Category Archives: GDPR

Exploiting GDPR to Get Private Information

A researcher abused the GDPR to get information on his fiancee:

It is one of the first tests of its kind to exploit the EU's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which came into force in May 2018. The law shortened the time organisations had to respond to data requests, added new types of information they have to provide, and increased the potential penalty for non-compliance.

"Generally if it was an extremely large company -- especially tech ones -- they tended to do really well," he told the BBC.

"Small companies tended to ignore me.

"But the kind of mid-sized businesses that knew about GDPR, but maybe didn't have much of a specialised process [to handle requests], failed."

He declined to identify the organisations that had mishandled the requests, but said they had included:

  • a UK hotel chain that shared a complete record of his partner's overnight stays

  • two UK rail companies that provided records of all the journeys she had taken with them over several years

  • a US-based educational company that handed over her high school grades, mother's maiden name and the results of a criminal background check survey.

Cyber Security Roundup for July 2019

July was a month of mega data privacy fines. The UK Information Commissioners Office (ICO) announced it intended to fine British Airways £183 million for last September's data breach, where half a million BA customer personal records were compromised. The ICO also announced a £100 million fine for US-based Marriot Hotels after the Hotel chain said 339 million guest personal data records had been compromised by hackers. Those fines were dwarfed on the other side of the pond, with Facebook agreeing to pay a US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) fine of $5 billion dollars, to put the Cambridge Analytica privacy scandal to bed. And Equifax paid $700 million to FTC to settle their 2017 data breach, which involved the loss of at least 147 million personal records. Big numbers indeed, we are seeing the big stick of the GDPR kicking in within the UK, and the FTC flexing some serious privacy rights protection punishment muscles in the US. All 'food for thought' when performing cybersecurity risk assessments.

Through a Freedom of Information request, the UK Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) disclosure a sharp rise of over 1000% in cyber-incidents within UK financial sector in 2018. In my view, this rise was fueled by the mandatory data breach reporting requirement of the GDPR, given it came into force in May 2018. I also think the finance sector was reluctant to report security weakness pre-GDPR, over fears of damaging their customer trust. Would you trust and use a bank if you knew its customers were regularly hit by fraud?

Eurofins Scientific, the UK's largest forensic services provider, which was taken down by a mass ransomware attack last month, paid the cybercrooks ransom according to the BBC News. It wasn't disclosed how much Eurofins paid, but it is highly concerning when large ransoms are paid, as it fuels further ransomware attacks.

A man was arrested on suspicion of carrying out a cyberattack against Lancaster University. The UK National Crime Agency said university had been compromised and "a very small number" of student records, phone numbers and ID documents were accessed. In contrast, the FBI arrested a 33 old software engineer from Seattle, she is alleged to have taken advantage of a misconfigured web application firewall to steal a massive 106 million personal records from Capital One. A stark reminder of the danger of misconfiguring and mismanaging IT security components.

The Huawei international political rhetoric and bun fighting has gone into retreat. UK MPs said there were no technological grounds for a complete Huawei banwhile Huawei said they were 'confident' the UK will choose to include it within 5G infrastructure. Even the White House said it would start to relax the United States Huawei ban. It seems something behind the scenes has changed, this reversal in direction is more likely to be financially motivated than security motivated in my rather cynical view.

A typical busy month for security patch releases, Microsoft, Adobe and Cisco all releasing the expected barrage of security updates for their products. There was security updates released by Apple as well, however, Google researchers announced six iPhone vulnerabilities, including one that remains unpatched.

BLOG
NEWS
VULNERABILITIES AND SECURITY UPDATES
HUAWEI NEWS AND THREAT INTELLIGENCE

Four Key Questions to ask following a Cyber Attack

Guest Article by Andy Pearch, Head of IA Services at CORVID

Cyber attacks are inevitable, but it’s how an organisation deals with them that can make or break their business. Have they got all the answers, and do they fully understand the implications? Can they be sure the attack won’t happen again?

Swift and comprehensive incident response is a critical step to ensuring the future security of a business and protecting its reputation. It’s not enough to be aware that an attack is taking (or has taken) place. There are four key questions organisations need to be able to answer following a cyber security breach – if a single answer is missing, the security team won’t have the full picture, leaving the business vulnerable to impending attacks. Not having this level of insight can also damage an organisation’s relationships with suppliers and affect customer confidence, as it means the business itself is not in control of the situation.

Andy Pearch, Head of IA Services at CORVID, outlines four key questions all organisations must be able to answer after a cyber attack.

1. How and where did the Security Breach take place?The first step of an effective incident response strategy is to identify how the attackers got in. Quite simply, if an organisation misses this first crucial step, attackers will exploit the same vulnerability for future cyber attacks. Guesswork won’t cut it – any security professional can hypothesise that “it was probably an email”, but security teams need clear evidence so they can fully analyse all aspects of the problem and devise an appropriate solution.

2. What Information was Accessed?
Understanding specifically what information was accessed by the attacker is paramount to knowing what impact the attack will have on the organisation. Identifying which departments were targeted or what types of information might have been stolen isn’t good enough; organisations need to be able to articulate exactly which files were accessed and when. 

Headlines about attackers stealing information are common, but just as importantly, you need to know the scope of the information they’ve seen, as well as the information they’ve taken. Not only will this inform the next steps that need to be taken, and shed light on which parts of the business will be affected, but it will also enable the organisation to remain compliant with legal obligations, for example, identifying if a data breach needs to be reported under GDPR.

3. How can Systems be Recovered Quickly?
Organisations will understandably want to get their IT estate back to normal as soon as possible to minimise damage to their business, service and reputation. If the compromise method is identified and analysed correctly, IT systems can be remediated in seconds, meaning users and business operations can continue without downtime for recovery.

4. How do you prevent it from happening again?
Knowing the IT estate has been compromised is useless without taking steps to make sure it doesn’t happen again. Managed Detection and Response (MDR) is all about spotting the unusual activity that indicates a potential breach. If a user is accessing files they would never usually touch, sending unexpected emails or reaching out to a new domain, for example, such activity should prompt a review. The problem for most companies, however, is they lack not only the tools to enable such detection, but also the time and skills to undertake thorough analysis to determine whether it is a breach or a false positive.

A managed approach not only takes the burden away from businesses, but also enables every company to benefit from the pool of knowledge built up as a result of detecting and remediating attacks on businesses across the board. With MDR, every incident detected is investigated and, if it’s a breach, managed. That means shutting down the attack’s communication channel to prevent the adversary communicating with the compromised host, and identifying any compromised asset which can then be remediated.

