Skip to content

CyberSecurity Institute

Security News Curated from across the world

Menu
Menu

UK banks to set new industry online security standard

Posted on April 19, 2005December 30, 2021 by admini

The new directive is designed to combat the alarming rise in online fraud that has developed out of identity theft and phishing, while also improving customer confidence in Internet banking tools.

The system would include a device that reads a payment card and accepts a PIN entry from the cardholder. This is then followed by the generation by the device of a unique security number to be imputed into the website system of the goods’ seller.

Banks are expected to agree on the new technology in May, with roll out to be undertaken over the next 12 months.

http://www.datamonitor.com/~464a534ca19940dfbfac9f95422efbc6~/industries/news/article/?pid=3EBB8311-179A-40CB-8543-DA15A0C07570&type=NewsWire

Read more

2005: The Year of Internal Security

Posted on April 19, 2005December 30, 2021 by admini

For too long now we’ve seen security threats have a negative impact on internal networks, and as a result, a harmful effect on employee and company productivity. And for far too long, enterprises of all sizes have neglected to focus enough resources and energy on securing these valuable internal network resources. And this year, the information technology industry will see this phenomenon further evolve as organizations begin to focus on securing their internal networks with the same vigor they have applied at the perimeter.

Internal security refers to a focused effort to secure resources on internal networks, or LANs. These resources can include applications, data, servers, and endpoint devices.

Meta Group has observed that “only 10-20 percent of organizations with relatively mature security programs have managed to address internal security to a meaningful extent.” Why is internal security finally becoming a priority?

First, there are business drivers prompting more focus on internal security. Around the globe, companies are being forced to comply with regulations that ensure the privacy of customer data and the security of intellectual property that resides on internal networks. These regulations drive an increased need for internal security.

Second, there is increased awareness about internal hacking. Organizations can no longer take a “don’t look, don’t tell” approach. Instead, many are now required to provide proof that they are continuously looking for internal hackers. How large has the internal hacking threat become? The CSI/FBI Computer Crime and Security Survey showed that 66 percent of organizations suffered an insider attack in 2003.

At the same time, the financial impact of worm and other new types of destructive threats has increased and become more visible in the industry. Having the ability to protect against and contain worms, is perhaps the No. 1 problem driving the investment in internal security solutions. It is estimated that the Slammer worm alone resulted in more than $1billion in damage, for example.

Furthermore, as security vulnerabilities in software have become more proactively communicated by Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT) and other sources, the timeline from vulnerability to exploit is shrinking. The time to patch the announced security holes remains ever-present — and just takes too long. So companies are searching for ways to protect their LAN resources during this period of susceptibility – until the holes can be filled with properly patched software.

Lastly, IT organizations have realized that endpoint devices — whether a personal computer, PDA or other device, must be as secure on LANs as they are when connecting from outside the perimeter (such as on a VPN connection.) Once these endpoints are secure internally as well as externally, they will no longer inadvertently introduce malicious code and other security threats.

Companies of all sizes are beginning to shift their attention to the topic of internal security. They are starting to initiate change in how they protect resources on the LAN, and in turn, protect their employees’ productivity.

2005 is the year of internal security.

A combination of business and technology drivers are triggering this revolution, including worm outbreaks, privacy regulations, reduced windows of time to react and a multitude of new types of threats. There are simple steps organizations can take to get started on protecting their internal network resources. For the organizations who make these moves, in 2005 they will reap the benefits of having more secure and stable LANs, and in turn, a more productive workforce.

http://www.technewsworld.com/rsstory/42227.html

See Terms of Use and Privacy notice.

Read more

Security Concerns for Migrations and Upgrades to Windows Active Directory

Posted on April 19, 2005December 30, 2021 by admini

You need to decide how you will get from where you are now, possibly a Windows NT domain(s), to Windows 2000 or Server 2003 Active Directory domain(s). The pressure and work that goes along with moving from one network operating system to another network operating system can be intense. You will be required to make many decisions during your journey.

