Reading view

There are new articles available, click to refresh the page.

NIST AI_Risk Management Framework Playbook

The Playbook provides suggested actions for achieving the outcomes laid out inthe AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF) Core (Tables 1 – 4 in AI RMF1.0). Suggestions are aligned to each sub-category within the four AI RMFfunctions (Govern, Map, Measure, Manage).The Playbook is neither a checklist nor set of steps to be followed in its […]

La entrada NIST AI_Risk Management Framework Playbook se publicó primero en CISO2CISO.COM & CYBER SECURITY GROUP.

Remember: Compliance is a checkbox, Real Cybersecurity is a journey.

The Cybersecurity Misconception: Compliance ≠ Security In the complex digital landscape of modern business, robust cybersecurity is paramount. However, a pervasive misconception persists: the belief that achieving compliance equates to comprehensive cybersecurity. This dangerous fallacy can leave organizations exposed to significant risks. While compliance is undoubtedly essential, it is merely a foundational element within a […]

La entrada Remember: Compliance is a checkbox, Real Cybersecurity is a journey. se publicó primero en CISO2CISO.COM & CYBER SECURITY GROUP.

We Love What’s Broken … Yes, This Of Course Means SIEM!

We Love What’s Broken … Yes, This Of Course Means SIEM!

SIEM challenges never stopped me from loving this technology, but I am very cognizant of YMMV. Anyhow, CardinalOps released their annual “state of SIEM” report, and here are some fun highlights.

CardinalOps State of SIEM 2024 Report
  • “Can potentially cover 87% of ATT&CK with existing data sources they’re already ingesting — but are currently only covering less than 19%.“ [A.C. — in my fairly informed opinion, the “security data lakers” are possibly making this particular one worse and definitely not better]
  • ”Have more than 18% of their rules that are broken and will never fire an alert due to common issues such as misconfigured data sources, missing fields, and parsing errors.”
  • Why so broken?

Complexity: The average enterprise has more than 130 distinct security tools (endpoint, network, cloud, email, IAM, etc.).

Constant change in infrastructures, security tools, attack surfaces, adversary techniques, and business priorities (e.g., cloud). In fact, over the next 5 years, Gartner Research projects that over 60% of security incidents will be traced to misconfigured security controls.1

No “one-size-fits-all” — every enterprise is unique, making it impractical to copy/paste generic content from SIEM vendors, MSSPs, open source communities, and marketplaces.

Manual and error-prone processes that are highly dependent on individual “ninjas” with specialized expertise, making it difficult to effectively scale and maintain high-quality detections.

Challenges in hiring and retaining skilled personnel who can develop detections across diverse scenarios and log source types.”

  • “If you’re like most detection engineering teams, you’re continuously adding new detection rules to your SIEM. But over time, your environment has changed in different ways. [..] So you must continuously identify and fix broken rules!” [A.C. — You have a process to make rules? Good! You actually make rules? Great! Now, get a process for fixing the rules that decayed over time…]
  • ”Researchers found that 20–30% of all alerts are simply ignored or not investigated in a timely manner. ” [A.C. — depressing take of the day, but likely true. Don’t create ‘always-ignore’ alerts, and if they are created, destroy them!]

Read the report!

P.S. Free Gemini / LLM tip: don’t ask to summarize, or for insights, ask for surprises!

Related blogs:


We Love What’s Broken … Yes, This Of Course Means SIEM! was originally published in Anton on Security on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

The post We Love What’s Broken … Yes, This Of Course Means SIEM! appeared first on Security Boulevard.

What is IRDAI Compliance and Its Role

The Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India (IRDAI) plays a crucial role in overseeing and advancing the insurance sector in India. Founded in 1999 as an autonomous and statutory body, IRDAI compliance acts as the principal regulator for the insurance industry both domestically and internationally. Its primary mission is to protect policyholders’ interests while […]

The post What is IRDAI Compliance and Its Role appeared first on Kratikal Blogs.

The post What is IRDAI Compliance and Its Role appeared first on Security Boulevard.

Connecticut Has Highest Rate of Health Care Data Breaches: Study

health care data breaches cybersecurity

It’s no secret that hospitals and other health care organizations are among the top targets for cybercriminals. The ransomware attacks this year on UnitedHealth Group’s Change Healthcare subsidiary, nonprofit organization Ascension, and most recently the National Health Service in England illustrate not only the damage to these organizations’ infrastructure and the personal health data that’s..

The post Connecticut Has Highest Rate of Health Care Data Breaches: Study appeared first on Security Boulevard.

Managing Artificial Intelligence-Specific Cybersecurity Risks in the Financial Services Sector

The U.S. Department of the Treasury’s report focuses on the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the financial services sector, particularly in cybersecurity and fraud protection. It highlights the challenges and opportunities associated with AI adoption, emphasizing the need for a common AI lexicon, addressing capability gaps, and regulating AI in financial services. The report […]

La entrada Managing Artificial Intelligence-Specific Cybersecurity Risks in the Financial Services Sector se publicó primero en CISO2CISO.COM & CYBER SECURITY GROUP.

Colorado Privacy Act (CPA) 

What is the Colorado Privacy Act? The Colorado Privacy Act (CPA), signed into law on July 7, 2021, is a comprehensive privacy legislation that aims to enhance data privacy rights for residents of Colorado. The CPA provides consumers with greater control over their personal data and imposes obligations on businesses that process personal data. It […]

The post Colorado Privacy Act (CPA)  appeared first on Centraleyes.

The post Colorado Privacy Act (CPA)  appeared first on Security Boulevard.

