Due to the rapidly incre­asing thre­ats to an IT ope­ra­ti­on, every com­pa­ny should sur­vey and eva­lua­te the rele­vant IT thre­ats with regard to infor­ma­ti­on secu­ri­ty. Howe­ver, the sel­ec­tion of thre­ats for the pri­ma­ry Info­Sec pro­tec­tion goals con­fi­den­tia­li­ty, inte­gri­ty and avai­la­bi­li­ty is very com­plex, becau­se the­re are no simp­le thre­at lists, espe­ci­al­ly for small and medi­um-sized enterprises.

SEC4YOU has taken on this task and crea­ted the SEC4YOU Infor­ma­ti­on Secu­ri­ty Thre­at List 2022. In this artic­le, the most important thre­ats are pre­sen­ted and explai­ned. Rea­ders will get a sound over­view of which thre­ats you should have secu­red your com­pa­ny against, as the­se are now beco­ming a rea­li­ty for com­pa­nies on an almost dai­ly basis.

What does an infor­ma­ti­on secu­ri­ty risk assess­ment accomplish?

In addi­ti­on to the pre­ven­ti­on of signi­fi­cant to exis­tence-threa­tening eco­no­mic and intan­gi­ble dama­ges, an infor­ma­ti­on secu­ri­ty risk assess­ment sup­ports the sel­ec­tion of sui­ta­ble Info­Sec mea­su­res that are requi­red to pro­tect the com­pa­ny from the dan­gers. If you ope­ra­te an ISMS accor­ding to ISO 27001 or TISAX®, the com­pa­ny must pro­vi­de docu­men­ted evi­dence of the com­ple­te risk assess­ment, inclu­ding the risk method, the assess­ment cri­te­ria and the assessment.

Sources of infor­ma­ti­on secu­ri­ty threats

The fol­lo­wing sources were used as the basis for the SEC4YOU Infor­ma­ti­on Secu­ri­ty Thre­at List 2022:

The 47 Ele­men­ta­ry Thre­ats of the Ger­man Fede­ral Office for Infor­ma­ti­on Secu­ri­ty (BSI).

A very clas­sic list that lists a varie­ty of ele­men­ta­ry thre­ats and deals inten­si­ve­ly with the aspects of sabotage/terror and espio­na­ge. Unfort­u­na­te­ly, this publi­ca­ti­on does not ade­qua­te­ly assess modern cyber­at­tack vectors.

ENISA Thre­at Land­scape 2021

A valuable infor­ma­ti­on secu­ri­ty assess­ment by the Euro­pean Cyber­se­cu­ri­ty Agen­cy that ana­ly­zes cyber­se­cu­ri­ty trends on 115 pages, describ­ing the nine most signi­fi­cant thre­ats and pro­vi­ding detail­ed recom­men­da­ti­ons on how to avo­id them.

2022 Cyber­th­re­at Defen­se Report by CyberEdge Group

This report high­lights tech­no­lo­gies and their resi­li­ence to cyber­th­re­ats, in addi­ti­on the report pro­vi­des an excel­lent assess­ment of 12 cyber­th­re­ats that no risk assess­ment should be without.

Clear distinc­tion bet­ween hazard, mea­su­re, effect and effec­ti­ve­ness test

In an infor­ma­ti­on secu­ri­ty risk assess­ment, the CISO is requi­red to actual­ly assess the threats/hazards and only later deter­mi­ne the action and its poten­ti­al impact, here using a sim­pli­fied prac­ti­cal exam­p­le of “mal­wa­re” to delinea­te the terms:

