STE WILLIAMS

Webroot dunked in Carbonite: Should be quite well protected – if it survives the freezing process, that is

Online backup service Carbonite has inked a deal to buy Webroot for over half a billion dollars to help it fling cloud-based endpoint security at smaller biz.

The $618.5m acquisition will be financed through $550m in loans and cash on hand and is expected to close this quarter.

Founded in 1997, Webroot develops security tools for SMEs. It has around 600 employees, sells to 14,000 managed service flingers in the channel, has circa 300,000 customers and its fiscal 2018 revenues were $215m, up 14 per cent year-on-year.

Carbonite reported fourth quarter 2018 revenues of $77.0m, up 25 per cent, which produced a $719,000 profit. There was a $1.6m loss a year ago.

Its full fiscal 2018 revenues were $296.4m, up 24 per cent, with profits of $7.56m.

Webroot will be Carbonite’s sixth acquisition, following MailStore in 2014, EVault in 2016, DataCastle and Double-Take in 2017, and Mozy in 2018. Up until now, Carbonite has had no security tech, starting out as a backup-to-the cloud service for consumers. It has shape shifted into B2B data protection and can now twin that with security.

Carbonite is up against Acronis, Barracuda, Datto and Veeam in storage. Webroot competes with Avast, McAfee, Sophos and Symantec.

Mohamed Ali, Carbonite president and CEO, will commandeer the combined business, and Webroot CFO John Post will take the helm as general manager of the Webroot business unit.

Co-founder Stephen Thomas and business partner Kristen Talley sold Webroot to VCs in 2004 for $108m. Thomas was sadly found dead in Hawaii in 2008. ®

Article source: http://go.theregister.com/feed/www.theregister.co.uk/2019/02/08/carbonite_buying_webroot/

Cyberattack Hits Australian Parliament

Officials believe a nation-state is to blame for the incident, which took place Thursday night into Friday morning.

The Australian Parliament today disclosed a cyberattack targeting its network from Thursday night into Friday morning. So far, evidence does not indicate any information was taken.

This network contains lawmakers’ email archives, which officials indicate may have been a target given that Australia’s national elections will likely take place in May. Parliament’s network is where hackers could find compromising emails or potential disagreements among members.

Given the circumstances, experts believe a nation-state is to blame. After all, “it’s hard to make money from breaching a parliamentary system,” said Fergus Hanson, head of the International Cyber Policy Center at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, to The New York Times.

Experts are reluctant to attribute the attack. China seems a top suspect given its previous attempts to target Australian politics; last year, security analysts said tools commonly used by Chinese actors were used to attack its Defense Department and National University. Officials have also said Iranian, North Korean, or Russian actors could be responsible for the incident.

Parliament leaders Tony Smith and Scott Ryan issued a joint statement reporting the attack. The two said there is no sign this incident was meant to influence or disrupt electoral or political processes. Further, they said, all users have been required to change their passwords.

Read more details here.

 

 

Join Dark Reading LIVE for two cybersecurity summits at Interop 2019. Learn from the industry’s most knowledgeable IT security experts. Check out the Interop agenda here.

Dark Reading’s Quick Hits delivers a brief synopsis and summary of the significance of breaking news events. For more information from the original source of the news item, please follow the link provided in this article. View Full Bio

Article source: https://www.darkreading.com/threat-intelligence/cyberattack-hits-australian-parliament/d/d-id/1333828?_mc=rss_x_drr_edt_aud_dr_x_x-rss-simple

We Need More Transparency in Cybersecurity

Security has become a stand-alone part of the corporate IT organization. That must stop, and transparency is the way forward.

In college, I was assigned to write a paper for a political science class to argue what would be the greatest national threat our upcoming generation would face. I wrote what I believed to be a solidly reasoned and articulate essay positing that cyber terrorism would be the major issue with which the United States would need to grapple.

It was the only time I received a D grade during my college tenure.

