The Standard Cybersecurity Model Is Fundamentally Broken

By: sikur

Every year companies around the world invest hundreds of billions of dollars in cybersecurity products, services, and training—yet malware compromise and massive data breaches are still a regular occurrence. According to data from Cybersecurity Ventures, cybersecurity spending for the five years leading up to 2021 is expected to exceed $1 trillion—with a “T”—but the annual global losses from cyber attacks is expected to hit $6 trillion by the same year. Clearly, there is something fundamentally wrong with the standard model of cybersecurity.

Common Cybersecurity Strategy is Insane

The way companies approach cybersecurity is literally insane—at least according to the popular quote attributed to Albert Einstein: “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”

Imagine if your house was like the cybersecurity market. You invest thousands of dollars every year in the best tools and services to ensure it is safe and secure. You have cutting edge technology to detect burglars and prevent unauthorized access, and innovative solutions to prevent fires and guard against flooding. Now, imagine that every year your house gets broken into and all of your possessions stolen, and then it burns to the ground…and you start over and do it again. That is basically the prevailing model for cybersecurity.

Meanwhile, the cybersecurity industry as a whole right now seems to be perceived as a hot commodity. Companies that don’t traditionally operate in the security space are investing in the cybersecurity space and buying up industry-leading companies that are household names. Intel acquired McAfee (and eventually spun it back off), BlackBerry bought Cylance, and Broadcom has purchased both CA and—more recently—Symantec.

Many organizations try to throw money at the problem. They assume that if they just allocate more budget and purchase the right products and services, they will be secure. However, some of the largest and most expensive data breaches in history occurred at companies with significant investments in cybersecurity tools and platforms, and that have huge teams of cybersecurity experts and vast resources at their disposal.

In other words, cybersecurity is a very lucrative business, but buying more of it does not guarantee you will be secure. In fact, it often doesn’t actually deliver on its promise.

Redefining Cybersecurity

I recently had a chance to speak with Matt Moynahan, CEO of Forcepoint, about these issues. He told me that he is extremely concerned with the current state of the cybersecurity industry. “We’re talking about arguably one of the most important industries in the next millennium—where the consequences of failure range from terrorism to nation-state espionage—and the world’s largest cybersecurity company was just acquired by a Singapore chip maker.”

Moynahan stressed that one of the fundamental problems with cybersecurity today is that it is trying to solve for the wrong problem. At the very least, it is an outdated problem. The industry as a whole has been built on—and is still primarily driven by—point solutions designed to “keep people out.” It’s a model that assumes there is an “us” and a “them”, an “inside” and an “outside”—and then strives to ensure that malicious actors from the “them” and “outside” groups can be detected and blocked before they can compromise systems and data.

History—or the headlines on any given week—illustrates that this model is dysfunctional at best.

The core cybersecurity tools like firewalls and antimalware defenses are still necessary, but not necessarily something to spend too much money on. They are cybersecurity “table stakes” and serve a purpose to identify and block a majority of known threats, so they still have value. However, they are clearly not enough on their own.

Moynahan explained it in terms similar to my home analogy. “Imagine living in a bad neighborhood where you can never lock your door. That is your network.”

The new model of cybersecurity revolves around technologies like multifactor authentication, behavioral analytics, and deception technology. Multifactor, or two-factor, authentication raises the bar for gaining authorized access to systems and data in the first place and prevents attackers from slipping in with compromised or stolen credentials alone. Behavioral analysis and deception technology provide more comprehensive monitoring and protection based on the assumption that attackers will get through—that the “them” is “us” and they are already inside.

With that assumption, security becomes less about preventing unauthorized access and more about ensuring the activities of those who have access makes sense and don’t violate any policies. The reality is that most attacks—at the point where they are detected—are “inside” attacks, because whether they are performed by a disgruntled employee or an external attacker using stolen or compromised credentials, they appear to be from an “authorized” user from the perspective of the IT department.

