As the social media giant celebrates its two-decade anniversary, privacy experts reflect on how it changed the way the world shares information.

SourceL Skorzewiak via Alamy Stock Photo

In the 20 years since then-Harvard University student Mark Zuckerberg launched Facebook, there has been a profound shift in our understanding of privacy and security in the digital age. Facebook's path to becoming a digital town square has been fraught with challenges as the company — and the rest of the world — balanced the human desire to share information with the expectation of personal privacy.

In February, Zuckerberg went before a Senate committee and made apologies to parents who blame social media for what they say was its role in their children's death by suicide or from drug overdoses. Zuckerberg has appeared before congressional committees multiple times over the years to address concerns about the platform's impact. The issue of privacy, security, and Facebook has been a long-standing lightning rod, says Martin J. Kraemer, a security awareness advocate at KnowBe4 who has a doctorate in cybersecurity.

"Facebook's fundamental purpose, centered around the systematic collection of information, naturally conflicts with privacy and data protection laws," Kraemer says.

The social media company's missteps over the years have shaped the broader discussions and regulations around data privacy. In fact, it is that tension between social connectivity and privacy rights that prompted the need for robust data protection measures, influencing the creation of significant legal frameworks, like Europe's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA).

The Cambridge Analytica scandal in 2016 was a watershed moment for many, as the company's decision to grant third-party entities with unethical access to user data underscored the potential for personal data to be weaponized against democratic processes. This incident, according to Kraemer, was a direct catalyst for the CCPA and marked a decisive turn in how policymakers and the public at large perceived and prioritized online privacy and data security.

"Cambridge Analytica was the first time the dangers of mass data collection and processing became a tangible reality for the public," Kraemer says.

**The 'Attention Economy': Your Data Up For Sale**

Facebook has also been a key player in the development of the "attention economy," says Justin Daniels, a faculty member at IANS Research. Its creation catalyzed a shift toward the sale of user data as a commodity sold to the highest bidder under the guise of a "free" service.

"Their algorithm, designed to keep you on the site with things that you emotionally respond to, has resulted in the following: Information is available everywhere, yet the facts prove elusive, and anyone who disagrees with you becomes your adversary," Daniels says. "Our need to have convenience above all has made privacy and security afterthoughts for too many people."

The platform's initial slow response to recognize its role in disseminating misinformation, as evidenced by Zuckerberg's later retracted comments on the 2016 election, underscores the company's significant impact, Daniels says. Resulting state laws in Texas and Florida, targeting big tech, highlight a legislative response to privacy concerns directly influenced by Facebook's actions. Facebook's long-standing stance of neutrality as mere "engineers" has also allowed misinformation to proliferate, causing harm and dividing communities, he says.

Looking ahead, Daniels foresees a challenging future for online privacy and security, particularly with the advent of AI.

"If you connect the dots, you see that we are paying the price in privacy and security for Congressional inaction on the digital economy," he says. "They basically let the private sector innovate without any rules. Since big tech business models depend on collecting personal information, they are never going to voluntarily limit themselves, as data collection is critical to their business model. They are the richest companies in human history and now have great influence. An AI black swan event will be the culmination of this lack of regulatory oversight."

**A Privacy-Free Future?**

Like Daniels, AJ Nash, VP and Distinguished Fellow of Intelligence at ZeroFox, also thinks the quest for profitability, driving platforms like Facebook to maximize user engagement, comes at the expense of user privacy. Social media companies are neither legally accountable for user content, thanks to Section 230(c)(1) of the Communications Decency Act, nor are they obligated to adhere to First Amendment principles, he notes. That means policy changes within these platforms are primarily motivated by either the pursuit of growth or forced with governmental mandates, such as GDPR.

"If the user base shrinks or engagement drops as a result of user concerns regarding censorship, mis/dis/malinformation, privacy, or security \[for example\], social media platforms will likely be motivated to address those concerns with new policies," Nash says. "Beyond that, the only motivation any private corporation — including social media platforms — has for making any policy changes will likely be when they are required to do so by a government with the authority to enforce such mandates."

And as anyone working in security knows, social media's extensive data collection practices have also become a goldmine for attackers, enabling crimes ranging from theft to influence campaigns designed to sway public opinion — underscoring the complexity of securing user data against cyber threats on social sites that are designed to be, well, social.

"I recently read that 1.4 billion social media accounts are hacked every month, showing that hackers aren't reluctant to attack users directly," Nash says. "Social media platforms can \[and do\] collect an impressive amount of information about their users, including name, age, gender, location, IP address, devices used, hobbies/interests, shopping tendencies, political views, and individual or group pattern of life analysis … the list goes on. Most \[if not all\] social media platforms have reportedly been compromised at least once."

In light of this near-constant onslaught of attacks, Nash thinks there will be a shift toward resignation and skepticism among users. The concept of privacy also will be increasingly viewed as untenable in the face of the Internet and social media's expansion, he says.

