Page 1,392«..1020..1,3911,3921,3931,394..1,4001,410..»

Germanys Reluctant Approach to Space Security Policy – War On The Rocks

On Oct. 26, 2022, eight months after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, reading the news felt something like watching a Star Wars movie. At the United Nations, Russia, represented by a senior Russian foreign ministry official, was threatening to attack commercial Western satellites. Providing intelligence or communication services to the Ukrainian army, the official said, could make any satellite a legitimate target for retaliation. Of all of Ukraines Western allies, the United States was the only country to respond, saying that any damage to U.S. space infrastructure would result in an appropriate response. Moscows focus on the commercial space sector, no matter how surreal, is no surprise commercial providers such as Starlink have played an enormous role in the conflict.

Since the 1950s, space has been increasingly important to militaries around the world. This is particularly true now, as the rapid development of space technology has allowed both public and private actors access to the cosmos. The war in Ukraine has shown how satellite internet can connect armed forces and help bring information from sensors, such as drones, to shooters, like heavy artillery, much quicker than before.

Despite these trends, the German government has maintained a passive approach to space and does not consider it a security priority. Germans take for granted free access to space and the uninhibited use of space systems, including infrastructure and vehicles, such as satellites, that collaborate to perform tasks such as communication, provision, and Earth observation. These systems can be civil, scientific, or military and always entail related ground-control services. Given that both private companies and Germanys adversaries have made space a security priority, the German government should develop its own space security strategy, build a European coalition in space, and consider the development of offensive capacities in the cosmos.

Space Is the Antechamber to Connectivity on Earth

Since the early 1960s, space has been a breeding ground for military activities. This began during the Cold War, when both the United States and the Soviet Union used spy satellites for intelligence activities. In recent years, the number of players and the number of objects in the atmosphere have both risen. Today, several thousand satellites orbit the Earth, with estimates varying from 4,500 to 7,400. This could rise to 70,000 within the next 10 years. The private sector has entered the space age with companies like SpaceX or Blue Origin that provide services, such as satellite launches, that until recently could only be provided by nation-states. This increasing number of actors and advances in space technology mean that space is more critical than ever to security policy.

Satellites are also getting smaller and launches are getting cheaper this has made it easier than ever to get objects into orbit. Companies like Amazon and OneWeb, as well as governments around the world, are planning to create so-called mega-constellations of satellites. The largest of these is the Starlink constellation run by SpaceX, which already consists of more than 3,250 small satellites, comprising roughly half of all satellites in space.

This proliferation has led to an increase in both space traffic and reliance on satellites services. Satellites comprise critical infrastructure necessary for the provision of numerous digital services on Earth, both for civilian and military applications. These critical provisions range from simple banking transactions to the provision of the internet in remote places such as cruise ships. The satellites that provide these capabilities are potential targets for military aggression and are increasingly threatened by the risk of collision with other satellites and objects.

Conflicts on Earth are now carried on in space, too. In Ukraine, for instance, where Elon Musk and his company, SpaceX, provided Starlink services, satellites are vital for coordination and communication among soldiers. The advanced industrialized armies that fought in Iraq and Afghanistan had trouble getting relevant information to where it was needed Ukraine has no such problems now. The Starlink system is also surprisingly resilient and resistant against everything from jamming to cyberattacks. However, the satellites themselves remain vulnerable. On the first day of Russias invasion of Ukraine, hackers attacked a communication satellite from American provider Viasat. The repercussions were felt in Germany when almost six thousand wind turbines were no longer accessible over the internet.

Competitive, Congested, and Contested

Free access to space today is endangered by the renewed development of military counter-space capabilities. These capabilities are primarily intended to prevent other nations access to space while ensuring ones own control. The development of counter-space capabilities might sound like something out of a science fiction film, but it is not a new phenomenon. Rather, it represents a return to the mid-Cold War paradigm. Between the 1960s and 1990s, the United States and the Soviet Union conducted over 50 anti-satellite tests in space. These decreased after the end of the Cold War about 20 tests were recorded from the early 2000s until 2021. What has changed since then is the rising number of actors in space and the technological evolution of counter-space capabilities. Launches have also become cheaper, which has made space far more accessible but also less safe if some players have malicious intent.

Attacks in space come in several forms, each of which have unique risks and advantages. A kinetic physical attack is a direct hit on a target (a satellite or a ground station) by a missile launched from the Earth or another satellite. While direct, these are easily trackable, and the impacts create space debris. This was demonstrated most recently by Russias anti-satellite test on one of its own satellites in November 2021.

A non-kinetic physical offensive, such as dazzling blinding a satellites sensors so that for the duration of the attack it cannot take any photos deteriorates the physical functions of a satellite without destroying it, using high-powered lasers or microwaves. These attacks are often launched to make a satellite physically inoperable, either temporarily or permanently, while leaving very little trace of the attackers identity. However, the success rate of these attacks is difficult to assess. The same holds for electromagnetic attacks, when the transmission of data through radio frequency signals is temporarily disabled. Finally, counter-space cyber-attacks target the data provided or used by a satellite or a ground station.

Based on an annual report by the Secure World Foundation in 2022, many countries are investing in the research and development of offensive and defensive counter-space capabilities. The states making these investments claim that they only plan to use these capabilities for defensive purposes in a peaceful and sustainable way, but these technologies can be misused to damage space systems as well. As a result, the line between offensive and defensive capabilities is blurred. Anyone who possesses these weapons for defense purposes can harm others.

Four countries so far have managed to develop advanced counter-space capabilities: the United States, Russia, China, and India. The United States has always been a key player in space and is trying to maintain its supremacy against Russia and China, who are also trying to achieve superiority. India has begun to develop a military space arsenal, including offensive capabilities, though it claims to be against the militarization of space.

France, Japan, Australia, South Korea, and the United Kingdom only have basic space capabilities, but some of them seem willing to move toward the development of offensive assets that can target other satellites or ground systems. By contrast, Germany has adopted a more preventive military strategy that opposes the development and use of offensive capabilities.

Current German Thinking on Space

Despite these developments, space is very rarely examined from a security policy perspective in German public political discourse. It is neither seen as a military concern nor as something that has much to do with warfare. The current governments coalition agreement does stress Germanys intention to strengthen national space programs and the European Space Agency in order to promote and guarantee the sustainable use of space. However, it makes no reference to security policy. Germany has a Federal Government Coordinator of German Aerospace Policy, but its functions are clearly focused on the civilian side of space policy, areas such as climate change, sustainability, and research and education.

In a recent analysis, Dr. Christian Mlling, deputy director of the German Council on Foreign Relations, said, Thus far, the Federal Government shows little commitment to taking space policy beyond the current infrastructure. This is problematic. Germanys space infrastructure was originally created in a time when there was unhindered access to space, but this no longer holds true.

Currently, the German armed forces have the capacity for global imaging reconnaissance and satellite communication and are investigating the possibility of developing satellite-based early warning systems. However, there has been no work toward developing defense systems for satellites. Instead, the German military relies heavily on American assets to gain space situational awareness. Since the German government rejects the use of debris-generating systems in space, it is unlikely that its armed forces will develop kinetic physical anti-satellite weapons, such as missiles, in the foreseeable future. In fact, they currently rule out any offensive means in space, even those that would not result in more debris.

