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.

Risk

4/19/2019
10:00 AM
Connect Directly
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
100%
0%

Third-Party Cyber-Risk by the Numbers

Recent stats show that the state of third-party cyber risk and vendor risk management remains largely immature at most organizations.
Previous
1 of 8
Next

Make no mistake: Even the most technologically mature organizations are struggling to keep in check the rising force of third-party cyber-risk. Recent high-profile security incidents, such as the Facebook data leak and the ASUS Shadowhammer attack, bring home the fact that third parties can introduce tremendous risk to business operations, data security, and even the technical integrity of products and services.

Data shows that enterprises of all types are still way behind on instituting the governance and technology to wrap their arms around third-party risks, be they in the software supply chain, access governance, or data handling. And, unfortunately, some experts say the industry isn't moving the needle on third-party risk.

"The overall maturity of vendor risk management programs is virtually unchanged in the face of an increasingly challenging external risk and regulatory environment," wrote experts from Protiviti in the company's fifth annual vendor risk management survey.

For this slide show, Dark Reading took a look at data in that report as well as a number of others on third-party cyber-risk to offer insight into the current attitudes around the problem, the scope of access afforded to third parties, and the maturity level of current vendor risk management practices.

 

Ericka Chickowski specializes in coverage of information technology and business innovation. She has focused on information security for the better part of a decade and regularly writes about the security industry as a contributor to Dark Reading.  View Full Bio
 

Recommended Reading:

Previous
1 of 8
Next
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-2020-4626
PUBLISHED: 2020-11-30
IBM Cloud Pak for Security 1.3.0.1 (CP4S) could reveal sensitive information about the internal network to an authenticated user using a specially crafted HTTP request. IBM X-Force ID: 185362.
CVE-2020-4627
PUBLISHED: 2020-11-30
IBM Cloud Pak for Security 1.3.0.1(CP4S) potentially vulnerable to CVS Injection. A remote attacker could execute arbitrary commands on the system, caused by improper validation of csv file contents. IBM X-Force ID: 185367.
CVE-2020-4696
PUBLISHED: 2020-11-30
IBM Cloud Pak for Security 1.3.0.1(CP4S) does not invalidate session after logout which could allow an authenticated user to obtain sensitive information from the previous session. IBM X-Force ID: 186789.
CVE-2020-4900
PUBLISHED: 2020-11-30
IBM Business Automation Workflow 19.0.0.3 stores potentially sensitive information in log files that could be read by a local user. IBM X-Force ID: 190991.
CVE-2020-4624
PUBLISHED: 2020-11-30
IBM Cloud Pak for Security 1.3.0.1 (CP4S) uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms during negotiation could allow an attacker to decrypt sensitive information.