"I think we've reached a point where most people believe they've been compromised and are becoming numb to — and skeptical of — the idea that their privacy can be protected," Nash says. "The two youngest generations seem largely less concerned with privacy than their predecessors. Social media probably played a significant role in all of this. As people spent more time on these platforms over the last two decades, they have grown accustomed to the news of data leaks, while becoming more interested in the potential benefits of less privacy than the associated risks. To be frank, I think we are nearing — if not already at — the dawn of a post-privacy world."

**About the Author(s)**

Contributing Writer, Dark Reading

Joan Goodchild is a veteran journalist, editor, and writer who has been covering security for more than a decade. She has written for several publications and previously served as editor-in-chief for CSO Online.

Facebook at 20: Contemplating the Cost of Privacy

The purported metadata for each these containers had embedded links to malicious files.

Source: Tada Images via Shutterstock

Docker has removed nearly 3 million public repositories from Docker Hub after researchers discovered each one to be imageless and have no content besides an accompanying apparent description page that contained links to malicious content instead.

Researchers from JFrog spotted the threat in a recent investigation and identified the containers as being used in three large-scale campaigns to distribute spam and malware. Docker has since instituted a new mechanism that prevents links to external resources in the description pages of imageless repositories.

**More Moderation Needed?**

"Unlike typical attacks targeting developers and organizations directly, the attackers in this case tried to leverage Docker Hub's platform credibility, making it more difficult to identity the phishing and malware installation attempts," JFrog said in an April 30 report. "Almost 3 million malicious repositories, some of them active for over three years, highlight the attackers' continued misuse of the Docker Hub platform and the need for constant moderation on such platforms."

JFrog found that some 4.6 million imageless repositories were published on Docker Hub over a five-year period. Of that, nearly all of them had associated metadata that was malicious in nature. JFrog researchers counted a total of 208,739 fake accounts that the attackers used to upload the malicious repositories.

According to JFrog, what enabled the threat actors is a Docker policy that allows users to include short text descriptions and metadata in HTML format, along with any container images that they publish to Docker Hub. The purpose in allowing these descriptions is to enable users to search for and find images on the cloud-based registry service that they might find useful for their projects. The feature allowed threat actors to upload imageless containers and to relatively easily include description pages that had embedded links to spam, phishing, and malware sites.

The mass uploads happened in two distinct waves — one in 2021 and the other in 2023. JFrog researchers were able to tie many of the 2021 repository uploads to a campaign to get users to download pirated content and cheats for video games. Most of the URLs in the campaign resolved to sites for malicious file downloads. If a server hosting malicious files was shut down or became otherwise unavailable, the links resolved to a different active server. Another mass upload in 2021 involved a free e-book phishing campaign that appeared designed to steal credit card information.

The 2023 uploads to Docker Hub were a repeat of the 2021 campaign involving pirated content and video game cheats. But instead of the repositories directly pointing to malicious sources, JFrog found them pointing to legitimate resources that quickly redirected victims to a malicious source. One page on blogger.com, for instance, took all of 500 milliseconds to redirect visitors to the malicious payload.

JFrog also uncovered a third campaign that involved a threat actor uploading 1,000 repositories to Docker Hub daily for three years. While the content in the associated documentation appeared harmless, the motive was clearly malicious, JFrog said. The company surmised the threat actor might have been carrying out some kind of a stress testing before launching a malicious campaign.

**Taking Advantage of a Policy Loophole**

Brian Moussalli, malware research team leader at JFrog, says the threat actors were able to carry out the attacks due to the lack of a policy in place that could have prevented it. "After we disclosed the attacks to Docker Hub, they implemented a protection mechanism that blocks embedding links to external resources in the description pages of imageless repositories," he says.

It's hard to tell how effective the malicious campaigns really were, Moussalli says. But it's likely the attackers used a legitimate site like Docker Hub to host pages containing links to malicious files, so users searching for pirated content, video game cheats, and free e-books wouldn't get suspicious. "Another option could be that they used Docker Hub for legitimacy but spread the links to those pages via direct messages to victims," Moussalli says. "Unfortunately, we're unable to determine how exactly victims were manipulated into clicking those links."

Docker can make things harder for threat actors by implementing restriction on mass creation of accounts, alongside enforcing new rules on repository creation, he says. For example, it could prohibit creation of imageless repositories or not allow new users to embed external links for some time after creation of the account or the repository.

**About the Author(s)**

Jai Vijayan is a seasoned technology reporter with over 20 years of experience in IT trade journalism. He was most recently a Senior Editor at Computerworld, where he covered information security and data privacy issues for the publication. Over the course of his 20-year career at Computerworld, Jai also covered a variety of other technology topics, including big data, Hadoop, Internet of Things, e-voting, and data analytics. Prior to Computerworld, Jai covered technology issues for The Economic Times in Bangalore, India. Jai has a Master's degree in Statistics and lives in Naperville, Ill.

Attackers Planted Millions of Imageless Repositories on Docker Hub

London Drugs offered no details about the nature of the incident, nor when its pharmacies would be functioning normally again.

Source: ton koene via Alamy Stock Photo

London Drugs, a Canadian pharmacy chain, has closed its stores until further notice due to an "operational issue."