The reasons for Germanys reluctant approach are complex. Germany has a generally careful strategic culture in which security policy does not win elections. To this day, Germanys politicians have trouble talking about the use of military force from a strategic, national interest-dominated standpoint ideological arguments abound. Military might, for example, is instead often framed as enabling economic development.

This reluctant strategic culture has translated into space. The to German eyes martial American approach to space in the 1980s, particularly President Ronald Reagans Strategic Defense Initiative (also dubbed Star Wars), made it difficult to sell space security policy to an already hesitant German population. The American initiative was a space-based missile defense program and aimed to make the doctrine of mutually assured destruction and by extension nuclear weapons obsolete. Many European allies, led by France, feared a new arms race and had concerns about the technological feasibility of the system and its efficiency in the European area.

Germany was divided. While the government led by Chancellor Helmut Kohl supported the American project, expecting it to provide access to innovative technology, the Social Democratic Party , a left-leaning party not known for an active and forward-looking security policy, was against it. More than 350 scientists wrote an open letter to Kohl opposing participation because stationing weapons systems in space would destroy any hope for disarmament. Germanys current chancellor, Olaf Scholz, joined the Social Democrat Party in 1975. He is currently criticized for not stepping up enough to the changes in Europes security brought about by the war in Ukraine.

Germany has not always been this passive. The previous government, a grand coalition of the Christian Democratic Union, its sister party, the Christian Social Union of Bavaria, and the Social Democratic Party, took various measures to highlight the importance of space for the German army. In 2017, for instance, the Ministry of Defense published a strategy paper on space, stressing, among other things, the need to develop further capabilities necessary for the planning and command of military missions abroad. In 2021, the German armed forces even created their own space command, run by the German air force. The German Space Situational Awareness Center, which aims to provide the armed forces with an understanding of what is happening in space, was integrated into the space command, and a project was initiated to update its hardware and software. However, there are currently no ambitious plans to build on these initiatives because of a lack of political will by the current government.

How Can Germany Take Space More Seriously?

The German government should, instead, consider space from a security-policy perspective. Germany is currently developing its own national security strategy, the first of its kind for the Federal Republic. Originally planned to be unveiled at the Munich Security Conference in February, its release was delayed, and it has not yet been published. Any strategy should consider the fact that space, especially lower earth orbit (below an altitude of 1,200 miles), has become more crowded and congested of late and that fact should inform Germanys strategic interests. Critically, the German government should consider to what extent it wants to depend on others, including for the launch of satellites the last satellite owned and operated by the German army was brought into orbit by SpaceX. Ideally, a more detailed space security strategy would follow this broader security strategy, which would make it easier to allocate resources.

Strategy, however, is moot without subsequent action. Once Germany has defined its goals, there are two things that need to be done. First, Germany should spearhead the formation of a European coalition to collectively develop space assets, gain independence, and ensure Europes access to space. Germany does not have the same means that the United States or China has it needs its European allies for grander ambitions, such as a European mega-constellation of small satellites. The window for building such a network, however, is closing players such as Starlink are rapidly securing usage rights for the limited number of radio frequencies available for signal transmission in space for their own mega-constellations.

The government should also build a national coalition between the government, academia, and the private sector, including both start-ups as well as established industry players, with the aim of reducing dependence on foreign space companies. This would nurture innovation in Germany and Europe and advance the countrys strategic interests. There is a vibrant space tech scene in Germany and many start-ups have developed innovative and intelligent solutions to developments in space, such as a means of traveling into space without a rocket or new approaches to space traffic management. A lack of funding and interest in these projects, however, could result in a brain drain. German universities are also home to renowned engineers and researchers who are developing important solutions for problems in space. The government needs to reverse its traditionally reluctant approach to collaboration with the private sector and initiate ties with players in both the private sector and academia to collectively develop space infrastructure.

Finally, the German military also needs to invest more in analyzing and developing its own offensive capabilities. Currently, the government says that it does not want any offensive capabilities in space. However, there is a twofold rationale for Germany to reconsider. First, these capabilities can act as a deterrent against attempts to interfere with Germanys space-based infrastructure. Second, Germany can hardly maintain its stated aspiration of becoming the best equipped armed force in Europe without protecting itself in space. Instead of targeting satellites, offensive capabilities could target ground-based control systems for adversarial space infrastructure. In cyber security, its accepted that the lines between defense and offense are blurred the same goes for space.

There are also several technologies that Berlin should consider investing in that would make for more resilient satellites. One is laser communication, which could replace radio waves. This would allow more data to be transmitted in less time. There are also satellites that are able to observe their near environment, which could help to avoid collisions in increasingly crowded orbits. The government could also consider investing in sensors that screen the Earth for missile launches. Such early-warning capabilities would be a contribution to both German and broader European security.

There is no time to lose. SpaceX is launching several mini-satellites regularly. Already, the company possesses the power to intervene in an ongoing conflict: If Elon Musk decided to cut his services, the Ukrainian army would lose a serious warfighting advantage. The German government is uniquely positioned to take the lead in space security policy in Europe, but it should start being ambitious now.

Dr. Carolin Busch is a senior manager and Lorne Slous is a junior consultant at Eviden, an Atos business and multinational company that focuses on high-tech, cloud, big data, and cyber security services. Carolin holds a Ph.D. from the University of the Federal Armed Forces in Munich and specializes in military capability development. Lorne has studied and worked in both Paris and Berlin and is currently working in IT projects that deal with space situational awareness.

Image: German Space Agency

Originally posted here:
Germanys Reluctant Approach to Space Security Policy - War On The Rocks

Read More..

VIPRE Security Group Named Winner In the Coveted Global InfoSec … – PR Newswire

VIPRE wins awards in 6 categories at the 11th Annual Global InfoSec Awards at RSAC 2023.

SAN FRANCISCO, April 25, 2023 /PRNewswire/ -- VIPRE Security Group, an industry-leader and award-winning global cybersecurity, privacy, and data protection company, announced today that it has received the following Global InfoSec Awards from Cyber Defense Magazine (CDM), the industry's leading electronic information security magazine:

"With a rich history dating back nearly 30 years, VIPRE Security Group has been defending consumers from online security threats since the internet was in its infancy, gaining recognition for our ability to do that while being considered innovative and best of breed by Cyber Defense Magazine is testament to our success." said Usman Choudhary, chief product and technology officer at VIPRE. "We are proud to deliver unmatched protection against even the most aggressive online threats for our global customers and partners. Our VIPRE and Inspired eLearning Powered by VIPRE solutions have yet again proven that they are best in class."

VIPRE Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is designed to help small and medium-sized businesses and the IT partners that serve them navigate the complexities of EDR management from a single, easy-to-use console. The solution delivers the sophistication of a high-performing, cloud-based protection without the complexity that users might expect in an EDR solution.

Inspired eLearning Security Awareness Training reduces human-related security incidents by educating with engaging content designed for adult learning. This content drives employees to become an active part of an organization's security efforts in recognizing and preventing cyber-attacks.

