Search This Blog

Powered by Blogger.

Blog Archive

Labels

About Me

Showing posts with label Cyber Security Tool. Show all posts

Why Major Companies Are Still Falling to Basic Cybersecurity Failures

 

In recent weeks, three major companies—Ingram Micro, United Natural Foods Inc. (UNFI), and McDonald’s—faced disruptive cybersecurity incidents. Despite operating in vastly different sectors—technology distribution, food logistics, and fast food retail—all three breaches stemmed from poor security fundamentals, not advanced cyber threats. 

Ingram Micro, a global distributor of IT and cybersecurity products, was hit by a ransomware attack in early July 2025. The company’s order systems and communication channels were temporarily shut down. Though systems were restored within days, the incident highlights a deeper issue: Ingram had access to top-tier security tools, yet failed to use them effectively. This wasn’t a tech failure—it was a lapse in execution and internal discipline. 

Just two weeks earlier, UNFI, the main distributor for Whole Foods, suffered a similar ransomware attack. The disruption caused significant delays in food supply chains, exposing the fragility of critical infrastructure. In industries that rely on real-time operations, cyber incidents are not just IT issues—they’re direct threats to business continuity. 

Meanwhile, McDonald’s experienced a different type of breach. Researchers discovered that its AI-powered hiring tool, McHire, could be accessed using a default admin login and a weak password—“123456.” This exposed sensitive applicant data, potentially impacting millions. The breach wasn’t due to a sophisticated hacker but to oversight and poor configuration. All three cases demonstrate a common truth: major companies are still vulnerable to basic errors. 

Threat actors like SafePay and Pay2Key are capitalizing on these gaps. SafePay infiltrates networks through stolen VPN credentials, while Pay2Key, allegedly backed by Iran, is now offering incentives for targeting U.S. firms. These groups don’t need advanced tools when companies are leaving the door open. Although Ingram Micro responded quickly—resetting credentials, enforcing MFA, and working with external experts—the damage had already been done. 

Preventive action, such as stricter access control, routine security audits, and proper use of existing tools, could have stopped the breach before it started. These incidents aren’t isolated—they’re indicative of a larger issue: a culture that prioritizes speed and convenience over governance and accountability. 

Security frameworks like NIST or CMMC offer roadmaps for better protection, but they must be followed in practice, not just on paper. The lesson is clear: when organizations fail to take care of cybersecurity basics, they put systems, customers, and their own reputations at risk. Prevention starts with leadership, not technology.

Integrating Human Expertise and Technology for Robust Cybersecurity

 

In today’s complex digital landscape, the role of human expertise in cybersecurity remains indispensable. Two pivotal approaches — human-led security testing and human-centric cybersecurity (HCC) — have gained prominence, each contributing distinct strengths. However, these strategies often function in silos, creating fragmented defenses. To achieve comprehensive cyber resilience, organizations must integrate these methods with advanced technologies like automation and data analytics.

Human-led security testing leverages the intuition and expertise of cybersecurity professionals. Ethical hackers and penetration testers bring invaluable insights, uncovering vulnerabilities that automated tools may overlook. Their ability to simulate real-world attack scenarios allows organizations to anticipate and neutralize sophisticated cyber threats dynamically. This approach ensures tailored defenses capable of adapting to specific challenges.

On the other hand, human-centric cybersecurity (HCC) focuses on empowering end users by designing security measures that align with their behaviours and limitations. Traditional tools often burden users with complexity, leading to risky workarounds. HCC addresses this by creating intuitive, accessible solutions that seamlessly integrate into daily workflows. When users perceive these measures as helpful rather than obstructive, compliance improves, enhancing overall security frameworks.

Technology acts as a vital bridge between these human-driven approaches. Automation and data analytics provide scalability and efficiency, handling repetitive tasks and processing vast data volumes. Real-time threat intelligence and continuous monitoring enable organizations to identify and respond to emerging risks quickly. This technological backbone allows human experts to focus on addressing complex, strategic challenges.

Integrating these elements fosters a proactive security culture where people, not just systems, are central to defense strategies. Educating employees, conducting regular threat simulations, and promoting secure behaviors through incentives help build shared responsibility for cybersecurity. Research forecasts that by 2027, half of large enterprises will adopt HCC strategies, prioritizing security behavior and culture programs (SBCPs). These initiatives utilize simulations, automation, and analytics to encourage informed decision-making and enhance incident reporting.

A holistic cybersecurity approach blends human intuition, user-friendly processes, and technology-driven efficiency. Human-led testing uncovers evolving threats, while HCC empowers employees to respond confidently to risks. Automation and analytics amplify these efforts, providing actionable insights and driving continuous improvements. Together, these elements create a robust, forward-thinking cybersecurity environment capable of meeting the challenges of an ever-evolving digital world.

Dark web listings for malware aimed at companies on rise


There's been a significant rise in the number of dark web listings for malware and other hacking tools which target the enterprise, and an increasing number of underground vendors are touting tools that are designed to target particular industries.

