The NotPetya attacks weren’t as bad as WannaCry; they were worse, and we all need to start cooperating to prevent the next attack.

It’s looking more and more like last week’s NotPetya malware attacks, which infected computers around the world but hit Ukraine particularly hard, were designed to cause widespread damage and disruption, not make money.

Unlike WannaCry and other ransomware, NotPetya doesn’t just encrypt files; it destroys Windows machines’ master boot record (MBR), doing irrevocable damage to the system. There is no such thing as a key that can restore a destroyed MBR. Additionally, one, lone email address was set aside for victims to pay the “ransom” and receive their de-encryption keys. This address was immediately shut down by the email provider, rendering payment useless. Cyber criminals who truly wanted to collect money would have anticipated this.

NotPetya also has no known “kill switch.” The only way to stop it is to prevent it from infecting your machine in the first place.

NotPetya successfully caused chaos, mostly in Ukraine, where it hit organizations ranging from shipping companies to the infamous Chernobyl plant.

NSA Hack the Gift That Keeps on Giving to Cyber Criminals

Like the recent WannaCry attacks and cryptocurrency mining malware infections, NotPetya exploits the EternalBlue vulnerability found in older versions of MS Windows, the one made public last year after a group calling itself the Shadow Brokers sent a list of stolen NSA hacking tools to WikiLeaks. In the immediate aftermath of the NSA hack, the biggest question arguably was, “If one of the world’s most covert spy agencies can be breached, where does that leave everyone else?” Now, even bigger questions are emerging regarding the NSA’s (or any government agency’s) responsibility for cyber attacks that are committed using the cyber-spy tools it has developed, especially vulnerabilities that it finds but does not disclose to manufacturers. NextGov reports:

NSA, which employs more mathematicians than any organization on Earth, has been collecting these vulnerabilities. The agency often shares the weaknesses it finds with American manufacturers so they can be patched. But not always.

As NSA Director Mike Rogers told a Stanford audience in 2014, “the default setting is if we become aware of a vulnerability, we share it,” but then added, “There are some instances where we are not going to do that.” Critics contend that’s tantamount to saying, “In most cases we administer our special snake bite anti-venom that saves the patient. But not always.”

Everyone Needs to Start Cooperating

In the aftermath of NotPetya, U.S. Representative Ted Lieu (D-CA) sent a written appeal to the NSA, imploring the spy agency to do whatever was in its power to halt NotPetya and to commit to working with tech companies to prevent future attacks. Meanwhile, NATO released a statement declaring that NotPetya “can most likely be attributed to a state actor” and that the WannaCry and NotPetya attacks “[raise] questions about possible response options of affected states and the international community.” In other words, these attacks could be construed as potential acts of war, and everyone needs to start cooperating to defend against them.

A few months ago, an article on ZDNet bemoaned what the author saw as a lack of cooperation on cyber security between organizations in Australia. Allegedly, we here in the U.S. collaborate much better – but do we, really? We’ve got a situation where our country’s top spy agency may or may not share discovered software vulnerabilities with manufacturers, and this lack of disclosure has led to two major cyber attacks in as many months, three if you count the cryptocurrency mining malware attacks.

Clearly, the motive behind NotPetya was to cause real-world disruption of critical infrastructure. Even more concerning, the hackers behind it may have chosen Ukraine as a beta test environment for this new breed of malware, one that seeks not to steal data or lock down files, but to destroy systems beyond repair. The next attack – and there will be one – may be launched on a much larger country, maybe even the U.S., either as a standalone event or in conjunction with a wider-scale, real-world terrorist event.

Preventing cyber attacks isn’t just about losing money and data anymore; it’s about national security. There needs to be cooperation between countries, and within countries, between all organizations, both private and public.

The cyber security experts at Continuum GRC have deep knowledge of the cyber security field, are continually monitoring the latest information security threats, and are committed to protecting your organization from security breaches. Continuum GRC offers full-service and in-house risk assessment and risk management subscriptions, and we help companies all around the world sustain proactive cyber security programs.

Continuum GRC is proactive cyber security®. Call 1-888-896-6207 to discuss your organization’s cyber security needs and find out how we can help your organization protect its systems and ensure compliance with all applicable laws, frameworks, and standards.

