Login
Cybersecurity professionals are often perceived as sole practitioners, plying their craft in dimly lit rooms. Nothing could be further from the truth, as one of the keys to being a successful cybersecurity professional is the ability to collaborate and, more importantly, to share knowledge as far and wide as possible.
At Cisco, we have formed the Cisco Insider Advocacy program, which consists of a global community of professionals passionate about working and spreading their knowledge with others. We celebrate these individuals’ efforts with annual awards in various disciplines and locales. In 2023, Cisco will recognize top advocates by region for the Global Advocate Awards. Our first event – highlighting Cisco customers from across the EMEA region – is around the corner. It all happens at Cisco Live in Amsterdam, in a live ceremony on February 8!
I am joined on the Advocate Awards judges’ panel by my colleagues, Cindy Valladares, Director of Brand Strategy and Customer Advocacy at Cisco Secure, Caroline Surujpaul, EMEA and European Marketing Director at Cisco Secure and Sarah Stephens, Senior Security Marketing Leader for EMEA at Cisco Secure. We are pleased to introduce the nominees for the Cybersecurity Defender of the Year Award in EMEA.
We have five distinguished nominees, and while we have yet to select a winner, you will see how each of their contributions to Cisco’s cybersecurity community raised our attention.
Alessandro was featured in a recent successful case study about the Future of Work with Umbrella, as well as an earlier piece about simplified security using Cisco Meraki in Talent Garden.
Alessandro also authored a book about digital transformation long before it was a common buzzword. That is typical of Alessandro’s foresight, the ability to be proactive to changes before they are commonplace. He is indeed on the cutting edge.
Alessandro considers his involvement in the Advocacy community as “a very easy goal for me. First, because I’m very passionate about cybersecurity, and second because here I can find very valuable peers and professionals to share information with.” Alessandro’s abilities are borne from passion, drive, and adherence to a personal code of excellence; he learned security in a strictly hands-on style. He is also a member of Cisco’s “League of Cybersecurity Heroes.”
Christoffer, the newest Cisco Insider Advocacy community member, has gotten off to a brisk involvement with the group. He was recently featured in the case study “NTNU Supports a Diverse Academic and Research Community with Proactive Security,” which detailed how the Norwegian University of Science and Technology tackled the management of a dizzying 110,000 endpoints connecting to the university’s VPN.
Christoffer fully embraces the ideology of collaboration, mentioning that when he was seeking a security solution, “We didn’t want a vendor. We didn’t want a product. We wanted a partner to help us attack this large problem of cybersecurity.” He also demonstrates a fervent dedication to sharing by authoring half a dozen works in the cybersecurity realm, ranging from scientific to academic articles. His involvement in the Insider Advocacy community has earned him a spot in Cisco’s “League of Cybersecurity Heroes.”
Mark is one of the most erudite cybersecurity professionals one could meet. He has extensive educational credentials and enjoys sharing his knowledge, making him one of the Top 10 most engaged advocates of the Cybersecurity Channel within the Cisco Insider Advocates community.
Mark’s professional involvement extends beyond his local precinct, offering his knowledge of security best practices across the UK Policing community. In completing his most recent university degree, he authored a dissertation that “has led to an initiative to improve the security posture of my workplace.” Mark’s support to other Cisco customers has also led to his election as Vice-Chair of the Internet Society Cybersecurity Special Interest Group. He is also a member of Cisco’s “League of Cybersecurity Heroes.”
Luigi is a valuable member of the Insider Advocacy group and was recently featured in a video and written success story about Zero Trust and XDR.
Luigi is an agent of change who embraces the collaborative spirit of a true cybersecurity expert, as exemplified in his entire professional approach: “Since the infrastructure is now cloud-based, we had to change our mindset regarding cybersecurity as well. It was important to have the people, the process, the organisation, and the technology under the same security umbrella.”
When not working to ensure the security of the Sara Assicurazioni environment, Luigi has dedicated time to speaking at events, such as the “Experts Learning from Experts” global virtual session, a special virtual roundtable dedicated to Zero Trust and, last but not least, his presentation at Cisco Live Emea in Amsterdam about XDR and Zero Trust. His contributions to the Insider Advocacy platform reflect a tireless commitment to the cybersecurity community. Luigi is also a member of Cisco’s “League of Cybersecurity Heroes.”
Last year, Diego participated as speaker at the Tech Forum: Convergencia entre redes y seguridad. He will also be featured in a future ThreatWise TV – Cisco episode
Diego recognised early on that remote work would place his organisation outside the scope of their security and took proactive measures to meet the challenge. Part of his proactive approach is to freely communicate his ideas, leading to his involvement in the Insider Advocacy community. This has also earned him a place within Cisco’s “League of Cybersecurity Heroes.”
Diego’s view of working with Cisco’s products is summed up in a catchy phrase: “If it’s connected, it’s protected.” His involvement within the Insider Advocacy community makes us echo that sentiment by stating that he is connected, helping to keep everyone protected.