"We scoured the globe looking for cybersecurity innovators that could make a huge difference and potentially help turn the tide against the exponential growth in cyber-crime. VIPRE is absolutely worthy of these coveted awards and consideration for deployment in your environment," said Yan Ross, Editor of Cyber Defense Magazine.

VIPRE joins an elite group of organizations working to reinforce good cyber behavior leveraging all aspects of the people, process and technology trinity in their protection of users across the globe. The list of winners is published here:http://www.cyberdefenseawards.com/

About CDM InfoSec Awards

This is Cyber Defense Magazine's tenth year of honoring InfoSec innovators from around the Globe. Our submission requirements are for any startup, early stage, later stage, or public companies in the INFORMATION SECURITY (INFOSEC) space who believe they have a unique and compelling value proposition for their product or service. Learn more atwww.cyberdefenseawards.com

About the Judging

The judges are CISSP, FMDHS, CEH, certified security professionals who voted based on their independent review of the company submitted materials on the website of each submission including but not limited to data sheets, white papers, product literature and other market variables. CDM has a flexible philosophy to find more innovative players with new and unique technologies, than the one with the most customers or money in the bank. CDM is always asking "What's Next?" so we are looking for best of breed, next generation InfoSec solutions.

About Cyber Defense Magazine

Cyber Defense Magazine is the premier source of cyber security news and information for InfoSec professions in business and government. We are managed and published by and for ethical, honest, passionate information security professionals. Our mission is to share cutting-edge knowledge, real-world stories and awards on the best ideas, products, and services in the information technology industry. We deliver electronic magazines every month online for free, and special editions exclusively for the RSA Conferences. CDM is a proud member of the Cyber Defense Media Group. Learn more about us athttps://www.cyberdefensemagazine.com and visit https://www.cyberdefensetv.com and https://www.cyberdefenseradio.com to see and hear some of the most informative interviews of many of these winning company executives. Join a webinar at https://www.cyberdefensewebinars.comand realize that infosec knowledge is power.

About VIPRE Security Group

VIPRE Security Group is a leading provider of internet security solutions purpose-built to protect businesses, solution providers, and home users from costly and malicious cyber threats. With more than 25 years of industry expertise, VIPRE is one of the world's largest threat intelligence clouds, delivering exceptional protection against today's most aggressive online threats. Its award-winning software portfolio includes next-generation antivirus endpoint cloud solutions, advanced email security products, along with threat intelligence for real-time malware analysis, and security awareness training for compliance and risk management. VIPRE solutions deliver easy-to-use, comprehensive layered defense through cloud-based and server security, with mobile interfaces that enable instant threat response. VIPRE is a proud Advanced Technology Partner of Amazon Web Services operating globally across North America and Europe. The group operates under various brands, including VIPRE, StrongVPN, IPVanish, Inspired eLearning, Livedrive, and SugarSync. http://www.VIPRE.com

Press Contact: Scott E. Rupp941-448-7566https://millerrupp.com/

SOURCE VIPRE Security Group

Continued here:
VIPRE Security Group Named Winner In the Coveted Global InfoSec ... - PR Newswire

Read More..

More than 2K organizations at risk of major attacks linked to SLP … – Cybersecurity Dive

Dive Brief:

SLP was originally developed in 1997 as a mechanism for systems on a network to communicate with each other. However, researchers say SLP was never designed to be exposed to the public internet.

VMware has disabled SLP by default since 2021 after issuing prior warnings about vulnerabilities in ESXi products. The company warned customers in February to apply security updates and disable OpenSLP after a series of ransomware attacks.

Researchers warn such an attack using this vulnerability could result in one of the most powerful DoS attacks ever committed.

This flaw is easily exploitable and should be considered particularly dangerous to the global community given the large-scale amplification that can be achieved, Pedro Umbelino, principal security researcher at BitSight, said via email.

VMware said in a blog post that earlier unsupported releases of ESXi, have been shown to be affected by the vulnerability.

As noted by the researchers, many SLP services visible to the internet appear to be older and likely abandoned services, a spokesperson said via email.

Currently supported services, including ESXi 7.x and 8.x lines are not impacted by the amplification attack, according to VMware.

View post:
More than 2K organizations at risk of major attacks linked to SLP ... - Cybersecurity Dive

Read More..

How AIoT Will Reshape the Security Industry in 2023 – Security Intelligence

The Internet of Things (IoT) has been around since 1990 ever since John Romkey created a toaster that could be switched on over the internet. Today, 66% of North American homes have at least one IoT device, such as a smart speaker, bulb or watch.

But for all their conveniences, many IoT devices are limited in functionality and performance. Moreover, they have notable security flaws that could compromise public safety, consumer data or entire company databases.

The key to unlocking the full potential of these devices and improving security in the IoT industry as a whole may lie with another rapidly rising force in modern technology: artificial intelligence.

IBM defines artificial intelligence as software that leverages computers and machines to mimic the problem-solving and decision-making capabilities of the human mind.

Since Alan Turing asked, Can machines think? the world has been fixated on finding the answer. Just a decade ago, AI was still relatively unproven in the mainstream. But progress has been exponential, with investment in AI startups increasing sixfold since 2000.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, many organizations adapted to remote work environments by embracing the subfields of AI automation, machine learning, data science and deep learning.

Here are three of the most common uses of AI:

Speech recognition uses natural language processing (NLP) to translate human speech into text. Most modern mobile devices have built-in speech recognition software for voice search and text messaging features.

Customer service chatbots have replaced many human support representatives. From FAQs to handling complaints, AI-driven messaging bots offer tailored assistance depending on the needs of each customer.

Recommendation engines on e-commerce stores use AI algorithms to study consumer shopping data trends and offer targeted upsells and cross-sells to enhance the online shopping experience.

In The State of AI in 2022, McKinsey reported that the adoption of AI has more than doubled in the past five years. However, the proportion of organizations using artificial intelligence has plateaued settling between 50% and 60%. As we move into 2023, we can expect AI to tackle a long-standing problem IoT security.

The Internet of Things (IoT) is the collective network of sensors, tools and physical objects that contain software and technology that enable internet connectivity, data exchange and communication with other connected devices and systems.

Some popular IoT devices include:

While IoT has always been an innovative space, there are undeniable drawbacks to the technology. Many products suffer from common issues such as disconnecting or delayed responses. But thats not the biggest concern.

Because IoT devices transmit large amounts of data, they naturally attract the attention of cyber criminals.

Whether its an identity thief snooping for personal information on public Wi-Fi networks or state-sponsored hacking groups looking to breach government entities, IoT devices are vulnerable points in any security posture.

Here are a few of the main security issues with IoT:

Lack of visibility. Most manufacturers have no way to monitor their devices after they are shipped to users. Without oversight for maintenance and security, a single malfunction could expose the device to a data breach.

Code vulnerabilities. Developers of IoT devices typically use open-source software, which is prone to bugs and security vulnerabilities.

Poor security integration. Security is often an afterthought in IoT. In 2021, Forescout reported at least 100 million IoT devices were not adequately secured. Many of these vulnerable devices are in key industries, including medical services.

Weak passwords. Many users dont change the default passwords on smart home devices, leaving them at risk of being compromised by hackers.