A London Drugs spokesperson said the closure of stores in British Columbia, Alberta, and Saskatchewan is due to a "cybersecurity incident" that was discovered earlier this week, according to The Register.

The company doesn't believe any customer or employee data was affected, and it's working with third-party experts to investigate further. London Drugs also hasn't disclosed what kind of cyber incident occurred, such as a ransomware attack, nor who was responsible. It is unclear when stores will be operating regularly once more.

The retail chain posted on social platform X that its "pharmacists are standing by to support with urgent pharmacy needs." It recommends customers call in advance should they need services from their local pharmacy.

**About the Author(s)**

Canadian Drug Chain in Temporary Lockdown Mode After Cyber Incident

USBs have something the newest, hottest attack techniques lack: the ability to bridge air gaps.

Source: Mohammad Aaref Barahouei via Alamy Stock Photo

Industrial cyberattackers are increasingly using removable media to penetrate operational technology (OT) networks, then leveraging the same old malware and vulnerabilities to make their mark.

For whatever reason, USB devices are a la mode again with some of the world's premier threat actors. Nowhere is this more evident than in the OT space where, according to Honeywell's "2024 USB Threat Report," attackers are "clearly" turning to USBs to get a foothold in industrial networks.

With that foothold, Honeywell reports, attackers are forgoing sophisticated exploitation techniques, zero-day vulnerabilities, or novel malware. Instead, they're leveraging old tools and bugs, plus the built-in capabilities of OT control systems to achieve their end goals.

**Why USBs?**

USBs have something that none of the newest, hottest attack techniques do: the ability to bridge air gaps.

True air gaps are physical separations between OT and IT networks designed to let no malicious attacks pass through. Some also use the term to describe other kinds of setups that distinguish IT and OT systems using access controls, segmentation, and the like. Air gaps are most often used in high-risk industries — think nuclear, military, financial services, etc. — where other means of demarcating IT and OT networks won't cut it.

"A lot of operational facilities are entirely air gapped," explains Matt Wiseman, director of OT product marketing at OPSWAT. "Those more modern approaches like email-based attack — something over the network — aren't really as effective when \[the OT systems\] are disconnected from the broader Internet. You need to be more creative, think outside the box. USBs and removable media are very interesting because they're the only threat you can pick up in your pocket and carry beyond that air gap."

Interestingly, the trend seems to have been born during COVID. In 2019, only 9% of USB-carried cyber threats to industry were actually designed for USBs. By 2022 — and consistently ever since — that number exceeded 50%.

Having crossed that air gap with a USB, attackers are opting for living-off-the-land tactics to perform data collection and exfiltration (observed in 36% of Honeywell's detected USB attacks), defense evasion (29%), and escalation privileges (18%), ultimately achieving persistence in the operational network.

Clearly novel and powerful malware and vulnerabilities are not the focus, as brand name tools of yesteryear such as BlackEnergy and Industroyer (aka CrashOverride) are still making rounds. The most common vulnerabilities exploited in such attacks — such as CVE-2010-2883 and CVE-2017-11882 — are equally dated. All of the most common CVEs listed in Honeywell's report have been known since at least 2018.

In most cases, the goal of these attacks is disruption or destruction. Around 80% of USB-based threats every year now are capable of causing disruptions to OT systems, including loss of visibility or control, or worse (ransomware, wipers, etc.).

**Defending Against USB Threats**

The good news for defenders is that with such antiquated threat vectors, fancy and expensive solutions aren't necessarily the solution. "You can always go with the fundamentals," Wiseman says, meaning strict USB policies and procedures.

At many organizations, he says, "You go back a number of years, there was an honor system. 'Hey, did you scan that?' Now you have technology that can check to make sure. If you plug something in, it's not going to work unless it has been scanned and checked by some type of formal security solution."

This technology often takes the form of a kiosk or "sanitation station" for scanning removable media, placed strategically at the exterior of a sensitive site in order to make sure no malicious ones make their way through. Sometimes those stations are paired with file transfer systems to ensure that no outside device ever actually has to cross the threshold of an industrial control floor.

"We're seeing more mature conversations now. What's our mobile program? What's the process for employees? What's the process for guests? How do we manage these devices? How do we view the activity that's occurring? And how do we ensure that we're ahead of it going forward?" he says. "There's definitely a massive realization of the threat that these devices can pose."

**About the Author(s)**

Nate Nelson is a freelance writer based in New York City. Formerly a reporter at Threatpost, he contributes to a number of cybersecurity blogs and podcasts. He writes "Malicious Life" -- an award-winning Top 20 tech podcast on Apple and Spotify -- and hosts every other episode, featuring interviews with leading voices in security. He also co-hosts "The Industrial Security Podcast," the most popular show in its field.

To Damage OT Systems, Hackers Tap USBs, Old Bugs &amp; Malware

Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile USA are being fined for sharing location data. They plan to appeal the decision, which is the culmination of a four-year investigation into how carriers sold customer data to third parties.

Source: Wavebreak Media ltd via Alamy Stock Photo

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has fined the top US wireless carriers a collective $200 million for sharing access to customers' location information without consent, the culmination of an action proposed four years ago as authorities continue to grapple with how to reel in companies' handling of sensitive personal data. For carriers, who note that the fines are based on outdated programs that no longer exist, the action represents unsettled regulatory waters as requirements for handling customer data security and privacy in the modern era continue to shake out.

