Very simple, very ‘common sense,’ so why do we still see so much BEC?
Best Practices to Thwart Business Email Compromise (BEC) Attacks
… In a recent study, 71% of organizations acknowledged they had seen a business email compromise (BEC) attack during the past year. Forty-three percent of organizations experienced a security incident in the last 12 months, with 35% stating that BEC/phishing attacks account for more than 50% of the incidents.
The FBI's Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) reports that BEC scams were the most expensive of cyberattacks in 2020, with 19,369 complaints and adjusted losses of approximately $1.8 billion. Recent BEC attacks include spoofing attacks on Shark Tank Host Barbara Corcoran, who lost $380,000; the Puerto Rican government attacks that amounted to $4 million, and Japanese media giant, Nikkei, who transferred $29 million based on instructions in a fraudulent email.
To thwart a BEC attack, an organization must focus on the Golden Triangle: the alignment of people, process, and technology. Read on to discover best practices every organization should follow to mitigate BEC attacks.
(Related)
In the First Half of 2021, HP Found that 75% of Threats Came via Email
A recent report published by HP titled HP Wolf Security Threat Insights Report shows that in the first half of 2021, email is the most used method of spreading malware and other threats, accounting for 75% of all threats.
Probably wise to assume your report will not be privileged either. So, get your security right.
Another Court Deems Forensic Investigation Report Not Privileged
On July 22, 2021, a Magistrate Judge in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania (the “Court”) ordered Rutter’s, a convenience-store chain, to produce an investigative report prepared by a security consultant regarding a suspected data breach event, as well as all communications between the party and the company performing the investigation. In the ruling. Rutter’s Data Sec Breach Litig, No. 1:20-cv-000382-JEJ-KM, the Court held that the report and related communications were not protected from disclosure by the work product doctrine or the attorney-client privilege.
Pros and cons.
https://www.bespacific.com/facial-recognition-surges-in-retail-stores/
Facial recognition surges in retail stores
Axios: “Face-recognition tech is coming to a store near you, if it’s not there already, and that’s sparking a new wave of opposition.
Why it matters: The systems can scan or store facial images of both shoppers and workers. Their use accelerated during the pandemic as retailers looked for ways to prevent fraud, track foot traffic with fewer employees, and offer contactless payments at a time when consumers were wary of interacting with others.
Driving the news: More than three dozen advocacy groups launched a campaign late last week to pressure retailers to stop using facial recognition technologies, or to pledge not to use them…”
(Related)
As Facial Recognition Technology Surges, Organizations Face Privacy and Cybersecurity Concerns, and Fraud
Joseph J. Lazzarotti, Jason C. Gavejian, and Maya Atrakchi of JacksonLewis write:
Facial recognition technology has become increasingly popular in recent years in the employment and consumer space (e.g. employee access, passport check-in systems, payments on smartphones), and in particular during the COVID-19 pandemic. As the need arose to screen persons entering a facility for symptoms of the virus, including temperature, thermal cameras, kiosks, and other devices with embedded with facial recognition capabilities were put into use. However, many have objected to the use of this technology in its current form, citing problems with the accuracy of the technology, and now, more alarmingly, there is growing concern that “Faces are the Next Target for Fraudsters” as summarized by a recently article in the Wall Street Journal (“WSJ”).
A campaign issue?
House’s Resolve to Curb Surveillance State Faces Biggest Test Since Trump Presidency
Sara Sirota reports:
In a huge win for surveillance reformers, the House Rules Committee agreed on Wednesday morning to another full chamber vote on a bipartisan proposal that would limit the federal government’s warrantless searches of Americans’ private data. The vote, expected later in the day, will now test rank-and-file lawmakers’ willpower to break with congressional leaders, who’ve killed similar measures in years past, and safeguard their constituents’ Fourth Amendment rights after the Donald Trump presidency brought greater attention across the political spectrum to the surveillance state’s excesses.
Read more on The Intercept.
Inevitable. No doubt this argument opens the door for lawsuits as well.
South Africa issues world's first patent listing AI as inventor
South Africa has become the first country to award a patent that names an artificial intelligence as its inventor and the AI’s owner as the patent's owner.
The patent was secured by University of Surrey professor Ryan Abbott and his team, who have been at odds with patent offices around the world for years over the need to recognise artificial intelligences as inventors.
Abbott was representing Dr Stephen Thaler, creator of an artificial neural system named Dabus ('device for the autonomous bootstrapping of unified sentience'), which Thaler claims is the sole inventor of a food container that improves grip and heat transfer.
Abbott and his team have filed patents listing Dabus as the inventor in more than ten jurisdictions since 2018, including in the UK, Europe and the US. The High Court in England and Wales last year sided with the UK Intellectual Property Office in refusing the applications, accepting that while Dabus created the inventions, it cannot be granted a patent on the grounds that it isn’t a ‘natural person’. The European Patent Office and the US Patent and Trademark Office objected on the same grounds, with Abbott’s team appealing.
… Abbott argues that the status quo is no longer fit for purpose and could put investment in AI at risk. Speaking to The Times, he said that naming the creator of the AI system as the inventor was legally risky, as they would not have substantially contributed to what the AI had created and would therefore be breaking patent law.
He also pointed to the increasing use of AI in R&D to discover new drug compounds and repurpose drugs. In such cases, he said, there may an invention that qualifies for a patent but not a person who qualifies as an inventor and if that means that a patent won’t be granted, it “says to companies that are investing in AI, like DeepMind or Siemens or Novartis, you can’t use AI in these areas”.
Good writing is not always paired with tech smarts.
https://www.bespacific.com/the-chatbot-problem/
The Chatbot Problem
The New Yorker: “As we teach computers to use natural language, we are bumping into the inescapable biases of human communication… Artificial intelligence is an ethical quagmire. Its power can be more than a little nauseating. But there’s a kind of unique horror to the capabilities of natural language processing. In 2016, a Microsoft chatbot called Tay lasted sixteen hours before launching into a series of racist and misogynistic tweets that forced the company to take it down. Natural language processing brings a series of profoundly uncomfortable questions to the fore, questions that transcend technology: What is an ethical framework for the distribution of language? What does language do to people?…”
Perspective. (A future podcast.)
https://www.wbur.org/onpoint/2021/07/29/understanding-the-ai-warfare-and-ethics
Understanding The AI Warfare And Its Implications
Artificial intelligence-enabled armies are being designed and planned — right now. China is determined to dominate the AI battlefield of tomorrow, and Robert Work, co-chair of the National Security Commission on AI, is ringing the alarm bells:
"We are not organized to win this competition. We just are not," he says. "We have got to take this competition seriously, and we need to win it."
… "The real worst-case scenario is that different governments deploy AI that isn't well thought through," he says. "So don't worry about being evil. Worry about it being fast and stupid. And that is a much easier worst-case scenario to realize, especially in the next three to four years."
Today, On Point: the coming AI war.
This program airs on July 29, 2021. Audio will be available after the broadcast.
No comments:
Post a Comment