Will you have Windows 2000 or Windows Server 2003 domain controllers?
Will you run some of each type of domain controller?
What client operating system will you run for the IT staff, executives, and other employees?
How many Active Directory domains will you end up with?
How many Active Directory forests will you end up with?
How will you get from your Windows NT domains to Windows Active Directory domains?
What tools will you use to get to your Windows Active Directory domains?
Are there any security concerns that you need to consider during your move to Windows Active Directory?

It is this last question that is focus in this article. They discuss the primary options for going from Windows NT domains to Windows Active Directory domains. It then talks about each of the options, focusing on the different security considerations that you need to contemplate. When you are done reading this article, you should be able to pinpoint the key security considerations that you will face along your journey.

You have two primary options for moving from Windows NT domains to Windows 2000 or Server 2003 Active Directory domains. The second option is to perform a migration. A migration is more complex than an upgrade. With a migration, you will need to create your Active Directory domain(s) in conjunction with your Windows NT domain(s). This will require that you purchase additional hardware and server licenses.

The overall concept of the migration is to gradually move objects (user, group, and computer accounts) from Windows NT to Windows Active Directory.

An upgrade is much simpler in all aspects. With an upgrade you work with the existing Windows NT domain and domain controllers. You will take the Windows 2000 Server or Windows Server 2003 installation CD and place it in the Windows NT Primary Domain Controller. You follow the steps in the wizard and when the computer restarts, you have a Windows Active Directory domain. All of the objects that were once in the Windows NT domain have completely been retained and are immediately available in the Windows Active Directory domain.

If you choose to perform a migration, you most likely are consolidating multiple Windows NT domains into a few (hopefully one) Windows Active Directory domains. It is the method that is available for moving accounts from multiple domains into just a few domains. However, as you perform your migration, you will have unique security concerns that you need to consider during the process.

Here are some of the most prominent security concerns that you will run into.
As you migrate user accounts from NT to Active Directory, you will end up with duplicate user accounts, with one in each domain. Most tools will allow you to control the state of both of the accounts after the migration. There might be times when you want the source user account to be active, and other times when the target user account should be active.
Regardless of your decision, you need to be aware that there are two user accounts in two domains.

When you migrate a user account from NT to Active Directory, you need to consider how the new user account will continue to access resources that exist in the Windows NT domain. This new property is referred to as SIDHistory. During a migration, the primary objects that you will migrate include user, group, and computer accounts, as well as trusts. However, the other configurations that you once had in Windows NT are not transposed to the Active Directory domain. This includes the account policy settings, which include the password min age, max age, min length, and password complexity.

Derek Melber manages http://www.auditingwindows.com, the first dedicated Web site for Windows auditing and security.

http://www.windowsecurity.com/articles/Security-Concerns-Migrations-Upgrades-Windows-Active-Directory.html

Read more

Malware Evolution: January – March 2005

Posted on April 18, 2005December 30, 2021 by admini

IM-Worms
Worms that propagate via Internet messaging services by sending URLs to all contacts in the local contact list. The URLs take incautious users to websites containing the body of the worm. This approach is also often used by email worms.

One of the most interesting developments in 2005 was the appearance of worms for instant messenger applications. Instant messenger applications have become very popular, but users rarely perceive them as potential infection vectors. The source code for some early IM-worms was also published on a number of virus writers’ sites, and most of the new worms are clearly based on this code. As P2P-worms were simple to create, and spread rapidly, several hundred families appeared, with numerous versions in each. Kaspersky Lab monitored P2P networks closely during the upsurge in P2P-worms and analysis showed that almost every second file in the Kazaa file-sharing network was a P2P-worm. Despite the fact that Internet messaging services allow file transfer, for some reason virus writers are not utilizing it as a method of infection, possibly because they find overly complex. The worm penetrates victim systems either by exploiting Internet Explorer vulnerabilities or simply by downloading and installing the malicious code. Monitoring incoming http traffic for malicious code (which should be part of any responsible security policy) will block those worms which penetrate via browser vulnerabilities.

