Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Application Security //

Database Security

5/17/2013
03:32 PM
Adrian Lane
Adrian Lane
Commentary
50%
50%

Why Database Monitoring?

Hoping other people detect your breach before you lose millions is not a good strategy

Why should you monitor database activity? This is why! Hackers stole $45 million from ATMs -- a theft made possible by breaching several bank databases and make simple alterations that allowed thieves to siphon of cash.

Do you understand how hard it is to take $45 million from ATM machines in $2,000 increments? Do you realize that's more than 20,000 withdrawals? What's more troubling is this was the second attack. The first, committed several months before, successfully netted $5 million. Police caught up with some of the attackers on the second attack only after they had managed to steal another $40 million, but not by being nabbed at ATMs or tracked back to the source. Rather, one of the "money mules" got greedy, killed one of the ringleaders, and police stumbled on the theft ring as part of a murder investigation.

The sad thing is that the easiest point of detection should have been through the database. The entire attack is predicated on breaching the database of ATM/gift cards, finding the card numbers, and altering the withdrawal limits of those cards. For you database experts out there, you know that this takes about three or four SQL statements to do. It's also a dead simple attack to detect, and one of the types of attacks that database activity monitoring systems were designed for.

The simplest way to stop the thieves would have been to detect the alterations and then lock the card numbers or limits so they could not be used. Or they could have detected the attack and then coordinated with law enforcement to catch the thieves as they started taking out money. They would have had lots of opportunities to catch them -- about 20,000 or so.

And if you read the Verizon Data Breach Report, you noticed that 69 percent of the breaches were not detected by the company; rather, they were detected by outsiders. So what sounds easier, faster, and cheaper? Hoping someone outside of your company detects the data breach for you before $45 million is stolen, or detecting the first phase of the attack while it happens?

Sure, this is one of the more costly attacks in the past decade, but the point should be clear: Monitor databases that hold financial information!

Adrian Lane is an analyst/CTO with Securosis LLC, an independent security consulting practice. Special to Dark Reading. Adrian Lane is a Security Strategist and brings over 25 years of industry experience to the Securosis team, much of it at the executive level. Adrian specializes in database security, data security, and secure software development. With experience at Ingres, Oracle, and ... View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Manchester United Suffers Cyberattack
Dark Reading Staff 11/23/2020
As 'Anywhere Work' Evolves, Security Will Be Key Challenge
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  11/23/2020
Cloud Security Startup Lightspin Emerges From Stealth
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  11/24/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win an Amazon Gift Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: This comment is waiting for review by our moderators.
Current Issue
2021 Top Enterprise IT Trends
We've identified the key trends that are poised to impact the IT landscape in 2021. Find out why they're important and how they will affect you today!
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-29367
PUBLISHED: 2020-11-27
blosc2.c in Blosc C-Blosc2 through 2.0.0.beta.5 has a heap-based buffer overflow when there is a lack of space to write compressed data.
CVE-2020-26245
PUBLISHED: 2020-11-27
npm package systeminformation before version 4.30.5 is vulnerable to Prototype Pollution leading to Command Injection. The issue was fixed with a rewrite of shell sanitations to avoid prototyper pollution problems. The issue is fixed in version 4.30.5. If you cannot upgrade, be sure to check or sani...
CVE-2017-15682
PUBLISHED: 2020-11-27
In Crafter CMS Crafter Studio 3.0.1 an unauthenticated attacker is able to inject malicious JavaScript code resulting in a stored/blind XSS in the admin panel.
CVE-2017-15683
PUBLISHED: 2020-11-27
In Crafter CMS Crafter Studio 3.0.1 an unauthenticated attacker is able to create a site with specially crafted XML that allows the retrieval of OS files out-of-band.
CVE-2017-15684
PUBLISHED: 2020-11-27
Crafter CMS Crafter Studio 3.0.1 has a directory traversal vulnerability which allows unauthenticated attackers to view files from the operating system.