Shifting Security Thinking
Clearly, GDPR has raised awareness that the risks associated with a cyber attack are not only financial, as hackers are actively seeking to access information. Security plans, therefore, must also consider data confidentiality, integrity and availability. But it is also essential to accept the fundamental shift in security thinking – protection is not a viable option given today’s threat landscape. When hackers are using the same tactics and tools as bona fide users, rapid detection and remediation must be the priority.

UK Pub Chain ‘Greene King’ Gift Card Website Hacked

Major UK pub chain, Greene King (Bury St. Edmunds), had its gift card website (https://www.gkgiftcards.co.uk) compromised by hackers. The personal data breach was discovered on 14th May 2019 and confirmed a day later. The pub, restaurant and hotel chain informed their impacted customers by email today (28th May 2019).


Greene King said the hackers were able to access:
  • name
  • email address
  • user ID
  • encrypted password
  • address
  • post code
The pub chain did not disclose any further details on how passwords were "encrypted", only to say within their customer disclosure email "
Whilst your password was encrypted, it may still be compromised". It is a long established good industry coding practice for a website application's password storage to use a one-way 'salted' hash function, as opposed to storing customer plaintext passwords in an encrypted form.

No details were provided on how the hackers were able to compromise the gift card website, but there is a clue within Greene King's email statement, which suggests their website had security vulnerabilities which were fixable, "
we have taken action to prevent any further loss of personal information"

The number of customer records impacted by this data breach has also not disclosed. However, as this was a breach of personal information, Greene King was obligated under the DPA\GDPR to report the breach to the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) as well as its impacted customers. Both Greene King and ICO are yet to release a press statement about this data breach.

This is not the first data breach reported by Greene King in recent times, in November 2016 2,000 staff bank details were accidentally leaked.

Greene King Personal Data Compromise Email to Customers
Dear Customer,
I am writing to inform you about a cyber-security breach affecting our website gkgiftcards.co.uk.

Suspicious activity was discovered on 14th May and a security breach was confirmed on 15th May. No bank details or payment information were accessed. However, the information you provided to us as part of your gift card registration was accessed. Specifically, the hackers were able to access your name, email address, user ID, encrypted password, address, post code and gift card order number. Whilst your password was encrypted, it may still be compromised. It is very important that you change your password on our website, and also any other websites where this password has been used.

When you next visit our website, using the following link (https://www.gkgiftcards.co.uk/user) you will be prompted to change your password. As a consequence of this incident, you may receive emails or telephone calls from people who have obtained your personal information illegally and who are attempting to obtain more personal information from you, especially financial information.

This type of fraud is known as 'phishing'. If you receive any suspicious emails, don't reply. Get in touch with the organisation claiming to have contacted you immediately, to check this claim. Do not reply to or click any links within a suspicious email and do not dial a suspicious telephone number given to you by someone who called you. Only use publicly listed contact details, such as those published on an organisation's website or in a public telephone directory, to contact the organisation to check this claim. At this stage of our investigation, we have no evidence to suggest anyone affected by this incident has been a victim of fraud but we are continuing to monitor the situation. We have reported the matter to the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO).

As soon as we were made aware of the incident, our immediate priority was to close down any exposure, which has been done, and then confirm which customer accounts have been affected. I recognise that this is not the sort of message you want to receive from an organisation which you have provided your personal information to. I want to apologise for what has happened, and reassure you that we have taken action to prevent any further loss of personal information, and to limit any harm which might otherwise occur as a result of this incident.

Phil Thomas
Chief Commercial Officer of Greene King Plc.

Advice
  • Change your Greene King account password immediately, use a unique and strong password.
  • Ensure you have not used the same Greene King credentials (i.e. your email address with the same password) on any other website or app, especially with your email account, and with banking websites and apps. Consider using a password manager to assist you in creating and using unique strong passwords with every website and application you use.
  • Always use Multi-factor Authentication (MFA) when offered. MFA provides an additional level of account protection, which protects your account from unauthorised access should your password become compromised.
  • Check https://haveibeenpwned.com/ to see if your email and password combination is known to have been compromised in a past data breach.
  • Stay alert for customised messages from scammers, who may use your stolen personal information to attempt to con you, by email (phishing), letter and phone (voice & text). Sometimes criminals will pretend to represent the company breached, or another reputable organisation, using your stolen personal account information to convince you they are legit.
  • Never click on links, open attachments or reply to any suspicious emails.  Remember criminals can fake (spoof) their 'sender' email address and email content to replicate a ligament email.

Top Tips On Cyber Security for SMEs

Guest article by Damon Culbert of Cyber Security Jobs

Cyber criminals are a part of modern life, from Uber account hacks to major business data breaches, our online identities are rarely safe. And, while big-name companies under threat often make the news, it’s small and medium-sized enterprises who are actually their biggest targets.

Large businesses and government departments may seem like more obvious hacking targets with bigger payoffs, but these organisations can afford much more robust, well-kept and successful IT security measures and cyber security professionals working round the clock. Due to this, cyber criminals are much more likely to swing for easy targets like family businesses.

With the introduction of GDPR across Europe, all businesses are now much more responsible for the personal data they keep, meaning companies of all size can’t really afford to not have at least the basic security measures in place. The UK National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) have created a list of five principles as part of their Cyber Essentials Scheme. These include:

1. Secure your internet connection
2. Protect from viruses and other malware
3. Control access to your data and services
4. Secure your devices and software
5. Keep your devices and software up to date

All small businesses should know these principles and be putting them into practice, no matter how many staff they employ. In addition to this, here are a couple of other tips to keep hackers at bay which can be simply implemented into your business practices and keep the ICO (Information Commissioner’s Office) from the door.

Invest in Software and Hardware
While just functioning from day to day might be your only priority as a small business owner, investing in your technology will undoubtedly help in the long run. Keeping your software, such as virus software and operation systems, will ensure that any vulnerabilities identified by the creators are covered and there are no gaping holes in your cyber defences.

It might also be a good idea to invest in a good-quality back-up server and cyber insurance, so that if any personal data is every compromised, your operations can simply switch to the back-up server without affecting your business. Cyber insurance will also help keep you covered in case any clients’ personal data is lost and costs are incurred.