One point of note is the absence of women from the list of nominees. This was not the result of bias, as Cisco has a history of substantial diversity, equity, and inclusion. As you can see from the activities of the current nominees, the selection was based strictly on contributions to the community. We would love to see more engagement and membership in the Insider Advocacy program, not only from women but from a broader geographic area. This would increase the choices of possible nominees and add an even wider palette of inclusion to the entire nomination process.
We know that there is an entire population of cybersecurity professionals who seek more connection with like-minded individuals, and we welcome you to join this cohesive community.
We’d love to hear what you think. Ask a Question, Comment Below, and Stay Connected with Cisco Secure on social!
Cisco Secure Social Channels
On Dec. 23, 2022, KrebsOnSecurity alerted big-three consumer credit reporting bureau Experian that identity thieves had worked out how to bypass its security and access any consumer’s full credit report — armed with nothing more than a person’s name, address, date of birth, and Social Security number. Experian fixed the glitch, but remained silent about the incident for a month. This week, however, Experian acknowledged that the security failure persisted for nearly seven weeks, between Nov. 9, 2022 and Dec. 26, 2022.
The tip about the Experian weakness came from Jenya Kushnir, a security researcher living in Ukraine who said he discovered the method being used by identity thieves after spending time on Telegram chat channels dedicated to cybercrime.
Normally, Experian’s website will ask a series of multiple-choice questions about one’s financial history, as a way of validating the identity of the person requesting the credit report. But Kushnir said the crooks learned they could bypass those questions and trick Experian into giving them access to anyone’s credit report, just by editing the address displayed in the browser URL bar at a specific point in Experian’s identity verification process.
When I tested Kushnir’s instructions on my own identity at Experian, I found I was able to see my report even though Experian’s website told me it didn’t have enough information to validate my identity. A security researcher friend who tested it at Experian found she also could bypass Experian’s four or five multiple-choice security questions and go straight to her full credit report at Experian.
Experian acknowledged receipt of my Dec. 23 report four days later on Dec. 27, a day after Kushnir’s method stopped working on Experian’s website (the exploit worked as long as you came to Experian’s website via annualcreditreport.com — the site mandated to provide a free copy of your credit report from each of the major bureaus once a year).
Experian never did respond to official requests for comment on that story. But earlier this week, I received an otherwise unhelpful letter via snail mail from Experian (see image above), which stated that the weakness we reported persisted between Nov. 9, 2022 and Dec. 26, 2022.
“During this time period, we experienced an isolated technical issue where a security feature may not have functioned,” Experian explained.
It’s not entirely clear whether Experian sent me this paper notice because they legally had to, or if they felt I deserved a response in writing and thought maybe they’d kill two birds with one stone. But it’s pretty crazy that it took them a full month to notify me about the potential impact of a security failure that I notified them about.
It’s also a little nuts that Experian didn’t simply include a copy of my current credit report along with this letter, which is confusingly worded and reads like they suspect someone other than me may have been granted access to my credit report without any kind of screening or authorization.
After all, if I hadn’t authorized the request for my credit file that apparently prompted this letter (I had), that would mean the thieves already had my report. Shouldn’t I be granted the same visibility into my own credit file as them?
Instead, their woefully inadequate letter once again puts the onus on me to wait endlessly on hold for an Experian representative over the phone, or sign up for a free year’s worth of Experian monitoring my credit report.
As it stands, using Kushnir’s exploit was the only time I’ve ever been able to get Experian’s website to cough up a copy of my credit report. To make matters worse, a majority of the information in that credit report is not mine. So I’ve got that to look forward to.
If there is a silver lining here, I suppose that if I were Experian, I probably wouldn’t want to show Brian Krebs his credit file either. Because it’s clear this company has no idea who I really am. And in a weird, kind of sad way I guess, that makes me happy.
For thoughts on what you can do to minimize your victimization by and overall worth to the credit bureaus, see this section of the most recent Experian story.
Denis Emelyantsev, a 36-year-old Russian man accused of running a massive botnet called RSOCKS that stitched malware into millions of devices worldwide, pleaded guilty to two counts of computer crime violations in a California courtroom this week. The plea comes just months after Emelyantsev was extradited from Bulgaria, where he told investigators, “America is looking for me because I have enormous information and they need it.”
A copy of the passport for Denis Emelyantsev, a.k.a. Denis Kloster, as posted to his Vkontakte page in 2019.
First advertised in the cybercrime underground in 2014, RSOCKS was the web-based storefront for hacked computers that were sold as “proxies” to cybercriminals looking for ways to route their Web traffic through someone else’s device.
Customers could pay to rent access to a pool of proxies for a specified period, with costs ranging from $30 per day for access to 2,000 proxies, to $200 daily for up to 90,000 proxies.
Many of the infected systems were Internet of Things (IoT) devices, including industrial control systems, time clocks, routers, audio/video streaming devices, and smart garage door openers. Later in its existence, the RSOCKS botnet expanded into compromising Android devices and conventional computers.
In June 2022, authorities in the United States, Germany, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom announced a joint operation to dismantle the RSOCKS botnet. But that action did not name any defendants.