The professor, a renowned political science teacher, told me that although the logical structure of the essay was sound and it was overall well written, cyberterrorism was not a threat. Nor would it be in the near future, therefore making the position I took to be based upon a flawed premise and not worthy of serious inquiry. He wanted assessments on weapons of mass destruction, chemical or biological warfare, political instability, and such.

It was an unintended lesson that those of us who had not grown up riding the early waves of the Internet did not fully understand about the looming danger of a world that would become increasingly enveloped by software.

Though this was many years ago, the essential problem still exists today. From the boardroom to the Senate chamber, there is a fundamental and widespread underappreciation of the real-world, global-scale consequences of the technology-powered Pandora’s box we’ve opened in becoming a digital society.

The beginning stages of the Internet were based on the idealism of trust among the digital pioneers that were both mapping and creating the new frontiers of a world where information would be shared openly and freely. This gave rise to a societal revolution where everyone could have equal access to the totality of human knowledge.

Yet, as with nearly every new exploratory venture throughout history, there came those who look to take advantage and exploit vulnerabilities in newly charted territories and societal structures. Then came those who must defend against it.

In the Shadows
Cybersecurity was born in the shadows by three-letter acronym agencies — NSA, CIA, DoD, etc. —  as an effort to combat a new type of villain who could produce massive damage with minimal risk. A new era of battles were fought on the digital theater with an enemy into whose eyes you could not see; instead, you would catch a glimpse of the enemy through the zeros and ones of the virtual world.

For many years, cybersecurity professionals embraced the clandestine nature of their work, living in tribal communities that shunned outsiders. The IT security groups existed in a separation of church and state framework, removed from the business side of the companies they protected. This environment of being “in the know” and harboring threat intel, remaining secretive, following spy-craft methodologies, and keeping the techniques of information security in the shadows influenced the culture of the cybersecurity professional from the early era. 

As a result, security has become a stand-alone part of the corporate IT organization. Teams became self-siloed and disassociated from the larger organizational objectives they are tasked with protecting, keeping the business side of organizations at arm’s length. Without an understanding between the various departments that create a business, and a holistic security strategy, many companies defaulted to rely solely on regulatory checkboxes for the sake of maintaining the compliance status quo versus placing focus on proactive security measures that protect the organization responsibly, mitigate risk, and adapt to an ever-changing world.

Operating a business becomes more complex daily, as organizations move to hybrid clouds and multicloud platforms, distributing information broadly beyond the network perimeter by nontechnical employees that neither have the time nor understanding to consider the security outcomes. At the same time, threats are becoming increasingly sophisticated and organized. While this ought to be a call to action to elevate the role of security to have a seat at the executive table, there still exists a mentality that security is a compliance requirement rather than a need-to-have. And from the security side, there is often the notion that “no one could possibly understand what I do, so why bother telling them about it?”

Nearly every business today is now a technology business. The problem is that we’ve developed a culture that doesn’t recognize the necessity to have open lines of communication and shared responsibility across the organization to make cybersecurity not only a priority but a standardized part of daily operational procedures.

In a world where the click of an email link can jeopardize an entire network, everyone is responsible for maintaining a secure environment.

Transparency and open lines of communication between all sides of the house — security, DevOps, and business units from financing to marketing to HR — will be the only way to successfully move forward to protect against the never-ending evolution of the threat landscape.

The way forward starts with breaking down the communication barriers between data and people. Anyone in an organization should be able to speak directly with their data and ask questions of it without needing the technical expertise to write data queries. And the data should be able to respond in real time, providing live answers. 

Data transparency is the first step. Once this is achieved, it becomes far easier to create cultural transparency among the separate lines of business because there is a shared language across the organization.

Related Content:

 

 

Join Dark Reading LIVE for two cybersecurity summits at Interop 2019. Learn from the industry’s most knowledgeable IT security experts. Check out the Interop agenda here.