  • Thre­at: The risk that the com­pa­ny will be infec­ted by malware.
  • Mea­su­re:
    • Full-covera­ge mal­wa­re pro­tec­tion soft­ware on all end­points with ven­dor A.
    • Peri­me­ter gate­way pro­tec­tion and upload fil­ters with manu­fac­tu­rer B
    • Regu­lar test­ing of inter­nal and exter­nal ser­vices for weak points (vul­nerabi­li­ties)
  • Effect of the mea­su­re (the defi­ni­ti­on of effec­ti­ve­ness targets):
    • Mal­wa­re from the source Inter­net and e‑mail is relia­bly detec­ted at the gateway.
    • Mal­wa­re from the source USB sticks and end-to-end encrypt­ed emails is relia­bly detec­ted at the end device.
  • Effec­ti­ve­ness testing:
    • Is the­re any indi­ca­ti­on that mal­wa­re is not relia­bly detec­ted at the gate­way, upload fil­ters or end devices?
    • Is mal­wa­re also detec­ted in encrypt­ed connections?
    • If the effec­ti­ve­ness test shows that the mea­su­res are not effec­ti­ve, the mea­su­res must be opti­mi­zed or expanded.

The SEC4YOU Methodology

CyberEdge 2022 Cyber­th­re­at Defen­se Report lis­ted and prio­ri­ti­zed. You can iden­ti­fy the prio­ri­ty of a thre­at by the red flag in the chart below.

We then clas­si­fied the thre­ats into the fol­lo­wing cate­go­ries: Ele­men­tal, Data Loss, Sup­pli­er Cau­se, Terror/Insider/Sabotage/Espionage, Orga­niza­tio­nal Error, Cyberattack.

We then fil­te­red the prio­ri­ti­zed thre­ats from all 3 sources, but remo­ved the terror/insider/sabotage/espionage cate­go­ry becau­se it is not very rele­vant to a majo­ri­ty of companies.

The result: The SEC4YOU Infor­ma­ti­on Secu­ri­ty Thre­at List 2022

The fol­lo­wing 17 thre­ats were deve­lo­ped as the most signi­fi­cant thre­ats to IT operations:

Ele­men­tal

1. Fire and other physical/technical disasters

Data loss

2. Loss of infor­ma­ti­on to unaut­ho­ri­zed par­ties (phy­si­cal and electronic)

3. Loss of data due to lack of redundancy/backup

Sup­pli­er Cause

4. Attack through the sup­pli­er chain

Orga­niza­tio­nal error

5. Expo­sure due to errors or misconfiguration

6. Lack of planning

Cyber attacks

7. Ran­som­wa­re

8. Mal­wa­re

9. Misu­se or hijack­ing of user IDs

10. Cryp­to­jack­ing

11. Social engi­nee­ring / phis­hing / spear phis­hing / other e‑mail attacks

12. Attacks on data

13. Attacks on data avai­la­bi­li­ty incl. DoS/DDoS

14. Tar­ge­ted attacks (APTs)

15. Attacks on SSL encryption

16. Attacks on web appli­ca­ti­ons (OWASP Top 10)

17. Zero-day attacks

Expl­ana­ti­on of the thre­at list

As part of the infor­ma­ti­on secu­ri­ty risk assess­ment, eva­lua­te the thre­at list with the asset groups and iden­ti­fy exis­ting and addi­tio­nal­ly requi­red tech­ni­cal and orga­niza­tio­nal mea­su­res. Use the expl­ana­ti­ons below to app­ly a risk assess­ment by impact and pro­ba­bi­li­ty of occurrence.

1. Fire and other physical/technical disasters.

This is about natu­ral dis­as­ters and local ele­men­tal hazards such as fire or water that can des­troy IT infra­struc­tures. Howe­ver, tech­ni­cal defects in ser­ver rooms or in cri­ti­cal IT ser­vices that com­ple­te­ly inter­rupt IT ope­ra­ti­ons are also cover­ed. Whe­ther flood, fire or fire­fight­ing foam des­troys the ser­ver rack, ensu­re red­un­dan­ci­es and mul­ti­ple data sto­rage in time.

