Intelligent CISO Issue 07 | Page 63

avenues for phishing, it is much harder to scrutinise the validity of a message on a mobile phone compared to a desktop. The limited preview that mobile phones tend to display can make it far harder to spot a malicious sender on a mobile device than on a desktop computer. What’s worse is that employees are more likely to first see a message on a mobile phone. Email isn’t the only place where mobile users are vulnerable. Mobile web browsers and messaging apps are also increasingly targeted by phishers. Man-in-the-middle attacks Additionally, busy employees on the move often make use of public Wi-Fi where it’s available but this can leave them vulnerable to another form of attack. It can be convenient that Wi-Fi connections are widely available for free, but not all networks are genuine. Hackers have been known to float spoof connections to fake public Wi-Fi networks. In these scenarios, unsuspecting users log on, and by doing so they unknowingly provide a hacker with access to all the information transmitted when they connect – from login credentials to confidential documents – unless the user’s connection is encrypted. This is called a ‘man in the middle’ (MitM) attack. Stepping up mobile security Although it is convenient to connect and do business wherever we are, it can cause problems that are costly and time consuming to solve. www.intelligentciso.com | Issue 07 Introducing stronger authentication With an increasing number of stolen login credentials available on the black market and rampant phishing scams, it is critical that any mobile application has the option for strong authentication. User names and passwords are no longer providing adequate security. That said, there are some unique considerations for mobile authentication. Many authentication methods today – like SMS or mobile push apps – rely on the phone as the trusted second factor. However, in a mobile app setting these methods can no longer be considered as trusted second factors as they are tied to the device itself. If the device is compromised, so is the authentication method. Additionally, one-time codes delivered via SMS or app can be spoofed by porting a number to a different mobile device or can be very unreliable at the mercy of the phone networks. While strong authentication is about improving the security to the mobile application, the app is at risk if the authentication solution itself has a vulnerability. Therefore, it is important for enterprises to deploy a second factor other than a phone that can be used to establish a trusted relationship between the phone and the apps being used. By using an external hardware-based authentication solution, it can provide a trust anchor, or ‘root of trust’, that ensures that the authentication solution and end user practices are secure. Creating a security-first culture Aside from the technical solutions such as strong authentication, business culture also needs to change. Organisations must take the proper steps to protect the fleet. For example, employee training to help staff recognise the risks they face off-site as well as in the office can help to mitigate mobile threats. Additionally, mobile devices used for work should also be regularly checked to ensure their operating system, web browser, apps and any security programs protecting them are up to date. u 63 If hackers successfully obtain the sensitive information they seek, it takes organisations an average of 191 days to find the source and contain the breach. In 2017, such attacks cost businesses an average of US$3.62 million to remediate – a figure set to rise after the first fines for GDPR non- compliance are issued. The fact that personal mobile devices are often not considered part of an organisation’s overall security policy means that these devices will be more vulnerable to attack. It is easier to ensure that all business and communication is conducted in compliance with any relevant regulations while on the company’s premises but managing risks off-site can be more complicated and costly. Fines and other penalties for non-compliance can make the cost of a successful attack spiral.