Staff Awareness Without the awareness of your staff, no manner of cyber security measures will keep your business safe. 90% of breaches happen because of user interaction, most commonly through phishing scams. Sophisticated phishers can impersonate senior members of staff in your organisation and trick other employees into handing over login details, authorising bogus payments or redirecting bank transfers.

Ensuring that staff are made aware of how to identify phishing scams and even having experienced trainers come in to guide them through cyber security best practice may seem like a cost you can spare but will go far in keeping the walls around your business impenetrable.

Compliance
The GDPR states that businesses who suffer a breach must alert the ICO and any customers who may have been affected within 72 hours of discovery. This is vital, and although fines could still be handed out for failure to prevent a breach, these fines will be much higher if the ICO discovers that you kept the information to yourself for longer than the 72 hour period.

The average time it takes for an organisation to discover a breach is 229 days, so the actual time it takes for the breach to come to your attention isn’t going to work too poorly in your favour. However, regular reporting is likely to result in earlier identification which will not only help you save time and money, but will also be a great trust signal to your clients that you take protecting their data seriously.

Pre-emptive planning
Security breaches are a ‘when’ not ‘if’ problem, so planning ahead is a necessity of modern business. 74% of SMEs don’t have any money saved to deal with an attack and 40% wouldn’t even know who to contact in the event of a breach. Having comprehensive disaster management plans in place will help keep you and your clients safe, keep your reputation in top shape and make sure you don’t have to pay out major money in the worst case scenario.

Plan of Action
The best thing for SMEs to do is to start small and keep building their defences as time goes on, helping keep costs down and customers happy. Here’s a plan of action to get started:

1. Start with the basics: follow the Cyber Essentials Scheme and bake these principles into your daily operations
2. Get an understanding of the risks to your business: check out the NCSC’s ’10 Steps to Cyber Security’ for further detail than the Cyber Essentials
3. Know your business: if you still feel your data isn’t safe, research more comprehensive frameworks like the IASME standard developed for small businesses
4. Once you have a complete security framework in place, develop on the NCSC’s advice with more sophisticated frameworks, such as the NIST framework for cybersecurity.

Why Isn’t GDPR Being Enforced?

Politico has a long article making the case that the lead GDPR regulator, Ireland, has too cozy a relationship with Silicon Valley tech companies to effectively regulate their privacy practices.

Despite its vows to beef up its threadbare regulatory apparatus, Ireland has a long history of catering to the very companies it is supposed to oversee, having wooed top Silicon Valley firms to the Emerald Isle with promises of low taxes, open access to top officials, and help securing funds to build glittering new headquarters.

Now, data-privacy experts and regulators in other countries alike are questioning Ireland's commitment to policing imminent privacy concerns like Facebook's reintroduction of facial recognition software and data sharing with its recently purchased subsidiary WhatsApp, and Google's sharing of information across its burgeoning number of platforms.

Only 55% of companies plan to be ready for CCPA implementation

While reputation and consumer privacy are the biggest drivers for CCPA compliance, only 55% of companies plan to be ready by the law’s Jan. 1, 2020 effective date, according to the OneTrust and the IAPP research. The CCPA is the first of its kind U.S. consumer privacy law which broadly expands the data protection and privacy rights of California residents. The law, inspired by the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), requires organizations that do … More

The post Only 55% of companies plan to be ready for CCPA implementation appeared first on Help Net Security.

How much does the average employee know about data privacy?

With the impacts and repercussions of the looming California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) on the minds of many privacy professionals, new research from MediaPRO shows more work is needed to train U.S. employees of this first-of-its-kind privacy regulation. MediaPRO’s 2019 Eye on Privacy Report reveals 46 percent of U.S. employees have never heard of CCPA, which sets specific requirements for the management of consumer data for companies handling the personal data of California residents. Passed … More

The post How much does the average employee know about data privacy? appeared first on Help Net Security.

The leading sources of stress for cybersecurity leaders? Regulation, threats, skills shortage

A perfect storm of regulation, increased threats and technological complexity is overwhelming cybersecurity decision makers, reveals new research from Symantec. Cybersecurity suffers from information overload Four in five (82 percent) security leaders across France, Germany and the UK report feeling burned out, whilst just under two-thirds (63 percent) think about leaving the industry or quitting their job (64 percent). Surveying 3,045 cybersecurity decision makers across the across France, Germany and the UK, the research – … More

The post The leading sources of stress for cybersecurity leaders? Regulation, threats, skills shortage appeared first on Help Net Security.

Privacy Shield Approaching Its 3 Year Anniversary in Operation

With data protection-related activity bustling around the world–from “Brexit” and GDPR enforcement to the approaching CCPA and exciting developments in the APAC region–it’s understandable to lose track of the EU-U.S. and Swiss-U.S. Privacy Shield Frameworks. What follows are responses to the most frequent Privacy Shield inquiries TrustArc is hearing from our customers. Is Privacy Shield Still Valid? Yes – in fact, Privacy Shield is fast approaching its three year anniversary on July 12th. Since its 2016 adoption, Privacy Shield has remained a sound, scalable and steady legal transfer mechanism for U.S. entities seeking to receive personal data from the EU … Continue reading Privacy Shield Approaching Its 3 Year Anniversary in Operation

The post Privacy Shield Approaching Its 3 Year Anniversary in Operation appeared first on TrustArc Blog.

Where data privacy executives plan to focus their strategies and budgets

Adapting to an increasingly volatile regulatory environment is the top priority for privacy executives, with only approximately four in 10 confident in their current abilities to keep pace with new requirements, according to a Gartner. Conversations with Gartner clients and Gartner’s annual survey data reveals where data privacy executives plan to focus their strategies and budgets for 2019. Their top five priorities highlighted the need to strengthen strategic approaches to engage with quickly shifting regulatory, … More

The post Where data privacy executives plan to focus their strategies and budgets appeared first on Help Net Security.

Six Myths People Still Believe About GDPR

The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) came into force in May 2018, and by the letter of the law, virtually every business in the UK needs to comply with it. However, there are still some misconceptions surrounding the law and what it means to organizations. This can lead to difficult situations where mistakes can be […]… Read More

The post Six Myths People Still Believe About GDPR appeared first on The State of Security.