Sen. Wyden Urges HHS to Raise Cybersecurity Standards for Healthcare Sector

Wyden Urged HHS

Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) is pressing the U.S. government to accelerate cybersecurity enhancements within the healthcare sector following the devastating Change Healthcare ransomware attack that exposed the protected health information of nearly a third of Americans. In a letter to Xavier Becerra, secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Wyden urged HHS to implement immediate, enforceable steps to improve “lax cybersecurity practices” of large healthcare organizations.
“It is clear that HHS’ current approach to healthcare cybersecurity — self-regulation and voluntary best practices — is woefully inadequate and has left the health care system vulnerable to criminals and foreign government hackers.”Wyden.
He stated that the sub-par cybersecurity standards have allowed hackers to steal patient information and disrupt healthcare services, which has caused “actual harm to patient health.”

MFA Could Have Stopped Change Healthcare Attack

The call from Wyden comes on the back of the ransomware attack on Change Healthcare — a subsidiary of UnitedHealth Group — which, according to its Chief Executive Officer Andrew Witty, could have been prevented with the basic cybersecurity measure of Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA). The lack of MFA on a Citrix remote access portal account that Change Healthcare used proved to be a key vulnerability that allowed attackers to gain initial access using compromised credentials, Witty told the Senate Committee on Finance in a May 1 hearing.
“HHS’ failure to regulate the cybersecurity practices of major health care providers like UHG resulted in what the American Hospital Association has described as the worst cyberattack against the healthcare sector in U.S. history.” - Wyden
The use of MFA is a fundamental cybersecurity practice that HHS should mandate for all healthcare organizations, Wyden argued. He called for the implementation of broader minimum and mandatory technical cybersecurity standards, particularly for critical infrastructure entities that are designated as "systemically important entities" (SIE) by the U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. “These technical standards should address how organizations protect electronic information and ensure the healthcare system’s resiliency by maintaining critical functions, including access to medical records and the provision of medical care,” Wyden noted. He suggested that HHS enforce these standards by requiring Medicare program participants to comply.

Wyden’s Proposed Cybersecurity Measures for HHS

Wyden said HHS should mandate a range of cybersecurity measures as a result of the attack. “HHS must follow the lead of other federal regulators in mandating cybersecurity best practices necessary to protect the healthcare sector from further, devastating, easily-preventable cyberattacks,” Wyden argued. The Democratic senator proposed several measures to enhance cybersecurity in the healthcare sector, including:
  • Mandatory Minimum Standards: Establish mandatory cybersecurity standards, including MFA, for critical healthcare infrastructure.
  • Rapid Recovery Capabilities: Ensure that organizations can rebuild their IT infrastructure within 48 to 72 hours following an attack.
  • Regular Audits: Conduct regular audits of healthcare organizations to assess and improve their cybersecurity practices.
  • Technical Assistance: Provide technical security support to healthcare providers.
Wyden criticized HHS for its current insufficient regulatory oversight, which he believes contributes to the ongoing cyberattacks harming patients and national security. “The current epidemic of successful cyberattacks against the health care sector is a direct result of HHS’s failure to appropriately regulate and oversee this industry, harming patients, providers, and our national security,” Wyden said. He urged HHS to use all of its authorities to protect U.S. healthcare providers and patients from mounting cybersecurity risks.

The State of Ransomware in Healthcare

The healthcare sector was the most common ransomware target among all critical infrastructure sectors, according to FBI’s Internet Crime Report 2023. The number of attacks and individuals impacted have grown exponentially over the last three years. [caption id="attachment_75474" align="aligncenter" width="1024"]Healthcare ransomware attacks Ransomware attacks on healthcare in last three years. (Source: Emsisoft)[/caption]
“In 2023, 46 hospital systems with a total of 141 hospitals were impacted by ransomware, and at least 32 of the 46 had information, including protected health information, stolen.” - Emsisoft
A study from McGlave, Neprash, and Nikpay from the University of Minnesota School of Public Health found that in a five-year period starting in 2016, ransomware attacks likely killed between 42 and 67 Medicare patients. Their study further observed a decrease in hospital volume and services by 17-25% during the week following a ransomware attack that not only hit revenue but also increased in-hospital mortality among patients who were already admitted at the time of attack.

HHS Cybersecurity Response

HHS announced in December plans to update its cybersecurity regulations for the healthcare sector for the first time in 21 years. These updates would include voluntary cybersecurity performance goals and efforts to improve accountability and coordination. The Healthcare and Public Health Sector Coordinating Council also unveiled a five-year Health Industry Cybersecurity Strategic Plan in April, which recommends 10 cybersecurity goals to be implemented by 2029. Wyden acknowledged and credited the latest reform initiatives from HHS and the HSCC, but remains concerned about the lengthy implementation timeline, which he said requires urgency when it comes to the healthcare sector. The latest letter follows Wyden’s request last week to the SEC and FTC to investigate for any negligence in cybersecurity practices of UnitedHealth Group. HHS is currently investigating the potential UHG breach that resulted in the exposure of protected health information of hundreds of thousands of Americans.

Listen up: 10 cybersecurity podcasts you can learn from

Regardless of where you are in your career in cybersecurity –  whether you have been a trusted expert for decades or are just starting out – it can be difficult to keep up with what’s happening in this fast-moving field. One way to kick-start your continual learning is by tuning into top cybersecurity podcasts.

The post Listen up: 10 cybersecurity podcasts you can learn from appeared first on Security Boulevard.

IoT Security Means Remediation Not Mitigation

A topic that I recently got asked about was vulnerability mitigation for IoT systems, which shows that even within the security community there is still a belief that mitigation equals threat resolution.  For IoT systems this simply does not work for many reasons, first among them is that these IoT, OT, or ICS systems performing […]

The post IoT Security Means Remediation Not Mitigation appeared first on Viakoo, Inc.

The post IoT Security Means Remediation Not Mitigation appeared first on Security Boulevard.

Australian Privacy Watchdog Files Lawsuit Against Medibank Over 2022 Data Breach

Lawsuit against Medibank, Medibank, Medibank Data Breach, Medibank Data Breach 2022

The Australian privacy watchdog on Wednesday filed a lawsuit against Medibank, the country's largest private health insurer, for failing to protect its 9.7 million customers' personal information in a 2022 data breach incident.

