Disaster Recovery Planning

Disaster Recovery Planning

It seems like it’s almost every day that the news reports another major company outage and as a result, the massive operational, financial and reputational consequences experienced, both short- and long-term. Widespread systemic outages first come to mind when considering disasters and threats to business and IT service continuity. But oftentimes, it’s the overlooked, “smaller” threats that regularly occur. Human error, equipment failure, power outages, malicious threats and data corruption can too bring an entire organization to a complete standstill.

It’s hard to imagine that these organizations suffering the effects of an outage don’t have a disaster recovery plan in place — they most certainly do. But, why do we hear of and experience failure so often?

Challenges with disaster recovery planning

Documenting

At the heart of any successful disaster recovery plan is comprehensive, up-to-date documentation. But with digital transformation placing more reliance on IT, environments are growing larger and more complex, with constant configuration changes. Manually capturing and documenting every facet of IT critical to business continuity is neither efficient or scalable, sending to us our first downfall.

Testing

Frequent, full-scale testing is also critical to the success of a thorough disaster recovery plan, again considering the aforementioned scale and complexity of modern environments — especially those that are multi-site. Paired with the resources required and potential end-user impact of regular testing, the disaster recovery plan’s viability is often untested.

Executing

The likelihood of a successful failover — planned or unplanned — is slim if the disaster recovery plan continues to be underinvested in, becoming out-of-date and untested quickly. Mismatched dependencies, uncaptured changes, improper processes, unverified services and applications and incorrect startup sequences are among the many difficulties when committing to a failover, whether it’s a single application or the entire data center.

Compliance

While it is the effects of an IT outage that first come to mind when considering disaster recovery, one aspect tends to be overlooked — compliance.

Disaster recovery has massive compliance implications — laws, regulations and standards set in place to ensure an organization’s responsibility to the reliability, integrity and Availability of its data. While what constitutes compliance varies from industry to industry, one thing holds true — non-compliance is not an option and brings with it significant financial and reputational risks.

 

meltdown spectre

Meltdown & Spectre: Where Are We at Now?

Meltdown and Spectre still continue to dominate the security news and the more we delve into it, we are starting to understand the depth and breadth of what this now means for the future of the security landscape.

Turns out the three variants of side-channel attacks, Meltdown and two different for Spectre, were discovered back in June of last year [2017] by researchers using speculative execution, which is where processors execute on code and then fetch and store the speculative results in cache. It’s a technique used to optimize and improve the performance of a device. What is important to note with Spectre is that it puts users at risk for information disclosure by exposing the weakness in the architecture of most processors in the market, and the breadth is vast: Intel, AMD, ARM, IBM (Power, Mainframe Z series) and Fujitsu/Oracle SPARC implementations across PCs, physical and virtual servers, smartphones, tablets, networking equipment and possibly IoT devices.

Currently there are no reported exploits in the wild.

Of the two, Meltdown is the easier one to mitigate with operating system updates. AMD processors are not affected by Meltdown. Spectre is a bit more complex to resolve because it is a new class of attack. The two variants of Spectre both can potentially do harm like stealing logins and other user data residing on the affected device. Intel, ARM, and AMD processors are affected by Spectre. Recently, Microsoft released another emergency update to disable Intel’s microcode fix. This original update was meant to patch for variant 2 of Spectre. Unfortunately, that update had adverse effects as there were numerous reports of reboots and instability, so Microsoft issued an out of band update to disable.

Things are still evolving around Spectre and while operating system updates and browser updates are helping to patch for Spectre, it is being reported by some sources that a true fix may be an update to the hardware (processor) itself.

The following is a chart* to clarify each vulnerability:

meltdown-spectre-chart

*Chart is courtesy of SANS/Rendition Infosec. See full presentation here.

It will be important over the next few weeks to stay on top of any breaking news around Meltdown and Spectre. Mitigation efforts should be underway in your IT organization to prevent a future zero-day attack.


This article was provided by our service partner : Connectwise

Data Privacy

Security : 3 Pitfalls Facing Privacy in 2018

Earlier this month, CES attendees got a taste of the future with dazzling displays of toy robots, smart assistants, and various AI/VR/8K gadgetry. But amid all the remarkable tech innovations on the horizon, one thing is left off the menu: user privacy. As we anticipate the rocky road ahead, there are three major pitfalls that have privacy experts concerned.

Bio hazard

Biometric authentication—using traits like fingerprints, iris, and voice to unlock devices—will prove to be a significant threat to user privacy in 2018 and beyond. From a user’s perspective, this technology streamlines the authentication process. Convenience, after all, is the primary commodity exchanged for privacy.

Mainstream consumer adoption of biometric tech has grown leaps and bounds recently, with features such as fingerprint readers becoming a mainstay on modern smartphones. Last fall, Apple revealed its Face ID technology, causing some alarm among privacy expertsA key risk in biometric authentication lies in its potential as a single method for accessing multiple devices or facilities.  You can’t change your fingerprints, after all. Biometric access is essentially akin to using the same password across multiple accounts.

“Imagine a scenario where an attacker gains access to a database containing biometric data,” said Webroot Sr. Advanced Threat Research Analyst Eric Klonowski. “That attacker can then potentially replay the attack against a variety of other authenticators.”

That’s not to say that biometrics are dead on arrival. Privacy enthusiasts can find solace in using biometrics in situations such as a two-factor authentication supplement. And forward-thinking efforts within the tech industry, such as partnerships forged by the FIDO Alliance, can help cement authentication standards that truly protect users. For the foreseeable future, however, this new tech has the potential to introduce privacy risks, particularly when it comes to safely storing biometric data.