Botnets
Initially, infected computers were linked via an IRC channel and received commands from the remote user via IRC, and this is still the most popular way of controlling botnets from a single central point and is used by the Agobot, Rbot and SdBot families, which are the most common malicious bots. Mydoom would open a single port in the range between 3127 and 3198 which gave anyone access to the infected system. The Internet was flooded with worms attempting to penetrate computers already infected by Mydoom. Virus writers also wrote scanners that allowed potential controllers to search computers for the Mydoom backdoor component: if the backdoor was detected, the new controller would drop and execute new malware on the infected machine. At the height of this outbreak, infected machines were passing from controller to controller several times a day. All of these infected machines are being actively used by cyber criminals as spamming platforms in order to make money. Botnets can also be used in DoS attacks and to spread new malware – such threats often lead site owners to pay cyber criminals not to attack their sites. Detection and prevention of botnets should be a priority for both the IT industry and end users, since the future of the Internet depends on coordinated action now.

Email Worms
2004 was distinguished by a number of major epidemics caused by email worms such as Mydoom, NetSky, Bagle and Zafi. However, late 2004 and early 2005 was free of such outbreaks, with nothing on the scale of even the mid-sized outbreaks of 2004.

Social engineering
I.e. techniques used by cybercriminals to trick end users into sharing confidential data, continues to evolve. According to data from the Anti-Phishing Working Group, in January 2005 phishers sent 12,845 unique phishing letters leading to 2,560 spoofed websites. The public fear of spyware has also been exploited by Adware writers and other cyber -fraudsters to penetrate victim machines.

No new critical Windows vulnerabilities
Isolated attacks notwithstanding, the fact that older versions of Windows do not have critical vulnerabilities, and the encouraging trend of more and more Windows XP users installing Service Pack 2 gives hope for the future. The current lack of worldwide outbreaks can be partially acounted for by two important factors: no new serious vulnerabilites in Windows and the migration of users to Windows XP with Service Pack 2.

On the other hand, security holes in Internet Explorer are responsible for a significant number of infections. Kaspersky Lab data shows that the MHTML URL Processing Vulnerability (CAN-2004-0380) is the loophole currently most frequently exploited by virus writers. This vulnerability makes it possible to hide executable files written in VBS or JS in CHM files (Microsoft Compiled Help) and post links to the infected files on the Internet. When an infected CHM file is opened, the hidden files are executed in the Local Internet Zone with current user rights.These scripts are usually Trojan Downloaders or Droppers that install other Trojans on the victim machines. However, this vulnerability is not new and Microsoft issued the MS04-013 patch for it over a year ago on April 13, 2004, meaning that users do have the ability to protect themselves against such attacks.

On-line games: a new arena
Contemporary cyber criminals don’t only steal banking and financial details. Games have achieved enormous popularity since their first appearance, and individual items and/or characters in various on-line games are sold for tens of thousands of dollars in on-line auctions. For instance, a virtual island from “Project Entropia” was sold, for $26,500, the largest amount spent at any one time in online-gaming history. In short, several billion dollars are currently invested in virtual worlds and role-playing games, a sum equivalent to the budget of a small country. Naturally, the presence of real money in on-line games hasn’t escaped the attention of cyber criminals.

The first cybercrime targeting on-line games was committed in early 2003, when Trojans designed to steal user account data to the Asian game Legend of Mir were detected. And two years on, there are more than 700 known malicious programs which target Legend of Mir. Detailed analysis of these programs shows that most of them originate in South Korea and China. The first Trojans attacking Lineage were detected by Kaspersky Lab virus analysts in October 2004; in less than six months the number of such malicious programs has grown to several hundred.

Among the most recent programs targeting online games is a family of Trojans designed to steal personal information from Gamania players. The first one was detected in February 2005 and since then there has been at least one new variant every week. Admnistrators immediately forward any viruses, scripts and Trojans attacking the game portals, and Kaspersky Lab ensures that updates protecting against such threats are released almost immediately.