Grant Wernick is the co-founder CEO of Insight Engines. Insight Engines is a leader in natural language search technologies. The company builds products to augment human intelligence with machine intelligence via their patented NLP and ML technology. Insight Engine’s … View Full Bio

Article source: https://www.darkreading.com/vulnerabilities---threats/we-need-more-transparency-in-cybersecurity/a/d-id/1333780?_mc=rss_x_drr_edt_aud_dr_x_x-rss-simple

A Dog’s Life: Dark Reading Caption Contest Winners

What do a telephony protocol, butt-sniffing, and multifactor authentication have in common? A John Klossner cartoon! And the winners are …

Dark Reading reader Len Sebesta earns the top honors and a $25 Amazon gift card for his  dog-surfing caption, penned below.

Tied for Second Place ($10 Amazon gift card) are MrPink10 for “It’s a dog tweet dog world” and Fred Kreitzberg (aka FKREITZBERG980), threat researcher and owner of Be Cause There Be Dragons. Fred’s caption: “I tried to get him to focus on App level permissions but he gave the ‘Bone Finder’ App access to everything.”

Many thanks to everyone who entered the contest with all their puns and clever observations, and to our loyal readers who cheered the contestants on. Also a shout out to our judges, John Klossner and the Dark Reading editorial team: Tim Wilson, Kelly Jackson Higgins, Sara Peters, Kelly Sheriden, Curtis Franklin, Jim Donahue, Gayle Kesten, and yours truly.

If you haven’t had a chance to read all the entries, be sure to check them out today.

More Cartoon Caption Winners:

 

Marilyn has been covering technology for business, government, and consumer audiences for over 20 years. Prior to joining UBM, Marilyn worked for nine years as editorial director at TechTarget Inc., where she launched six Websites for IT managers and administrators supporting … View Full Bio

Article source: https://www.darkreading.com/vulnerabilities---threats/a-dogs-life-dark-reading-caption-contest-winners/a/d-id/1333820?_mc=rss_x_drr_edt_aud_dr_x_x-rss-simple

Housing biz made to pay £1.5k for sticking fingers in its ears when served a subject access request

A Buckinghamshire housing developer has been forced to pay up £1,500 after ignoring a person’s request for information the company held on them.

Using subject access requests (SAR), people can ask organisations to provide all the personal data held on them.

Under data protection laws, companies have 40 calendar days to respond, but Magnacrest failed to meet this time frame for a SAR it received in April 2017.

The individual, who had also included a cheque for £10 – the fee that organisations were allowed to charge for processing SARs before the GDPR made them free – then complained to the UK’s data protection watchdog.

The Information Commissioner’s Office sent the firm letters in August, September and October requesting that it respond to the individual, and the spoke to Magnacrest on the phone in September.

However, it failed to take heed, and the ICO issued an enforcement notice (PDF) ordering it to comply in January 2018.

However, Magnacrest failed to do so, at which point the ICO brought a criminal prosecution against the firm.

That case was heard on 6 February in Westminster Magistrates’ Court, where the housing developer pleaded guilty to a charge of failing to comply with an enforcement notice.

Magnacrest was fined £300 for the inaction, and ordered to pay £30 for a victim surcharge and some £1,133.75 towards prosecution costs.

“The right to access your own personal information is a fundamental and long-standing principle of data protection law,” said Mike Shaw, the ICO’s criminal enforcement manager.

“Organisations not only have to respect this right but must also respect notices from the ICO enforcing the law. If they fail to do so then they must accept the consequences, which can include a criminal prosecution.”

The General Data Protection Regulation, brought into effect in May 2018, made it free for people to make SARs. ®

Article source: http://go.theregister.com/feed/www.theregister.co.uk/2019/02/08/housing_biz_to_fork_out_1500_for_failing_to_hand_over_data_when_asked/

OK, Google. Music in 2019 isn’t what it was, but Play nice, will ya?

A bug has music lovers with a Google Play subscription stumped – devices won’t cast music from 2019 to connected speakers.

Reader Paul Brown owns a Home and several other Google devices including a Pixel phone. The Home speaker won’t play music released in 2019, Paul told us. While his Pixel 3 XL will “play anything … you then can’t cast it or ask Google Home to play it,” he said.

A video describes the results.

Youtube Video

Google appears to have acknowledged the bug and escalated it. Our tipster also let Android Authority know, and they managed to replicate the bug in two global regions.