Specifically, the FCC fined Sprint and T-Mobile USA, which have merged since the investigation began, more than $12 million and $80 million, respectively; AT&T more than $57 million; and Verizon almost $47 million.

The agency proposed the fines in 2020 based on an investigation that started after reports that a Missouri sheriff consistently used a "location-finding service" operated by Securus, a company that provides and monitors telecommunications service in correctional facilities, to access the location information of the wireless carriers' customers without their consent between 2014 and 2017.

The case ultimately revealed that the four telecom providers had programs in place at the time that were selling customer-location data to two data-aggregation firms, who then resold access to this data to other entities.

"This action demonstrated the carriers offloading obligations to obtain customer consent onto downstream recipients of location information," which in many instances meant customers did not actually consent to releasing their data, according to an FCC press release (PDF) on the decision. For their part, the carriers say that the data was shared with the third parties in order to enable location-based safety services such as roadside assistance.

"Our communications providers have access to some of the most sensitive information about us," said FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel in a statement on the fines. "These carriers failed to protect the information entrusted to them."

This is likely not the end of the fines: The commission also said that it plans to continue to resolve these types of older privacy cases regarding customer data, holding "all carriers accountable and making sure they fulfill their obligations to their customers as stewards of this most private data," she said.

**Wireless Cos Push Back on FCC Privacy Fines**

All of the carriers confirmed to Dark Reading that they will go to court to appeal the decision, which was based on a provision of the Communications Act of 1934 that requires US wireless carriers to take reasonable steps to safeguard specific customer data, such as location information.

Generally, the companies claim the action by the FCC is based on outdated scenarios at the telecom providers that have since been remedied, and they no longer allow third parties to access sensitive customer location-based data.

Verizon spokesman Rich Young says the order concerns an old program at Verizon that required customers to opt in and was shut down more than five years ago. The program "was intended to support services like roadside assistance and medical alerts," he tells Dark Reading, and Verizon shuttered it when the company discovered it was being used fraudulently.

"Verizon is deeply committed to protecting customer privacy," Young says. "Unfortunately, the  FCC's order gets it wrong on both the facts and the law, and we plan to appeal this decision."

For its part, T-Mobile USA gave Dark Reading a statement to much the same effect: "This industry-wide third-party aggregator location-based services program was discontinued more than five years ago after we took steps to ensure that critical services like roadside assistance, fraud protection, and emergency response would not be disrupted. We take our responsibility to keep customer data secure very seriously and have always supported the FCC's commitment to protecting consumers, but this decision is wrong, and the fine is excessive. We intend to challenge it."

AT&T too plans to appeal the fines, which apply for a service that was discontinued in 2019.

"The FCC order lacks both legal and factual merit," a spokesperson says. "It unfairly holds us responsible for another company's violation of our contractual requirements to obtain consent, ignores the immediate steps we took to address that company's failures, and perversely punishes us for supporting life-saving location services like emergency medical alerts and roadside assistance that the FCC itself previously encouraged. We expect to appeal the order after conducting a legal review."

A spokesman for CTIA, a telecommunications industry trade association representing US carriers and resellers, also criticized the fines, citing a "broken enforcement process" on the part of the FCC that deserves examination by Congress.

"After touting the potential of location-based services to provide benefits like roadside assistance and emergency medical alerts, the FCC refused CTIA's request for guidance on how providers should run those programs, and is now penalizing providers for facilitating them," said CTIA senior vice president and chief communications officer Nick Ludlum, in a media statement.

**Carrier Uncertainly: Customer-Privacy Worries Persist**

Complaints that the FCC is behind the times may indeed be justified, as the commission is not known for moving quickly on clarifying how telecom and VoIP providers handle customer privacy.

For instance, it took the FCC 16 years to update how telecom and VoIP providers report data-breaches, issuing new rules in February of this year that they must notify customers whenever there's personally identifiable information (PII) involved in a cyber incident. The new rules — which also require carriers and service providers to report breaches to the FCC, the FBI, and the Secret Service within seven days of discovery — were the first since 2007 to be issued by the commission regarding data-breach notifications.

Meanwhile, the issue of customer privacy when it comes to carriers continues to be a worry, and the fines appear to demonstrate a heavy hand by the FCC in holding communications providers accountable when private customer data leaks. Abroad, other privacy troubles concerning how carriers handle customer data also are brewing.

For example, a huge swathe of telecom customers in Namibia recently were faced with losing their phone service if they didn't hand over sensitive biometric data to the country's premier telco, Mobile Telecommunications Ltd. The potential privacy threat occurred after a well-intentioned plan to combat mobile fraud and identity theft went astray.

**About the Author(s)**

Elizabeth Montalbano is a freelance writer, journalist, and therapeutic writing mentor with more than 25 years of professional experience. Her areas of expertise include technology, business, and culture. Elizabeth previously lived and worked as a full-time journalist in Phoenix, San Francisco, and New York City; she currently resides in a village on the southwest coast of Portugal. In her free time, she enjoys surfing, hiking with her dogs, traveling, playing music, yoga, and cooking.