The Australian Information Commissioner said in a civil penalty proceedings filed in the Federal Court that Medibank "seriously interfered" with the privacy of Australians by failing to take reasonable steps to protect their data from misuse and unauthorized access. These issues are allegedly in breach of the country's Privacy Act 1988, according to the OAIC.

The legal actions follow an investigation from the Australian Information Commissioner Angelene Falk into the Medibank cyberattack in which threat actors accessed the personal information of millions of current and former Medibank customers. The personally identifiable data that was stolen in this breach also ended up being published on the dark web. “The release of personal information on the dark web exposed a large number of Australians to the likelihood of serious harm, including potential emotional distress and the material risk of identity theft, extortion and financial crime,” said acting Australian Information Commissioner Elizabeth Tydd. Tydd emphasized that Medibank’s business as a health insurance services provider involves collecting and holding customers’ personal and sensitive health information.
“We allege Medibank failed to take reasonable steps to protect personal information it held given its size, resources, the nature and volume of the sensitive and personal information it handled, and the risk of serious harm for an individual in the case of a breach,” Tydd said. “We consider Medibank’s conduct resulted in a serious interference with the privacy of a very large number of individuals.”
Privacy Commissioner Carly Kind put the responsibility of data security and privacy on the organizations that collect, use and store personal information. These orgnizations have a considerable responsibility to ensure that data is held safely and securely, particularly in the case of sensitive data, she said. “This case should serve as a wakeup call to Australian organizations to invest in their digital defenses,” Kind added.

Aim and Findings of OAIC's Medibank Data Breach Investigation

OAIC commenced the investigation into Medibank’s privacy practices in December 2022 following an October data breach of Medibank and its subsidiary ahm. The investigation focused on whether Medibank's actions constituted a privacy interference or breached Australian Privacy Principle (APP) 11.1. This law enforcement mandates organizations to take reasonable steps in the protection of information from misuse, interference, and unauthorized access. The OAIC's findings suggested that Medibank's measures were insufficient given the circumstances. Under section 13G of the Privacy Act, the Commissioner can apply for a civil penalty order for serious or repeated privacy interferences. For the period from March 2021 to October 2022, the Federal Court can impose a civil penalty of up to AU$2.2 million (approximately US$1.48 million) per violation.

A spokesperson for the health insurer did not detail the plan of action against the lawsuit but told The Cyber Express that ”Medibank intends to defend the proceedings.”

Set Aside Millions to Fix the Issues

Australia's banking regulator last year advised Medibank to set aside AU$250 million (approximately US$167 million) in extra capital to fix the weaknesses identified in its information security after the 2022 data breach incident. The Australian Prudential and Regulation Authority (APRA) said at the time that the capital adjustment would remain in place until an agreed remediation programe was completed by Medibank to the regulator's satisfaction. Medibank told investors and customers that it had sufficient existing capital to meet this adjustment. APRA also said it would conduct a technology review of Medibank that would expedite the remediation process for the health insurer. It did not immediately respond to The Cyber Express' request for an update on this matter.

Medibank Hacker Sanctioned and Arrested

The United States, Australia and the United Kingdom earlier in the year sanctioned a Russian man the governments believed was behind the 2022 Medibank hack. 33-year-old Aleksandr Gennadievich Ermakov, having aliases AlexanderErmakov, GustaveDore, aiiis_ermak, blade_runner and JimJones, was said to be the face behind the screen. Post the sanctions, Russian police arrested three men including Ermakov, on charges of violating Article 273 of the country's criminal code, which prohibits creating, using or disseminating harmful computer code, said Russian cybersecurity firm F.A.C.C.T. Extradition of Ermakov in the current political environment seems highly unlikely. The legal action against Medibank serves a critical reminder for organizations to prioritize data security and adhere to privacy regulations. The outcome of this lawsuit will likely influence how Australian entities manage and protect personal information in the future, reinforcing the need for stringent cybersecurity practices in an evolving digital landscape. “Organizations have an ethical as well as legal duty to protect the personal information they are entrusted with and a responsibility to keep it safe,” Kind said.

The CJIS Compliance Deadline is Fast Approaching | Is your state / local government ready?

The deadline for CJIS compliance is rapidly approaching – it is mandated that all entities accessing criminal justice information (CJI) must have an acceptable multi-factor authentication (MFA) solution in place by October 1st, 2024. As per Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS) Security Policy 5.9.3, non-compliance with this policy (i.e. not having an acceptable MFA solution) […]

The post The CJIS Compliance Deadline is Fast Approaching | Is your state / local government ready? first appeared on Accutive Security.

The post The CJIS Compliance Deadline is Fast Approaching | Is your state / local government ready? appeared first on Security Boulevard.

The Dual Edges of AI in Cybersecurity: Insights from the 2024 Benchmark Survey Report

Artificial intelligence (AI) in cybersecurity presents a complex picture of risks and rewards. According to Hyperproof’s 5th annual benchmark report, AI technologies are at the forefront of both enabling sophisticated cyberattacks and bolstering defenses against them. This duality underscores the critical need for nuanced application and vigilant management of AI in cybersecurity risk management practices....

The post The Dual Edges of AI in Cybersecurity: Insights from the 2024 Benchmark Survey Report appeared first on Hyperproof.

The post The Dual Edges of AI in Cybersecurity: Insights from the 2024 Benchmark Survey Report appeared first on Security Boulevard.

Unlocking HIPAA Compliance: Navigating Access Control and MFA Guidelines

As technology continues to revolutionize healthcare operations, protecting patient data has never been more challenging. In the ongoing struggle against data breaches, last year marked a tipping point, as an unprecedented 133 million healthcare records were breached, according to the HIPAA Journal. In this blog, we will delve into the HIPAA compliance framework, with a...

