy bactrim online youngchiropractic.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/jpg/bactrim.html no prescription pharmacy

    Consider registering all available TLDs for your domain, although with the emergence of generic TLDs (gTLD) this may not be scalable.

  • Review your finance team’s procedures; consider revising how payments to external third parties are authorized. Require more than single sign-off, or perhaps use voice or biometric approval only with the requestor to ensure validity of the request.

Check out the infographic below for more on business email threats:

mimecast business email threats