Wireless Carriers Face $200M FCC Fine As Data Privacy Waters Roil

Themed "The Art of Possible," this year's conference celebrates new challenges and opportunities in the age of AI.

Liat Hayun, Co-Founder & CEO, Eureka Security

April 30, 2024

3 Min Read

Source: Aleksandr Matveev via Alamy Stock Photo

COMMENTARY

This year's RSA Conference theme, "The Art of Possible," celebrates the challenges brought about by new frontiers, broken boundaries, and promising horizons. While the shift to the cloud initially caused concern and hesitation, as data began moving through it, across environments and with very little oversight, data security professionals knew this profound shift in the modern business model would bring about not only challenges but also opportunities. As we enter the age of AI, the security community must embrace the possibilities of improved data security mechanisms, alongside — without obstructing — improved business processes. Looking ahead to this year's RSA Conference, here are six leading data security sessions we're excited to attend — and that will help us uncover AI's risks and opportunities.

**My Top Six Picks****Operational Data Governance-by-Design Techniques for a Data Practitioner**

Monday, May 6

Why you should attend: This session, led by Cisco Systems, seems like a unique opportunity to discover practical tools for implementing data governance across your organization while presenting various use cases, with attention given to all aspects of data use and management. Assess your level of data governance by engaging with other data practitioners in the audience in this live discussion.

**Bridging Theory and Practice of Privacy and Data Protection**

Monday, May 6

Why you should attend: The more data floods the industry, the more practical tools security practitioners need to ensure that privacy and data protection concerns are addressed across their organizational environments. This session will include practical examples of integrating data security and privacy guardrails and measures in real business environments, sourced from the audience.

**ChatGPT Unleashed: Solving Data Breach Puzzles With Precision**

Monday, May 6

Why you should attend: A data security challenge leveraging AI? Sign us up! This unique session challenges participants to use ChatGPT prompts to mitigate a looming data breach, with hidden malware waiting to be found and fixed. Beyond a fun experience, this session will expand the knowledge of what may be possible with the next generation of AI technology and lead us through an innovative learning experience.

**Controlling a Data Footprint — How to Build a Data Disposition Framework**

Monday, May 6

Why you should attend: Data is a goldmine for organizations, and they're constantly innovating in how they gather and leverage it to achieve business goals. This session will equip you with a step-by-step approach to building a data lifecycle management framework. This framework will empower companies to decide how long to hold onto data, and outline methods for safeguarding, transforming, or eliminating data to comply with regulations.

**Establishing a Data Perimeter on AWS**

Wednesday, May 8

Why you should attend: While it may seem like there are no boundaries in the cloud era to where data can reside, be stored, and be used, data security guardrails and mechanisms exist for this purpose exactly — to let data roam free for business use, while ensuring that security controls are set in place and visibility is maintained across all environments, at all times. This session will present some of the controls used by AWS to protect data from unauthorized access.

**Data Heist: How Stolen Information Becomes a Hot Commodity**

Thursday, May 9

Why you should attend: We're so busy preventing breaches that we don't often take the time to consider what malicious actors do with the data they steal after the crime. This session dives deeper, exploring the clandestine marketplaces where stolen information is peddled. You'll be exposed to the inner workings of these criminal data shops, with comprehensive risk assessments comparing the vulnerabilities of various data types and how to best protect them.

**Final Thoughts**

While data security has been a top-of-mind business and security concern for the past decade, the ever-evolving landscape of data innovation constantly introduces new and emerging threats for security practitioners. To stay ahead of the curve, cybersecurity professionals must remain vigilant and adapt their strategies accordingly. The upcoming RSA Conference provides a phenomenal platform to achieve just that, with a wide range of sessions on the latest data security trends and solutions. Hope to see you there!

**About the Author(s)**

Co-Founder & CEO, Eureka Security

Liat Hayun is the Co-founder and CEO of Eureka Security, a Cloud Data Security Posture Management platform that enables security teams to successfully navigate the ongoing and often chaotic expansion and growth of cloud data. Prior to co-founding Eureka Security, Liat spent a decade leading cybersecurity efforts in the Israeli Cyber Command and Palo Alto Networks. Her IDF service merited the prestigious Israel Defense Prize. As VP of Product Management at PANW, Liat led the production of Cortex XDR and PANW’s Managed Threat Hunting service. These roles have enabled Liat to pursue her greatest interests and concerns in the cybersecurity threat landscape, as well work with wonderfully talented people on their solutions. Passionate about working closely with others, she is driven to identify meaningful operational security gaps and develop exciting new technologies and strategies to help fellow security leaders tackle them.

The 6 Data Security Sessions You Shouldn't Miss at RSAC 2024

PRESS RELEASE

SAN DIEGO, April 29, 2024/PRNewswire/ -- ESET, a global leader in cybersecurity solutions, today announced the launch of two new Managed Detection and Response (MDR) subscription tiers: ESET PROTECT MDR for small and medium businesses (SMBs) and ESET PROTECT MDR Ultimate for enterprises. These offerings are built on the foundation of ESET PROTECT Elite and ESET PROTECT Enterprise, offering businesses of all sizes the most comprehensive, AI-powered threat detection and response capabilities, in combination with expert human analysis and comprehensive threat intelligence.