CCPA and GDPR Compliance Report: New Research Measures Compliance Status and Plans for CCPA and GDPR (Part 3 of 3)

The European Union’s (EU) General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) has been occupying the minds of privacy professionals for the past two years and now attention is shifting to the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA). The CCPA is the toughest US privacy regulation to date and its impact will be felt by almost every organization that does business in California or handles personal information of California citizens. To understand the readiness and plans for businesses to meet the January 1, 2020 deadline for the CCPA, Dimensional Research conducted this research among 250 US privacy professionals from Feb 15th – 27th, 2019. … Continue reading CCPA and GDPR Compliance Report: New Research Measures Compliance Status and Plans for CCPA and GDPR (Part 3 of 3)

The post CCPA and GDPR Compliance Report: New Research Measures Compliance Status and Plans for CCPA and GDPR (Part 3 of 3) appeared first on TrustArc Blog.

CCPA and GDPR Compliance Report: New Research Measures Compliance Status and Plans for CCPA and GDPR (Part 2 of 3)

The European Union’s (EU) General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) has been occupying the minds of privacy professionals for the past two years and now attention is shifting to the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA). The CCPA is the toughest US privacy regulation to date and its impact will be felt by almost every organization that does business in California or handles personal information of California citizens. To understand the readiness and plans for businesses to meet the January 1, 2020 deadline for the CCPA, Dimensional Research conducted this research among 250 US privacy professionals from Feb 15th – 27th, 2019. … Continue reading CCPA and GDPR Compliance Report: New Research Measures Compliance Status and Plans for CCPA and GDPR (Part 2 of 3)

The post CCPA and GDPR Compliance Report: New Research Measures Compliance Status and Plans for CCPA and GDPR (Part 2 of 3) appeared first on TrustArc Blog.

Security roundup: April 2019

We round up interesting research and reporting about security and privacy from around the web. This month: healthy GDPR, gender rebalance, cookie walls crumble, telecom threats and incident response par excellence.

A healthy approach to data protection

Ireland’s Department of Health is now considering amendments to the Health Research Regulations, with data protection as one of the areas under review. The Health Research Consent Declaration Committee, which was formed as part of the Health Research Regulations made under GDPR, confirmed the possible amendments in a statement on its website.

GDPR triggered significant changes to health research because of the obligations on data protection impact assessments. Our senior data protection consultant Tracy Elliott has blogged about this issue.

The newly announced engagement process may lead to changes to the Health Research Regulations “where any such amendments are sound from a policy perspective and legally feasible”, the HRCDC said. There’s a link to a more detailed statement on the proposed amendments at this link.

A welcome improvement

Women now make up almost a quarter of information security workers, according to new figures from ISC(2). For years, female participation in security roles hovered around the 10-11 per cent mark. The industry training and certification group’s latest statistics show that figure is much higher than was generally thought.

Some of this increase is due to the group widening its parameters beyond pure cybersecurity roles. The full report shows that higher percentages of women security professionals are attaining senior roles. This includes chief technology officer (7 per cent of women vs. 2 per cent of men), vice president of IT (9 per cent vs. 5 per cent), IT director (18 per cent vs. 14 per cent) and C-level or executive (28 per cent vs. 19 per cent).

“While men continue to outnumber women in cybersecurity and pay disparity still exists, women in the field are buoyed by higher levels of education and certifications, and are finding their way to leadership positions in higher numbers,” ISC(2) said.

The trends are encouraging for any girls or women who are considering entering the profession; as the saying goes, if you can see it, you can be it. (The report’s subtitle is ‘young, educated and ready to take charge’.) After the report was released, Kelly Jackson Higgins at Dark Reading tweeted a link to her story from last year about good practice for recruiting and retaining women in security.

Great walls of ire

You know those annoying website pop-ups that ask you to accept cookies before reading further? They’re known as cookie walls or tracker walls, and the Dutch data protection authority has declared that they violate the General Data Protection Regulation. If visitors can’t access a website without first agreeing to be tracked, they are being forced to share their data. The argument is that this goes against the principle of consent, since the user has no choice but to agree if they want to access the site.

Individual DPAs have taken different interpretations on GDPR matters. SC Magazine quoted Omar Tene of the International Association of Privacy Professionals, who described the Dutch approach as “restrictive”.

This might be a case of GDPR solving a problem of its own making: The Register notes that cookie consent notices showed a massive jump last year, from 16 per cent in January to 62.1 per cent by June.

Hanging on the telephone

Is your organisation’s phone system in your threat model? New research from Europol’s European Cybercrime Centre and Trend Micro lifts the lid on network-based telecom fraud and infrastructure attacks. The Cyber-Telecom Crime Report includes case studies of unusual attacks to show how they work in the real world.

By accessing customers’ or carriers’ accounts, criminals have a low-risk alternative to traditional forms of financial fraud. Among the favoured tactics are vishing, which is a voice scam designed to trick people into revealing personal or financial information over the phone. ‘Missed call’ scams, also known as Wangiri, involve calling a number once; when the recipient calls back, thinking it’s a genuine call, they connect to a premium rate number. The report includes the eye-watering estimate that criminals make €29 billion per year from telecom fraud.

Trend Micro’s blog takes a fresh angle on the report findings, focusing on the risks to IoT deployments and to the arrival of 5G technology. The 57-page report is free to download from this link. Europol has also launched a public awareness page about the problem.  

From ransom to recovery

Norsk Hydro, one of the world’s largest aluminium producers, unexpectedly became a security cause célèbre following a “severe” ransomware infection. After the LockerGoga variant encrypted data on the company’s facilities in the US and Europe, the company shut its global network, switched to manual operations at some of its plants, and stopped production in others.

Norsk Hydro said it planned to rely on its backups rather than paying the ransom. Through it all, the company issued regular updates, drawing widespread praise for its openness, communication and preparedness. Brian Honan wrote: “Norsk Hydro should be a case study in how to run an effective incident response. They were able to continue their business, although at a lower level, in spite of their key systems being offline. Their website contains great examples of how to provide updates to an issue and may serve as a template for how to respond to security breaches.”

Within a week, most of the company’s operations were back running at capacity. Norsk Hydro has released a video showing how it was able to recover. Other victims weren’t so lucky. F-Secure has a good analysis of the ransomware that did the damage, as does security researcher Kevin Beaumont.