Inspired by that takedown, KrebsOnSecurity followed clues from the RSOCKS botnet master’s identity on the cybercrime forums to Emelyantsev’s personal blog, where he went by the name Denis Kloster. The blog featured musings on the challenges of running a company that sells “security and anonymity services to customers around the world,” and even included a group photo of RSOCKS employees.
“Thanks to you, we are now developing in the field of information security and anonymity!,” Kloster’s blog enthused. “We make products that are used by thousands of people around the world, and this is very cool! And this is just the beginning!!! We don’t just work together and we’re not just friends, we’re Family.”
But by the time that investigation was published, Emelyantsev had already been captured by Bulgarian authorities responding to an American arrest warrant. At his extradition hearing, Emelyantsev claimed he would prove his innocence in an U.S. courtroom.
“I have hired a lawyer there and I want you to send me as quickly as possible to clear these baseless charges,” Emelyantsev told the Bulgarian court. “I am not a criminal and I will prove it in an American court.”
RSOCKS, circa 2016. At that time, RSOCKS was advertising more than 80,000 proxies. Image: archive.org.
Emelyantsev was far more than just an administrator of a large botnet. Behind the facade of his Internet advertising company based in Omsk, Russia, the RSOCKS botmaster was a major player in the Russian email spam industry for more than a decade.
Some of the top Russian cybercrime forums have been hacked over the years, and leaked private messages from those forums show the RSOCKS administrator claimed ownership of the RUSdot spam forum. RUSdot is the successor forum to Spamdot, a far more secretive and restricted community where most of the world’s top spammers, virus writers and cybercriminals collaborated for years before the forum imploded in 2010.
A Google-translated version of the Rusdot spam forum.
Indeed, the very first mentions of RSOCKS on any Russian-language cybercrime forums refer to the service by its full name as the “RUSdot Socks Server.”
Email spam — and in particular malicious email sent via compromised computers — is still one of the biggest sources of malware infections that lead to data breaches and ransomware attacks. So it stands to reason that as administrator of Russia’s most well-known forum for spammers, Emelyantsev probably knows quite a bit about other top players in the botnet spam and malware community.
It remains unclear whether Emelyantsev made good on his promise to spill that knowledge to American investigators as part of his plea deal. The case is being prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of California, which has not responded to a request for comment.
Emelyantsev pleaded guilty on Monday to two counts, including damage to protected computers and conspiracy to damage protected computers. He faces a maximum of 20 years in prison, and is currently scheduled to be sentenced on April 27, 2023.
As part of Cisco’s recognition of International Data Privacy Day, today we released the Cisco 2023 Data Privacy Benchmark Study, our sixth annual review of key privacy issues and their impact on business. Drawing on responses from more than 3100 organizations in 26 geographies, the findings show that organizations continue to prioritize and get attractive returns from their privacy investments, while integrating privacy into many of their most important processes, including sales motions, management metrics, and employee responsibilities.
Nearly all organizations have recognized the importance of privacy to their business. Ninety-four percent (94%) of respondents said their customers wouldn’t buy from them if their data was not properly protected, and 95% said privacy has become a business imperative.
Even in a difficult economic environment, the average privacy spend in 2022 was $2.7 Million, up 125% from 3 years ago. Estimated benefits from privacy rose to $3.4 Million with significant gains across all organization sizes. The average organization is getting benefits of 1.8 times spending, meaning they get $180 of benefit for each $100 invested in privacy. Thirty-six percent (36%) of organizations are getting returns at least twice their spending with many getting returns upwards of 3 or 5 times.
More organizations are recognizing that everyone across the organization plays a vital role in protecting personal data. Ninety-five percent (95%) of survey respondents said that “all of their employees” need to know how to protect data privacy. Among the security professionals who completed our survey, one-third (33%) included data privacy in their top three areas of responsibility.
Another important indication of privacy’s importance to the organization is the use of privacy metrics. Ninety-eight percent (98%) of organizations said they are reporting one or more privacy-related metrics to the Board of Directors. The average number of privacy metrics was 3.1, which is up from 2.6 in last year’s survey. The most-reported metrics include the status of any data breaches, impact assessments, and incident response.
Privacy legislation continues to be very well-received around the world. Seventy-nine percent (79%) of all corporate respondents said privacy laws have had a positive impact, and only 6% indicated that the laws have had a negative impact.
Ninety-six percent (96%) of organizations said they have an ethical obligation to treat data properly. However, when it comes to earning and building customer trust, their priorities are not fully consistent with those of consumers. Transparency – providing easily accessible and clear information about how their data is being used – was the top priority (39%) for respondents in the consumer survey, well ahead of not selling personal information or complying with privacy laws. Yet, when asked what builds trust for consumers, organizations in the Benchmark Survey selected compliance over transparency. It seems consumers consider legal compliance to be a “given” with transparency more of a differentiator.