It’s looking like it could be a rights management issue.

We asked Google for more information, but the ad-slinger has yet to respond. ®

Article source: http://go.theregister.com/feed/www.theregister.co.uk/2019/02/08/google_play_wakes_up_in_2019_and_wont_play/

Apple puts bullet through ‘Do Not Track’, FaceTime snooping bug and iOS vulnerabilities

Apple on Wednesday removed the vestigial “Do Not Track” (DNT) privacy technology from Preview Release 75 of its macOS Safari browser, and buried the corpse without ceremony. DNT is also missing from mobile Safari 12.1 in the soon-to-be released iOS 12.2.

The shiny device biz did so, it says, to protect privacy – the presence of the setting could be used as a data point in a browser fingerprint.

No tears were shed because DNT does not work: it presents a request to websites to show restraint and forego ad tracking. But compliance is voluntary and – surprise – websites have shown little interest in foregoing potentially valuable data. Facebook, Google, and Twitter – ad businesses all – ignore DNT, which takes the form of some text in the header of an HTTP request.

Apple’s browser surgery follows a decision last month by web standards group W3C to close the DNT working group because the technology hasn’t received wide enough support to justify continued development.

Microsoft announced support for DNT first in late 2010. Mozilla, Apple, Opera, and eventually Google were all on board by the end of 2012. That was not long after America’s trade watchdog, the Federal Trade Commission, voiced support for the technology – anything to avoid actually stepping in and regulating.

Firefox logo

Mozilla changes Firefox policy from ‘do not track’ to ‘will not track’

READ MORE

Although research firm Forrester last year found that almost a quarter of American adults have enabled “Do Not Track” in their web browsers and privacy-focuses search biz DuckDuckGo this week published similar numbers, enthusiasm for DNT among browser makers has waned.

Left to themselves to defend against ad tracking, many internet users have opted for ad and content blocking, though with Google looking to limit how browser extensions can intercept and alter incoming web traffic, existing filtering tools, at least in the dominant Chromium ecosystem (Chrome, Edge, Opera, and many others) may need to be rewritten or may no longer be possible.

Apple, which relies on a different rendering engine (WebKit) than Chromium-based browsers (Blink), is focusing on to other web privacy mechanisms, namely Intelligent Tracking Protection. Its Safari browser, however, only accounts for about 5 per cent of desktop browser use globally and holds only about 20 per cent of the mobile browser market globally, according to StatCounter.

Mozilla, which makes the Firefox browser, has also pursued a separate path on privacy. Last summer, it said it would begin blocking tracking tech by default. And it implemented those changes with the release of Firefox 65 late last month.

While US lawmakers dither, European data rules have begun to change the ad tracking landscape abroad and made the value of tracking and ads to publishers visible: The Washington Post charges EU residents $90 for a yearly subscription without ads or tracking, or $60 annually for those who surrender GDPR protections and submit to surveillance capitalism. ®

Security updates

Today, Apple also emitted security fixes for iOS 12.1.4. This fixes the FaceTime eavesdropping bug (CVE-2019-6223) found by 14-year-old Grant Thompson of Catalina Foothills High School and Daven Morris of Arlington, Texas. We understand the teen and his family will get some compensation from Apple, which will also pay toward his education.

The OS update also fixes two elevation-of-privilege holes (CVE-2019-7286 in Foundation, CVE-2019-7286 in IOKit), and a vague problem with Live Photos in FaceTime (CVE-2019-7288).

Meanwhile, FaceTime has been fixed in macOS, too.

According to Googe Project Zero’s Tavis Ormandy, “Three out of the four vulnerabilities in the latest iOS advisory were exploited in the wild, yikes.” The team discovered two of them: the elevation of privilege bugs. Get patching!

Article source: http://go.theregister.com/feed/www.theregister.co.uk/2019/02/07/apple_dnt_ios_macos_patches/

US lawmakers furious (again) as mobile networks caught (again) selling your emergency location data to bounty hunters (again)

Analysis US lawmakers have again called for an investigation into cell networks after it emerged that they have been selling specially protected user location data intended only for emergency services.

Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR), who has repeatedly highlighted privacy violations by mobile operators, today called out Ajit Pai, boss of America’s comms watchdog the FCC, in particular for the latest violation.

“This is more than an oversight. It’s flagrant, willful disregard for the safety and security of Americans. Meanwhile, instead of policing these carriers, FCC and Ajit Pai have been rewriting the rules to help phone companies rake in more profit,” he tweeted.

FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel, who signed off on rules that put specific privacy protections around what is called A-GPS data and is designed to provide user location accurate to a few feet, including the height at which someone is located so they can be found within apartment blocks, was also shocked.

“This mobile phone data location scandal keeps getting worse. It’s time for the FCC to step it up and complete its investigation,” she tweeted. “There is something fundamentally wrong when hundreds of bounty hunters can pay a few hundred dollars and know where any of us are with our mobile devices.”

Meanwhile privacy advocates are up in arms, having fought for and achieved specific privacy protections over the A-GPS data.

“This is outrageous,” senior VP of privacy advocacy group Public Knowledge, Harold Feld, told us. “This was precisely the danger we were worried about.”

Feld also squarely pinned the blame on FCC chair Ajit Pai. “We have a chairman who doesn’t want to do his job. Even though it’s the law, Pai has made it plain that he doesn’t think the FCC should be protecting privacy.”

Privacy requirements

Ever since the GPS requirements were introduced in 1996, there has been a requirement for mobile networks to consider user privacy under Section 222 of the Communications Act. But when the FCC proposed in 2015 that more precise location data be gathered because people were increasingly using mobile phones rather than landlines, privacy advocates were alarmed and fought [PDF] for extra provisions to be added that required someone to be explicitly informed that they were being tracked and to give consent before that data can be shared.

After a two-year process, the cellular network industry in 2017 released a “roadmap” for how it would account for user privacy and the FCC put it out for public comment. But, according to documents seen by Motherboard, bounty hunters had already figured out a way around all of those protections.

Mobile phone networks sold location data to third parties under what it has since emerged was a very lax process that they didn’t adequately audit. Those third parties then sold that data onto others, with the data eventually ending up in the hands of private citizens.

In the case of A-GPS data, it appears that everyone involved knew it was supposed to have extra protections with the third party in this case – a company called CerCareOne – going to some lengths to keep its service a closely guarded secret within the bounty hunter industry.

Money talks

The company’s website has, for years, been “under construction” but it ran a fully functional parallel portal that gave precise location details for specific phone numbers. Those wanting access to the service had to sign a contract that obliged them to keep the service secret, and they were charged up to $1,100 for a single location search.

That is worth paying if it helps locates someone who has skipped a jail hearing because a bounty hunter can expect to make $10,000 if they successful find someone who posted a $100,000 bail. It makes even more sense for a bail bond company that provides the money for bail in the first place.

According to internal documents from CerCareOne, its service was used tens of thousands of times, meaning that the market is worth millions of dollars a year. It’s unclear how much mobile network giants have profited from the sale of protected private data but it was clearly sufficient for them to take the risk.

When the requirement for A-GPS data was approved by the FCC, all the regulator’s commissioners offered heartbreaking stories of how named individuals has died because of a lack of precise location data.

At the time none of them mentioned the privacy concerns in their public comments but it was assumed that Section 222 would apply. However, in 2017 while the FCC was looking into the case of a company that sells phone services to jails, Securus, the misuse of location data was explicitly and repeatedly raised by concerned companies.

Securus had built a huge database on inmates – and on the people that they called – that used A-GPS data and combined it with other information culled from elsewhere. In letters to the FCC, a group of inmate family member – called the Wright Petitioners – pointed out that the location data in that database explicitly broke Section 222 because no one’s consent had been obtained.

The FCC, under chair Pai, dismissed the issue saying that while it “takes seriously allegations regarding possible violations of section 222 of the Act… allegations regarding Securus’s rates and practices, any allegations regarding violations of these rules are better handled in the context of an enforcement proceeding and not in that of a transaction.”