Links we liked

Remember the Melissa virus? Congratulations, you’re old: that was 20 years ago. MORE

New trends in spam and phishing, whose popularity never seems to fade. MORE and MORE

For parents and guardians: videos to spark conversations with kids about online safety. MORE

A look behind online heists on Mexican banks that netted perpetrators nearly $20 million. MORE

While we’re on the subject, more cybercriminal tactics used against financial institutions. MORE

This is a useful high-level overview of the NIST cybersecurity framework. MORE

This campaign aims to hold tech giants to account for fixing security and privacy issues. MORE

How can security awareness programmes become more effective at reducing risk? MORE

An excellent security checklist for devices and accounts, courtesy of Bob Lord. MORE

Shodan Monitor alerts organisations when their IoT devices become exposed online. MORE

The post Security roundup: April 2019 appeared first on BH Consulting.

Special Webinar Event: Current State of Brexit and Data Protection Impact

TrustArc is proud to present a special webinar event: “Current State of Brexit and Data Protection Impact.” This webinar will take place this Thursday, March 28th at 12pm GMT | 8am ET | 5am PT. Don’t miss this opportunity to learn more about how Brexit will affect data protection – register today! Can’t make it? Register anyway – we’ll automatically send you an email with both the slides and recording after the webinar! Click here for answers to the most commonly asked webinar related questions. The impact of a potential “Brexit” will play an important role on the data protection … Continue reading Special Webinar Event: Current State of Brexit and Data Protection Impact

The post Special Webinar Event: Current State of Brexit and Data Protection Impact appeared first on TrustArc Blog.

When is it fair to infer?

While the GDPR framework is robust in many respects, it struggles to provide adequate protection against the emerging risks associated with inferred data (sometimes called derived data, profiling data, or inferential data). Inferred data pose potentially significant risks in terms of privacy and/or discrimination, yet they would seem to receive the least protection of the personal data types prescribed by GDPR. Defined as assumptions or predictions about future behaviour, inferred data cannot be verified at the time of decision-making. Consequently, data subjects are often unable to predict, understand or refute these inferences, whilst their privacy rights, identity and reputation are impacted.

Reaching dangerous conclusions

Numerous applications drawing potentially troubling inferences have emerged; Facebook is reported to be able to infer protected attributes such as sexual orientation and race, as well as political opinions and the likelihood of a data subject attempting suicide. Facebook data has also been used by third parties to decide on loan eligibility, to infer political leniencies, to predict views on social issues such as abortion, and to determine susceptibility to depression. Google has attempted to predict flu outbreaks, other diseases and medical outcomes. Microsoft can predict Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s from search engine interactions. Target can predict pregnancy from purchase history, users’ satisfaction can be determined by mouse tracking, and China infers a social credit scoring system.

What protections does GDPR offer for inferred data?

The European Data Protection Board (EDPB) notes that both verifiable and unverifiable inferences are classified as personal data (for instance, the outcome of a medical assessment regarding a user’s health, or a risk management profile). However it is unclear whether the reasoning and processes that led to the inference are similarly classified. If inferences are deemed to be personal data, should the data protection rights enshrined in GDPR also equally apply?

The data subjects’ right to being informed, right to rectification, right to object to processing, and right to portability are significantly reduced when data is not ‘provided by the data subject’ for example the EDPB note (in their guidelines on the rights to data portability) that “though such data may be part of a profile kept by a data controller and are inferred or derived from the analysis of data provided by the data subject, these data will typically not be considered as “provided by the data subject” and thus will not be within scope of this new right’.

The data subject however can still exercise their “right to obtain from the controller confirmation as to whether or not personal data concerning the data subject has being processed, and, where that is the case, access to the personal data”. The data subject also has the right to information about “the existence of automated decision-making, including profiling (Article 22(1),(4)) meaningful information about the logic involved, as well as the significance and consequences of such processing” (Article 15). However the data subject must actively make such an access request, and if the organisation does not provide the data, how will the data subject know that derived or inferred data is missing from their access request?

A data subject can also object to direct marketing based on profiling and/or have it stopped, however there is no obligation on the controller to inform the data subject that any profiling is taking place – “unless it produces legal or significant effects on the data subject”.

No answer just yet…

Addressing the challenges and tensions of inferred and derived data, will necessitate further case law on the interpretation of “personal data”, particularly regarding interpretations of GDPR. Future case law on the meaning of “legal effects… or similarly significantly affects”, in the context of profiling, would also be helpful. It would also seem reasonable to suggest that where possible data subjects should be informed at collection point, that data is derived by the organisation and for what purposes. If the data subject doesn’t know that an organisation uses their data to infer new data, the data subject cannot exercise fully their data subject rights, since they won’t know that such data exists.

In the meantime, it seems reasonable to suggest that inferred data which has been clearly informed to the data subject, is benevolent in its intentions, and offers the data subject positive enhanced value, is ‘fair’.

The post When is it fair to infer? appeared first on BH Consulting.

Five data protection tips from the DPC’s annual report

The first post-GDPR report from the Data Protection Commission makes for interesting reading. The data breach statistics understandably got plenty of coverage, but there were also many pointers for good data protection practice. I’ve identified five of them which I’ll outline in this blog.

Between 25 May and 31 December 2018, the DPC recorded 3,542 valid data security breaches. (For the record, the total number of breaches for the calendar year was 4,740.) This was a 70 per cent increase in reported valid data security breaches compared to 2017 (2,795), and a 56 per cent increase in public complaints compared to 2017.

1. Watch that auto-fill!

By far the largest single category was “unauthorised disclosures”, which was 3,134 out of the total. Delving further, we find that many of the complaints to the DPC relate to unauthorised disclosure of personal data in an electronic context. In other words, an employee at a company or public sector agency sent email containing personal data to the wrong recipient.

Data breaches in Ireland during 2018 and their causes

A case study on page 21 of the report illustrates this point: a data subject complained to the DPC after their web-chat with a Ryanair employee “was accidentally disclosed by Ryanair in an email to another individual who had also used the Ryanair web-chat service. The transcript of the webchat contained details of the complainant’s name and that of his partner, his email address, phone number and flight plans”.

It’s a common misconception that human error doesn’t count as a data breach, but in the eyes of GDPR, this isn’t the case. The most common reason for breaches like this comes from the auto-fill function in some software applications like email clients.

Where an organisation deals with high-risk data like healthcare information (because of the sensitivity involved), best practice is to disable auto-fill. I recommend this step to many of my clients. Many organisations don’t like doing this because it disrupts staff and makes their jobs a little bit harder. In my experience, employees soon get used to the inconvenience, while organisations greatly reduce their chances of a breach.