ESET's MDR offerings are designed to cater to the specific needs of both SMBs and Enterprises. To that end, ESET PROTECT MDR delivers a comprehensive cybersecurity package, offering 24/7/365 superior protection that addresses the most common challenges of small and medium-sized businesses. This includes modern protection for endpoints, email, and cloud applications, vulnerability detection and patching, and managed threat monitoring, hunting, and response. It addresses the cybersecurity talent shortages and ensures compliance with cyber insurance and regulations, offering a remarkable 20-minute average time to detect and respond, a comprehensive MDR dedicated dashboard and regular reporting for complete peace of mind.

For enterprises, ESET PROTECT MDR Ultimate offers continuous proactive protection and enhanced visibility, coupled with customized threat hunting and remote digital forensic incident response assistance. This comprehensive service is designed to support overstretched SOC teams, providing them with 24/7 access to world-class cybersecurity expertise. It ensures enterprises stay one step ahead of all known and emerging threats, effectively closing the cybersecurity skills gap, and facilitating expert consultations for incident management and containment in a fully managed experience.

ESET also sets itself apart with its own telemetry and unique global coverage, leveraging its detections and ESET Research to gather unique data about attacks, a competitive edge not offered by many players in the market.

"With the update of our business offering, we want to make ESET products accessible to customers without the necessary skill set or resources to operate them, but to also empower organizations to navigate the digital landscape confidently, safeguarded by our expertise and continuous, comprehensive coverage," stated Michal Jankech, Vice President of SMB and MSP segment at ESET.

Enhancements to the ESET business portfolio

Additionally, all ESET PROTECT subscription tiers, starting from ESET PROTECT Advanced, are now enhanced with ESET Mobile Threat Defense (EMTD). This new value-added, standalone module extends attack vector coverage to an organization's entire mobile fleet, seamlessly integrating into the ESET PROTECT Platform for efficient management, ensuring comprehensive protection for mobile devices. EMTD also includes a Mobile Device Management (MDM) functionality, with added support for Microsoft Entra ID.

Moreover, ESET Server Security introduces a firewall specifically designed for Windows servers, and Vulnerability & Patch Management, offering manual patch management and a 60-second delay of application process kill.

Finally, ESET LiveGuard Advanced now also offers advanced behavioral reports for our detection and response customers, providing an in-depth look into how our cloud sandboxing technology analyzes suspicious files, offering better visibility and context for security operators like cybersecurity and threat analysts, security engineers, or threat responders.

"This significant launch underscores ESET's unwavering dedication to delivering superior protection and services, effectively responding to the dynamic challenges faced by customers to stay one step ahead of threats," added Michal Jankech, Vice President of SMB and MSP segment at ESET.

For more detailed information about ESET and its updated portfolio, please visit the dedicated offering pages for SMBs and Enterprises.

About ESET  
ESET provides cutting-edge digital security to prevent attacks before they happen. By combining the power of AI and human expertise, ESET stays ahead of known and emerging cyber threats — securing businesses, critical infrastructure, and individuals. Whether it's endpoint, cloud or mobile protection, its AI-native, cloud-first solutions and services remain highly effective and easy to use. ESET technology includes robust detection and response, ultra-secure encryption, and multi-factor authentication. With 24/7 real-time defense and strong local support, we keep users safe and businesses running without interruption. An ever-evolving digital landscape demands a progressive approach to security: ESET is committed to world-class research and powerful threat intelligence, backed by R&D centers and a strong global partner network. For more information, visit www.eset.com or follow us on LinkedIn, Facebook, and X.

ESET PROTECT Portfolio Now Includes New MDR Tiers and Features

The CVE-2024-27322 security vulnerability in R's deserialization process gives attackers a way to execute arbitrary code in target environments via specially crafted files.

Source: Billion Photos via Shutterstock

A high-severity vulnerability in an R programming language process could expose organizations using the popular open source language to attacks via the software supply chain.

The vulnerability, assigned CVE-2024-27322, has a CVSS vulnerability-severity score of 8.8 out of 10. It involves R's process for deserializing data, or converting objects encoded in formats such as JSON, XML, and binary, back to their original form for use in an application or program.

R is a relatively widely used language for statistical computing and graphics applications. It is popular among developers in sectors such as financial services, healthcare, research, government and in environments involving large datasets such as AI and machine learning. The Comprehensive R Archive Network (CRAN), which is the most popular R package repository, currently hosts more than 20,000 packages, while R-Forge, a site that provides R package development tools, has more than 15,800 registered members and hosts some 2,146 projects.

**Deserialization Issue**

Researchers at HiddenLayer found a weakness in R's process that gives attackers a way to execute arbitrary code in a victim environment via a specially crafted R Data Serialization (RDS) file. Programmers commonly use RDS files to store or save objects in R for future use or for sharing with others.

