In today’s digital world, cybersecurity threats are on the rise, and businesses must stay vigilant to protect their sensitive data from cybercriminals. To combat these threats, companies often rely on cybersecurity information vendors to provide them with intelligence information. However, the quality of the intelligence information provided by these vendors has come under scrutiny, and there have been concerns about the accuracy and effectiveness of the information provided.
During a red team assessment for a client, Charles Fol and Dany Bach from LEXFO, discovered a heap overflow bug in Fortigate’s SSL VPN that can be exploited to achieve remote code execution on Fortigate instances. This vulnerability is reachable without authentication, and can be used to execute arbitrary code on vulnerable systems, which could lead to a complete compromise of the system.
In early June, multiple threat researchers observed attacks on MOVEit servers using a zero day vulnerability that facilitated data exfiltration. MOVEit Transfer is a managed file transfer software that supports the exchange of files and data. This vulnerability allows an attacker to gain access to the database and possibly infer information about the structure and contents of the database.
Every five to ten years, major technology shifts change the way that vulnerability assessment and the related IT risk mitigation processes are approached or implemented. What has remained constant is the formula we use to measure risk and thus prioritize and triage vulnerabilities. Risk = (Likelihood of event) * (Impact of consequences) It’s an approach that intuitively makes sense, but there have been two challenges with how this formula has been applied.
In 2016, Ivan Fontarensky, Technical Director CyberDetect & Respond at Thales, wanted to rollout a Cyber Threat Intelligence (CTI) service to continue to add value to the company’s cybersecurity products used by critical infrastructure organizations around the globe.