The post Unlocking HIPAA Compliance: Navigating Access Control and MFA Guidelines appeared first on Silverfort.

The post Unlocking HIPAA Compliance: Navigating Access Control and MFA Guidelines appeared first on Security Boulevard.

Accelerating CMMC 2.0 Compliance for Defense Contractors with Microsoft Azure

Microsoft Azure provides a suite of highly integrated security services that provide a cost-effective solution for Defense contractors looking to meet the CMMC 2.0 requirements. The Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) is a framework designed to enhance the security posture of companies that work with the Department of Defense (DoD) by implementing a set of […]

The post Accelerating CMMC 2.0 Compliance for Defense Contractors with Microsoft Azure appeared first on Security Boulevard.

Shining the Light on Shadow IT: Top Five SaaS Security Tips for Third-Party Risk Management

cybersecurity, SaaS, Palo Alto, third-party vendors, SaaS security, CISO, SSPM, SaaS security, SentinelLabs AppOmni Valence SaaS security Thirdera SaaS management SSPM CISOs SaaS

Security teams often grapple with the uncertainty of data exposure in their SaaS supply chain, especially with third-party SaaS vendors. A proactive approach helps safeguard organizations against SaaS threats. It begins with a comprehensive evaluation of third-party vendor cybersecurity practices to pinpoint potential vulnerabilities and risks within the supply chain.

The post Shining the Light on Shadow IT: Top Five SaaS Security Tips for Third-Party Risk Management appeared first on Security Boulevard.

What is an IS (RBI) Audit?

RBI has issued comprehensive master directions and guidelines for banks and non-banking financial corporations to identify and address operational risks and weaknesses. These guidelines are based on recommendations from working groups focused on information security, e-banking, governance, and cyber fraud. The primary motivation behind these directives is the growing need to mitigate cyber threats arising […]

The post What is an IS (RBI) Audit? appeared first on Kratikal Blogs.

The post What is an IS (RBI) Audit? appeared first on Security Boulevard.

Copilot+ Recall is ‘Dumbest Cybersecurity Move in a Decade’: Researcher

Copilot Recall privacy settings

A new Microsoft Windows feature dubbed Recall planned for Copilot+ PCs has been called a security and privacy nightmare by cybersecurity researchers and privacy advocates. Copilot Recall will be enabled by default and will capture frequent screenshots, or “snapshots,” of a user’s activity and store them in a local database tied to the user account. The potential for exposure of personal and sensitive data through the new feature has alarmed security and privacy advocates and even sparked a UK inquiry into the issue.

Copilot Recall Privacy and Security Claims Challenged

In a long Mastodon thread on the new feature, Windows security researcher Kevin Beaumont wrote, “I’m not being hyperbolic when I say this is the dumbest cybersecurity move in a decade. Good luck to my parents safely using their PC.” In a blog post on Recall security and privacy, Microsoft said that processing and storage are done only on the local device and encrypted, but even Microsoft’s own explanations raise concerns: “Note that Recall does not perform content moderation. It will not hide information such as passwords or financial account numbers. That data may be in snapshots that are stored on your device, especially when sites do not follow standard internet protocols like cloaking password entry.” Security and privacy advocates take issue with assertions that the data is stored securely on the local device. If someone has a user’s password or if a court orders that data be turned over for legal or law enforcement purposes, the amount of data exposed could be much greater with Recall than would otherwise be exposed. Domestic abuse situations could be worsened. And hackers, malware and infostealers will have access to vastly more data than they would without Recall. Beaumont said the screenshots are stored in a SQLite database, “and you can access it as the user including programmatically. It 100% does not need physical access and can be stolen.” He posted a video (republished below) he said was of two Microsoft engineers gaining access to the Recall database folder with apparent ease, “with SQLite database right there.” [videopress izzNn3K5] Beaumont said in a separate blog that in his own testing with an off-the-shelf infostealer and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint — which detected the infostealer — "by the time the automated remediation kicked in (which took over ten minutes) my Recall data was already long gone."

"Recall enables threat actors to automate scraping everything you’ve ever looked at within seconds," he concluded.

Does Recall Have Cloud Hooks?

Beaumont also questioned Microsoft’s assertion that all this is done locally. “So the code underpinning Copilot+ Recall includes a whole bunch of Azure AI backend code, which has ended up in the Windows OS,” he wrote on Mastodon.  “It also has a ton of API hooks for user activity monitoring. “It opens a lot of attack surface. ... They really went all in with this and it will have profound negative implications for the safety of people who use Microsoft Windows.”

Data May Not Be Completely Deleted

And sensitive data deleted by users will still be saved in Recall screenshots. “There's no feature to delete screenshots of things you delete while using your PC,” Beaumont said. “You would have to remember to go and purge screenshots that Recall makes every few seconds. If you or a friend use disappearing messages in WhatsApp, Signal etc, it is recorded regardless.” One commenter said Copilot Recall seems to raise compliance issues too, in part by creating additional unnecessary data that could survive deletion requests. “[T]his comprehensively fails PCI and GDPR immediately and the SOC2 controls list ain't looking so good either,” the commenter said. Leslie Carhart, Director of Incident Response at Dragos, replied that “the outrage and disbelief are warranted.” A second commenter noted, “GDPR has a very simple concept: Data Minimization. Quite simply, only store data that you actually have a legitimate, legal purpose for; and only for as long as necessary. Right there, this fails in spectacular fashion on both counts. It's going to store vast amounts of data for no specific purpose, potentially for far longer than any reasonable use of that data.” It remains to be seen if Microsoft will make any modifications to Recall to quell concerns before it officially ships. If not, security and privacy experts may find themselves busier than ever.

Business Continuity Compliance Checklist

A Business Continuity Compliance Checklist is a comprehensive tool used by organizations to ensure preparedness and resilience in the face of disruptions. It involves conducting a Business Impact Analysis (BIA) to identify and prioritize critical functions, assess the impact of disruptions, and define recovery objectives. A thorough risk assessment identifies potential threats and vulnerabilities, leading […]

La entrada Business Continuity Compliance Checklist se publicó primero en CISO2CISO.COM & CYBER SECURITY GROUP.