"This vulnerability can be exploited through the loading of RDS files or R packages, which are often shared between developers and data scientists," HiddenLayer researchers Kasimir Schulz and Kieran Evans said in a report this week. "An attacker can create malicious RDS files or R packages containing embedded arbitrary R code that executes on the victim’s target device upon interaction," according to the report.

The maintainers of R have addressed the issue in R version 4.4.0 after HiddenLayer informed them of the issue.

**A Lazy Promise Allows Tinkering**

The vulnerability in R that HiddenLayer discovered relates to two fundamental concepts in R, called "lazy evaluation" and "promise objects." Lazy evaluation is a programming technique where an R program does not evaluate an expression or variable until actually required to, or when directly accessed. The goal is to improve performance by avoiding computations for expressions that might end up not being needed. A promise object is closely related to lazy evaluation and represents the object that has been delayed for evaluation.

What the researchers at HiddenLayer discovered was a way to create a promise object with a payload that would run code of their choice when the object was accessed during RDS file deserialization.

"R packages leverage the RDS format to save and load data," according to HiddenLayer. Two files that facilitate this process are an .rdb file that contains all the serialized objects to be included in a package, and an .rdx file that contains metadata about each of the objects.

"When a package is loaded, the metadata stored in the RDS format within the .rdx file is used to locate the objects within the .rdb file," according to the analysis. The objects within the .rdb files are then deserialized.

"An attacker can exploit this by creating an RDS file that contains a specially crafted promise object embedded with arbitrary code," Schulz tells Dark Reading. "Due to the way R implements lazy evaluation, the embedded arbitrary code will be executed once a user has loaded the malicious file or package." An attacker can relatively easily add a weaponized package to an R repository such as CRAN and simply wait for an unwary user to load that package.

**Potentially Vast Attack Surface: Multiple Infection Sources**

There are literally dozens of major hubs, such as R-Forget and Bioconductor, that R developers use to share and download packages. Not only are these hubs providing developers with access to thousands of packages, some, like Bioconductor, with more than 42 million downloads are being used regularly, Schulz says. "Someone just needs to take advantage of the vulnerability and the massive open source space for R packages to affect thousands of downstream users in a potentially massive supply chain attack," he says.

Schulz recommends that organizations move to the latest version of R to mitigate risk: "In addition, organizations should ensure that users of R are made aware of current and potential future vulnerabilities of this nature and make it policy to only use known trusted files and packages."

**About the Author(s)**

Jai Vijayan is a seasoned technology reporter with over 20 years of experience in IT trade journalism. He was most recently a Senior Editor at Computerworld, where he covered information security and data privacy issues for the publication. Over the course of his 20-year career at Computerworld, Jai also covered a variety of other technology topics, including big data, Hadoop, Internet of Things, e-voting, and data analytics. Prior to Computerworld, Jai covered technology issues for The Economic Times in Bangalore, India. Jai has a Master's degree in Statistics and lives in Naperville, Ill.

R Programming Bug Exposes Orgs to Vast Supply Chain Risk

Okta warns users that the attack requests are made through an anonymizing service like Tor or various commercial proxy networks.

Source: Ahmed Zaggoudi via Alamy Stock Photo

Credential-stuffing attacks targeting online services are spiking due to the accessibility of residential proxy services, stolen credentials, and scripting tools, Okta is warning its users.

From April 19 through April 26, Okta's researchers observed an increase in credential-stuffing attacks against Okta accounts.

Moussa Diallo and Brett Winterford, researchers at Okta Security, note that all recent attacks share a common denominator: The requests are made largely through an anonymizing device such as Tor. 

In addition to this, the researchers found that millions of requests were routed through various residential proxies such as NSOCKS, Luminati, and Datalmpulse. These residential proxies are "networks of legitimate user devices that route traffic on behalf of a paid subscriber." The researchers recently have observed a significant number of mobile devices used in proxy networks where the user has a downloaded app on their device using compromised software developer kits (SDKs).

"Effectively, the developers of these apps have consented to or have been tricked into using an SDK that enrolls the device of any user running the app in a residential proxy network," the researchers wrote. "The net sum of this activity is that most of the traffic in these credential-stuffing attacks appear to originate from the mobile devices and browsers of everyday users."

Okta has released a capability into the Workforce Identity Cloud (WIC) and Customer Identity Solution (CIS) that blocks requests from anonymizing services. This feature can be turned on in the settings of the Okta Admin Console. Organizations that want to block access from specific anonymizers must be licensed to use Dynamic Zones, an Adaptive MFA feature.

Okta also recommends that its users shore up best-practice defense measures to prevent account takeovers from credential-stuffing attacks.

"Defense in-depth measures, such as utilizing multifactor authentication on externally available employee access portals as well as sensitive internal systems, are needed here," said Thomas Richards, principal consultant at Synopsys Software Integrity Group, in an emailed statement to Dark Reading. "Additionally, there are anomalous behavior detection systems that can identify if a user is logging in at an unusual time, physical location, or source IP address."

**About the Author(s)**

Okta: Credential-Stuffing Attacks Spike via Proxy Networks

While other professions are making up ground, cybersecurity still lags behind in female representation, thanks to a lack of respect and inclusion.

