We are all exposed to the constant danger of digital data theft. More so as many proof-of-concept attacks are likely to become real threats as connected devices become more commonplace.
Hackers exploit weaknesses in operating systems and the software running on them. They also obtain passwords through any number of simple cons. However, once they have the same access as legitimate users they can commit crimes that may not be noticed for weeks or even months.
When credit card breaches that used a magnetic stripe to read and record account data were discovered (where hackers grab unencrypted live data as it is sent to banks for authentication), the exploit was resolved by introducing new EMV smart cards that contained an authentication chip to ensure it was a legitimate bank card. The chip also generates a one-time transaction code with each purchase, preventing hackers from embossing stolen data onto fake cloned cards to use for fraudulent purchases in stores.
This is one example of how the software industry is engaged in a contest of ingenuity with tech-savvy thieves, who are constantly on the lookout for new ways to breach the security of existing software.
There was a time when the assets of businesses were tangible and the greatest risk to a business was physical burglary. These days, a company’s most valuable assets are largely intangible – intellectual property or sensitive data about their clients.
As a result, one of the biggest threats to businesses is data sabotage – that is changing or manipulating digital data in order to compromise its integrity. This is favoured by hackers because data alterations can go unnoticed for a time, but still have enormous consequences and implications – particularly so for financial institutions as well as the defence industry, but applies to all companies.
When such breaches occur, we must ask: how did this happen; what is the company doing about it; and how can we stop it happening again?
To answer these questions means looking beyond ‘Security’ measures, to’ Privacy’ issues too, and recognising the importance of security and privacy working hand-in-hand to mitigate the risk and enhance accountability.
This has recently been brought to the fore in the recent Apple v. FBI controversy and the auto-encryption bills the US Congress is trying to pass. The move is mirrored to some extent by the Investigatory Powers bill the UK government is trying to pass as part of new surveillance laws, which would require software vendors to build backdoors into their software by default. Doing so will, in effect, grant politicians extrajudicial powers to spy on private information.
This sort of smartphone intrusion is a further complexity that software developers may need to contend with when considering the security of their applications, as any intentionally designed backdoor carries the risk of becoming public property (this is in essence Apple’s argument for not providing the FBI with a “master key” to the encrypted smartphone, since it would mean the iPhone operating system would become less secure).