Building a Risk Resilient Organisation

Enterprise risk management (ERM) is an old idea that has gained renewed focus and relevance in the wake of the financial crisis. All industries are now facing unprecedented levels of risk. The pace of change and the speed of information flow are causal factors in the escalation of risk. Advancements in technology have spawned new […]

La entrada Building a Risk Resilient Organisation se publicó primero en CISO2CISO.COM & CYBER SECURITY GROUP.

7 New Pegasus Infections Found on Media and Activists’ Devices in the EU

Pegasus Spyware, NSO Group, Spyware

Seven Russian and Belarusian-speaking independent journalists and opposition activists based in Europe were targeted or infected with NSO Group’s proprietary Pegasus spyware. A joint investigation by Citizen Lab and Access Now detailed incidents from August 2020 to January 2023 and concluded that a single NSO Group customer might be responsible for at least five of these cases.

Threats Against Critics of Russian and Belarusian Regimes

In September 2023, Citizen Lab and Access Now reported the hacking of exiled Russian journalist Galina Timchenko, CEO and publisher of Meduza, with Pegasus spyware. Building on these findings, the investigation, in collaboration with digital security expert Nikolai Kvantiliani, now reveals the targeting of seven additional Russian and Belarusian-speaking civil society members and journalists. Many of these individuals, living in exile, have vocally criticized the Russian government, including its invasion of Ukraine, and have faced severe threats from Russian and Belarusian state security services. Critics of the Russian and Belarusian governments typically face intense retaliation, including surveillance, detention, violence, and hacking. The repression has escalated following Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine, with laws severely curtailing the operations of media and civil society organizations. An example of this is the Russian government designating the Munk School of Global Affairs & Public Policy at the University of Toronto, home to the Citizen Lab, as an “Undesirable Organization,” in March 2024. Many opposition activists and independent media groups have relocated abroad to continue their work. Despite the geographic distance, these exiled communities face ongoing threats, including violent attacks, surveillance, and digital risks. For instance, Meduza reported a significant Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attack on their website during Russia’s 2024 presidential elections.

Investigation Confirmed Pegasus Spyware Targeting

The investigation confirmed that the following individuals were targeted or infected with Pegasus spyware. Their names are published with their consent. [caption id="attachment_73182" align="aligncenter" width="1532"]Pegasus Spyware, New Pegasus Spyware Infections, Latest Pegasus Spyware Infections Table Showing Individuals Identified in the Latest Pegasus Spyware Infections (Credit: Citizen Lab)[/caption] Access Now and Citizen Lab confirmed that five victims' phones had Apple IDs used by Pegasus operators in hacking attempts. Exploits leveraging bugs in HomeKit can leave the attacker's Apple ID email address on the victim's device. Citizen Lab believes each Apple ID is tied to a single Pegasus operator, although one operator may use multiple IDs. The same Apple ID was found on the phones of Pavlov, Radzina, and a second anonymous victim. A different email account targeted both Erlikh and Pavlov’s phones on November 28, 2022. Artifacts from Andrei Sannikov and Natallia Radzina’s phones contained another identical email. This indicates that a single Pegasus spyware operator may have targeted at least three of the victims, possibly all five. [caption id="attachment_73184" align="aligncenter" width="1024"]Pegasus Spyware Credit: Citizen Lab[/caption] The investigators could not attribute the attacks to a specific operator but certain trends pointed to Estonia’s involvement. Based on previous investigation, Poland, Russia, Belarus, Lithuania, and Latvia are all known to be customers of the NSO Group’s spyware, but the likeliness of their involvement is low as they do not target victims outside their borders, the investigators said. Estonia, however, is known to use Pegasus extensively beyond its borders, including in multiple European countries.

Concerns Over Digital Transnational Repression

This pattern of targeting raises serious concerns about the legality and proportionality of such actions under international human rights law. The attacks occurred in Europe, where the targeted individuals sought safety, prompting questions about host states’ obligations to prevent and respond to these human rights violations. The ongoing investigation highlights the persistent threats faced by exiled Russian and Belarusian journalists and activists. As digital transnational repression continues, it underscores the urgent need for robust international measures to protect freedom of expression and privacy for these vulnerable groups.
“Access Now [urged] governments to establish an immediate moratorium on the export, sale, transfer, servicing, and use of targeted digital surveillance technologies until rigorous human rights safeguards are put in place to regulate such practices, and to ban the use of spyware technologies such as Pegasus that have a history of enabling human rights abuses.”
Apple recently issued notifications to users in more than 90 countries alerting them of possible mercenary spyware attacks. The tech giant replaced the term "state-sponsored" in its alerts with "mercenary spyware attacks," drawing global attention. Previously, Apple used "state-sponsored" for malware threats, but now it highlights threats from hacker groups. Apple noted that while these attacks were historically linked to state actors and private entities like the NSO Group’s Pegasus, the new term covers a broader range of threats.

OpenAI Announces Safety and Security Committee Amid New AI Model Development

OpenAI Announces Safety and Security Committee

OpenAI announced a new safety and security committee as it begins training a new AI model intended to replace the GPT-4 system that currently powers its ChatGPT chatbot. The San Francisco-based startup announced the formation of the committee in a blog post on Tuesday, highlighting its role in advising the board on crucial safety and security decisions related to OpenAI’s projects and operations. The creation of the committee comes amid ongoing debates about AI safety at OpenAI. The company faced scrutiny after Jan Leike, a researcher, resigned, criticizing OpenAI for prioritizing product development over safety. Following this, co-founder and chief scientist Ilya Sutskever also resigned, leading to the disbandment of the "superalignment" team that he and Leike co-led, which was focused on addressing AI risks. Despite these controversies, OpenAI emphasized that its AI models are industry leaders in both capability and safety. The company expressed openness to robust debate during this critical period.