This disconnect can also be seen when it comes to the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI). Ninety-six percent (96%) of organizations in our survey believe they have processes already in place to meet the responsible and ethical standards that customers expect. Yet, the majority of consumers don’t see it that way. As reported in our 2022 Consumer Privacy Survey, 65% already have lost trust in organizations over their AI practices. Fortunately, organizations may be starting to get the message that they aren’t doing enough. Ninety-two percent (92%) of respondents said that when it comes to AI applications, their organization needs to be doing more to reassure customers that their data is only being used for intended and legitimate purposes.
Many governments and organizations are putting in place data localization requirements, which forces data to be kept within a country or region. The vast majority (88%) of survey respondents believe that their data would be inherently safer if it is only stored locally. Remarkably, 90% also said that a global provider, operating at scale, can better protect the data compared to local providers. When viewing these two statements together, it seems that while organizations would ideally like to keep their data local, they still prefer and trust a global provider over a local provider. Of course, if they can get both — a local instance set up by a global provider — they would presumably like that even better.
This research suggests that organizations should continue to build and apply privacy capabilities into their operations and solutions, particularly among engineering, IT and security professionals, and those who work with personal data. Transparency is particularly important to customers, and organizations need to do more to reassure customers on how their data is being used, especially when applying and using AI and automated decision-making. Finally, organizations should consider the consequences of data localization requirements and recognize that these add cost and may degrade functionality, privacy, and security.
To learn more, check out the Cisco 2023 Data Privacy Benchmark Study, Infographic, and our Principles for Responsible AI.
Also, the new Cisco 2022 Purpose Report (Power section) and the Cisco ESG Reporting Hub (Integrity and Trust section) to see how trustworthiness, transparency, and accountability are key to Cisco’s approach to security, privacy, and trust.
All this and more can be found on the Cisco Trust Center.
We’d love to hear what you think. Ask a Question, Comment Below, and Stay Connected with Cisco Secure on social!
Cisco Secure Social Channels
Written by James Schmidt
Editor’s Note: We often speak of online scams in our blogs, ones that cost victims hundreds if not thousands of dollars. This account puts a face on one of those scams—along with the personal, financial, and emotional pain that they can leave in their wake. This is the story of “Meredith,” whose aunt “Leslie” fell victim to an emerging form on online elder fraud. Our thanks to James for bringing it forward and to “Meredith’s” family for sharing it, all so others can prevent such scams from happening to them.
“Embarrassing. Simply embarrassing.” She shook her head. “It’s too raw. I can’t talk about it right now. I need time.”
Her aunt had been scammed. To the tune of $100,000 dollars. My colleague—we both work in the security industry—felt a peculiar sense of loss.
“I work in this industry. I thought I’d done everything right. I’ve passed on enough warnings to my family and friends to ensure they’d avoid the fate of the scammed. Simply because I’m in this industry does not imply my circle is always aware of all the threats to them, even if I do my best to teach them.”
“My mental state, recently, borders on shame; this feeling, you know? How could someone working in my industry have something like this happen to a family member?”
I told her many people working in other industries cannot control what happens to people in their families even if people in that industry had knowledge that could have helped them or otherwise avoided a problem altogether.
“I know, but this simply should never have happened! My aunt is one of the smartest, most conscientious people I know, and she fell for this. It’s crazy and I can’t wrap my head around it.”
My colleague, let’s call her Meredith (not her real name as she’s a bit ashamed to know this happened to a family member), told me the beginnings.
Let’s call her aunt Leslie.
Her story unfolds, the overall picture a pastiche of millions of people in the United States today. Her aunt is retired, bored, lonely, and isolated. She feels adrift without something to occupy her time; she was looking for companionship, connections, someone (anyone) to talk to. Her feelings intensified during the pandemic. She morphed into perfect prey for scammers of what is now known as the “Pig Butchering Scam.”
The term “Pig Butchering” has a visceral and raw feel to it, which falls right in line with how brutal this scam can be. It’s a long con game, where the scammer befriends the victim and encourages them to make small investments through the scammer, which get bigger and bigger over time. The scammer builds trust early with what appear to be small investment wins. None of it is legit. The money goes right into the scammer’s pocket, even as the scammer shows the victim phony financial statements and dashboards to show off the bogus returns. Confidence grows. The scammer wrings even larger sums out of the victim. And then disappears.
It was a targeted attack that started innocuously enough with a “fake wrong number”. An SMS arrives. A text conversation starts. The scammer then apologizes but tells Leslie someone gave them the number to initiate the text.
The scammer then uses emotional and psychological techniques to keep Leslie hooked. “How are you, are you having a nice day?” Leslie, being bored and interested, engages willingly.
The scammer asks to talk directly, not via text: and a phone conversation ensues. The scammer proceeds to describe—in very soothing detail—what they are doing, helping people, like Leslie, invest their “hard-earned money” into something that will make them more money, to help them out in retirement.
Of course, it is too good to be true.
“The craziest part of all of this is my aunt refuses—to this day—to believe she’s been scammed!”
She still thinks this scammer is a “friend” even though the entire family is up in arms over this, all of whom beg her aunt to “open her eyes.”