2. Loss of infor­ma­ti­on to unaut­ho­ri­zed per­sons (phy­si­cal and electronic)

This thre­at is about the infor­ma­ti­on its­elf. Howe­ver, it does not mat­ter whe­ther an unaut­ho­ri­zed per­son ste­als it as paper docu­ments or it is copied elec­tro­ni­cal­ly via remo­te access.  The com­pa­ny-cri­ti­cal infor­ma­ti­on in the hands of a com­pe­ti­tor or the loss of repu­ta­ti­on can cau­se las­ting dama­ge to the company.

3. Data loss due to lack of redundancy/backup

If cri­ti­cal IT ser­vices are not desi­gned red­un­dant­ly (inclu­ding sto­rage, vir­tua­liza­ti­on plat­forms, domain con­trol­lers, direc­to­ry ser­vices, DNS ser­vers, web ser­vices), data loss can occur. Data loss can be cau­sed by hard­ware defects, con­fi­gu­ra­ti­on errors or sim­ply human error. In the end, a pro­fes­sio­nal­ly plan­ned and regu­lar­ly tes­ted back­up solu­ti­on helps pre­vent data loss.

4. Attack via the sup­p­ly chain

In the “sup­p­ly chain attack”, the trust bet­ween a (lar­ge) sup­pli­er and its cus­to­mers is abu­sed. Here, atta­ckers can com­pro­mi­se the data and sys­tems of one (or many) com­pa­nies via remo­te access set up or cre­den­ti­als or keys stored with the sup­pli­er. In the past, howe­ver, a lar­ge pro­por­ti­on of attacks were car­ri­ed out via com­pro­mi­sed soft­ware from indi­vi­du­al sup­pli­ers, whe­re hackers were able to place tar­ge­ted attack methods in sup­po­sedly trust­wor­t­hy soft­ware updates.

5. Risk due to errors or misconfiguration

Ser­vers and IT ser­vices are con­fi­gu­red dif­fer­ent­ly and some­ti­mes inse­cu­re­ly, espe­ci­al­ly due to a lack of con­fi­gu­ra­ti­on spe­ci­fi­ca­ti­ons (har­dening gui­de­lines, con­fi­gu­ra­ti­on base­lines) and a lack of auto­ma­ti­on. Also, sub­se­quent secu­ri­ty-rele­vant con­fi­gu­ra­ti­on adjus­t­ments are often not imple­men­ted by the IT teams of com­pa­nies. Unfort­u­na­te­ly, all too often soft­ware or ser­vices are put into ope­ra­ti­on with the default con­fi­gu­ra­ti­ons and default access data, which can be easi­ly exploi­ted by attackers.

6. Lack of planning

Poor­ly plan­ned IT infra­struc­tures, impro­per main­ten­an­ce and repair pro­ces­ses, unde­re­sti­ma­ted IT migra­ti­ons, pro­cu­re­ment of IT sys­tems with ina­de­qua­te secu­ri­ty fea­tures, poor resour­ce plan­ning, lack of spa­re parts, and even out­da­ted trans­fer pro­to­cols can all be tra­ced back to a lack of plan­ning and poor pro­ject manage­ment. Only through ear­ly con­side­ra­ti­on of infor­ma­ti­on secu­ri­ty and strin­gent plan­ning manage­ment are infor­ma­ti­on secu­ri­ty-rele­vant pro­jects unco­ver­ed and can be plan­ned and imple­men­ted accor­ding to criticality.

7. Ran­som­wa­re

Is a spe­cial type of devious attack in which atta­ckers encrypt cor­po­ra­te data and demand a ran­som to make the data acces­si­ble again. Some­ti­mes the atta­ckers also ste­al the data and demand pay­ments so that the data is not sent to aut­ho­ri­ties, com­pe­ti­tors or the public. Phis­hing emails and remo­te desk­top pro­to­col (RDP) con­nec­tions top the list of ent­ry points for ransomware.