The lack of visibility and testing in IoT is an ongoing issue. Many devices have unpatched vulnerabilities, making it a question of when rather than if they will be hacked.

But now, thanks to the rapid advances in AI technology, there is a solution that could revolutionize security in the IoT industry.

Artificial Intelligence of Things (AIoT) combines the data-driven knowledge of artificial intelligence technologies with the connected devices from IoT infrastructure.

AI technology can improve the efficiency of IoT devices through two major subfields:

With artificial Intelligence, IoT devices can collect and analyze data. Moreover, these devices can then use the learned information to simulate smart behavior, such as making autonomous decisions to switch on a bulb or reduce the heat on a thermostat.

But how can this union of AI and IoT tackle the major security problems in IoT devices? Here are several use cases of AIoT that offer better security for people, data and property.

Better Data Security

Developers can incorporate AI technologies like decision trees, linear regression and neural networks to create more effective IoT cybersecurity applications that are able to identify and nullify threats quicker.

Improved Visibility and Analysis

As AI facilitates high-speed analysis with large data sets, we can improve how IoT devices manage and monitor data. Companies that integrate IoT with AI and ML technologies benefit from continuous monitoring and analyses and real-time situational awareness. Ultimately, this approach leads to accurate decision-making with minimal human interference.

More Robust Access Control With Smart Locks

AIoT can improve access control in multiple industries. For example, banks and healthcare institutions can use AIoT-enabled devices equipped with biometric technology to restrict access to specific rooms, vaults or equipment storage compartments.

Safer Workplaces With Smart Factory Robots

AI and IoT have been embedded in manufacturing for years. Now, as the technologies converge, smart factory robots with implanted sensors can facilitate data exchange. Not only will this transformation save time and money, but it will also reduce human error and injuries as manufacturing operations become more automated.

Creating Safer Self-Driving Vehicles

AIoT enables autonomous vehicles to analyze weather, road conditions and speed and adjust accordingly. Despite several setbacks, Tesla looks destined to create automobiles that are capable of detecting animal and pedestrian activity and safely navigating journeys without the need for human drivers.

Digital twins use sensors to collect real-time data about a physical object and create a digital duplicate that analysts can review, optimize and learn from. This use of AIoT can be applied to large retail outlets or industrial environments, allowing managers to analyze the activity of the real environment and respond to changes or incidents quickly.

Improve Traffic Management in Smart Cities

Over 50% of smart cities have adopted 5G technology, which makes communication between connected devices faster and more reliable. One example is the rise of AIoT-based drones. These devices transmit and analyze real-time traffic data and make decisions to control traffic lights and reduce congestion.

As smart cities, offices and homes embrace the global rollout of 5G, we can expect AIoT adoption to grow at scale in 2023.

Artificial intelligence unlocks more potential in the internet of things by enabling connected devices to analyze and learn from past data, predict future activities and make smarter, data-driven decisions. In return, IoT adds value to AI technology through increased connectivity and data exchange.

While AIoT devices bridge the security gap in IoT, we can get more peace of mind knowing personal and company data is safer with these devices. The growth of AIoT paves the way for more effective, secure, future-proof systems and applications for companies and consumers in 2023.

Tech Writer

With a passion for creative writing and an unquenchable thirst to learn about futuristic tech, Christopher John Haughey segued from a journalism degree into ...

Continue Reading

Go here to see the original:
How AIoT Will Reshape the Security Industry in 2023 - Security Intelligence

Read More..

What Were the Twitter Files? – The Nation

What exactly were the Twitter Files about? By now, its settled into a near-consensus everywhere but on the right that the disclosures were of little consequence. This view only hardened after MSNBC anchor Mehdi Hasan challenged Matt Taibbi, the journalist most associated with the so-called Files, on several major reporting errors two weeks ago.

Taibbi had mixed up the timeline of the creation of the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), the public-private project set up to monitor social media misinformation during the election, and had vastly overstated the number of tweets it had flagged for removal, from 2,890 tweets to 22 millionTaibbis most consequential claim, according to one commentator.

Most seriously, Hasan showed that in charging that the EIP was partnered with state entities, Taibbi had erroneously identified the Center for Internet Security (CIS), a private nonprofitas the CISA, the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. Adding an A to the end of CIS allowed Taibbi to make what Hasan called the false claim that the EIP was partnered with the government.

As the MSNBC chyron asked whether there was proof of [a] censorship regime, viewers were clearly left to think there wasnt. Since then, Hasan has said that Taibbis false identification of the CISA was key to his thesis. In a widely circulated post, Techdirt charged that it had been a key linchpin in the argument that the government was sending tweets for Twitter to remove, concluding that there remains no there there. Various pundits have since repeated these points, charging the entire scary censorship narrative has fallen apart.

For many, this was a gratifying end to the saga: A media figure that many viewed as having gone over to the Dark Side of the conservative culture wars was taken down on live television. But reducing the matter to an episode of media comeuppance does a profound public disservice when, despite Taibbis errors, the convergence of social media censorship and the national security establishment is both very real and deeply worrying.

And Taibbis critics overstatements are themselves deeply misleading. Take the issue of the CIS and the CISA. While Taibbi mixed up the two in his tweet, the fact that the CISA works with the EIP isnt remotely a false claim: The EIP itself openly says its partnership with CISA began under the Trump administration.

Meanwhile, though the CIS certainly isnt a government entity, its also received a little under $250 million of US government funding since 2008the vast majority of it from the DHS. By the CISs own admission, both its divisions on election security and broader cybersecurity, which work together, are funded by grants from the very same CISA in question. It openly calls its cybersecurity division a government entity and boasts members from all 50 states, 49 state capitals, as well as hundreds of local governments, tribal governments, and U.S. territories. The CISs president and CEO is a former US Air Force and Department of Energy official who sat on the Cyber Security Commission under Barack Obama, while its other executives and board members hail from government entities like the National Security Agency (NSA), the Pentagon, and of course, the DHS. It even has a handy infographic showing the close relationship between it and the CISA.

Theres no question that the CIS is a private nonprofit. But its one so intertwined with the DHS, and so deeply connected to the similarly named CISA, that the lines between private and government are awfully blurry.

But in many ways, the CIS/CISA issue is beside the point, because this was by no means the most important revelation regarding government involvement in tech censorship. The three letters conspicuously missing from criticisms of the Twitter files are F, B, and I, with the disclosures having laid bare the alarming extent of the role that the Federal Bureau of Investigation now plays in the companys content moderation policies.

Among the disclosures were the fact that the FBI was having monthly and even weekly meetings with Twitter executives to coordinate anti-misinformation efforts; that it was doing so in conjunction with entities like the DHS, the Department of Justice (DOJ), and the office of the Director of National Intelligence; that the Central Intelligence Agency and even, at one point, the NSA, were involved in such meetings; that in Twitters interactions with the FBI, former Head of Trust and Safety Yoel Roth considered the Bureau a proxy for the entire intelligence community as a whole; and that the FBI and Twitter have become closely enmeshed, through the voluminous hiring of former Bureau personnel, offers of temporary security clearances and classified information sharing, and the creation of special portals for it and other government agencies to flag content.

