Cybersecurity – Page 12 – Cyber Law Watch

Hackers to take the blame for Census?

Aug 10 2016

By Cameron Abbott and Rebecca Murray

The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) says that the 2016 online census form was subject to “four Denial of Service attacks,” which prompted the ABS to shut down its Census website as a security precaution on Tuesday night. Read the ABS’s media release here.

While the ABS maintains that 2 million forms were successfully submitted and safely stored, thousands of Australians were prevented from taking part in the Census due to the website crash. The ABS has revealed that it believes that the attacks came from overseas and were a deliberate attempt to sabotage the census. However, we are wondering if the entire Australian population accessing the website at the same time might look like a Denial of Service attack in its own right! If ever a system should have been robust enough to cope with such an attack it was this one.

Attorney-General George Brandis has stated that the security measures in place were “more than sufficient to protect individual privacy” and that “the cyber security operations centre has been engaged overnight…and is investigating the matter.”

What Pokémon ‘needed’ to know about you

Jul 22 2016

By Cameron Abbott and Rebecca Murray

The hugely popular Pokémon GO app is at the centre of privacy and security concerns after recent media reports noted that its installation required access to a significant amount of users’ personal information. This prompted Australian Privacy Commissioner, Timothy Pilgrim to make enquiries with the developer of the app, Niantic Labs, to “ensure the personal information of users is being managed in accordance with the Australian Privacy Act.” Read the OAIC statement here.

Available on iOS and Android platforms, the smash-hit game uses augmented reality technology and your smart-phone GPS and camera to display fictional Pokémon which users then aim to find and capture.

Privacy concerns arose after users noted that installing the iOS version of the app required full access to users’ Google accounts. In response, Niantic Labs reported that the access was requested erroneously and that Google would reduce Pokémon GO’s permission to only the basic profile data that it needs. Niantic and Google have since corrected the permissions. Read Niantic’s statement here.

Commissioner Timothy Pilgrim warned that the security scare was a “timely reminder that people need to read the privacy policies of all smartphone apps before signing up. This way people can make an informed decision about if they want to use an app.” However, we will wager that 99% of people just click “accept”.

Yes it can cost you your job…even if you are the boss!

May 31 2016

By Cameron Abbott and Giles Whittaker

The CEO of Austrian aerospace parts maker FACC, has been fired following a cyber fraud that cost the company 42 million euros (AUD $65 million). FACC also fired their CFO in February soon after the cyber fraud.

Executives are being held responsible for business’ cybersecurity measures, and while FACC declined to comment on the details of Walter Stephan’s shortcomings, their supervisory board concluded that Walter Stephan had “severely violate his duties, in particular in relation to the fake president incident”. It is likely that this violation is in reference to a lack of adequate cybersecurity procedures or protections, which would be considered essential for most businesses in this technologically integrated era.

So how was it done? The technique used to deceive FACC into handing over their money is known as a ‘fake president incident’. To put it simply, the hackers sent an email to an employee posing as the CEO, and requested that funds be transferred to a specified account for a fake acquisition project. It would appear the board figured it shouldn’t have been that easy.

More information about this cyber fraud can be found in an article by reuters.

Australian Government releases Cyber Security Strategy

Apr 29 2016

By Cameron Abbott and Giles Whittaker

Cybersecurity appears to be a new popular expenditure, particularly in Australia, as Malcom Turnbull announces his government’s new Cyber Security Strategy initiative budgeted to cost $230 million over 4 years in addition to the $400 million allocated in the 2016 Defence White Paper over 10 years.

So what do we get for all that money? The government has announced their 5 themes of action over the next 4 years which includes:

a national cyber partnership;
strong cyber defences;
global responsibility and influence;
growth and innovation; and
a cyber smart nation.

This will include the funding to establish a Cyber Security Growth Centre through a National Innovation and Science Agenda. The Growth Centre is intended to serve as an innovation hub which will identify and prioritise cybersecurity challenges and identify opportunities for Australia to build globally competitive commercial solutions.

Cybersecurity is grabbing global attention and the Turnbull government has appointment their first Cyber Ambassador. The role of the Cyber Ambassador will be to identify opportunities for practical international cooperation and ensure Australia is situated to take advantage of new commercial opportunities.

Small businesses are often left exposed to hackers due to a lack of resources allocated to cybersecurity and, are targeted for their potential provide a back door to other companies, are often targeted. Turnbull’s no business left behind strategy sees small businesses being allocated $15 million in grants to have their systems tested and improved by The Council of Registered Ethical Security Testers (CREST).

For further information access the government’s plan here.

A New Cyber Regulator on the Beat: The CFPB Issues its First Cybersecurity Order and Fine

Mar 09 2016

By Ted Kornobis

On March 2, 2016, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) instituted its first data security enforcement action, in the form of a consent order against online payment platform Dwolla, Inc.

The CFPB joins several other regulators that have recently issued statements or instituted enforcement actions in this space, including the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), Commodities Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”), the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”), the National Futures Association (“NFA”), the Department of Justice (“DOJ”), state attorneys general, and the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”), which has been active in this area for several years.