OpenAI's Safety and Security Committee Composition and Responsibilities

The safety committee comprises company insiders, including OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, Chairman Bret Taylor, and four OpenAI technical and policy experts. It also features board members Adam D’Angelo, CEO of Quora, and Nicole Seligman, a former general counsel for Sony.
"A first task of the Safety and Security Committee will be to evaluate and further develop OpenAI’s processes and safeguards over the next 90 days." 
The committee's initial task is to evaluate and further develop OpenAI’s existing processes and safeguards. They are expected to make recommendations to the board within 90 days. OpenAI has committed to publicly releasing the recommendations it adopts in a manner that aligns with safety and security considerations. The establishment of the safety and security committee is a significant step by OpenAI to address concerns about AI safety and maintain its leadership in AI innovation. By integrating a diverse group of experts and stakeholders into the decision-making process, OpenAI aims to ensure that safety and security remain paramount as it continues to develop cutting-edge AI technologies.

Development of the New AI Model

OpenAI also announced that it has recently started training a new AI model, described as a "frontier model." These frontier models represent the most advanced AI systems, capable of generating text, images, video, and human-like conversations based on extensive datasets. The company also recently launched its newest flagship model GPT-4o ('o' stands for omni), which is a multilingual, multimodal generative pre-trained transformer designed by OpenAI. It was announced by OpenAI CTO Mira Murati during a live-streamed demo on May 13 and released the same day. GPT-4o is free, but with a usage limit that is five times higher for ChatGPT Plus subscribers. GPT-4o has a context window supporting up to 128,000 tokens, which helps it maintain coherence over longer conversations or documents, making it suitable for detailed analysis. Media Disclaimer: This report is based on internal and external research obtained through various means. The information provided is for reference purposes only, and users bear full responsibility for their reliance on it. The Cyber Express assumes no liability for the accuracy or consequences of using this information.

Vendor Risk Management Best Practices in 2024 – Source: securityboulevard.com

vendor-risk-management-best-practices-in-2024-–-source:-securityboulevard.com

Source: securityboulevard.com – Author: Kyle Morris, Senior Compliance Success Manager, Scytale ‘Vendor Risk Management’ is more than just a buzzword in the information security and compliance landscape. It’s a crucial aspect that can make or break your organization’s security. Consider this: 98% of organizations have had vendor relationships with at least one-third party experiencing a […]

La entrada Vendor Risk Management Best Practices in 2024 – Source: securityboulevard.com se publicó primero en CISO2CISO.COM & CYBER SECURITY GROUP.

SEC Fines NYSE Owner ICE for Delay in Reporting VPN Breach

VPN breach, NYSE, New York Stock Exchange

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) announced today that a major player in the U.S. financial system has agreed to pay a $10 million penalty for failing to timely report an April 2021 VPN breach. The Intercontinental Exchange Inc. (ICE), which owns the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) and a number of other major financial interests, will pay the penalty to settle charges that it “caused the failure of nine wholly-owned subsidiaries, including the New York Stock Exchange, to timely inform the SEC of a cyber intrusion as required by Regulation Systems Compliance and Integrity (Regulation SCI),” the agency said in a press release. The SEC found out about the ICE breach after contacting the company while assessing reports of similar vulnerabilities several days after the breach occurred. Regulation SCI requires immediate reporting of cybersecurity incidents and an update within 24 hours if the incident is significant. The SEC said in its order that a third party identified only as “Company A” informed ICE that it was potentially impacted by a system intrusion involving a zero-day VPN vulnerability. The following day, ICE “identified malicious code associated with the threat actor that exploited the vulnerability on one of its VPN concentrators, reasonably concluding that it was ... indeed subject to the Intrusion.” Over the next several days, ICE and its internal InfoSec team took steps to analyze and respond to the intrusion, including taking the compromised VPN device offline, forensically examining it, and reviewing user VPN sessions to identify any intrusions or data exfiltration, the SEC said. ICE also retained a cybersecurity firm to conduct a parallel forensic investigation, and also worked with the VPN device manufacturer “to confirm the integrity of ICE’s network environment.” Five days after being notified of the vulnerability, ICE InfoSec personnel concluded that the threat actor’s access was limited to the compromised VPN device. At that point – “four days after first having had a reasonable basis to conclude that unauthorized entry ... had occurred” – legal and compliance personnel at ICE’s regulated subsidiaries were finally notified of the intrusion, the SEC order said. “As a result of ICE’s failures, those subsidiaries did not properly assess the intrusion to fulfill their independent regulatory disclosure obligations under Regulation SCI,” the SEC press release said. “The reasoning behind the rule is simple: if the SEC receives multiple reports across a number of these types of entities, then it can take swift steps to protect markets and investors,” Gurbir S. Grewal, Director of the SEC’s Division of Enforcement, said in a statement. “Here, the respondents subject to Reg SCI failed to notify the SEC of the intrusion at issue as required. Rather, it was Commission staff that contacted the respondents in the process of assessing reports of similar cyber vulnerabilities.” The order and penalty reflect not only the seriousness of the violations, but also that several of them have been the subject of prior SEC enforcement actions, including for violations of Reg SCI, Grewal added. Among the ICE subsidiaries involved in the case were Archipelago Trading Services, Inc., NYSE Arca, Inc., ICE Clear Credit LLC, and the Securities Industry Automation Corporation (SIAC), all of which agreed to a cease-and-desist order in addition to ICE’s monetary penalty. VPN devices have come under increased scrutiny in recent days. The Norwegian National Cyber Security Centre issued last week an advisory to replace SSLVPN and WebVPN solutions with more secure alternatives, due to the repeated exploitation of vulnerabilities in edge network devices. The advisory followed a notice from the NCSC about a targeted attack against SSLVPN products in which attackers exploited multiple zero-day vulnerabilities in Cisco ASA VPN used to power critical infrastructure facilities. The campaign had been observed since November 2023. Media Disclaimer: This article is based on internal and external research obtained through various means. The information provided is for reference purposes only, and users bear full responsibility for their reliance on it. The Cyber Express assumes no liability for the accuracy or consequences of using this information.

