[HN Gopher] The Original APT: Advanced Persistent Teenagers
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       The Original APT: Advanced Persistent Teenagers
        
       Author : todsacerdoti
       Score  : 54 points
       Date   : 2022-04-06 18:05 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (krebsonsecurity.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (krebsonsecurity.com)
        
       | flerchin wrote:
       | Damages seem to have been pretty minimal. Yeah there's a lot of
       | "This could have been worse" but defense in depth seems to have
       | worked. Okta seems to have taken the worst of it, and that was
       | mostly in terms of reputational damage.
        
       | vegetablepotpie wrote:
       | The way to fix this is that corporate IT needs to have more
       | authority with the rest of the company.
       | 
       | It's easy to blame the user when they get a phone call from IT
       | that says their account has been hacked and they need to reset
       | their password. Except it's not IT and the password reset tool is
       | not the companies.
       | 
       | The reason this happens is that the business side of the company
       | always hampers security. You could have the best IT security
       | training in the world that says not to share your password and do
       | not click external links in an email. But that means nothing when
       | you have Susan, the admin of your department manager, send out an
       | email with a link to a survey outside your corporate domain with
       | instructions, bright red in comic sans, we are using a new survey
       | tool, all employees are required to complete the survey.
       | 
       | So some things that should be red flags look acceptable. The
       | people in charge consistently break their own rules that they
       | impose on others. Companies set up conditions where the only
       | thing preventing a breach is their employees ability to guess
       | what feels like a phishing scheme, and what doesn't.
       | 
       | IT security needs to identify and sanction activities in the
       | business that trains users to produce bad outcomes.
        
         | ipnon wrote:
         | I once worked at a place that secretly red teamed it's
         | employees with phishing emails. I diligently reported them all
         | in public channels, unaware I was being duped, and received no
         | response or promise to block the domains. Eventually I was fed
         | up by the inaction, and inspected the payload in an isolated VM
         | with execution disabled. I thought I was doing them a favor,
         | but just the act of clicking on the link subjugated me to 3
         | days of mandatory fishing training. The saltiness left over
         | from that incident could pickle an entire nation's agricultural
         | output.
        
           | briandoesdev wrote:
           | I ran internal phishing email exercises were I use to work.
           | We never let users know when it was an exercise vs real-world
           | event, they always got the same automated response that it
           | was being looked into and that was all. I guess luckily for
           | our users no one ever received any training or punishment for
           | "falling" for our emails. We use to do it mainly for click
           | rate tracking.
        
             | not2b wrote:
             | My company does phishing email exercises, and they've added
             | a "report phishing" button to Outlook you're supposed to
             | hit, either for the fake messages or any real phish
             | attempts you get, or worse, fall for.
             | 
             | The difficulty is that the company has outsourced many
             | functions, meaning that there are external companies I
             | often haven't heard of sending messages we have to interact
             | with. Worse, one of those vendors has a very spammy-looking
             | style and has even mis-spelled our company's name before in
             | their mails.
        
         | uuyi wrote:
         | Totally agree. But the thing is that costs money and the real
         | desire is to tick the compliance check list at the lowest cost.
         | So they throw out some software assurance tech, force staff
         | through a click through phishing training program once a year
         | and low ball ISO 27001 and SOC 2 certs.
         | 
         | Ass covered. Security and defence in depth? Hell no. They can
         | employ the apologetics department dung beetles to roll that
         | turd away quickly after the fact.
        
           | BeFlatXIII wrote:
           | See also: DEI and anti-harassment training
        
       | AtlasBarfed wrote:
       | At any given time, a company is actively working against the
       | interests of 90% of its employees: trying to cut salary, reduce
       | benefits, stack ranking, or squeezing their schedules.
       | 
       | IT departments are among the worst of underfunding, exploitation,
       | stressing. Because fundamentally the cool management guys see IT
       | as a bunch of nerds to bully. But the problem is IT holds all the
       | keys to the castle.
       | 
       | Until this long-standing fundamental bias of management is fixed,
       | companies will be security sieves.
       | 
       | Unfortunately, what will be done is punitive to the employees:
       | more red tape with no allowance for time, victim blaming, and
       | ass-covering.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-04-07 23:02 UTC)