Monitoring behavior is a more proactive and more effective means of detecting suspicious or malicious behavior. Bob may be an employee who is authorized to access employee data and company financial records, but Bob will also have a normal pattern of behavior that can be used to flag unusual activity. If Bob works normal business hours at an office in Tulsa, it’s easy to detect suspicious activity if he suddenly logs in from Tel Aviv at 3am on Saturday. If Bob generally accesses, but does not download, financial data, behavioral analysis can alert IT if Bob suddenly decides to download gigabytes of sensitive information.

By virtually any objective measurement, the traditional model of cybersecurity has failed. It doesn’t make any sense to simply continue pouring money into the next point solution and hope things will turn out differently. It’s time for organizations to recognize that the technology ecosystem and the threat landscape have evolved, and that a new approach is necessary for more effective cybersecurity.


By Tony Bradley

Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/tonybradley/2019/10/07/the-standard-cybersecurity-model-is-fundamentally-broken/#171a1b111189

Lorep ipsum Lorep ipsum, journalist Lorep ipsum Lorep ipsum, journalist Lorep ipsum Lorep ipsum, journalist Lorep ipsum Lorep ipsum, journalist Lorep ipsum Lorep ipsum, journalist Lorep ipsum Lorep ipsum, journalist Lorep ipsum Lorep ipsum, journalist Lorep ipsum Lorep ipsum, journalist

Cibersegurança: mais de 146 bilhões de registros serão roubados até 2023

By: TI inside- Redação

Um novo relatório da Juniper Research constatou que mais de 33 bilhões de registros serão roubados por cibercriminosos somente em 2023, um aumento de 175% sobre os 12 bilhões de registros que deverão ser comprometidos em 2018, resultando em perda acumulada de mais de 146 bilhões de registros para todo o período.

A nova pesquisa, O Futuro do Cibercrime e Segurança: Análise de Ameaças, Avaliação de Impacto e Principais Fornecedores 2018-2023, descobriu que, apesar de legislações como GDPR e PSD2 exigirem fortes medidas de segurança cibernética e autenticação para proteger dados pessoais e financeiros, os níveis médios de os gastos com segurança cibernética permanecerão relativamente estáticos.

Pequenas empresas vulneráveis

Os gastos das pequenas empresas em 2018 representarão apenas 13% do mercado global de segurança cibernética em 2018, apesar de mais de 99% de todas as empresas serem pequenas. Além disso, o custo das violações pode exceder milhões de dólares, diminuindo o volume de negócios dessas empresas.

Muitas dessas empresas usam produtos de consumo, gastando em média US $ 500 por ano em segurança cibernética. Com a digitalização de muitas empresas, isso as deixará vulneráveis ??a novas formas de malware que exigem uma segurança cibernética mais avançada, além da proteção simples do ponto de extremidade.

Hardware Wallet Demand in South Korea Grows Exponentially

By: Jamie Redman

According to local reports in South Korea, demand for hardware wallets is increasing exponentially. The demand has stemmed from attempted hacks last year against domestic trading platforms like Upbit and Bithumb.

Regional Reports Detail South Korean Hardware Wallet Demand is Rising

South Korean cryptocurrency traders want to keep their digital assets safer after a few scares from local exchanges in 2017. The cryptocurrency trading platform Upbit, and Bithumb were both targeted last year with attempts at breaching the firm’s hot wallets. Further, the recent Coincheck exchange hack in Japan has frightened South Koreans as well, which has bolstered more individuals to get their hands on some form of cold storage.

Many cryptocurrency enthusiasts worldwide use cold storage devices like Trezor, Ledger, Bitbox, and Keepkey. However, South Koreans also have a few local choices to choose from when it comes to hardware wallets and more in the near future. The cold storage hardware producers selling products in South Korea or plan to launch this year include Key Fair, Penta Security, Coldwelt, and K-Sine.

Two Local Choices

Key Fair’s CEO Lee Chang-keun has created the ‘Key Wallet Series’ that utilizes its own developed algorithm tethered to a dedicated security chip. There are also features called “Pro and Touch” which uses fingerprint recognition and NFC communications with smartphones. The Key Wallet can hold multiple cryptocurrencies including bitcoin core, ethereum, bitcoin cash, dash, ethereum classic, ripple, and litecoin.

MORE: https://news.bitcoin.com/hardware-wallet-demand-in-south-korea-grows-exponentially/