2. Encrypted messaging may not be OK

Another misconception I hear a lot is that it’s OK to use WhatsApp as a messaging tool because it’s encrypted. The case study on page 19 of the DPC report clarifies this position. A complainant claimed the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade’s Egypt mission had shared his personal data with a third party (his employer) without his knowledge. A staff member at the mission was checking the validity of a document and the employer had no email address, so they sent a supporting document via WhatsApp.

In this case, the DPC “was satisfied that given the lack of any other secure means to contact the official in question, the transmission via WhatsApp was necessary to process the personal data for the purpose provided (visa eligibility)”.

My reading of this is that although the DPC ruled that WhatsApp was sufficient in this case, this was only because no other secure means of communication was available.

3. Do you need a DPO?

The report tells us that there were 900 Data Protection Officers appointed between 25 May and 31 December 2018. My eyes were immediately drawn to some text accompanying that graph (below). “During 2019, the DPC plans to undertake a programme of work communicating with relevant organisations regarding their obligations under the GDPR to designate a DPO.” This suggests to me that the DPC doesn’t believe there are enough DPOs, hence the outreach and awareness-raising efforts.

Notifications of new DPOs between 25 May and 31 December 2018

Private and public organisations will need to decide whether they should appoint a full-time DPO or avail of a service-model from a third-party data protection specialist.

4. A data protection policy is not a ‘get out of jail free’ card

Case study 9 from the report concerns an employee of a public-sector body who lost an unencrypted USB device. The device contained personal information belonging to a number of colleagues and service users. The data controller had policies and procedures in place that prohibited the removal and storage of personal data on unencrypted devices. But the DPC found that it “lacked the appropriate oversight and supervision necessary to ensure that its rules were complied with”.

The lesson I take from this is, “user error” is not a convenient shield for all data protection shortcomings. Many organisations expended effort last year in writing policies, and some think they’re covered from sanction because they did so. But unless they implement and enforce the policy – and provide training to staff about it – then it’s not enough.

5. Email marketing penalties may change

My final point is more of an observation than advice. Between 25 May and 31 December, the DPC prosecuted five entities for 30 offences involving email marketing. The reports detail those cases. A recurring theme is that the fines were mostly in the region of a couple of thousand euro. However, all of these cases began before GDPR was in force; since then, the DPC has the power to levy fines directly rather than going through the courts. This is an area I expect the DPC to address. Any organisation that took a calculated risk in the past because the fines were low should not expect this situation will continue.

There are plenty of other interesting points in the 104-page report, which is free to download here.

The post Five data protection tips from the DPC’s annual report appeared first on BH Consulting.

Learning from the Big Data Breaches of 2018

Guest article by Cybersecurity Professionals

What can we learn from the major data breaches of 2018?
2018 was a major year for cybersecurity. With the introduction of GDPR, the public’s awareness of their cyber identities has vastly increased – and the threat of vulnerability along with it. The Information Commissioner’s Office received an increased number of complaints this year and the news was filled with reports of multi-national and multi-millionaire businesses suffering dramatic breaches at the hand of cybercriminals.

2018 Data Breaches
Notable breaches last year include:

5. British Airways
The card details of 380,000 customers were left vulnerable after a hack affected bookings on BA’s website and app. The company insists that no customer’s card details have been used illegally but they are expected to suffer a major loss of money in revenue and fines as a result of the attack.

4. T-Mobile
Almost 2 million users had their personal data, including billing information and email addresses accessed through an API by an international group of hackers last August.

3. Timehop
A vulnerability in the app’s cloud computing account meant that the names and contact details of 21 million users were affected on Timehop. The company assured users that memories were only shared on the day and deleted after, meaning that the hackers were not able to access their Facebook and Twitter history.

2. Facebook & Cambridge Analytica
One of the most sensationalised news stories of the last year, Facebook suffered a string of scandals after it was released that analytics firm Cambridge Analytica had used the Facebook profile data of 87 million users in an attempt to influence President Trump’s campaign and potentially aid the Vote Leave campaign in the UK-EU referendum.

1. Quora
After a “malicious third party” accessed Quora’s system, the account information, including passwords, names and email addresses, of 100 million users was compromised. The breach was discovered in November 2018.

GDPR
As the UK made the switch from the Data Protection Act to GDPR, businesses and internet users across the country suddenly became more aware of their internet identities and their rights pertaining to how businesses handled their information.

With the responsibility now firmly on the business to protect the data of UK citizens, companies are expected to keep a much higher standard of security in order to protect all personal data of their clients.

How many complaints to the ICO?
Elizabeth Denham, the UK’s Information Commissioner, said that the year 2017-18 was ‘one of increasing activity and challenging actions, some unexpected, for the office’.

This is shown in an increase in data protection complaints by 15%, as well as an increase in self-reported breaches by 30%. Since this is the first year of GDPR, it is expected that self-reported breaches have increased as businesses work to insure themselves against much higher fines for putting off their announcement.

The ICO also reports 19 criminal prosecutions and 18 convictions last year and fines totalling £1.29 million for serious security failures under the Data Protection Act 1998. The office has assured that they don’t intend to make an example of firms reporting data breaches in the early period of GDPR but as time goes on, leniency is likely to fade as businesses settle into the higher standards.

What does it mean for SMEs?
With 36% of SMEs having no cybersecurity plan, the general consensus is that they make for unpopular targets. However, with the GDPR, the responsibility is on the business to protect their data so being vulnerable could result in business-destroying costs. Considering the cost to businesses could total the higher of 2% of annual turnover or €10 million, data protection is of paramount importance to small businesses.

How exposed are we in the UK?
At 31%, our vulnerability rating is higher than the Netherlands, Germany, Estonia (30%) and Finland (29%), but the UK is a more likely target for cybercriminals looking to exploit high tech and financial services industries, which are some of the most vulnerable across Great Britain.

Despite a higher level of vulnerability, the UK has one of the largest cyber security talent pools, showing there is time and manpower being dedicated to the protection of our data online.

https://www.cybersecurity-professionals.com/blog/2019/03/01/cybercrime-in-the-uk-infographic/

Why it’s too easy to manipulate voters – and steal the EU elections | Eleonora Nestola

It’s time to act, as personal data is being used to target voters – and the EU commission isn’t doing enough to stop this

On 11 July last year the UK Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) published its first report on the Cambridge Analytica scandal. This is a date I will never forget, a date that substantially changed my vision of the current threats to our democratic society. It is a day that became a call to arms for me – and, for once, I had the understanding, the knowledge and the expertise to support the fight. I felt it was time to put all of this to good use for civil society, and so I set out to discover how online electoral campaigning works. And let me tell you, the system is not in good health and we Europeans should all be made more aware of that.