What did they do with this influence? Among other things, the FBI and other government entities regularly sent over lists and Excel spreadsheets of hundreds of problematic accounts and tweets, a deluge of censorship requests that Twitter employees were overwhelmed by; repeatedly pressured Twitter to find evidence of large-scale foreign disinformation that the company officials said didnt exist; were involved in what one employee called a sustained (If uncoordinated) effort by the I[ntelligence]C[ommunity] to push us to share more info & change our API policies, an effort that involved congressional staffers; and that US officials simultaneously had Twitter exempt from censorship their own propaganda accounts. While critics charge that theres no evidence of government censorship in the files, there are in fact numerous instances of employees acting on government requests, with Twitters former public policy chief acknowledging that it identifies misinformation via the FBI/DHS.

Readers like you make our independent journalism possible.

Twitter employees themselves didnt share the blas attitude of critics of the reporting. They were perturbed that the FBI was just doing keyword searches for [terms of service] violations when it flagged accounts. Even the companys former deputy general counsel Jim Bakerhimself a former FBI officialfound it odd that they are searching for violations of our policies. Roth was uncomfortable with the implications of state-controlled media the Bureaus increasingly aggressive demands brought up.

But you dont need Twitter bigwigs to explain why this is all troubling. Take the FBI, which just in recent years has turned its spying power on Black activists protesting police brutality in ways that the ACLU has said are built on anti-Black racial stereotypes, investigated and infiltrated the Standing Rock protest movement, and carried out a nationwide sweep of Muslim households on the eve of the 2016 election. There is alarming evidence of far-right sympathies within the Bureau and its collaboration with far-right extremists for the purpose of targeting anti-fascists. The FBI most recently made headlines for its role in the prosecution of Cop City protesters in Atlanta and its surveillance of connected activist groups.

Theres no shortage of scandals in the bloated DHS either, from its surveillance of journalists, activists, and anti-Trump protesters, to the overlap between it and the membership of the far-right Oath Keepers, to the tune of hundreds of its current and former employees. This is all against the backdrop of a wider policy strategy involving the DHS and the DOJ that views left-leaning activist movements like environmentalism, animal rights, and anti-capitalism as potential domestic terrorism.

This bias is evident in the Twitter files. The FBI flagged tweets supporting the George Floyd protests as potentially driven by foreign-controlled bots. It likewise incorrectly flagged leftist Catalonian accounts as being of Russian origin, while Taibbi reported that a list of hundreds of supposedly Iranian government-linked accounts included a former newspaper reporter and the left-wing outlet Truthout. Intelligence reports flagged thousands of accounts propagating anti-Bolsonaro/pro-Lula hashtags, referring to the far-right former president of Brazil and his leftist challenger, respectively.

That Twitter often resisted the FBI isnt especially encouraging either, since even it admitted it was fighting a losing battle. Commenting on Twitters resistance to one particular censorship request, one employee wrote that our window on that is closing, given that government partners are becoming more aggressive. When another employee found no links to Russia on a set of flagged accounts, they offered to try to find a stronger connection anyway.

Hasan played down these concerns by pointing out that Twitter officially acted on 40 percent of government requests, instead of 100 percent of them. This will be cold comfort to the many left-leaning users who have been on the other side of these requests. That includes the hundreds of Palestinian activists, journalists, and other users who have complained for years about being censored for alleged terms of service and other violations on the platform, which has become integral to Palestinian organizing. An internal report last year from Facebook, another platform that partners with the FBI to fight misinformation, determined that its policies had an adverse human rights impact on Palestinians democratic rights partly through greater over-enforcement against Arabic posts.

Little thought is being given to how such a censorship regime could be misused in the future. Indeed, national security agencies dont tend to give up power and shrink but to accumulate it and grow. And the Twitter Files show ample evidence of the government already pushing for exactly that.

Since taking over Twitter, Musk has slashed the platforms content moderation team, claiming that the censorship bureau was let go. But there is little reason to sleep soundly. Musk, whose businesses are highly reliant on government contracts, particularly from the Pentagon, has stopped Twitters practice of publishing regular transparency reports about government requests, raising the question of whether Musk has not so much ended the companys cooperation with the national security state as simply hidden it from public view. Musks free speech crusade has not extended to restoring the account of the group responsible for the 2020 BlueLeaks disclosures about police misconduct, and he has willingly gone along with the Modi governments censorship demands against critics in India, in line with his highly questionable definition of free speech as merely meaning censorship in accordance with whatever the law demands. Musks words of assurance arent credible either: in the same BBC interview in which he claimed to be resisting government censorship, he labeled as total bullshit the existence of a family emerald mine that he once openly boasted about.

But even if one holds the utmost faith in Musks free speech commitments, the Tesla billionaire wont own Twitter forever. And the kind of government role in social media censorship laid bare in the Twitter files extends to a variety of other industry partners like Facebook, which has shown an equally alarming propensity for censoring content that deviates from official US policy.

Get unlimited access: $9.50 for six months.

Will progressives be comfortable when the speech thats targeted for censorship doesnt concern elections and vaccines but instead that which undermines the publics trust in the courts and the financial system, or provokes violence against key infrastructureall of which the CISA has plans to target? And given the cyclical nature of politics, do they trust Donald Trump or whichever other Republican inevitably ends up in the White House someday to use these powers responsibly, let alone to share their views of what constitutes online misinformation? Progressives should remember that objections to War on Terror excesses were largely about how the sprawling, invasive national security state created after 9/11 could easily be hijacked by an unscrupulous, authoritarian leadera prophecy we got some taste of in Trumps response to the protests of 2020.

Government control of whats said on social media and the rest of the Internet is a hallmark of authoritarian systems that exist in countries like Russia and China. Theres good reason to worry that the enmeshment of social media platforms with the national security state outlined in the Twitter Files, if left unchecked, could lay the foundation for exactly that. Progressives will protest in outrage if and when this regime is weaponized by right-wing forces. But by then, it may prove too late.

Originally posted here:
What Were the Twitter Files? - The Nation

Read More..

The K-12 Report: A Cybersecurity Assessment of the 2021-2022 … – tripwire.com

The K-12 Report breaks down the cyber risks faced by public schools across the country and is sponsored by the CIS (Center for Internet Security) and the MS-ISAC (Multi-State Information Sharing & Analysis Center).

Published to prepare K-12 leaders with the information to make informed decisions around cyber risk, the report provides a data-driven analysis of what went well, what could be better, and what exactly is threatening our K-12 schools.

The MS-ISAC is federally funded by CISA and a division of the CIS.

What security risks are K-12s concerned about?

When considering the security concerns facing K-12 school districts, respondents stated their top five as:

Compounding these vulnerabilities are the real-world risks that these schools face. As listed in the report, they are:

The problems facing K-12 schools are roughly the problems we see across the board, but in these data-rich and resource-poor" environments, the sensitive, personal nature of whats at stake makes the situation all the more critical.

How prepared are schools to meet them?

This year, schools earned just over 50% in Average Cyber Maturity with a passing grade in Identity Management and the highest participation rate for K-12 school districts in the NCSRs 10-year history. Noting an overall 3% YoY increase in maturity scoring, schools are off to a good (albeit very gradual) start.