To read more click here.

Nissan shakes like a LEAF and disables app after car hacking potential exposed

Mar 02 2016

By Cameron Abbott and Meg Aitken

Lock you doors…oh wait, that won’t protect you. Australian security researchers, Troy Hunt and Scott Helme have exposed a security flaw in Nissan’s Connect app which allows certain features of the manufacturer’s best-selling electric car, the ‘LEAF’, to literally be controlled by someone else on the other side of the world.

Hunt and Helme recently discovered that the app did not require any owner identification information in order to link with and control LEAF cars. All that was required was the Vehicle Identification Number (VIN), which is conveniently displayed on the chassis of the vehicle.

OK, so hackers couldn’t actually steer the car, but they could command the climate control and telematics to access driving data about trip durations, raising privacy concerns. Further, given that the LEAF is an electric powered vehicle, being able to access the climate controls could potentially allow a hacker to drain the battery and leave a driver stranded.

Car companies are racing to embrace the internet of things, and privacy and security seems to be taking a back seat. While there is no doubt that connected car technology boasts exciting functionality for drivers, it is not without road bumps, and we are once again reminded of the dangerous potential presented by interconnected devices. With a bit of luck, Nissan’s scare will see the automotive industry get in the driver’s seat towards developing a better appreciation of the risks associated with these devices and how they can be mitigated.

Nissan has now reportedly disabled the NissanConnect app and plans to release a new version once these security concerns are rectified. According to Hunt’s blog post, it took Nissan more than a month to take the app offline after he reported the security vulnerabilities.

Read Troy Hunt’s blog post on the discovery here.

It’s official and, it’s personal – Gemalto’s 2015 results reveal scary cybercrime stats

Feb 29 2016

By Cameron Abbott and Meg Aitken

Never mind your credit card details, let’s worry about cybercriminals stealing your identity.

The latest Breach Level Index released by Gemalto has revealed that identity theft was the primary target of hackers in 2015, with stolen personal information accounting for 53% of all data breaches.

It’s a worry, you see, because while your credit card has inbuilt security defences and merchant protection mechanisms, your valuable personal information is probably stored in multiple locations, across a number of interfaces, in a variety of forms, exposing it to substantial risk of theft.

Not only is the massive volume of personal information that is available to be stolen a cause for alarm, but what cybercriminals can potentially do with that information is the major concern.

So who is to blame? Well, malicious outsiders were the leading source of data breaches in 2015, accounting for 58%, accidental loss of data was next and then came malicious insiders, who accounted for 14% of all data breaches.

Clearly, companies need to recognise that today’s cyber environment demands robust security strategies that not only protect networks from external attacks and accidental data loss, but also keep an eye on insiders too.

To secure against a data breach, Gemalto recommends that organisations commit to the encryption of all sensitive information, secure storage and management of data and encryption keys, and controlled access and authentication of users.

Access the Gemalto 2015 Breach Level Index Report here.

Apple sends passionate message to customers following court order to hack iPhone

Feb 18 2016

By Cameron Abbott and Meg Aitken

A US District Court has ordered Apple to assist US law enforcement agents to bypass the security features, disable the auto-erase function and ultimately access the data contained within an iPhone 5C that was used by one of the San Bernardino shooters, Syed Rizwan Farook.

Apple’s CEO Tim Cook responded to the order with an open letter to customers discussing the privacy and security implications of the order and calling for public discussion on the issue.

Read Apple’s Customer Letter here.

Access the Court Order here.

‘EU-US Privacy Shield’ agreed for trans-Atlantic data flow

By Cameron Abbott and Meg Aitken

A new trans-Atlantic data transfer framework has been agreed between the European Commission and the United States this week. Known as the ‘EU-US Privacy Shield’, the new arrangement is intended to offer greater legal certainty for businesses and afford EU citizens increased protection when their data is transferred across the Atlantic to the US.

The new regulations will replace the US-EU Safe Harbor framework, which was invalidated by the European Court of Justice last October on the basis that the generalised access that public authorities had to the data and content of electronic communications violated fundamental privacy rights. Read our earlier blog post on the Safe Harbour decision here.

The key features of the new EU-US Privacy Shield are:

Stronger obligations on US companies to protect the personal data of EU citizens
More robust enforcement powers granted to both EU and US regulators, including greater monitoring and prosecution by the US Department of Commence and Federal Trade Commission (FTC)
Clearer conditions, limitations, redress avenues and safeguards for data transferred across the Atlantic
Expanded obligations for US companies to prove compliance
Several new avenues for EU citizens to lodge complaints about data misuse, including the establishment of a new independent privacy Ombudsman

The new Privacy Shield is still awaiting final approval from the College of Commissioners and will be subject to further review by the Article 29 Working Party before it is introduced. Much of the detail has not been released, so while the principles have been articulated, the impact on the obligations of affected companies is still far from clear.

Read the European Commission press release here for further details.

Our US and EU colleagues have drafted a more detail description which can be accessed here for further information.

Tag:Cybersecurity