3 ms·

IIRC Uber was hacked via human weakness in multi-factor authentication. It’s actually something a ton of companies are vulnerable to so I wouldn’t be at all sur

IIRC Uber was hacked via human weakness in multi-factor authentication. It’s actually something a ton of companies are vulnerable to so I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see it replicated here.

shmde 4y ago
Yes it was replicated here the same way as the uber hack. Using social engineering.
sorenjan 4y ago
Is this what zero trust is supposed to protect against? It's weird to let everyone have free reign over critical infrastructure and data once you gain access to the network. Are there any network security that uses AI to automatically detect and flag unusual behavior? For example, a regular developer doesn't need to port scan the entire network, the receptionist's computer doesn't need to log in to admin resources, support personnel doesn't need to access source code, etc. This should be possible to flag and let a human verify.
- goodoldneon 4y ago
  Zero trust doesn’t mean 0 network segmentation. Zero trust is supposed to be the opposite of walled gardens
  - Sohcahtoa82 4y ago
    "Zero trust" is a buzzword with no real meaning, IMO.
- not1ofU 4y ago
  Yes, - the tech is called UBA (user behaviour analytics.. or something) - over time it builds a baseline of what a user does in a typical day/ week/ month as part of their role, and if they deviate from that base pattern then an alert can be triggered on different thresholds - for example, why is a member of support downloading the entire production database (not that they should have access there, but you get my point)
GekkePrutser 4y ago
That was the initial attack vector. But it looks like there has been a lot of lateral movement in that hack. I don't think a single user account would have had access to that much information and if it did that's part of the reason for the hack too, not just the initial breach method.

3 ms·

IIRC Uber was hacked via human weakness in multi-factor authentication. It’s actually something a ton of companies are vulnerable to so I wouldn’t be at all sur

by afavour 4y ago

IIRC Uber was hacked via human weakness in multi-factor authentication. It’s actually something a ton of companies are vulnerable to so I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see it replicated here.

shmde 4y ago
Yes it was replicated here the same way as the uber hack. Using social engineering.
sorenjan 4y ago
Is this what zero trust is supposed to protect against? It's weird to let everyone have free reign over critical infrastructure and data once you gain access to the network. Are there any network security that uses AI to automatically detect and flag unusual behavior? For example, a regular developer doesn't need to port scan the entire network, the receptionist's computer doesn't need to log in to admin resources, support personnel doesn't need to access source code, etc. This should be possible to flag and let a human verify.
- goodoldneon 4y ago
  Zero trust doesn’t mean 0 network segmentation. Zero trust is supposed to be the opposite of walled gardens
  - Sohcahtoa82 4y ago
    "Zero trust" is a buzzword with no real meaning, IMO.
- not1ofU 4y ago
  Yes, - the tech is called UBA (user behaviour analytics.. or something) - over time it builds a baseline of what a user does in a typical day/ week/ month as part of their role, and if they deviate from that base pattern then an alert can be triggered on different thresholds - for example, why is a member of support downloading the entire production database (not that they should have access there, but you get my point)
GekkePrutser 4y ago
That was the initial attack vector. But it looks like there has been a lot of lateral movement in that hack. I don't think a single user account would have had access to that much information and if it did that's part of the reason for the hack too, not just the initial breach method.