Related: This is Europe: stay close with the Guardian’s email updates

Voters become unaware they are receiving political messages based on bias. The risks are enormous

Related: Data protection laws are shining a needed light on a secretive industry | Bruce Schneier

Continue reading...

Cyber Security Roundup for February 2019

The perceived threat posed by Huawei to the UK national infrastructure continued to make the headlines throughout February, as politicians, UK government agencies and the Chinese telecoms giant continued to play out their rather public spat in the media. See my post Is Huawei a Threat to UK National Security? for further details. And also, why DDoS might be the greater threat to 5G than Huawei supplied network devices.

February was a rather quiet month for hacks and data breaches in the UK, Mumsnet reported a minor data breach following a botched upgrade, and that was about it. The month was a busy one for security updates, with Microsoft, Adobe and Cisco all releasing high numbers of patches to fix various security vulnerabilities, including several released outside of their scheduled monthly patch release cycles.

A survey by PCI Pal concluded the consequences of a data breach had a greater impact in the UK than the United States, in that UK customers were more likely to abandon a company when let down by a data breach. The business reputational impact should always be taken into consideration when risk assessing security.


Another survey of interest was conducted by Nominet, who polled 408 Chief Information Security Officers (CISOs) at midsize and large organisations in the UK and the United States. A whopping 91% of the respondents admitted to experiencing high to moderate levels of stress, with 26% saying the stress had led to mental and physical health issues, and 17% said they had turned to alcohol. The contributing factors for this stress were job security, inadequate budget and resources, and a lack of support from the board and senior management. A CISO role can certainly can be a poisoned-chalice, so its really no surprise most CISOs don't stay put for long.

A Netscout Threat Landscape Report declared in the second half of 2018, cyber attacks against IoT devices and DDoS attacks had both rose dramatically. Fuelled by the compromise of high numbers of IoT devices, the number of DDoS attacks in the 100GBps to 200GBps range increased 169%, while those in the 200GBps to 300GBps range exploded 2,500%. The report concluded cybercriminals had built and used cheaper, easier-to-deploy and more persistent malware, and cyber gangs had implemented this higher level of efficiency by adopting the same principles used by legitimate businesses. These improvements has helped malicious actors greatly increase the number of medium-size DDoS attacks while infiltrating IoT devices even quicker.

In a rare speech, Jeremy Fleming, the head of GCHQ warned the internet could deteriorate into "an even less governed space" if the international community doesn't come together to establish a common set of principles. He said "China, Iran, Russia and North Korea" had broken international law through cyber attacks, and made the case for when "offensive cyber activities" were good, saying "their use must always meet the three tests of legality, necessity and proportionality. Their use, in particular to cause disruption or damage - must be in extremis".  Clearly international law wasn't developed with cyber space in mind, so it looks like GCGQ are attempting to raise awareness to remedy that.

I will be speaking at the e-crime Cyber Security Congress in London on 6th March 2019, on cloud security, new business metrics, future risks and priorities for 2019 and beyond.

Finally, completely out of the blue, I was informed by 4D that this blog had been picked by a team of their technical engineers and Directors as one of the best Cyber Security Blogs in the UK. The 6 Best Cyber Security Blogs - A Data Centre's Perspective Truly humbled and in great company to be on that list.

BLOG
NEWS 
AWARENESS, EDUCATION AND THREAT INTELLIGENCE
REPORTS

    43% of Cybercrimes Target Small Businesses – Are You Next?

    Cybercrimes cost UK small companies an average of £894 in the year ending February of 2018. Small businesses are an easy target for cybercrooks, so it little surprise that around about 43% of cybercrime is committed against small businesses. According to research conducted by EveryCloud, there is much more at stake than a £900 annual loss, with six out of ten small businesses closing within six months of a data breach.

    Damage to a small company’s reputation can be difficult to repair and recover from following a data breach. Since the GDPR data privacy law came in force in May 2018, companies face significant financial sanctions from regulators if found negligent in safeguarding personal information. Add in the potential for civil suits the potential costs start mounting up fast, which could even turn into a business killer.  Case in point is political consulting and data mining firm Cambridge Analytica, which went under in May 2018 after being implicated with data privacy issues related to its use of personal data held on Facebook. However, most small businesses taken out by cyber attacks don't have the public profile to make the deadly headlines.

    Most big companies have contingency plans and resources to take the hit from a major cyber attack, although major cyber attacks prove highly costly to big business, the vast majority are able to recover and continue trading. Working on a tight budget, small businesses just doesn't the deep pockets of big business. Cyber resilience is not a high priority within most small businesses strategies, as you might image business plans are typically very business growth focused.

    Cyber resilience within small business need not be difficult, but it does involve going beyond installing antivirus. A great starting point is UK National Cyber Security Centre's Cyber Essentials Scheme, a simple but effective approach to help businesses protect themselves from the most common cyber attacks. You’ll also need to pay attention to staff security awareness training in the workplace.

    Every employee must ensure that the company is protected from attacks as much as possible. It’s your responsibility to make sure that everyone understands this and knows what preventative measures to put in place.

    It may cost a few bob, but getting an expert in to check for holes in your cybersecurity is a good place to start. They can check for potential risk areas and also educate you and your staff about security awareness.

    We all know the basics, but how many times do we let convenience trump good common sense? For example, how many times have you used the same password when registering for different sites?

    How strong is the password that you chose? If it’s easy for you to remember, then there’s a good chance that it’s not as secure as you’d like. If you’d like more tips on keeping your information secure, then check out the infographic below.


    Privacy and Security by Design: Thoughts for Data Privacy Day

    Data Privacy Day has particular relevance this year, as 2018 brought privacy into focus in ways other years have not. Ironically, in the same year that the European Union’s (EU) General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) came into effect, the public also learned of glaring misuses of personal information and a continued stream of personal data breaches. Policymakers in the United States know they cannot ignore data privacy, and multiple efforts are underway: bills were introduced in Congress, draft legislation was floated, privacy principles were announced, and a National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Privacy Framework and a National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) effort to develop the administration’s approach to consumer privacy are in process.

    These are all positive steps forward, as revelations about widespread misuse of personal data are causing people to mistrust technology—a situation that must be remedied.