“My aunt still thinks she’d going to see that money again, or even make some money, which is crazy. The scammers are so good at emotional intelligence; really leveraging heartstrings and psychological makeup of the forlorn in society. My aunt finally agreed to stop sending more money to the scammers, but only after the entire family threatened to cut her off from the rest of the family. It took a lot to get her to stop trusting the scammers.”
Meredith feels this is doubly sad as the aunt in question is not someone they’d ever imagine would in this predicament. She was always the upright one, always the diligent and hardworking and the best with money. She is smart and savvy and we could never imagine her to be taken by these people and taken so easily. It boggles the mind.”
She did start to change in the last few years. And the pandemic created a weird situation. Retirement, loneliness from loss of a partner, and the added burden of the pandemic created a perfect storm for her to open herself up to someone willingly, simply for the sake of connection.
“No one deserves this. It has rocked my family to the core. It is not only about the money, but we’ve found family bonds stretched. She believes these random people, these scammers, more than she believes her own family. Have we been neglectful of our aunt? Does she no longer put her faith in people she knows, rather gives money to complete strangers?”
Being a security professional does not provide magical protection. We are more aware of scams and scammers, and how they work, and what to look for, and we try to do all we can to keep our family aware of scams out there in the big wide world, but we are human. We fall short.
Diligence is action. Awareness is action. Education is action.
We need to be better, all of us, at socializing risky things. We need to consistently educate our family and friends to protect themselves, not only via security software (which everyone should have as default) but by providing tips and tricks and warnings for things we all need to be on the lookout. This is not a one-time thing. The cliché holds true: “If you see something say something.” Repetition helps.
In today’s world, the need for protecting people’s security, identity, and privacy is critical to keeping them safe. Scammers long stopped focusing on attacking only your computer. Now focus more than ever on YOU: your identity, your privacy, your trust. If they get you there, they soon get your money.
As for contributing factors to scammers success with their victims, such as loneliness, isolation, and boredom, they all have remedies. Make connections with your loved ones, especially those easily tagged as vulnerable, those you feel might be at risk. Reach out. It may be hard sometimes due to distance and other factors but make it a point to connect. There is a reason these scammers are succeeding. They are stepping into roles of companions to people who are desperate for connection.
Most people are greatly saddened at seeing other people being “taken.” Let’s work together to help stop the scammers.
Look out for each other, and get your people protected!
Editor’s Closing Note:
If you or someone you know suspects elder fraud, the following resources can help:
For further reading on scams and scam prevention, check out the guides in our McAfee Safety Series, which provide in-depth advice on protecting your identity and privacy—and your family from scams. They’re ready to download and share.
The post A Scam in the Family—How a Close Relative Lost $100,000 to an Elder Scam appeared first on McAfee Blog.
It’s common practice to pull down the window shades at night. Homeowners invest in high fences. You may even cover the PIN pad when you type in your secret four-digit code at ATMs. Privacy is key to going about your daily life comfortably in your surroundings. Why shouldn’t privacy also extend to your digital surroundings?
This Data Privacy Day, round out your privacy protection toolbox with McAfee’s help so you can live your best online life safely.
An easy way to instantly boost the privacy of your every online move is to always connect to a virtual private network (VPN). A VPN scrambles your connected device’s internet session, meaning that it’s impossible for a cybercriminal to eavesdrop on your online comings and goings. VPNs are especially crucial for when you connect to public Wi-Fi networks or networks for which you cannot vouch for their security. Cybercriminals often lurk on public Wi-Fi networks at hotels, coffee shops, and libraries and pounce on users who connect their devices without the protection of a VPN.
Digital privacy not only implies remaining hidden from nefarious eyes, but also from the prying eyes of pesky advertisers. A VPN can assist with that too! When you have a VPN enabled, it confuses advertisers and targeted ads. The less information they have, the more privately you can surf online.
To improve your online privacy, it’s important to first know how safe you currently are. When you can identify your weakest digital privacy habits, you can make targeted improvements to them. Luckily, McAfee Protection Score can help you do just that! Protection Score is a helpful privacy tool that rates your current digital safety. Then, based on your score, the tool offers suggestions on how to boost your score.
For instance, Protection Score searches for your personally identifiable information (PII) on the dark web. If it finds a copy of your government ID or your financial records on a dubious site, your score will tank. While it may be alarming to have a low Protection Score, you can feel good that you’re making positive waves, hopefully before a cybercriminal takes advantage of your PII and uses it to steal your identity.
There are several easy ways to boost your score that require very little effort but have a huge payoff. Connecting to a VPN and running an antivirus scan on your device are just two things you can do and each only takes a few seconds. Changing your habits and turning your online safety around doesn’t have to be overwhelming! In some cases, there are services that’ll even do the work for you, like the service we’ll talk about next.
To round out your privacy protection toolbox, consider signing up for McAfee Personal Data Cleanup. This service is a great companion to Protection Score. While Protection Score identifies all the areas where you can improve your security, Personal Data Cleanup is a service that will remove your information from the web’s riskiest sites.
Did you know that, on average, a person has their PII for sale on 31 sites? Plus, 95% of people haven’t even given their permission and have their personal information for sale on data brokerage sites. Data brokerage sites are legal and anyone can buy your information. Online advertisers are the usual clients, but a cybercriminal can jump in and buy valuable PII, as well.