Lets review the high points. Schools performed well in:

Now, lets look for areas of opportunity. Referenced to a relevant NIST Cybersecurity Framework Category, these are the areas in which schools were generally performing poorly:

Just like eight out of ten schools were cyber insured, its interesting (and perhaps logical) that in an area where trained cyber professionals are hard to come by and there has been no historical groundwork for cyber infrastructure, the areas in which schools are performing the best are the ones leveraging the skills they already have (teaching, communicating, policy adherence).

Its fair to say this is one piece of evidence that schools are doing the best and in some cases, all they can. While a lean towards these security soft skills leaves some obvious technical gaps, this bias could prove an unlikely advantage. As the Verizon 2022 Data Breach Investigations Report notes, 82% of breaches are the result of human error, and tightening up that margin through security awareness and governance could be a small way to shut a large door.

How can schools improve their security posture?

In addition to some focused efforts on remediating the above areas of opportunity, there are a few things K-12 schools can do across the board to get those security grades up. They were listed in the report as follows:

In its final pages, the report outlines a host of free cybersecurity resources available to schools and districts looking to improve their security posture. Admittedly, its a new world for many of these organizations, and MS-ISAC, among others, is an organization committed to protecting what K-12 institutions have to offer.

The good news? This is just a pop quiz. If school administrators take the time to study, they can be ready for the real test. A test, hopefully, no school will have to face.

Editors Note: The opinions expressed in this guest author article are solely those of the contributor, and do not necessarily reflect those of Tripwire, Inc.

Link:
The K-12 Report: A Cybersecurity Assessment of the 2021-2022 ... - tripwire.com

Read More..

National push to bolster security of key election technology – ABC News

ATLANTA -- An effort to create a national testing program for technology central to U.S elections will be launched later this year, aiming to strengthen the security of equipment that has been targeted by foreign governments and provided fertile ground for conspiracy theories.

So far, states have been left on their own to evaluate the technology that provides the backbone of election operations: voter registration databases, websites used to report unofficial results on election night and electronic pollbooks, which are used instead of paper rolls to check in voters at polling places.

The nonprofit Center for Internet Security hopes to provide the nation's first uniform testing program for the technology, similar to one for voting machines. Its goal is to start the voluntary service in September as a way to help boost the security and reliability of the technology before the 2024 presidential election.

In 2020, 15 states, including Arizona, Florida and Nevada, did not require any type of electronic pollbook testing or certification, according to federal data.

This is a critical need being filled at a critical time, said Chris Wlaschin, senior vice president for Election Systems & Software, a leading voting machine manufacturer that also produces electronic pollbooks. I think as more election officials learn about it, the more theyre going to ask for it.

The use of electronic pollbooks in particular has expanded rapidly in recent years. Nearly one-third of all voting jurisdictions in the U.S. used electronic pollbooks in 2020, compared with about 18% four years earlier, according to data collected by federal Election Assistance Commission.

The systems bring unique security challenges. In many cases, they have internet connections or interact with systems that do. In counties with a vote center model, where registered voters can cast a ballot at any polling place, electronic pollbooks often communicate with each other and with the central voter registration system. Thats one way to ensure people are not able to vote at multiple locations or vote in-person after returning a mail ballot.

How much of an effect the new testing program will have on the 2024 presidential election is yet be determined. Much depends on how many technology providers sign up and how many state election offices will use it, but there appears to be wide interest.

One of the major benefits of this program is that it will provide a consistent process for certification for all of the different states that adopt it, Jamie Remes with VR Systems, a provider of electronic pollbooks and election management systems, said during a recent event organized to discuss the testing program.

The South Carolina Election Commission, which has developed its own voter registration system, was among the offices participating in the center's testing pilot. Commission member Brian Leach said during the recent panel discussion that he saw one benefit of the program as helping increase voter confidence in what we are doing."

Confidence in elections, particularly among Republicans, has decreased amid a sustained campaign by former President Donald Trump and his allies to discredit the results of the 2020 presidential election. There is no evidence of widespread fraud or manipulation of voting equipment in 2020, backed up by exhaustive reviews in states lost by Trump.

The center has not been immune to the assault on U.S. elections and has faced various claims related to its work. Online posts have sought to raise questions about its funding, purpose and the services it provides to state and local election offices.

The center receives a mix of federal and private money, and the pilot developed for its testing program got support from the Democracy Fund, which was started by eBay founder Pierre Omidyar, a donor to Democratic campaigns and liberal causes. The testing program itself is funded solely by the center and eventually is to be supported entirely with fees paid by technology providers, according to the center.

Meanwhile, the federal commission is pursuing its own testing program for electronic pollbooks. Earlier this year, agency officials said they are making progress with their pilot program but that it was unlikely standards could be in place before the 2024 election.

As the use of electronic systems has grown, they have proved an attractive target for those seeking to meddle in U.S. elections.

In 2016, Russian hackers scanned state voter registration systems looking for vulnerabilities and accessed the voter registration database in Illinois, although an investigation later determined no voter data was manipulated. In 2020, Iranian hackers obtained confidential voter data and used it to send misleading emails, seeking to spread misinformation and influence the election.

Experts say the systems could be prime targets again for those seeking to disrupt voting and sow doubts about the security of elections. Gaining access to a voter registration database, for example, could allow someone to delete voters from the rolls. When people show up to vote, they would be told they are not on the list and forced to cast a provisional ballot.

In Detroit last November, a few polling locations had brief delays checking in voters related to a data error that was quickly identified and resolved. Trump seized on the early reports, calling the situation in Detroit REALLY BAD in a social media post and urging people to Protest, Protest, Protest!

Those involved said the center's testing program already has had an effect in boosting confidence in the systems.

Its not just about product testing," said Jared Dearing, the centers senior director of election security and the former director of the Kentucky Board of Elections. "Its increasing the security posture of the companies that are creating these products.

Read more here:
National push to bolster security of key election technology - ABC News

Read More..

Global Cybersecurity Mesh Market Report 2023: Sector is Expected … – GlobeNewswire

Dublin, April 25, 2023 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- The "Global Cybersecurity Mesh Market Size, Share & Industry Trends Analysis Report by Offering, Vertical, Deployment Mode, Enterprise Size, Regional Outlook and Forecast, 2022-2028" report has been added to ResearchAndMarkets.com's offering.

The Global Cybersecurity Mesh Market size is expected to reach $3.1 billion by 2028, rising at a market growth of 27.5% CAGR during the forecast period.

Key Market Players

Cybersecurity mesh is a distributed architectural approach for scalable, adaptable, and reliable cybersecurity control that entails IT security design and implementation. Instead of erecting a single barrier around all devices, cyber security mesh involves constructing tiny, separate perimeters around each device and access point.

It enables businesses to extend security wherever required. The cybersecurity mesh facilitates the implementation of a zero-trust architecture by safeguarding all accessible systems and data regardless of location.

Many companies invest in cybersecurity mesh to improve data security and prevent hackers from manipulating diverse network components. Cybersecurity mesh solutions are gaining acceptance, particularly because of enterprises' growing security concerns and heightened awareness of sophisticated cybersecurity. Rapid economic development, increasing acceptance of cloud-based services, expanding Internet of Things (IoT) deployment, and rising need for cyber-savvy boards are driving the market's growth.