UK’s ICO Warns Not to Ignore Data Privacy as ‘My AI’ Bot Investigation Concludes

ICO Warns, Chat GPT, Chat Bot

UK data watchdog has warned against ignoring the data protection risks in generative artificial intelligence and recommended ironing out these issues before the public release of such products. The warning comes on the back of the conclusion of an investigation from the U.K.’s Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) into Snap, Inc.'s launch of the ‘My AI’ chatbot. The investigation focused on the company's approach to assessing data protection risks. The ICO's early actions underscore the importance of protecting privacy rights in the realm of generative AI. In June 2023, the ICO began investigating Snapchat’s ‘My AI’ chatbot following concerns that the company had not fulfilled its legal obligations of proper evaluation into the data protection risks associated with its latest chatbot integration. My AI was an experimental chatbot built into the Snapchat app that has 414 million daily active users, who on a daily average share over 4.75 billion Snaps. The My AI bot uses OpenAI's GPT technology to answer questions, provide recommendations and chat with users. It can respond to typed or spoken information and can search databases to find details and formulate a response. Initially available to Snapchat+ subscribers since February 27, 2023, “My AI” was later released to all Snapchat users on April 19. The ICO issued a Preliminary Enforcement Notice to Snap on October 6, over “potential failure” to assess privacy risks to several million ‘My AI’ users in the UK including children aged 13 to 17. “The provisional findings of our investigation suggest a worrying failure by Snap to adequately identify and assess the privacy risks to children and other users before launching My AI,” said John Edwards, the Information Commissioner, at the time.
“We have been clear that organizations must consider the risks associated with AI, alongside the benefits. Today's preliminary enforcement notice shows we will take action in order to protect UK consumers' privacy rights.”
On the basis of the ICO’s investigation that followed, Snap took substantial measures to perform a more comprehensive risk assessment for ‘My AI’. Snap demonstrated to the ICO that it had implemented suitable mitigations. “The ICO is satisfied that Snap has now undertaken a risk assessment relating to My AI that is compliant with data protection law. The ICO will continue to monitor the rollout of My AI and how emerging risks are addressed,” the data watchdog said. Snapchat has made it clear that, “While My AI was programmed to abide by certain guidelines so the information it provides is not harmful (including avoiding responses that are violent, hateful, sexually explicit, or otherwise dangerous; and avoiding perpetuating harmful biases), it may not always be successful.” The social media platform has integrated safeguards and tools like blocking results for certain keywords like “drugs,” as is the case with the original Snapchat app. “We’re also working on adding additional tools to our Family Center around My AI that would give parents more visibility and control around their teen’s usage of My AI,” the company noted.

‘My AI’ Investigation Sounds Warning Bells

Stephen Almond, ICO Executive Director of Regulatory Risk said, “Our investigation into ‘My AI’ should act as a warning shot for industry. Organizations developing or using generative AI must consider data protection from the outset, including rigorously assessing and mitigating risks to people’s rights and freedoms before bringing products to market.”
“We will continue to monitor organisations’ risk assessments and use the full range of our enforcement powers – including fines – to protect the public from harm.”
Generative AI remains a top priority for the ICO, which has initiated several consultations to clarify how data protection laws apply to the development and use of generative AI models. This effort builds on the ICO’s extensive guidance on data protection and AI. The ICO’s investigation into Snap’s ‘My AI’ chatbot highlights the critical need for thorough data protection risk assessments in the development and deployment of generative AI technologies. Organizations must consider data protection from the outset to safeguard individuals' data privacy and protection rights. The final Commissioner’s decision regarding Snap's ‘My AI’ chatbot will be published in the coming weeks. Media Disclaimer: This report is based on internal and external research obtained through various means. The information provided is for reference purposes only, and users bear full responsibility for their reliance on it. The Cyber Express assumes no liability for the accuracy or consequences of using this information.

Enforce and Report on PCI DSS v4 Compliance with Rapid7

Enforce and Report on PCI DSS v4 Compliance with Rapid7

The PCI Security Standards Council (PCI SSC) is a global forum that connects stakeholders from the payments and payment processing industries to craft and facilitate adoption of data security standards and relevant resources that enable safe payments worldwide.

According to the PCI SSC website, “PCI Security Standards are developed specifically to protect payment account data throughout the payment lifecycle and to enable technology solutions that devalue this data and remove the incentive for criminals to steal it. They include standards for merchants, service providers, and financial institutions on security practices, technologies and processes, and standards for developers and vendors for creating secure payment products and solutions.”

Perhaps the most recognizable standard from PCI, their Data Security Standard (PCI DSS), is a global standard that provides a baseline of technical and operational requirements designed to protect account data. In March 2022, PCI SSC published version v4.0 of the standard, which replaces version v3.2.1. The updated version addresses emerging threats and technologies and enables innovative methods to combat new threats. This post will cover the changes to the standard that came with version 4.0 along with a high-level overview of how Rapid7 helps teams ensure their cloud-based applications can effectively implement and enforce compliance.

What’s New With Version 4.0, and Why Is It Important Now?

So, why are we talking about the new standard nearly two years after it was published? That’s because when the standard was published there was a two year transition period for organizations to adopt the new version and implement required changes that came with v4.0. During this transition period, organizations were given the option to assess against either PCI DSS v4.0 or PCI DSS v3.2.1.

For those that haven’t yet made the jump, the time is now This is because the transition period concluded on March 31, 2024, at which time version 3.2.1 was retired and organizations seeking PCI DSS certification will need to adhere to the new requirements and best practices. Important to note, there are some requirements that have been “future-dated.” For those requirements, organizations have been granted another full year, with those updates being required by March 31, 2025.