You should care about data privacy every day not just when the calendar reminds you on Data Privacy Day. Take the steps and invest in the right solutions to shore up your online defenses. McAfee+ Ultimate is an all-in-one service that includes unlimited VPN, Protection Score, a full-service Personal Data Cleanup, and 13 other high-quality identity, privacy, and device security tools.
Live your online life more confidently with McAfee, knowing that cybercriminals are less likely to slip by and damage your credit, identity, or online reputation.
The post 3 Tools to Round Out Your Privacy Protection Toolbox appeared first on McAfee Blog.
When the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) announced the TLS 1.3 standard in RFC 8446 in August 2018, plenty of tools and utilities were already supporting it (even as early as the year prior, some web browsers had implemented it as their default standard, only having to roll it back due to compatibility issues. Needless to say, the rollout was not perfect).
Toward the end of 2018, EMA conducted a survey of customers regarding their TLS 1.3 implementation and migration plans. In the January 2019 report, EMA concluded:
Some participants’ organizations may find they have to go back to the drawing board and come up with a Plan B to enable TLS 1.3 without losing visibility, introducing unacceptable performance bottlenecks and greatly increasing operational overhead. Whether they feel they have no choice but to enable TLS 1.3 because major web server and browser vendors have already pushed ahead with it or because they need to keep pace with the industry as it embraces the new standard is unclear. What is clear is that security practitioners see the new standard as offering greater privacy and end-to-end data security for their organizations, and that the long wait for its advancement is over.
When EMA asked many of the same questions in an updated survey of 204 technology and business leaders toward the end of 2022, they found that nearly all the conclusions in the 2018/2019 report still hold true today. Here are the three biggest takeaways from this most recent survey:
While regulatory frameworks and vendor controls continue to push the adoption of the TLS 1.3 standard, adoption still comes with a significant price tag – one that many organizations are just not yet ready or able to consume. Technology improvements will increase rates of adoption over time, such as Cisco Secure Firewall’s ability to decrypt and inspect encrypted traffic. More recent and unique technologies, like Cisco’s encrypted visibility engine, allow the firewall to recognize attack patterns in encrypted traffic without decryption. This latter functionality preserves performance and privacy of the encrypted flows without sacrificing the visibility and monitoring that 94% of respondents were concerned about.
Readers wishing to read the full EMA report can do so here and readers wishing to learn more about Cisco Secure Firewall’s encyrpted visibility engine can do so here.
We’d love to hear what you think. Ask a Question, Comment Below, and Stay Connected with Cisco Secure on social!
Cisco Secure Social Channels
Most people who operate DDoS-for-hire businesses attempt to hide their true identities and location. Proprietors of these so-called “booter” or “stresser” services — designed to knock websites and users offline — have long operated in a legally murky area of cybercrime law. But until recently, their biggest concern wasn’t avoiding capture or shutdown by the feds: It was minimizing harassment from unhappy customers or victims, and insulating themselves against incessant attacks from competing DDoS-for-hire services.
And then there are booter store operators like John Dobbs, a 32-year-old computer science graduate student living in Honolulu, Hawaii. For at least a decade until late last year, Dobbs openly operated IPStresser[.]com, a popular and powerful attack-for-hire service that he registered with the state of Hawaii using his real name and address. Likewise, the domain was registered in Dobbs’s name and hometown in Pennsylvania.
Dobbs, in an undated photo from his Github profile. Image: john-dobbs.github.io
The only work experience Dobbs listed on his resume was as a freelance developer from 2013 to the present day. Dobbs’s resume doesn’t name his booter service, but in it he brags about maintaining websites with half a million page views daily, and “designing server deployments for performance, high-availability and security.”
In December 2022, the U.S. Department of Justice seized Dobbs’s IPStresser website and charged him with one count of aiding and abetting computer intrusions. Prosecutors say his service attracted more than two million registered users, and was responsible for launching a staggering 30 million distinct DDoS attacks.
The government seized four-dozen booter domains, and criminally charged Dobbs and five other U.S. men for allegedly operating stresser services. This was the Justice Department’s second such mass takedown targeting DDoS-for-hire services and their accused operators. In 2018, the feds seized 15 stresser sites, and levied cybercrime charges against three men for their operation of booter services.
Dobbs’s booter service, IPStresser, in June 2020. Image: archive.org.
Many accused stresser site operators have pleaded guilty over the years after being hit with federal criminal charges. But the government’s core claim — that operating a booter site is a violation of U.S. computer crime laws — wasn’t properly tested in the courts until September 2021.
That was when a jury handed down a guilty verdict against Matthew Gatrel, a then 32-year-old St. Charles, Ill. man charged in the government’s first 2018 mass booter bust-up. Despite admitting to FBI agents that he ran two booter services (and turning over plenty of incriminating evidence in the process), Gatrel opted to take his case to trial, defended the entire time by court-appointed attorneys.