    Effective consumer privacy policies and regulations are critical to the continued growth of the U.S. economy, the internet, and the many innovative technologies that rely on consumers’ personal data. Companies need clear privacy and security expectations to not only comply with the diversity of existing laws, but also to grow businesses, improve efficiencies, remain competitive, and most importantly, to encourage consumers to trust organizations and their technology.

    If an organization puts the customer at the core of everything it does, as we do at McAfee, then protecting customers’ data is an essential component of doing business. Robust privacy and security solutions are fundamental to McAfee’s strategic vision, products, services, and technology solutions. Likewise, our data protection and security solutions enable our enterprise and government customers to more efficiently and effectively comply with regulatory requirements.

    Our approach derives from seeing privacy and security as two sides of the same coin. You can’t have privacy without security. While you can have security without privacy, we strongly believe the two should go hand in hand.

    In comments we submitted to NIST on “Developing a Privacy Framework,” we made the case for Privacy and Security by Design. This approach requires companies to consider privacy and security on the drawing board and throughout the development process for products and services going to market. It also means protecting data through a technology design that considers privacy engineering principles. This proactive approach is the most effective way to enable data protection because the data protection strategies are integrated into the technology as the product or service is created. Privacy and Security by Design encourages accountability in the development of technologies, making certain that privacy and security are foundational components of the product and service development processes.

    The concept of Privacy and Security by Design is aspirational but is absolutely the best way to achieve privacy and security without end users having to think much about them. We have some recommendations for organizations to consider in designing and enforcing privacy practices.

    There are several layers that should be included in the creation of privacy and data security programs:

    • Internal policies should clearly articulate what is permissible and impermissible.
    • Specific departments should specify further granularity regarding policy requirements and best practices (e.g., HR, IT, legal, and marketing will have different requirements and restrictions for the collection, use, and protection of personal data).
    • Privacy (legal and non-legal) and security professionals in the organization must have detailed documentation and process tools that streamline the implementation of the risk-based framework.
    • Ongoing organizational training regarding the importance of protecting personal data and best practices is essential to the continued success of these programs.
    • The policy requirements should be tied to the organization’s code of conduct and enforced as required when polices are violated.

    Finally, an organization must have easy-to-understand external privacy and data security policies to educate the user/consumer and to drive toward informed consent to collect and share data wherever possible. The aim must be to make security and privacy ubiquitous, simple, and understood by all.

    As we acknowledge Data Privacy Day this year, we hope that privacy will not only be a talking point for policymakers but that it will also result in action. Constructing and agreeing upon U.S. privacy principles through legislation or a framework will be a complicated process. We better start now because we’re already behind many other countries around the globe.

    The post Privacy and Security by Design: Thoughts for Data Privacy Day appeared first on McAfee Blogs.

    Why other Hotel Chains could Fall Victim to a ‘Marriott-style’ Data Breach

    A guest article authored by Bernard Parsons, CEO, Becrypt

    Whilst I am sure more details behind the Marriott data breach will slowly come to light over the coming months, there is already plenty to reflect on given the initial disclosures and accompanying hypotheses.

    With the prospects of regulatory fines and lawsuits looming, assimilating the sheer magnitude of the numbers involved is naturally alarming. Up to 500 million records containing personal and potentially financial information is quite staggering. In the eyes of the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), this is deemed a ‘Mega Breach’, even though it falls short of the Yahoo data breach. But equally concerning are the various timeframes reported.

    Marriott said the breach involved unauthorised access to a database containing Starwood properties guest information, on or before 10th September 2018. Its ongoing investigation suggests the perpetrators had been inside the company’s networks since 2014.

    Starwood disclosed its own breach in November 2015 that stretched back to at least November 2014. The intrusion was said to involve malicious software installed on cash registers and other payment systems, which were not part of its guest reservations or membership systems.

    The extent of Marriott’s regulatory liabilities will be determined by a number of factors not yet fully in the public domain. For GDPR this will include the date at which the ICO was informed, the processes Marriott has undertaken since discovery, and the extent to which it has followed ‘best practice’ prior to, during and after breach discovery. Despite the magnitude and nature of breach, it is not impossible to imagine that Marriott might have followed best practice, albeit such a term is not currently well-defined, but it is fairly easy to imagine that their processes and controls reflect common practice.

    A quick internet search reveals just how commonplace and seemingly inevitable the industry’s breaches are. In December 2016, a pattern of fraudulent transactions on credit cards were reportedly linked to use at InterContinental Hotels Group (IHG) properties. IHG stated that the intrusion resulted from malware installed at point-of-sale systems at restaurants and bars of 12 properties in 2016, and later in April 2017, acknowledging that cash registers at more than 1,000 of its properties were compromised.

    According to KrebsOnSecurity other reported card breaches include Hyatt Hotels (October 2017), the Trump Hotel (July 2017), Kimpton Hotels (September 2016) Mandarin Oriental properties (2015), and Hilton Hotel properties (2015).

    Therefore perhaps, the most important lessons to be learnt in response to such breaches are those that seek to understand the factors that make data breaches all but inevitable today. Whilst it is Marriott in the news this week, the challenges we collectively face are systemic and it could very easily be another hotel chain next week.

    Reflecting on the role of payment (EPOS) systems and cash registers within leisure industry breaches is illustrative of the challenge. Paste the phrase ‘EPOS software’ into your favourite search engine, and see how prominent, or indeed absent, the notion of security is. Is it any wonder that organisations often unwittingly connect devices with common and often unmanaged vulnerabilities to systems that may at the same time be used to process sensitive data? Many EPOS systems effectively run general purpose operating systems, but are typically subject to less controls and monitoring than conventional IT systems.

    So Why is This?
    Often the organisation can’t justify having a full blown operating system and sophisticated defence tools on these systems, especially when they have a large number of them deployed out in the field, accessing bespoke or online applications. Often they are in widely geographically dispersed locations which means there are significant costs to go out and update, maintain, manage and fix them.

    Likewise, organisations don’t always have the local IT resource in many of these locations to maintain the equipment and its security themselves.

    Whilst a light is currently being shone on Marriott, perhaps our concerns should be far broader. If the issues are systemic, we need to think about how better security is built into the systems and supply chains we use by default, rather than expecting hotels or similar organisations in other industries to be sufficiently expert. Is it the hotel, as the end user that should be in the headlines, or how standards, expectations and regulations apply to the ecosystem that surrounds the leisure and other industries? Or should the focus be on how this needs to be improved in order to allow businesses to focus on what they do best, without being quite such easy prey?


    CEO and co-founder of Becrypt