Source: Valeriy Kachaev via Alamy Stock Photo

Right now, in 2024, at least three of every four cybersecurity professionals is male.

Cybersecurity is hardly the only male-dominated industry, but even in contrast to others — like law (53%), accounting (46%), and doctors of medicine (37%) — it lags behind.

According to new research from ISC2, women make up just 20% to 25% of the cybersecurity industry. And that figure, it noted, has remained relatively consistent for some years.

It stands out even more when compared with the racial makeup of the industry. While the majority of cyber pros over the age of 40 in the US, the UK, Canada, and Ireland are white, the majority under 40 are not. ISC2 found that over the past 12 months, a full two-thirds of new entrants to the industry from those countries have been non-white.

The takeaway? Cybersecurity is fixing its diversity problem, but only halfway.

**Gender Representation in Cyber, by the Numbers**

Just 4% of ISC2 survey respondents indicated that women make up a majority of their security teams. By contrast, 11% admitted they have no women on their teams at all.

There seems to be a mild networking effect at play, too. The average woman in security works with around 8% more women (30%) on average than men do (22%).

The problem is pretty much the same across industries, as the most-diverse sectors, like cloud services, automotive, and construction (all 28% female), don't far outpace the least-diverse (military and energy, each at 20%).

There are, however, some positive trends alongside the lagging ones.

Where only around 14% or 15% of cyber pros over age 40 are women, at least 25% under age 35 are (a relative improvement).

Most interestingly, the women who do make it into the cybersecurity field tend to rise up the corporate ladder at least as high as, if not higher than, their male counterparts. Women own executive titles at a similar clip to men. A greater percentage of them possess managerial-level roles, and a lesser percentage are ranked as individual contributors. And counterintuitive though it may sound, a greater percentage of women in security are involved in the hiring process than are men (33% to 24%).

That data, however, contrasts with other recent findings.

**The Root of the Problem: Exclusion**

In its "2023 State of Inclusion Benchmark in Cybersecurity" report, Women in Cybersecurity (WiCyS) tracked the ways in which women experience exclusion in the industry. "Respect" ranked as the worst issue on its list, but just behind respect was "career and growth opportunities."

"Women are experiencing a glass ceiling at around six years," reports Lynn Dohm, executive director at WiCyS. "You could imagine the journey for a woman in cybersecurity as they're advancing in their career, not necessarily getting the stretch assignments they're anticipating, perhaps their managers aren't taking initiative and identifying the trajectory of their career within the organization, they're getting passed up for promotions and experiencing that lack of respect with microaggressions, tokenism, comments. All of that leads up to the point where an individual would likely choose to step out of the career and move into other areas."

It's a self-fulfilling cycle: Too little female representation is leading more women to steer clear of security. As Dohm puts it: "Lack of diversity in the workforce is a symptom of the lack of inclusion."

Simply hiring more women doesn't solve the problem, either, since exclusion extends far deeper than any one person or organization can account for.

"The gender gap in cybersecurity begins long before women reach the workforce," explains Jessy McDermott, partner solution architect at Aqua Security. "I know firsthand as a former engineering student that this gap existed at the college level. For example, only four other women — out of an original 15, excluding myself — completed the engineering program alongside me at UMass Dartmouth. During those four years, I experienced an ongoing prejudice and doubt and saw how women were ultimately driven out of the field before they even graduated.

"This is only exacerbated as time goes on and women begin to see that careers in information technology or cybersecurity are 'male-dominated.' If you’re somehow able to get through college without being driven out of the field, you've just started the first leg of a never-ending journey. Ultimately, this can all lead to imposter syndrome, which myself and many female friends in the industry deal with. I have days where, even now, as a cybersecurity professional with years of experience under my belt, I still get challenged to show and, more importantly, prove my knowledge to others."

So, she adds, "I love how more companies are going out of their way to hire more women into the field, but to see a difference, women need internal support to feel confident and be successful in their roles."

**Non-Diversity Consequences to Companies**

Besides the obvious consequences for people, there are also consequences for uniformity for companies.

"When retention isn't there for female talent, it costs money, because it's pulling back out recruiting dollars. And it's also a reputational risk," Dohm notes.

"Broader than cybersecurity, there's a body of research that says the more perspectives you bring to the table, the better off you will be at problem solving," says Clar Rosso, CEO of ISC2. "In cybersecurity, which is a very complex, growing threat landscape, the more perspectives that we bring to the table to solve problems, the more likely we will be able to impact our cyber defense."

Dohm puts it tersely: "It's a security risk not having the diverse perspective that women bring to the cybersecurity workforce."

**About the Author(s)**

Nate Nelson is a freelance writer based in New York City. Formerly a reporter at Threatpost, he contributes to a number of cybersecurity blogs and podcasts. He writes "Malicious Life" -- an award-winning Top 20 tech podcast on Apple and Spotify -- and hosts every other episode, featuring interviews with leading voices in security. He also co-hosts "The Industrial Security Podcast," the most popular show in its field.

Source

DARKReading