White-Hat Hackers Are Already Being Caught in the Cryptocurrency Regulation Net

Cryptocurrencies have long been associated with cyber crime. The cryptocurrency Bitcoin was the de facto currency of the notorious online black market Silk Road, it remains the preferred payment method on the Dark Net, and the majority of ransomware attacks, including WannaCry, demand payment in Bitcoin. As if cryptocurrency didn’t have enough of a bad rep, shortly after the WannaCry attacks, reports emerged of a new type of cyber attack that may pose an even larger threat than WannaCry: cryptocurrency mining malware, which turns machines into “zombies” to mine a Bitcoin competitor called Monero. It’s no wonder that critics are clamoring for government cryptocurrency regulation.

Cryptocurrencies, in and of themselves, are not nefarious. Many perfectly legitimate businesses accept payment in Bitcoin, and large Wall Street investment firms are betting on a bright future for cryptocurrencies. However, outside the realm of tech enthusiasts, small-government advocates, and cyber security experts, cryptocurrencies are still widely misunderstood – and primarily associated with criminal activity. Ever since Silk Road was taken down, cryptocurrency critics, claiming that the digital currencies are fueling ransomware attacks and other cyber crime, have been calling for governments to implement cryptocurrency regulation, and these calls have grown louder since the WannaCry attacks.

Due to the very nature of cryptocurrencies – unlike fiat currencies, they are not issued or overseen by any central authority – attempts at cryptocurrency regulation have been slow and scattered. Unfortunately, it also appears that they may be harming the “good guys” more than the criminals, as reported in a recent story by CoinDesk. White-hat hacker Vinny Troia found his account on U.S. Bitcoin exchange Coinbase suspended after the exchange flagged his account for engaging in what they considered to be illegal activity, namely, paying ransomware demands and purchasing data from the Dark Net. Problem is, Troia was doing these things on behalf of his clients. Sometimes, Troia told CoinDesk, the best way to find out if a client’s information has truly been compromised, or to determine the scope of a hack, is to buy the data sets in question. Further, while it’s generally advised not to pay ransomware demands, some victims feel that paying up is their best bet; Hollywood Presbyterian Medical Center thought so.

Bitcoin Experts Blame Offshore Cryptocurrency Exchanges

Bitcoin experts and other cryptocurrency enthusiasts, alarmed by experiences like Troia’s and fearing Draconian cryptocurrency regulation, recently told a U.S. House subcommittee that the bulk of the problem lies with unregulated, offshore cryptocurrency exchanges, not those based in the U.S. and Europe, which must already comply with anti-money laundering and “know your customer” laws. However, these exchanges often strategically set up shop in countries where local governments are happy to look the other way and not cooperate with U.S. authorities in exchange for kickbacks.

Another issue hampering cryptocurrency regulation is the rise of next-generation cryptocurrencies such as Monero. While Bitcoin transactions are technically anonymous, the anonymity only stretches so far; all Bitcoin addresses and transactions are recorded on the cryptocurrency’s blockchain, allowing security experts and law enforcement to use blockchain analytics to tie addresses and transactions with users. Monero, on the other hand, uses ring signatures and stealth addresses to provide real, total anonymity.

Proactive Cyber Security Is Still Your Best Bet

Not everyone is against government cryptocurrency regulation. Morgan Stanley claims that government oversight is inevitable if Bitcoin wants to grow and truly go mainstream. But with technology advancing so quickly, the wheels of government moving slowly, and most politicians barely able (if at all) to grasp how the technology that powers cryptocurrencies works, cryptocurrency regulation faces an uphill battle, at best. Even if one technology were banned tomorrow, another one that gets around the new law would undoubtedly replace it. Governments need to tread lightly here, lest new regulations cause more problems than they solve.

Whatever the government decides to do with cryptocurrencies, the best way to cripple cyber crime is for organizations to engage in proactive cyber security practices that prevent hacks from happening in the first place.

The cyber security experts at Continuum GRC have deep knowledge of the cyber security field, are continually monitoring the latest information security threats, and are committed to protecting your organization from security breaches. Continuum GRC offers full-service and in-house risk assessment and risk management subscriptions, and we help companies all around the world sustain proactive cyber security programs.