Big data, big breaches

2017 was kind of a big year for data breaches. Equifax, of course, reined king by exposing the personal information (including Social Security Numbers) of some 140 million people in a spectacular display of shear incompetence. The Equifax breach was so massive that it overshadowed other big-data breaches from the likes of Whole Foods, Uber, and the Republican National Committee.

It seems no one—including the government agencies we trust to guard against the most dangerous online threats—was spared the wrath of serious data leaks. Unfortunately, there is no easy remedy in sight, and the ongoing global invasion of user privacy is forcing new regulatory oversight, such as the upcoming GDPR to protect EU citizens. The accelerated growth of technology, while connecting our world in ways never thought possible, has also completely upended traditional notions surrounding privacy.

The months ahead beg the question: What magnitude of breach will it take to trigger a sea change in our collective expectation of privacy? 

Talent vacuum

The third big issue that will continue to impact privacy across the board is the current lack of young talent in the cybersecurity industry. This shortfall is a real and present danger. According to a report by Frost & Sullivan, the information security workforce will face a worldwide talent shortage of 1.5 million by 2020.

Some of this shortfall is partly to blame on HR teams that fail to fully understand what they need to look for when assessing job candidates. The reality is that the field as a whole is still relatively new and is constantly evolving. Cybersecurity leaders looking to build out diverse teams are wise to search beyond the traditional background in computer science. Webroot Vice President and CISO Gary Hayslip explained that a computer science degree is not something on his radar when recruiting top talent for his teams.

“In cyber today, it’s about having the drive to continually educate yourself on the field, technologies, threats and innovations,” said Hayslip. “It’s about being able to work in teams, manage the resources given to you, and think proactively to protect your organization and reduce the risk exposure to business operations.

Beyond shoring up recruiting practices for information security roles, organizations of all types should consider other tactics, such as providing continual education opportunities, advocating in local and online communities, and inevitably replacing some of that human talent with automation.


This article was provided by our service partner : webroot.com 

Internet Security : How to Avoid Phishing on Social Media

From Facebook to LinkedIn, social media is flat-out rife with phishing attacks. You’ve probably encountered one before… Do fake Oakley sunglasses sales ring a bell?

Phishing attacks attempt to steal your most private information, posing major risks to your online safety. It’s more pressing than ever to have a trained eye to spot and avoid even the most cunning phishing attacks on social media.

Troubled waters

Spammers on social media are masters of their craft and their tactics are demonstrably more effective than their email-based counterparts. According to a report by ZeroFOXup to 66 percent of spear phishing attacks on social media sites are opened by their targets.  This compares to a roughly 30 percent success rate of spear phishing emails, based on findings by Verizon.

Facebook has warned of cybercriminals targeting personal accounts in order to steal information that can be used to launch more effective spear phishing attacks. The social network is taking steps to protect users’ accounts from hostile data collection, including more customizable security and privacy features such as two-factor authentication. Facebook has also been more active in encouraging users to adopt these enhanced security features, as seen in the in-app message below.

Facebook

Types of social phishing attacks

 

Fake customer support accounts

The rise of social media has changed the way customers seek support from brands, with many people turning to Twitter or Facebook over traditional customer support channels. Scammers are taking advantage of this by impersonating the support accounts of major brands such as Amazon, PayPal, and Samsung. This tactic, dubbed ‘angler phishing’ for its deepened deception, is rather prevalent. A 2016 study by Proofpoint found that 19% of social media accountsappearing to represent top brands were fake.

To avoid angler phishing, watch out for slight misspellings or variations in account handles. For example, the Twitter handle @Amazon_Help might be used to impersonate the real support account @AmazonHelp. Also, the blue checkmark badges next to account names on Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram let you know those accounts are verified as being authentic.

Spambot comments

Trending content such as Facebook Live streams are often plagued with spammy comments from accounts that are typically part of an intricate botnet. These spam comments contain URLs that link to phishing sites that try to trick you into entering your personal information, such as a username and password to an online account.

It is best to avoid clicking any links on social media from accounts you are unfamiliar with or otherwise can’t trust. You can also take advantage of security software features such as real-time anti-phishing to automatically block fake sites if you accidently visit them.

Dangerous DMs

Yes, phishing happens within Direct Messages, too. This is often seen from the accounts of friends or family that might be compromised. Hacked social media accounts can be used to send phishing links through direct messages, gaming trust and familiarity to fool you. These phishing attacks trick you into visiting malicious websites or downloading file attachments.

For example, a friend’s Twitter account that has been compromised might send you a direct message with a fake link to connect with them on LinkedIn. This link could direct to a phishing site like the one below in order to trick you into giving up your LinkedIn login.

LinkedIn Fishing Example

While this site may appear to look like the real LinkedIn sign-on page, the site URL in the browser address bar reveals it is indeed a fake phishing site. 

Phony promotions & contests 

Fraudsters are also known to impersonate brands on social media in order to advertise nonexistent promotions. Oftentimes, these phishing attacks will coerce victims into giving up their private information in order to redeem some type of discount or enter a contest. Know the common signs of these scams such as low follower counts, poor grammar and spelling, or a form asking you to give up personal information or make a purchase.

The best way to make sure you are interacting with a brand’s official page on social media is to navigate to their social pages directly from the company’s website. This way you can verify the account is legitimate and you can follow the page from there.