Prosecutors said Gatrel’s booter services — downthem[.]org and ampnode[.]com — helped some 2,000 paying customers launch debilitating digital assaults on more than 20,000 targets, including many government, banking, university and gaming websites.
Gatrel was convicted on all three charges of violating the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, including conspiracy to commit unauthorized impairment of a protected computer, conspiracy to commit wire fraud, and unauthorized impairment of a protected computer. He was sentenced to two years in prison.
Now, it appears Dobbs is also planning to take his chances with a jury. On Jan. 4, Dobbs entered a plea of not guilty. Neither Dobbs nor his court-appointed attorney responded to requests for comment.
But as it happens, Dobbs himself provided some perspective on his thinking in an email exchange with KrebsOnSecurity back in 2020. I’d reached out to Dobbs because it was obvious he didn’t mind if people knew he operated one of the world’s most popular DDoS-for-hire sites, and I was genuinely curious why he was so unafraid of getting raided by the feds.
“Yes, I am the owner of the domain you listed, however you are not authorized to post an article containing said domain name, my name or this email address without my prior written permission,” Dobbs replied to my initial outreach on March 10, 2020 using his email address from the University of Hawaii at Manoa.
A few hours later, I received more strident instructions from Dobbs, this time via his official email address at ipstresser[.]com.
“I will state again for absolute clarity, you are not authorized to post an article containing ipstresser.com, my name, my GitHub profile and/or my hawaii.edu email address,” Dobbs wrote, as if taking dictation from a lawyer who doesn’t understand how the media works.
When pressed for particulars on his business, Dobbs replied that the number of IPStresser customers was “privileged information,” and said he didn’t even advertise the service. When asked whether he was concerned that many of his competitors were by then serving jail time for operating similar booter services, Dobbs maintained that the way he’d set up the business insulated him from any liability.
“I have been aware of the recent law enforcement actions against other operators of stress testing services,” Dobbs explained. “I cannot speak to the actions of these other services, but we take proactive measures to prevent misuse of our service and we work with law enforcement agencies regarding any reported abuse of our service.”
What were those proactive measures? In a 2015 interview with ZDNet France, Dobbs asserted that he was immune from liability because his clients all had to submit a digital signature attesting that they wouldn’t use the site for illegal purposes.
“Our terms of use are a legal document that protects us, among other things, from certain legal consequences,” Dobbs told ZDNet. “Most other sites are satisfied with a simple checkbox, but we ask for a digital signature in order to imply real consent from our customers.”
Dobbs told KrebsOnSecurity his service didn’t generate much of a profit, but rather that he was motivated by “filling a legitimate need.”
“My reason for offering the service is to provide the ability to test network security measures before someone with malicious intent attacks said network and causes downtime,” he said. “Sure, some people see only the negatives, but there is a long list of companies I have worked with over the years who would say my service is a godsend and has helped them prevent tens of thousands of dollars in downtime resulting from a malicious attack.”
“I do not believe that providing such a service is illegal, assuming proper due diligence to prevent malicious use of the service, as is the case for IPstresser[.]com,” Dobbs continued. “Someone using such a service to conduct unauthorized testing is illegal in many countries, however, the legal liability is that of the user, not of the service provider.”
Dobbs’s profile on GitHub includes more of his ideas about his work, including a curious piece on “software engineering ethics.” In his January 2020 treatise “My Software Engineering Journey,” Dobbs laments that nothing in his formal education prepared him for the reality that a great deal of his work would be so tedious and repetitive (this tracks closely with a 2020 piece here called Career Choice Tip: Cybercrime is Mostly Boring).
“One area of software engineering that I think should be covered more in university classes is maintenance,” Dobbs wrote. “Projects are often worked on for at most a few months, and students do not experience the maintenance aspect of software engineering until they reach the workplace. Let’s face it, ongoing maintenance of a project is boring; there is nothing like the euphoria of completing a project you have been working on for months and releasing it to the world, but I would say that half of my professional career has been related to maintenance.”
Allison Nixon is chief research officer at the New York-based cybersecurity firm Unit 221B. Nixon is part of a small group of researchers who have been closely tracking the DDoS-for-hire industry for years, and she said Dobbs’s claim that what he’s doing is legal makes sense given that it took years for the government to recognize the size of the problem.
“These guys are arguing that their services are legal because for a long time nothing happened to them,” Nixon said. “It’s difficult to argue something is illegal if no one has ever been arrested for it before.”
Nixon says the government’s fight against the booter services — and by extension other types of cybercrimes — is hampered by a legal system that often takes years to cycle through cybercrime cases.
“With cybercrime, the cycle between the crime and investigation and arrest can often take a year or more, and that’s for a really fast case,” Nixon said. “If someone robbed a store, we’d expect a police response within a few minutes. If someone robs a bank’s website, there might be some indication of police activity within a year.”
Nixon praised the 2022 and 2018 booter takedown operations as “huge steps forward,” but added that “there need to be more of them, and faster.”
“This time lag is part of the reason it’s so difficult to shut down the pipeline of new talent going into cybercrime,” she said. “They think what they’re doing is legal because nothing has happened, and because of the amount of time it takes to shut these things down. And it’s really a big problem, where we see a lot of people becoming criminals on the basis that what they’re doing isn’t really illegal because the cops won’t do anything.”