The changes were driven by direct feedback from organizations across the global payments industry. According to PCI, more than 200 organizations provided feedback to ensure the standard continues to meet the complex, ever-changing landscape of payment security.

Key changes for this version update include:

Flexibility in How Teams Achieve Compliance / Customized Approach

A primary goal for PCI DSS v4.0 was to provide greater flexibility for organizations in how they can achieve their security objectives. PCI DSS v4.0 introduces a new method – known as the Customized Approach – by which organizations can implement and validate PCI DSS controls Previously, organizations had the option of implementing Compensating controls, however these are only applicable when a situation arises whereby there is a constraint – such as legacy systems or processes – impacting the ability to meet a requirement.

PCI DSS v4.0 now provides organizations the means to choose to meet a requirement leveraging other means than the stated requirement. Requirement 12.3.2 and Appendices D and E outline the customized approach and how to apply it. To support customers, Rapid7’s new PCI DSS v4.0 compliance pack provides a greater number of insights than in previous iterations. This should lead to increased visibility and refinement in the process of  choosing to mitigate and manage requirements.

A Targeted Approach to Risk Management

Alongside the customized approach concept, one of the most significant updates  is the introduction of targeted risk analysis (TRA). TRAallows organizations to assess and respond to risks in the context of an organization's specific operational environment. The PCI council has published guidance “PCI DSS v4 x: Targeted Risk Analysis Guidance” that outlines the two types of TRAs that an entity can employ regarding frequency of performing a given control and the second addressing any PCI DSS requirement for when an entity utilizes a customized approach.

To assist in understanding and having a consolidated view of security risks in their cloud environments, Rapid7 customers can leverage InsightCloudSec Layered Context and the recently introduced Risk Score feature. This feature combines a variety of risk signals, assigning a higher risk score to resources that suffer from toxic combinations or multiple risk vectors.Risk score holistically analyzes the risks that compound and increase the likelihood or impact of compromise.

Enhanced Validation Methods & Procedures

PCI DSS v4.0 has provided improvements to the self-assessment (SAQ) document and to the Report on Compliance (RoC) template, increasing alignment between them and the information summarized in an Attestation of Compliance to support organizations in their efforts when self-attesting or working with assessors to increase transparency and granularity.

New Requirements

PCI DSS v4.0 has brought with it a range of new requirements to address emerging threats. With modernization of network security controls, explicit guidance on cardholder data protections, and process maturity, the standard focuses on establishing sustainable controls and governance. While there are quite a few updates - which you can find detailed here on the summary of changes - let’s highlight a few of particular importance:

  • Multifactor authentication is now required for all access into the Cardholder Data Environment (CDE) - req. 8.5.1
  • Encryption of sensitive authentication data (SAD) - req. 3.3.3
  • New password requirements and updated specific password strength requirements: Passwords must now consist of 12 characters with special characters, uppercase and lowercase - reqs. 8.3.6 and 8.6.3
  • Access roles and privileges are based on least privilege access (LPA), and system components operate using deny by default - req. 7.2.5
  • Audit log reviews are performed using automated mechanisms - req. 10.4.1.1

These controls place role-based access control, configuration management, risk analysis and continuous monitoring as foundations, assisting organizations to mature and achieve their security objectives. Rapid7 can help  with implementing and enforcing these new controls, with a host of solutions that offer PCI-related support – all of which have been updated to align with these new requirements.

How Rapid7 Supports Customers to Attain PCI DSS v4.0 Compliance

InsightCloudSec allows security teams to establish, continuously measure, and illustrate compliance against organizational policies. This is accomplished via compliance packs, which are sets of checks that can be used to continuously assess your entire cloud environment - whether single or multi-cloud. The platform comes out of the box with dozens of compliance packs, including a dedicated pack for the PCI DSS v4.0.

Enforce and Report on PCI DSS v4 Compliance with Rapid7

InsightCloudSec assesses your cloud environments in real-time for compliance with the requirements and best practices outlined by PCI It also enables teams to identify, assess, and act on noncompliant resources when misconfigurations are detected. If you so choose, you can make use of the platform’s native, no-code automation to remediate the issue the moment it's detected, whether that means alerting relevant resource owners, adjusting the configuration or permissions directly or even deleting the non-compliant resource altogether without any human intervention. Check out the demo to learn more about how InsightCloudSec helps continuously and automatically enforce cloud security standards.

InsightAppSec also enables measurement against PCI v4.0 requirements to help you obtain PCI compliance. It allows users to create a PCI v4.0 report to help prepare for an audit, assessment or a questionnaire around PCI compliance. The PCI report gives you the ability to uncover potential issues that will affect the outcome or any of these exercises. Crucially, the report allows you to take action and secure critical vulnerabilities on any assets that deal with payment card data. PCI compliance auditing comes out of the box and is simple to generate once you have completed a scan against which to run the report.

Enforce and Report on PCI DSS v4 Compliance with Rapid7

InsightAppSec achieves this coverage by cross referencing and then mapping our suite of 100+ attack modules against PCI requirements, identifying which attacks are relevant to particular requirements and then attempting to exploit your application with those attacks to obtain areas where your application may be vulnerable. Those vulnerabilities are then packaged up in the PCI 4.0 report where you can see vulnerabilities listed by PCI requirements This provides you with crucial insights into any vulnerabilities you may have as well as enabling  management of those vulnerabilities in a simplistic format.

For InsightVM customers, an important change in the revision is the need to perform authenticated internal vulnerability scans for requirement 11.3.1.2. Previous versions of the standard allowed for internal scanning without the use of credentials, which is no longer sufficient. For more details see this blog post.

Rapid7 provides a wide array of solutions to assist you in your compliance and governance efforts. Contact a member of our team to learn more about any of these capabilities or sign up for a free trial.

❌