Continuum GRC is proactive cyber security®. Call Call +1 (888) 896-6207 to discuss your organization’s cyber security needs and find out how we can help your organization protect its systems and ensure compliance with all applicable laws, frameworks, and standards.

Schedule some time with our Superheroes for a Free Assessment!

The Healthcare Industry Cybersecurity Task Force’s report on healthcare cyber security echoes a similar study on medical device security issued by Synopsys and the Ponemon Institute.

On the heels of a damning study by Synopsys and the Ponemon Institute, which provides a blow-by-blow accounting of the many problems with medical device security, a federal task force has finally released its report on the poor state of healthcare cyber security and how to fix it. The report, issued by the Health Care Industry Cybersecurity Task Force, was mandated by the Cybersecurity Act of 2015, identifies six “high-level imperatives” to improve healthcare cyber security in the U.S.:

1. Define and streamline leadership, governance, and expectations for healthcare cyber security.
2. Increase the security and resilience of medical devices and health IT.
3. Develop the workforce capacity necessary to prioritize and ensure healthcare cyber security awareness and technical capabilities.
4. Increase healthcare cyber security readiness through improved awareness and education.
5. Identify mechanisms to protect R&D efforts and intellectual property from attacks or exposure.
6. Improve information sharing of industry threats, risks, and mitigations.

Medical Devices, Legacy Systems Pressing Issues for Healthcare Cyber Security

The federal task force’s findings on medical device security echoed those of the Ponemon/Synopsys report, meaning that it is largely nonexistent: There are no standards, no testing procedures, and no accountability. The task force urges medical device manufacturers to improve manufacturing and development transparency; bake cyber security into the software development lifecycle when developing medical devices and EHRs (including issuing security patches throughout the product’s lifecycle); and collaborate with healthcare organizations to establish standards for device-device authentication.

Legacy systems also pose grave risks to healthcare cyber security. This was illustrated by the recent WannaCry ransomware attacks, which targeted machines using older versions of Windows and hit the U.K.’s National Health Service particularly hard, forcing facilities to cancel procedures and divert emergency patients. Among other proactive security measures, the task force instructs healthcare organizations to 1) inventory their data environments and document unsupported operating systems, devices, and EHR systems; 2) when possible, replace or upgrade systems with supported alternatives that have superior security controls; 3) in cases where equipment cannot be replaced, develop and document retirement timelines; and 4) leverage segmentation, isolation, hardening, and other compensating risk reduction strategies for the remainder of each piece of equipment’s lifecycle.

A Point Person and a Set of Standards Are Needed

Modern healthcare organizations operate in a complex data environment that involves not only the protection of patient records but also payment card data, tax data, and a multitude of devices used both to store information and treat patients. Meanwhile, healthcare organizations are subject to multiple security standards and frameworks, many of which contradict each other. Worse yet, in some areas, such as smart medical devices, there are no standards.

To address these issues, the task force recommends appointing a single person within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to coordinate healthcare cyber security initiatives and liaise with other cyber security centers within the government, as well as a cybersecurity rapid response team whose job would be to respond to vulnerabilities in medical devices.

Further, the task force recommends utilizing the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Cybersecurity Framework to standardize risk assessment and definitions industry-wide. That said, the task force recognizes that the NIST framework is generic, and not all sections can be directly mapped to a healthcare environment; therefore, the task force recommends that NIST work with HHS to develop an application of the framework specific to healthcare cyber security environments.

The key takeaway from the taskforce report is that proactive cyber security, with risk assessments, testing, and robust compliance standards, will win the day.

The cyber security experts at Continuum GRC have deep knowledge of the cyber security field, are continually monitoring the latest information security threats, and are committed to protecting your organization from security breaches. Continuum GRC offers full-service and in-house risk assessment and risk management subscriptions, and we help companies all around the world sustain proactive cyber security programs.

Continuum GRC is proactive cyber security®. Call 1-888-896-6207 to discuss your organization’s cyber security needs and find out how we can help your organization protect its systems and ensure compliance with all applicable laws, frameworks, and standards.

[bpscheduler_booking_form]