Cybersecurity mesh architecture offers a flexible and scalable approach for increasing security controls even for widely separated assets.

Its versatility makes it perfect for more modular strategies and compatible with hybrid multi-cloud systems. Cybersecurity mesh allows a more composable, flexible, and robust security infrastructure. A cybersecurity mesh enables technologies to interoperate across many supported layers, such as centralized policy management, security intelligence, and identity fabric, instead of each security solution operating in isolation.

Market Growth Factors

Cyberspace expansion increases the demand for better security solution

Cyberspace has changed during the past few decades. Historically, corporations concentrated on safeguarding the network's perimeter, ensuring that the network's inside remained a secure, trusted environment. The pandemic has dramatically boosted organizations' use of the internet. IT firms have complicated security requirements, rendering the current security architectural techniques outdated. This quickly evolving digital ecosystem needs an updated security strategy to minimize all security risks and operational burdens. The perimeter of the enterprise network has evolved. These factors are boosting market growth.

The increasing adoption of the multi-cloud based strategies

Enterprises aspire to develop a unified security posture across multi-cloud environments. Cybersecurity mesh architecture (CSMA) allows people and machines to connect securely from numerous locations across hybrid and multi-cloud environments, channels, and diverse application generations, safeguarding the enterprise's digital assets. Hence, as CSMA safeguards the multi-cloud environment, which is becoming essential due to multi-cloud's rising adoption, the growth of the cybersecurity mesh market is expected to propel.

Market Restraining Factor

Shortage of skilled workers to employ and use cybersecurity mesh solution

Companies require competent cybersecurity workers today more than ever. Thus, many firms report that their board of directors advises raising headcount for IT and cybersecurity. After security administrators and architects, cloud security professionals and security operations analysts remain among the most sought-after positions in cybersecurity. Hence the shortage of skilled professionals, which is unable to meet the increasing demand for cybersecurity solutions, is expected to hinder the cybersecurity mesh market growth.

Scope of the Study

By Offering

By Vertical

By Deployment Mode

By Enterprise Size

For more information about this report visit https://www.researchandmarkets.com/r/vnh49s

About ResearchAndMarkets.comResearchAndMarkets.com is the world's leading source for international market research reports and market data. We provide you with the latest data on international and regional markets, key industries, the top companies, new products and the latest trends.

See the rest here:
Global Cybersecurity Mesh Market Report 2023: Sector is Expected ... - GlobeNewswire

Read More..

How to reduce cyber attacks in the global supply chain – Raconteur

Last year, 39% of businesses in the UK discovered that they had been the target of cyber attacks.

Those findings, published by the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) in its 2022 Cyber Security Breaches Survey, highlight the ever-present, pervasive and persistent nature of cybercrime.

One attack stands out above all others. According to Brad Smith, vice-chairman and president of Microsoft, the attack on US management software company SolarWinds was the largest and most sophisticated attackever.

The 2020 breach was significant as it compromised SolarWinds data plus the data of 30,000 of its clients. That meant an entire supply chain, which included the US military, the Pentagon, hundreds of leading finance companies and universities.

Professor Steve Schneider, the director of the Surrey Centre for Cyber Security, explains how the attack was carried out. Instead of attacking a raft of major companies and institutions at the front end, the hackers infiltrated a SolarWinds network monitoring program. They then created an extremely sophisticated update, which contained malware. This enabled the hackers to access highly privileged and sensitive data plus the networks and systems of SolarWinds clients.

Since the SolarWinds breach, which was reported in December 2020, there has been no let-up in the number of cyber attacks on supply chains. A study by the European Union Agency for Cybersecurity (ENISA), for instance, revealed that third-party incidents account for 17% of the intrusions in 2021 compared to less than 1% in2020.

Audits must be centred on the premise that the chain is only as strong as the weakestlink

According to Black Kite, a cyber security firm which specialises in disrupting third-party risk practices,Air France, KLM and Nissan America are just some organisations reporting data leaks in the past 18 months which were caused by third parties. Another statistic by the NCSC is equally telling. It found that fewer than one in 10 organisations were monitoring risk posed by the supply chain.

But arguably it was 2021, the year in which the world was wrestling with the Covid-19 pandemic, that saw some of the most high-profile attacks. In January of that year, an attack on Microsoft Exchange impacted 250,000 servers, 30,000 companies and the Norwegian parliament.

Six months later, Kaseya, an information technology management and security software company based in Florida, was hit by a ransomware attack that temporarily shut down the operations of around 1,500 companies. In Sweden, the attack led to a supermarket chain being shut down for a week, while in New Zealand schools and kindergartens wereaffected.

All of these larger organisations were targeted through vulnerabilities in smaller third-party partners.

Emily Taylor is the CEO of Oxford Information Labs and an associate fellow of Chatham Houses international security programme. She notes that supply-chain cyber attacks through third-party software providers not only illustrate the vulnerability of digital supply chains but the indiscriminate and widespread damage that such attacks cancause.

Dr Kalina Staykova is assistant professor, information systems and management group, at Warwick Business School and has researched cybersecurity supply chain attacks. She thinks that attacks targeting IT-management providers only tell half thestory.

Cyber attacks come from suppliers across all industry tiers, she says, and adds that while most companies focus on assessing the cyber risks coming mainly from tier-one and tier-two suppliers, threats also come from suppliers deep within the valuechain.

Too often companies underestimate the value of low-tech solutions

She points to a cyber attack on Target, a large US retailer with operations in every US state. In the case of Target, attackers breached its cyber defences by infiltrating a third-party vendor Fazio Mechanical Services, a heating, ventilation and air conditioning company, sheexplains.

This hack begs an important question. Are smaller suppliers that provide services to larger companies more vulnerable to cyber attacks than largervendors?

While few concrete studies validate this hypothesis, research by the NCSC revealed that larger companies, due to increased funding and expertise had more enhanced cybersecurity.

Staykova says there is not enough empirical evidence to make this claim. But equally, she concedes that often by definition smaller suppliers have poorer cybersecurity standards.

But even if it is true that smaller suppliers are at greater risk of cyber attack than their larger counterparts, as they are part of the same supply chain ecosystems, what steps can be taken to keep everyone safe from cyberattacks?

In vast and complex supply chains, Staykova says that maintaining visibility to manage risk is the greatest challenge. To counter this risk, she believes that the traditional, maturity-based approach is outdated and organisations should switch to a risk-based approach to cybersecurity.

For such a risk-based strategy to be effective requires a cultural sea change, thinks Emily Taylor. It is not a technical issue but an all-encompassing strategy that needs to be fully embraced at board level and embedded across the company instead of being left to technical teams to manage on their own, sheadds.

Taylor, who is a specialist in internet law and governance, says a successful approach is not necessarily about installing expensive cybersecurity software and systems. Instead, she thinks it is about staff training and clear policies and procedures that promote awareness, identify weaknesses in the security architecture and mitigate risk. That neednt cost a lot and should be within the capability of every supplier large, medium-sized orsmall.