Adware, spyware and viruses: is there a difference?
Adware and spyware are the IT buzzwords of the moment. Such programs may exhibit Trojan behaviour in how they install themselves, (for instance by exploiting browser vulnerabilities), or in how they behave once they are installed. With adware becoming increasingly inseparable from classic malware, dedicated anti-adware solutions will simply cease to provide adequate protection.

Mobile malware
The first malicious code targeting mobile phones (Cabir) was detected in the middle of June. We are now staring into the abyss: a Warhol Worm, which attacks all possible systems in the shortest possible time, is now a very real possiblity. The first attempt to create such a worm surfaced in March this year. Fortunately, ComWar, an MMS-worm, contained a number of errors and there was a significant time lag during propagation.

At the time of writing, no further Bluetooth-worms have been detected.

http://www.viruslist.com/en/analysis?pubid=162454316

Read more

IBM Stresses App Security

Posted on April 18, 2005December 30, 2021 by admini

Anthony Nadalin, chief security architect for IBM’s Software Group, said IBM is looking to do more to address the issue of security throughout the application life cycle, starting during the requirements process and going straight through to modeling and deployment. “There is a lot of interest in companies building secure applications and how to guarantee that, so we’re looking at the notion of security in the application life cycle.”

Nadalin said IBM is considering enhancing its modeling capability to enable users to integrate security into the process.

The authentication becomes a policy issue, and “you wind up with a policy-driven model. It is nearly impossible to retrofit,” Murphy said.

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1787115,00.asp?kc=EWRSS03119TX1K0000594

Read more

Expanded Wi-Fi certification brings confusion, says Gartner

Posted on April 18, 2005December 30, 2021 by admini

As if Wi-Fi standards are not confusing enough, last week’s addition of four widely used Extensible Authentication Protocol (EAP) types by the Wi-Fi Alliance will make your head spin.

WPA certification will be more confusing than meaningful for enterprise decisions until at least 4Q05, when it becomes mandatory for vendors to pass ‘new’ WPA2 certification.

Additional confusion will undoubtedly result after Cisco and Microsoft likely introduce a new or enhanced EAP type in coming months which will require the Wi-Fi Alliance to conduct further interoperability testing, according to Gartner.

And the Wi-Fi Alliance is reserving the term “WPA3” for new IEEE 802.11 security features rather than for security testing extensions, further contributing to the confusion around WPA and WPA2 certification through at least the first half of next year.

Gartner says to simply select the authentication approach that best meets matches your business, IT and security processes, regardless of Wi-Fi certification.

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Research/index.php?p=152

Read more

Posts pagination

  • Previous
  • 1
  • …
  • 304
  • 305
  • 306
  • 307
  • 308
  • 309
  • 310
  • …
  • 421
  • Next

Recent Posts

  • AI News – Mon, 17 Nov 2025
  • CSO News – Mon, 17 Nov 2025
  • AI/ML News – 2024-04-14
  • Incident Response and Security Operations -2024-04-14
  • CSO News – 2024-04-15

Archives

  • November 2025
  • April 2024
  • September 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • September 2020
  • October 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • December 2018
  • April 2018
  • December 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • August 2014
  • March 2014
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • February 2012
  • October 2011
  • August 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003

Categories

  • AI-ML
  • Augment / Virtual Reality
  • Blogging
  • Cloud
  • DR/Crisis Response/Crisis Management
  • Editorial
  • Financial
  • Make You Smile
  • Malware
  • Mobility
  • Motor Industry
  • News
  • OTT Video
  • Pending Review
  • Personal
  • Product
  • Regulations
  • Secure
  • Security Industry News
  • Security Operations
  • Statistics
  • Threat Intel
  • Trends
  • Uncategorized
  • Warnings
  • WebSite News
  • Zero Trust

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org
© 2025 CyberSecurity Institute | Powered by Superbs Personal Blog theme