8. Mal­wa­re

Mal­wa­re is the umbrel­la term for soft­ware, firm­ware or code that mali­cious­ly affects the con­fi­den­tia­li­ty, inte­gri­ty or avai­la­bi­li­ty of sys­tems. Sub­ty­pes include viru­s­es, worms, Tro­jan hor­ses, RATs (remo­te access tools), and code infec­tions of sys­tems. Some spy­wa­re and adware also count as mal­wa­re. Good mal­wa­re pro­tec­tion with run­time beha­vi­or ana­ly­sis on all sys­tems (cli­ents, ser­vers, gate­ways) helps to con­tain the infec­tion and spread of mal­wa­re. Instal­la­ti­on of soft­ware and dri­vers by users on end devices should be mas­si­ve­ly restricted.

9. Misu­se or take­over of user IDs

In the case of misu­se of user IDs or iden­ti­ty theft, the atta­cker fakes the iden­ti­ty of a per­son in order to act on their behalf. This is par­ti­cu­lar­ly easy to do by hack­ing email accounts and then taking over other ser­vices via email-based pass­word reset pro­ce­du­res. Strong pass­words with addi­tio­nal two-fac­tor authen­ti­ca­ti­on are the best pro­tec­tion against this thre­at. At the same time, com­pa­nies need to edu­ca­te users via secu­ri­ty awa­re­ness cam­paigns about the use of uni­que pass­words and the dan­ger of phis­hing attacks.

10. Cryp­to­jack­ing

The idea of cryp­to-mining on strong hard­ware is not new, but it beco­mes a crime to use the com­pu­ting power and elec­tri­ci­ty of a vic­tim. This equal­ly affects end devices and also ser­vers, which are infec­ted and exploi­ted by atta­ckers. Occa­sio­nal­ly, soft­ware manu­fac­tu­r­ers have also attempt­ed to incor­po­ra­te cor­re­spon­ding mining ser­vices into their soft­ware and plug-ins, arguing this with the free use of the soft­ware and dis­gu­i­sing it in a long EULA.

11. Social engi­nee­ring / phis­hing / spear phis­hing / other e‑mail attacks

The vari­ance of thre­ats through social engi­nee­ring is lar­ge and includes pis­hing, spear phis­hing, whai­ling, smis­hing, vis­hing and in the future cer­tain­ly also video phis­hing with deep fake tech­no­lo­gy. The infec­tion medi­um e‑mail still plays the most important role.  Com­pa­nies are requi­red to train all employees in the per­fi­dious methods of social engi­nee­ring attacks using cur­rent examp­les and their pos­si­ble effects in regu­lar secu­ri­ty awa­re­ness cam­paigns and man­da­to­ry trai­ning courses.

12. Attacks on data

The dan­gers posed by attacks on data include unaut­ho­ri­zed access, unwan­ted publi­ca­ti­on, fal­se report­ing / mis­in­for­ma­ti­on, dis­in­for­ma­ti­on (deli­bera­te­ly pro­vi­ding fal­se infor­ma­ti­on for the pur­po­se of decep­ti­on). Often refer­red to as a data breach / data leak, the­se inci­dents always refer to the publi­ca­ti­on of sen­si­ti­ve, con­fi­den­ti­al or pro­prie­ta­ry data in an untrus­ted envi­ron­ment. Par­ti­cu­lar cri­ti­cal­i­ty ari­ses when the data breach invol­ves per­so­nal data as defi­ned by the GDPR. Then the com­pa­ny must report this data breach to the authority.

13. Attack against data avai­la­bi­li­ty incl. DoS/DDoS.

Attacks against data avai­la­bi­li­ty focus on two attack methods: dis­tri­bu­ted deni­al of ser­vice (DDoS) and attacks on web ser­vices. A DoS/DDoS attack com­ple­te­ly blocks cri­ti­cal cor­po­ra­te IT ser­vices, which can be the Inter­net uplink, email ser­ver ser­vices, remo­te office con­nec­tions or any other ser­vices such as online sales. Web-based attacks usual­ly address data inte­gri­ty and avai­la­bi­li­ty. Here, even incon­spi­cuous web ser­vices can be abu­sed for mal­wa­re dis­tri­bu­ti­on or web form data theft through mani­pu­la­ted web links.