In December 2020, Dobbs filed an application with the state of Hawaii to withdraw IP Stresser Inc. from its roster of active companies. But according to prosecutors, Dobbs would continue to operate his DDoS-for-hire site until at least November 2022.
Two months after our 2020 email interview, Dobbs would earn his second bachelor’s degree (in computer science; his resume says he earned a bachelor’s in civil engineering from Drexel University in 2013). The federal charges against Dobbs came just as he was preparing to enter his final semester toward a master’s degree in computer science at the University of Hawaii.
Nixon says she has a message for anyone involved in operating a DDoS-for-hire service.
“Unless you are verifying that the target owns the infrastructure you’re targeting, there is no legal way to operate a DDoS-for-hire service,” she said. “There is no Terms of Service you could put on the site that would somehow make it legal.”
And her message to the customers of those booter services? It’s a compelling one to ponder, particularly now that investigators in the United States, U.K. and elsewhere have started going after booter service customers.
“When a booter service claims they don’t share logs, they’re lying because logs are legal leverage for when the booter service operator gets arrested,” Nixon said. “And when they do, you’re going to be the first people they throw under the bus.”
Authored by Dennis Pang
Online protection software. Antivirus. The two words get used interchangeably often enough. But sure enough, they’re different. And yet directly related when you take a closer look.
The term “antivirus” has been with us for decades now, dating back to the first software that was designed to prevent computers from getting malware—malicious code, like viruses, that would lock up computers, scramble data, or otherwise damage computers and the data on them. Prime examples of these early types of malware include 1999’s “Melissa” virus spreads by infected email attachments and the even more devastating “ILOVEYOU” virus that incurred billions in damages worldwide.
There’s a good reason why people default to the word “antivirus” so easily. Viruses have been on our collective minds for some time. And computer purchases have often been accompanied by the question, “Do you have antivirus for your computer?” By and large, the notion of antivirus has become pretty much engrained.
Yet look ahead to today and you can see how dramatically things have changed since those early days. We still need antivirus, that’s for sure. But it takes far more than that to live life safely online right now. And that’s where online protection software comes in.
Online protection software protects you. It includes antivirus, yet it further protects your identity and privacy in addition to your devices.
The way we use our computers, tablets, and phones nowadays shows the reason why we need such broad protection. We conduct so much of our lives online. We bank, we shop, we plan our finance online. We also run portions of our homes with smart devices and smart speakers. Increasingly, we track our health and wellness with connected devices too—like workouts on our phone and biometrics with consumer-grade and even medical-grade devices.
All of this creates data. Data about who we are, what we’re doing, when we’re doing it, how often, and where. That’s precious information. Private information. Personal information. And understandably, that needs to be protected.
Put simply, today’s threats have evolved. While viruses and malware remain a problem, today’s bad actors are out for the bigger games. Like stealing personal and financial info for identity theft. Moreover, organizations large and small collect data from your devices and the things you do on them, personal data that many share and sell for profit. Some of this data collection gets quite exacting, compiled from a broad range of public sources that can include records like bankruptcies, real estate sales, and birth records—plus private sources that can further include your shopping habits, the people you chat with, and what your daily travels look like based on location information captured from your smartphone.
If you find yourself surprised by this, you’re not alone. Tremendous volumes of data collection activity occur without people’s knowledge or consent.
Now as to why anyone would want any of that kind of data about you, consider the multi-billion-dollar industry of online data brokers. They compile thousands of data points from millions of people and put these vats of data up for sale to anyone who’ll buy them. That could be advertisers, potential employers, private investigators, and background checkers. And it could be bad actors as well who could use your own data to spam, harass, impersonate, or otherwise harm you.
Once, so many of these intrusions on our privacy and identity were difficult to spot, let alone prevent. For example, your personal info gets caught up in a data breach and winds up posted for sale on the dark web. How are you to know that before it’s too late and thief racks up umpteen charges on your debit card? Also, with dozens and dozens of data brokers out there, how do you track down which ones have information posted about you and then request to have it taken down? And what if online identity theft happens to you and you’re faced with the time and dollar costs it involves to set things right?
So just as online threats have evolved, so has online protection software. We go about so much of our day online, and online protection like our own McAfee+ helps you do it more privately and more safely. It’s quite comprehensive, and the various plans for McAfee+ include:
For certain, protections like these remain a primary focus of ours, because they protect you. And that’s who thieves and bad actors are really after—you, your information, your accounts, and even your identity. Expect us to continue to roll out more protections that look after you in this way and more.
So, while antivirus and online protection software are different, they work together. Antivirus provides strong device security, which complements the additional privacy and identity features included with online protection. That reflects how times have changed. Once it was enough to protect our devices from viruses and malware. Now we have to protect ourselves as well. Antivirus alone won’t do it, but antivirus as part of online protection will.
The post The Big Difference Between Online Protection Software and Antivirus appeared first on McAfee Blog.
FreshRSS 