The SANS Institute, an IT security and research organization, today released its annual Top-20 list of Internet security vulnerabilities, offering organizations at least a starting point for addressing critical issues.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The SANS list is compiled from recommendations by leading security researchers and companies around the world, from institutes such as the National Infrastructure Protection Center and the U.K.’s National Infrastructure Security Coordination Centre.<\/p>\n
The Top-20 is actually two lists of 10: the 10 most commonly exploited vulnerabilities in Windows, and the 10 most commonly exploited vulnerabilities in Unix and Linux.<\/p>\n
Many of the vulnerabilities have made the list before, but there were some surprises this year, according Ross Patel, director of the Top-20 list. As with IM, file-sharing applications are simple and operational in nature, and security concerns are often overlooked, Patel said.<\/p>\n
“Hands down, Web browsers for Windows were the topic that caused most of the harm, pain and passionate debate for experts from every continent,” Patel said. With the number of vulnerabilities in Microsoft Corp.’s Internet Explorer browser prompting some security experts to suggest earlier this year that users switch to other browsers, list contributors were left wondering whether they should recommend the same, Patel said. However, they finally decided that the move was too much to ask and that they should endorse securing whichever platform a user chooses.<\/p>\n
According to Gerhard Eschelbeck, chief technology officer at network security firm Qualys Inc. and a list contributor, the Top-20 is widely used by organizations as a security benchmark.<\/p>\n
http:\/\/www.computerworld.com\/securitytopics\/security\/story\/0,10801,96516,00.html<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[29],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-572","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/572","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=572"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/572\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3059,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/572\/revisions\/3059"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=572"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=572"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=572"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}