Active inaction

That refusal to look into privacy violations has been repeatedly compounded by the FCC under Pai.

First, the FCC actively scrapped new privacy protections for broadband internet users that was due to come into effect just days later. Then, when last year it was revealed that mobile network companies had been selling location data without proper authorizations, the FCC repeatedly refused to carry out investigations. It instead appeared to accept cell giants’ claims that they had cut off the offending third parties.

ostrich

FCC’s answer to scandal of ATT, Sprint, T-Mobile US selling people’s location data: Burying its head in the ground

READ MORE

But months later it emerged that location data was still being sold through different third parties. When Senator Wyden, among others, insisted on a briefing from the FCC, Pai claimed the regulator wasn’t able to give one because of the partial government shutdown.

Now it has emerged that even the most sensitive location data – that specifically set aside for the emergency services – was also made available for sale. And those that have spent years digging into the privacy aspects of this kind of data are united in their belief that the reason mobile networks did not act earlier to cut off the provision of such data was because of the clear signals from the FCC that they won’t investigate breaches of its own rules.

Because telecommunications are legally designated “Title II” communications they are explicitly under the remit of the FCC. It’s not even clear that a user would be able to go through the courts and sue a mobile operator for providing access to their personal location data. The buck stops with the FCC. And the FCC is actively refusing to do its job.

In fact, literally yesterday, the FCC’s Pai put out a new document calling for even more accurate GPS data to be provided by cellular giants. Of course it would only be for use in emergency alerts.

“The American people want, expect, and deserve the best possible public safety services – including the most precise targeting available for wireless alerts,” Pai said. ®

Article source: http://go.theregister.com/feed/www.theregister.co.uk/2019/02/08/mobile_companies_selling_locations/

Apple Patches Group FaceTime Flaw

Teenaged Fortnite player gets credit for finding the bug.

Apple today issued software updates that fix a recently exposed Group FaceTime bug that would allow a caller to access your audio even if you don’t pick up the call. 

The teenager who found the bug while trying to set up a Group FaceTime session with friends, Grant Thompson, got an official acknowledgement from Apple in two advisories on the bug (CVE-2019-6223)—one for macOS Mojave 10.14.3 and other for iOS 12.1.4.

Apple described the flaw as a logic issue in how Group FaceTime handles calls, and that it had been filed “with improved state management.” The patches came along with other security fixes, including another FaceTime service issue with Live Photos in FaceTime. “The issue was addressed with improved validation on the FaceTime server,” Apple said in its advisory. 

Dark Reading’s Quick Hits delivers a brief synopsis and summary of the significance of breaking news events. For more information from the original source of the news item, please follow the link provided in this article. View Full Bio

Article source: https://www.darkreading.com/endpoint/apple-patches-group-facetime-flaw/d/d-id/1333824?_mc=rss_x_drr_edt_aud_dr_x_x-rss-simple

Carbonite Announces Webroot Purchase

The purchase will add WebRoot’s cloud-based security to the cloud-based data backup and recovery platform of Carbonite.

Carbonite has announced an agreement to purchase Webroot, bringing endpoint and network protection to Carbonite’s cloud-based data protection services.

The deal, valued at approximately $618.5 million, will be an all-cash transaction paid for from Carbonite’s cash on hand and funds from a new credit facility. The deal is expected to close in the first quarter of this year, subject to regulatory approval and closing conditions.

According to the deal’s announcement, the combined company is expected to address endpoint protection through a combination of cloud-based security, backup, and recovery. One of the specific solutions envisioned for the integrated protection is a ransomware prevention and recovery service.

Both companies’ channel partners are expected to carry the combined offerings of the new platform.

For more, read here.

Dark Reading’s Quick Hits delivers a brief synopsis and summary of the significance of breaking news events. For more information from the original source of the news item, please follow the link provided in this article. View Full Bio

Article source: https://www.darkreading.com/cloud/carbonite-announces-webroot-purchase/d/d-id/1333823?_mc=rss_x_drr_edt_aud_dr_x_x-rss-simple