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.

Perimeter

6/16/2020
03:45 PM
Connect Directly
Twitter
LinkedIn
RSS
E-Mail
100%
0%

83% of Forbes 2000 Companies' Web Domains Are Poorly Protected

Only a handful have controls against domain-name hijacking, DNS modifications, and other threats, a new CSC study finds.

Web domains belonging to a large proportion of Forbes Global 2000 companies are troublingly vulnerable to domain hijacking, DNS attacks, and other common forms of abuse.

A new study by domain protection provider CSC's Brand Services Division reveals that 83% of these organizations have not adopted basic security protections against unauthorized changes to their WHOIS information, DNS modifications, and other transfer-away risks.

Seventy-three percent, for instance, do not use registry-lock services that prevent unauthorized changes to DNS information that could lead to a website becoming unavailable or visitors being redirected to malicious websites. Only 39% use the DMARC email authentication protocol that protects against an organization's email domain being used for email spoofing. A mere 3% use DNS security extensions (DNSSEC) that protect against DNS hijacking attacks.

"The main takeaway from this report is that the largest companies in the world remain very vulnerable to domain name and DNS hijacking, domain shadowing, and subdomain hijacking attacks," says Mark Calandra, executive vice president at CSC Digital Brand Services.

Especially troubling is the low adoption of domain security measures by banks, he says. CSC's study finds banks ranking lowest in terms of using registry-lock services and corporate domain-registrar services, even though they are often the most highly targeted organizations.

"One rationale may be because close to half of the banks represented in the Global 2000 are from Asia, and Asia is the region where there is generally lower domain security measures in place," Calandra says.

CSC's study comes amid signs that bad actors are ramping up attacks against vulnerable and weakly protected domains and DNS services. Earlier this year, the nonprofit Spamhaus Project, which tracks email spam-related activity worldwide, reported observing a recent increase in domain-name hijacking by criminals engaged in business email compromise campaigns. According to Spamhaus, criminals are increasingly using phishing, social engineering, and vulnerability exploits to gain access to legitimate domains.

Once they have gained access, the criminals "create new hostnames (domain shadowing) that point to a different IP range that is not associated with the root domain," Spamhaus said in a report. "Alternatively, they will change the name servers of the domain to point to a new location."

After changing the DNS, attackers have then been leveraging the victim's brand image and reputation to distribute spam widely or to host malware and disrupt businesses and users in other ways. The positive reputation associated with the stolen domains often is enough for the attackers to evade anti-spam measures, Spamhaus said.

Retail-Grade Domain Registrars
According to CSC's study, many domain-security issues prevalent among the Forbes Global 2000 community might have at least something to do with their use of generic retail domain-name registrars and service providers. In fact, more than half — 53% — use retail domain registrars that often do not offer enterprise-grade security protections. A majority of the organizations in the CSC study do not have any DNS hosting redundancy, meaning they are vulnerable to service disruptions in case of a distributed denial-of-service attack.

Calandra says common shortcomings among retail registrars include inadequately trained staff and relatively immature technical and operational processes to safeguard large enterprise domains against sophisticated phishing, social-engineering attacks that lead to DNS and domain-name hijacking, domain shadowing, and subdomain hijacking.

"These shortcomings have created a sort of haven for bad actors to take advantage," he says.

Proper management of DNS means securing access to domain and DNS management systems, including via two-factor authentication, IP validation, and federated ID mechanisms, he says. Organizations also need to have a handle on user roles and permissions within their domain and DNS management systems, especially those with elevated access controls. Adoption of security features such as DNSSEC, CAA records, registry lock, and DMARC can also help bolster DNS security, Calandra says.

CSC's study shows adoption of domain-name security measures tend to vary quite widely by industry. Generally, organizations in the IT and media and entertainment sectors have higher adoption of domain-name security controls, such as registry locks and DMARC. The same industries also rank relatively high in their use of enterprise-grade domain registrars compared with other sectors. At the opposite end of the spectrum are banks, real-estate firms, and organizations in the materials sector.

Domain names and the underlying DNS power mission-critical web infrastructure, such as email, apps, and websites, Calandra says. "They are noted soft targets," he says, "providing an easier way to breach your network, intercept email, and redirect websites for financial gain."

Related Content:

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Learn from industry experts in a setting that is conducive to interaction and conversation about how to prepare for that "really bad day" in cybersecurity. Click for more information and to register
Jai Vijayan is a seasoned technology reporter with over 20 years of experience in IT trade journalism. He was most recently a Senior Editor at Computerworld, where he covered information security and data privacy issues for the publication. Over the course of his 20-year ... View Full Bio
 

Recommended Reading:

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 8/10/2020
Researcher Finds New Office Macro Attacks for MacOS
Curtis Franklin Jr., Senior Editor at Dark Reading,  8/7/2020
Healthcare Industry Sees Respite From Attacks in First Half of 2020
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  8/13/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win an Amazon Gift Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: It's a technique known as breaking out of the sandbox kids.
Current Issue
Special Report: Computing's New Normal, a Dark Reading Perspective
This special report examines how IT security organizations have adapted to the "new normal" of computing and what the long-term effects will be. Read it and get a unique set of perspectives on issues ranging from new threats & vulnerabilities as a result of remote working to how enterprise security strategy will be affected long term.
Flash Poll
The Changing Face of Threat Intelligence
The Changing Face of Threat Intelligence
This special report takes a look at how enterprises are using threat intelligence, as well as emerging best practices for integrating threat intel into security operations and incident response. Download it today!
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-20383
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-13
ABBYY network license server in ABBYY FineReader 15 before Release 4 (aka 15.0.112.2130) allows escalation of privileges by local users via manipulations involving files and using symbolic links.
CVE-2020-24348
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-13
njs through 0.4.3, used in NGINX, has an out-of-bounds read in njs_json_stringify_iterator in njs_json.c.
CVE-2020-24349
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-13
njs through 0.4.3, used in NGINX, allows control-flow hijack in njs_value_property in njs_value.c. NOTE: the vendor considers the issue to be "fluff" in the NGINX use case because there is no remote attack surface.
CVE-2020-7360
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-13
An Uncontrolled Search Path Element (CWE-427) vulnerability in SmartControl version 4.3.15 and versions released before April 15, 2020 may allow an authenticated user to escalate privileges by placing a specially crafted DLL file in the search path. This issue was fixed in version 1.0.7, which was r...
CVE-2020-24342
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-13
Lua through 5.4.0 allows a stack redzone cross in luaO_pushvfstring because a protection mechanism wrongly calls luaD_callnoyield twice in a row.