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.

Comments
What Scares Me About Healthcare & Electric Power Security
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
<<   <   Page 2 / 2
Thomas Claburn
50%
50%
Thomas Claburn,
User Rank: Ninja
10/28/2014 | 7:08:33 PM
Re: public safety
>now it's time for the public to be better informed on this.

If only the public cared. And for those who do, the healthcare market is so screwed up that it's unlikely consumers will be able to vote with their feet -- they'll have to wait until open enrollment periods to switch providers and then they're likely to face few real choices. And if you're electricity provider is lax in its security, you probably have nowhere else to go.
Kelly Jackson Higgins
50%
50%
Kelly Jackson Higgins,
User Rank: Strategist
10/28/2014 | 3:40:41 PM
public safety
What worries me is that the world outside of our security bubble won't truly take security seriously until there's a tangible attack that affects public safety, etc. The increasingly networked consumer space is bringing this issue to the fore--now it's time for the public to be better informed on this.
GonzSTL
50%
50%
GonzSTL,
User Rank: Ninja
10/28/2014 | 3:34:30 PM
Re: Validation
Agree completely. During security reviews of potential vendors, I've asked for SAS 70 or SSAE 16 audit results if they have a current one, or a review of their security policies. Surprisingly, one potential vendor we looked into had none of those. Can you believe that? Not even security policies! So of course we expressed a lack of interest, and the next day, they miraculously came up with rudimentary security policies specific to our request. They indicated that they simply adopted the policies of one of their business partners who gave them permission to do so. One little problem – the policies reflected the name of their business partner, and not their own company. I couldn't believe how sloppy they were and naturally, my recommendation was "NO!!!"
RyanSepe
50%
50%
RyanSepe,
User Rank: Ninja
10/28/2014 | 1:18:15 PM
Re: Validation
Vendors need to receive the same scrutiny that you would provide to your own enteprise. They are handling your data. If they store your data or are connected via VPN, your corporation is taking a risk which needs to be acknowledged. Their compromise and is your compromise. You need to ensure that they follow stringent standards that you hold your own enterprise, to safeguard the data. Cryptology methods need to safeguard data in transit and at rest. Firewalls and DMZ's positioned to secure different severities of data. Active scanning to determine that no outside malicious influence has already circumvented your perimeter. There are many others, but a good template is to follow best security practices for data handling.
Marilyn Cohodas
50%
50%
Marilyn Cohodas,
User Rank: Strategist
10/28/2014 | 12:54:20 PM
Re: Validation
Interesting, ryan. What are some of the "measures" you are asking vendors about?
RyanSepe
100%
0%
RyanSepe,
User Rank: Ninja
10/28/2014 | 12:41:37 PM
Validation
Working for a healthcare enterprise I can vouch for many of these significant mismatches. Especailly "Too much vendor trust". However, at my organization we are starting to crack down on ensuring Business Associate Agreements are signed that mandate certain measures be performed by vendors that want to do business with us. This along with legal documentation need to be present ensure that vendors are providing due diligence for data security. Vendors are concerned mainly with functionality and due to this, security tends to fall by the wayside. I feel that if vendors are held to higher standards and industry starts cracking down on the stringence of their protocols that the security initiative will be represented much better.
<<   <   Page 2 / 2


COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 4/7/2020
The Coronavirus & Cybersecurity: 3 Areas of Exploitation
Robert R. Ackerman Jr., Founder & Managing Director, Allegis Capital,  4/7/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: This comment is waiting for review by our moderators.
Current Issue
6 Emerging Cyber Threats That Enterprises Face in 2020
This Tech Digest gives an in-depth look at six emerging cyber threats that enterprises could face in 2020. Download your copy today!
Flash Poll
State of Cybersecurity Incident Response
State of Cybersecurity Incident Response
Data breaches and regulations have forced organizations to pay closer attention to the security incident response function. However, security leaders may be overestimating their ability to detect and respond to security incidents. Read this report to find out more.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-11655
PUBLISHED: 2020-04-09
SQLite through 3.31.1 allows attackers to cause a denial of service (segmentation fault) via a malformed window-function query because the AggInfo object's initialization is mishandled.
CVE-2020-11656
PUBLISHED: 2020-04-09
In SQLite through 3.31.1, the ALTER TABLE implementation has a use-after-free, as demonstrated by an ORDER BY clause that belongs to a compound SELECT statement.
CVE-2019-20637
PUBLISHED: 2020-04-08
An issue was discovered in Varnish Cache before 6.0.5 LTS, 6.1.x and 6.2.x before 6.2.2, and 6.3.x before 6.3.1. It does not clear a pointer between the handling of one client request and the next request within the same connection. This sometimes causes information to be disclosed from the connecti...
CVE-2020-11650
PUBLISHED: 2020-04-08
An issue was discovered in iXsystems FreeNAS 11.2 and 11.3 before 11.3-U1. It allows a denial of service.
CVE-2020-11653
PUBLISHED: 2020-04-08
An issue was discovered in Varnish Cache before 6.0.6 LTS, 6.1.x and 6.2.x before 6.2.3, and 6.3.x before 6.3.2. It occurs when communication with a TLS termination proxy uses PROXY version 2. There can be an assertion failure and daemon restart, which causes a performance loss.