A study by cybersecurity company Bromium and criminologists at the University of Surrey involved researchers studying underground forums and interacting with cyber-criminal vendors. The study found that the dark web is fast becoming a significant source of bespoke malware.

In many cases, the dark web sellers demonstrated intimate knowledge of email systems, networks and even cybersecurity protocols in a way that suggests they themselves have spent a lot of time inside enterprise networks, raising questions about security for some companies.

"What surprised me is the extent you could obtain malware targeting enterprise, you could obtain operational data relating to enterprise," Mike McGuire, senior lecturer in Criminology at the University of Surrey and author of the study, told ZDNet.

"There seems to be an awareness and sophistication among these cyber criminals, to go for the big fry, to go where the money is, as a criminal, and the enterprise is providing that," he said, adding: "What surprised me is just how easy it is to get hold of it if you want to."

McGuire and his team interacted with around 30 sellers on dark web marketplaces – sometimes on forums, sometimes via encrypted channels, sometimes by email – and the findings have been detailed in the Behind the Dark Net Black Mirror report.

The study calculated that since 2016, there's been a 20 percent rise in the number of dark web listings that have the potential to harm the enterprise.

Malware and distributed denial of service (DDoS) form almost half of the attacks on offer – a quarter of the listings examined advertised malware and one in five offered DDoS and botnet services. Other common services targeting enterprises that were for sale include espionage tools, such as remote-access Trojans and keyloggers.

Google’s security tools can shield from cyber-attacks

Google has long been asking users to enable its security tools for shielding all its services - from Gmail to Google Photos - from hacking attempts.

The search giant has been pretty vocal about the importance of these features, but now, instead of urging users, it has released hard stats revealing how useful these capabilities can really be.

Let's take a look.

Advantage

Adding phone number can fend off bot-based attacks.

Researchers from New York University and the University of California, San Diego partnered with Google to assess at the impact of its security tools in preventing hijack attempts.

The results, presented recently at The Web Conference, revealed that simply adding a recovery phone number to Google account helped block a 100% bot-based attacks, 99% of automated phishing attacks, and 66% of targeted attacks.

Protection

Two-factor authentication offers highest security.

Google has been saying this for years and the stats prove it - two-step verification is the securest offering right now.

The studies reveal that using phone number-based 2SV (SMS verification) blocked 100% of automated bots, 96% of bulk phishing attacks, and 76% of targeted attacks.

Meanwhile, on-device prompts prevented 100% of automated bots, 99% of bulk phishing attacks and 90% of targeted attacks.

Security key offers strongest shield.

Notably, among all two-step verification methods, using a physical security key proved to be the strong account shield. It blocked all kind of attacks with a 100% success rate.

Risk

Google also showed what happens when you don't use 2SV.

The same study also measured the effectiveness of default sign-in verification techniques, like last location signed-in or your secondary email.

These knowledge-based methods are used when the company detects a suspicious sign-in attempt, say from a new device/location, and you don't have a 2SV on.

The results showed these methods can block bot-based attacks but can fail miserably against phishing or targeted hijack.

Will Cyber Security Companies shift their Headquarters out of US?


Until now nuclear, radiological, chemical and biological weapons considered to be a Weapon of Mass Destruction(WMD).

The Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS), an agency of the United States Department of Commerce that deals with issues involving national security and high technology, is proposing to classify cyber security tools as weapons of War in an attempt to control the distribution.

The tools used for extraction of data or information, from a computer or network-capable device, or the modification of system or user data, will come under this law and is being classified as Intrusion software. Also, the tools designed to avoid detection by 'monitoring tools'( Antivirus, IDS/IPS,End point security products) will be considered as a weapon.

Any penetration testing products designed to identify security Vulnerabilities of computers and network-capable devices fall under this category.

"The proposal is not beneficial. Most vulnerability scanners and penetration testing products come under it. The proposal means tools from US companies which have been used to do assessments and audits in corporate will need to go through the clearance. It could also lead to corporate getting tracked" says J.Prasanna, founder of Cyber Security and Privacy Foundation(CSPF).

Most of these Cyber Security firms either should convince their world wide clients to go through the process or shift their head quarter out of USA.

Prasanna pointed out that US government tried to stop the export of cryptography in the past. But, Russian, European and Israeli companies got advantage by the cryptography restriction.

He said that the new proposal is a bad news for the cyber security researchers. If it becomes a law, it will force them to find a new way to beat the Cyber Criminals.

"Hackers are already may steps ahead of us. Some tools like canvas and Metasploit Pro are important tool for penetration testing" said Prasanna.

Thomas Dullien, Google Researcher, said "addition of exploits to the Wassenaar arrangement is an egregious mistake for anyone that cares about a more secure and less surveilled Internet" in his personal blog.


Rapid7, a Boston-based cybersecurity firm, well known for its Metasploit Pentesting framework, said that they are investigating implications of Wassenaar for Metasploit and security research, and working on comments for the consultation.

According to the proposal, the governments of Australia, Canada, New Zealand or the UK will get favorable treatment for license applications, as they have partnered with the US on Cyber Security Policy and issues.

The BIS is seeking comments before 20th July 2015 on the proposed rule. You can submit the comments here.