14. Tar­ge­ted attacks (APTs)

The big dif­fe­rence bet­ween a “nor­mal” hack­ing attack on an infra­struc­tu­re and an Advan­ced Per­sis­tent Thre­at (APT) is that APT attacks are high­ly tar­ge­ted and car­ri­ed out with a high level of effort. To this end, the atta­ckers some­ti­mes spend weeks rese­ar­ching employee respon­si­bi­li­ties and exis­ting cus­to­mer and sup­pli­er rela­ti­onships befo­re the attack is laun­ched. Cus­to­mi­zed mal­wa­re is also often deve­lo­ped for an APT attack, which is not detec­ted by com­mer­ci­al­ly available mal­wa­re pro­tec­tion pro­grams. APT attacks are often pri­ma­ri­ly desi­gned for long-term spy­ing on the vic­tims (Link WIKI: Indus­tri­al espionage).

15. Attacks on SSL encryption

Attacks on SSL encryp­ti­on are con­cer­ned on the one hand with the dan­ger posed by self-signed cer­ti­fi­ca­tes, which can be easi­ly atta­cked via man-in-the-midd­le, and on the other hand with out­da­ted, inse­cu­re cryp­to­gra­phic algo­rith­ms and key lengths that do not pro­vi­de suf­fi­ci­ent pro­tec­tion for trans­mis­si­on pro­to­cols. The use of Open­S­SL in appli­ca­ti­ons and web ser­vices in par­ti­cu­lar poses grea­ter risks, sin­ce Open­S­SL vul­nerabi­li­ties (see Heart­bleed, Pood­le) are exten­si­ve­ly docu­men­ted and atta­ckers imme­dia­te­ly try to exploit them.

16. Attack­ing Web Appli­ca­ti­ons (OWASP Top 10)

Do you deve­lop web appli­ca­ti­ons yours­elf? Then you should know the Open Web Appli­ca­ti­on Secu­ri­ty Project’s top 10 thre­ats for this type of appli­ca­ti­on: A1:2021 — Bro­ken Access Con­trol, A2:2021 — Cryp­to­gra­phic Fail­ures, A3:2021 — Injec­tion, A4:2021 — Inse­cu­re Design, A5:2021 — Secu­ri­ty Mis­con­fi­gu­ra­ti­on, A6:2021 — Vul­nerable and Out­da­ted Com­pon­ents, A7:2021 — Iden­ti­fi­ca­ti­on and Authen­ti­ca­ti­on Fail­ures, A8:2021 — Soft­ware and Data Inte­gri­ty Fail­ures, A9:2021 — Secu­ri­ty Log­ging and Moni­to­ring Fail­ures, A10:2021 — Ser­ver-Side Request Forgery.
Unfort­u­na­te­ly, new or exis­ting web appli­ca­ti­ons are not regu­lar­ly scan­ned for the­se thre­ats, making it far too easy for hackers to hijack web apps and harm the enterprise.

17. Zero-Day Attacks

In prin­ci­ple, a zero-day vul­nerabi­li­ty is one of many vul­nerabi­li­ties that are dis­co­ver­ed, but the dif­fe­rence is that the­re is not yet a patch or hot­fix for the vul­nerabi­li­ty. In the ear­ly pha­se of a zero-day vul­nerabi­li­ty, the­re is often no solid infor­ma­ti­on about the ext­ent and impact of the vul­nerabi­li­ty. Com­pa­nies are requi­red to iden­ti­fy such zero-day vul­nerabi­li­ties at an ear­ly stage. This requi­res a relia­ble zero-day infor­ma­ti­on source and a quick assess­ment of whe­ther affec­ted ser­vices are used in the company.

Clas­si­fi­ca­ti­on: TLP White
Crea­tor: Andre­as Schus­ter, SEC4YOU
Ver­si­on: 1.0
Date: 8.7.2022