4 ms·
> Google is running the program to reduce the risk of cyberattacks, according to internal materials. “Googlers are frequent targets of attacks,” one internal de
by pierat 3y ago
> Google is running the program to reduce the risk of cyberattacks, according to internal materials. “Googlers are frequent targets of attacks,” one internal description viewed by CNBC stated.
Fair. The higher the profile you have, the worse and the more numerous the attacks.
I found after creating a LinkedIn account, attacks went up on my account 12x. Again, caveat emptor... but this makes a great deal of sense in who to target. When you willingly put "I am Gee Golly Whillikers, Sr Systems Engineer of Really Important Systems that 10m people use", well... you're self-selecting who to hit.
> The company has also in recent months been striving harder to contain leaks.
Wait WHAT? That's what we cybersec folks call an "Insider Threat". "Leaks" are done by insider employees wishing to harm the org they work for, up to leaking classified data, or secret corporate data.
This is a WHOLE DIFFERENT REALM of attacks, and relevant appropriate defense. And this is how you get SCIF's https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensitive_compartmented_information_facility https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensitive_compartmented_inform...
- chayesfss 3y agoHa, was a principle for a company for years, the never ending attacks were horrible.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- nneonneo 3y agoLeaks also happen accidentally, e.g. by employees copy-pasting sensitive data or code into ChatGPT or using Copilot. Although that may not result in a breach, it certainly opens up legal and IP concerns for Google.
- jhugo 3y agoI’m not sure those examples should be referred to as “accidents”. If you deliberately give the information to an external company, you leaked it deliberately, even if you thought they wouldn’t do anything bad with it.
- tommiegannert 3y agoOr leaving an unreleased iPhone in a bar...
- gumby 3y agoLeak need not be an insider threat. Install a Trojan or keylogger on an employee’s machine remotely and then exfiltrate data yourself.
- function_seven 3y agoThat’s not normally referred to as a “leak” though. That’s just “hackers broke into Acme Corp., stole trade secrets”
- Supermancho 3y agoThe language used is not formalized. There is no "normal". The language is chosen (or arbitrarily used) to serve the goals of the company. This may include trying to align with a minimization campaign or an overblown narrative to provide cover.
- jameshart 3y agoVaries, and the terminology in news seems to actually favor 'leaked' as a way to describe any information a company doesn't want being disclosed. You'll often see headlines like "Video Game Source Code Leaked Online", when it's a system breach, not a 'leaker'. Recent news headlines from a cursory search: Massive Leak Of ChatGPT Credentials (June 2023) Far Cry's Source Code Has Leaked All Over The Internet (July 2023) VirusTotal leaked data of 5,600 registered users (6 hours ago) Pikmin 4 ROM leaks online (14 hours ago) Wow, I was expecting to find a few examples of different kinds from the past year, not... several from today.
- macNchz 3y ago> I found after creating a LinkedIn account, attacks went up on my account 12x. I'm curious to know more about what you're doing to quantify this as an individual–I think I have a fairly sophisticated personal security posture and have implemented various business infosec measures professionally, but I'm not sure I have a great way of measuring how many attacks are targeted at me day to day, beyond a sort of vague sense of "this month I'm noticing more {frequent|targeted|sophisticated} attention".
- water9 3y agoPreviously, he had zero now he has one and so he rounded from infinity. Otherwise he did exactly what he’s making fun of I his post.
- balls187 3y agoIf I were someone of note who was concerned about increasing likelihood of attacks targeting me, I wouldn’t answer that question, doubly so if I was security conscious.
- pierat 3y agoIn my case, my estimation is a simple count. Prior to using my email, I was getting 2 targeted attacks per week to my email. After making an acct on LinkedIn with resume, was seeing 25-30 attacks per week. I didn't make any attempt to determine the classification of attack, or its complexity. It was a simple dumb count.
- crustaceansoup 3y agoI had a suspicion that phishers were using LinkedIn to build an employee directory to attack at work (using names and guessing our email address pattern), so I created a honeypot to test that: a company email along with a LinkedIn profile for a fake employee. Sure enough the honeypot mailbox started to get targeted by the same spear phishing emails our employees get pretty soon after.
- dhosek 3y agoMost of the attempts that I had were flagged as spam so I didn’t notice. The one that almost caught me was a simple email allegedly from the CEO asking if I had a minute. I was working at a small enough company that it wouldn’t be out of the question for the CEO to email me and I replied, sure. The next email was, fortunately, a clumsy attempt at fraud, asking me to buy some Xbox gift cards for a client, which made me look a little closer and notice that the email address hidden by the email client behind the CEO’s name was at a Russian ISP, so I dumped them into spam and posted a warning on Slack. Something less clumsily targeted might have caught someone (e.g., to do a test booking on our site, or open some tech window). That said, LinkedIn is useful enough to me that I’m willing to leave that window open, although it would be nice if company email addresses were less easily guessed.
- gizmo686 3y agoDefinitions might very by organization. The training I have received defined both "insider threat" and "leak" to include accidental disclosures by insiders as well. Incidentally, accidental disclosures are the main thing SCIFs are designed to prevent. Deliberately taking classified data out of a SCIF is not particularly difficult (although it is harder to plead accident if you are caught, which acts as a dissinsentive).
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- bluepod4 3y ago> "Leaks" are done by insider employees wishing to harm the org they work for This isn’t always the main motivation, and in my experience this isn’t even usually the main motivation. (But if I’m wrong, please tell me. Don’t downvote me for my opinion/life experience. I have definitely seen the whole “f the company” scenario a number of times. But usually it’s “f a particular person” or it’s a “this violates my principles” kind of thing. Companies are legally entities but not that much psychologically, in my opinion.)
- bluepod4 3y agoRe: “But usually…” It’s a “oops, I’m drunk or forgetful and said or did more than I should have” lol. I forgot to add that one. > Companies are legally entities but not that much psychologically. This is my own statement that I can’t edit. I understand that many people think otherwise depending on the context. I do also. In this particular context of “insider threat” (i.e. employee leaks), I still believe the main cause isn’t to “harm a company”.
- hazmazlaz 3y agoTotally agreed. Also, now I am going to start using that phrase mashed up with an Archer reference when discussing security controls - "Do you want SCIFs? Because that's how you get SCIF's." LOL.