Schneider agrees. Too often companies underestimate the value of low-tech solutions. Take the principle of least privilege. This policy is effective as it ensures that third-party software should only obtain the access privileges it needs to perform its function. If this simple principle is applied across the value chain then, while it will never eliminate cyber attacks in the supply chain, it closes one particular attackvector.

But there are other approaches which can add value. According to Hiscox, a global cybersecurity insurance provider, third-party attacks can be mitigated by better understanding supply chains and regular audits. So, what should a cyber security audit looklike?

For Staykova the two are linked: Audits must reflect reality, shesays.

They must be centred on the premise that the chain is only as strong as the weakest link and that cyber security defences are not impregnable. Therefore, audits should be complemented by real-world stress tests, where an organisation and its key suppliers come together and conduct table-top exercises in which mock attacks are launched to gauge how staffrespond.

It is not a technical issue but an all-encompassing strategy that needs to be fully embraced at boardlevel

As for shining a light on cyber weaknesses in the value chain, Staykova recommends that organisations in the same supply chain space commission third-party security providers to audit the status of cybersecurity defence by third-party vendors. This would be instead of asking third parties to self-report on this, which is usually done via questionnaires that she says are insufficient to paint an accurate picture of cyberhygiene.

Taylor says in addition to cybersecurity prevention awareness, cyber hygiene across the supply chain must improve across the board. For technical development teams, she notes that external penetration testing (pen testing) can be effective in raising standards of security by design. But she adds that resilience can be improved through organisation-wide training and awareness.

She explains: When there is a major outage, we often assume that its a highly sophisticated cyber attack. But the stark truth is that many outages are caused by human error or breaches that would never have got through if the level of cyber hygiene had beenhigher.

For smaller organisations, an NCSC-backed certification scheme, Cyber Essentials, is within reach and can help to improve standards. But Taylor believes the insurance sector too could play more of a key role in raising the cyber-hygiene bar in thefuture.

A few years ago, there was a belief in policy circles that insurers would ride to the rescue by incentivising organisations to improve standards of cyber hygiene. But that hasnt really happened. I still believe there is a potential virtuous circle to be created by insurers offering lower premiums to suppliers that can demonstrate higher levels ofsecurity.

But,Tim Andrews, a senior cyber underwriter for Hiscox, says that over the past few years the cyber insurance market has significantly increased the baseline requirements for cybercover.

Organisations are now expected to have cyber security controls in place that just a few years ago would have been seen as nice to haves. And underwriters are scrutinising those controls in much greater detail including how those controls have been implemented and are governed, heexplains.

With research from Hiscox also revealing that third-party supplier cyber attacks account for 40% of all ransomware attacks globally, for some vendors that help cant come soonenough.

Excerpt from:
How to reduce cyber attacks in the global supply chain - Raconteur

Read More..

Shift-Left, Shield Right | Early Availability of Wiz Integration with … – SentinelOne

SentinelOne is pleased to announce early availability (EA) of the integration between our real-time, AI-powered Cloud Workload Protection Platform (CWPP) with the Wiz Cloud-Native Application Protection Platform (CNAPP) functionality. This shift-left, shield right combination of Wiz and SentinelOne in a multi-layered cloud security stack helps cloud security practitioners quickly and easily identify, prioritize, and fix cloud security incidents more efficiently.

When SentinelOne detects a runtime threat to a cloud server or container, it automatically ingests relevant context from Wiz about that cloud resource, including any vulnerabilities, misconfigurations, and exposed secrets that Wiz has detected on it. The SentinelOne threat is automatically enriched with this information in the SentinelOne Singularity Platform console. This helps cloud security teams improve security outcomes, including faster and more effective triage, prioritization, and time to remediation. Through the integration of Wiz and SentinelOne products, security teams can now:

To get started, SentinelOne customers can navigate to the Singularity Marketplace from within the management console and search for Wiz. Select the Wiz app and install (See Figure 1).

To configure the integration (see Figure 2), the Wiz API URL value can be found from the Wiz console via:

The value for Wiz URL to fetch token will be https://auth.app.wiz.io/oauth/token. And the values for Client ID and Client Secret can be obtained by creating a new Service Account in the Wiz console. For instructions, please refer to the Wiz documentation on the topic. Then, simply save the configuration and your integration between the Wiz and SentinelOne platforms is ready to use.

From any Threat Details screen within the SentinelOne management console, click the XDR tab to review related context from Wiz called Issues for the underlying cloud resource (e.g., Amazon EC2 instance).

Singularity Cloud Workload Security is SentinelOnes real-time CWPP solution for workloads, on-prem or in the cloud, on VMs, containers, or Kubernetes clusters. It stops runtime threats such as ransomware, zero-day exploits, and memory injections from disrupting cloud operations or compromising company secrets. Machine-speed threats such as these require the machine-speed detection and response that only a real-time solution can provide. Working alongside a shift-left solution such as Wiz which scans for software vulnerabilities, excessive permissions, misconfigurations, and more only makes the cloud security stack that much more compelling.

Upon detecting a runtime threat, Singularity Cloud Workload Security automatically ingests issue details from Wiz, enriching threat details with context on the underlying infrastructure. For example, a suspicious threat detected on an Amazon EC2 instance (see Figure 3) is enriched with details such as whether the instance is exposed to the internet, has excessive permissions, and/or contains a vulnerability with a known exploit.

Wiz had previously scanned the infrastructure, identifying that this specific cloud compute instance is publicly exposed to the internet, via a cloud access key that was saved in cleartext on a public repository such as GitHub. Moreover, this instance has a critical or high network vulnerability with a known exploit. These supporting details are extraordinarily helpful to the security practitioner during triage. Not only is the investigation streamlined, the incident can be routed to the appropriate DevOps owner with all haste.

Additionally, a deep link from the cloud resource issues attached to the threat details can take the user whether a security practitioner, or the DevOps owner from the SentinelOne console directly into the Wiz console. As a matter of convenience and efficiency, the user can then examine the attack path in Wiz Security Graph, run queries to identify what other instances may have the same vulnerabilities, and take corrective action such as updating the workload image to prevent recurrence. Meanwhile, back in the SentinelOne console, the security user can remediate the incident, either with a single click or in a fully-automated, machine-speed fashion governed by policy which the security admin controls.

By enriching cloud runtime threats detected by Singularity Cloud Workload Security with context from Wiz on the underlying cloud resources directly within the SentinelOne console, security practitioners can better protect cloud workloads from build time to runtime. Through better prioritization, streamlined investigation, and simplified remediation, security can better manage risk and slash mean-time-to-repair. Each solution works alongside the other to set the stage for improved cloud operations, innovation, and ROI.

To learn more, visit us at RSAC 2023 at booth S-626, where we are demonstrating this exciting integration. Wont be at RSAC this year? Not a problem. Navigate over to our solution homepage to learn more and, when you are ready, connect with one of our cloud security experts for a demo.

Singularity Cloud

Simplifying security of cloud VMs and containers, no matter their location, for maximum agility, security, and compliance.

See original here:
Shift-Left, Shield Right | Early Availability of Wiz Integration with ... - SentinelOne

Read More..