Our cyber security products span from our next gen SIEM used in the most secure government and critical infrastructure environments, to automated cyber risk reporting applications for commercial and government organisations of all sizes.
The Australian Signals Directorate (ASD) recommends the use of multi-factor authentication (MFA) within their general security control guidance known as the Essential Eight. They claim, “it is one of the most effective cyber security controls an organisation can implement,” yet, not all implementations of MFA are equally effective, so choosing which one is right for your organisation is essential. Furthermore, adversaries know about inherent weaknesses and have begun targeting organisations that use particularly weak implementations. This blog looks at some of the issues and pitfalls with modern MFA solutions and offers some guidance that supports ASD’s claim that it’s one control not to overlook.
In our earlier blog post on multi-factor authentication we explained what it is and the various options available. You can read it here.
Multi-factor authentication is a stronger mechanism used to authenticate users to a system than the plain old username/password combination. Implementations rely on three categories of authentication services, of which one or more controls from two or more categories are used to authenticate users. These categories are:
MFA solutions works by prompting you to supply two authentication types at the point of entry into a system. Typically, organisations opt for a combination of type 1 and type 2 authenticators, where single-use codes are sent to a registered mobile phone, combined with the username and password. In this scenario, the user enters her username and password combination and is then sent the single-use authentication code to their registered mobile phone, which is then compared against the server along with the username and password and only when all three are correct will the user be authenticated.
Knowledge of the efficacy of MFA is certainly growing, with social media sites like Facebook and LinkedIn popularising the sending of a mobile token to users if they detect logins from new browsers and locations. Other online services, such as Gmail, PayPal and The PlayStation Network are also introducing two step verification services, many of which use convenient mobile apps, such as the Google Authenticator to prove the user is who they say they are.
Many commercial enterprise vendors provide MFA solutions, with strong uptake over the past few years. This indicates that users (and executives) are becoming increasingly aware of the cyber risk. Consequently, vendors are sometimes rushing their MFA implementations to market without proper validation and verification. One example where MFA has turned into a weaker overall security mechanism is that of the mobile phone. Many phones use a fingerprint reader to identify and authenticate legitimate users. However, the same mechanism is now allowing users access to their bank account, so there is one authentication service providing two levels of authentication to a sensitive service. Some banks have also implemented a separate verification service for all online bank transfers, one that sends a single-use pin code to the user to authorise the transaction – and guess where it goes… the very same mobile phone device. This means that anyone finding a way to spoof the fingerprint of a user has access to the bank, and if they are using the phone, they will also receive the bank’s verification code right into the palm of their hand.
There are some other disadvantages of mobile phone based authenticators, since:
Let’s look at another example, in this case a transportation business called We Move Stuff. It has an externally facing service that allows field-based salespeople to connect to and run client-facing applications. We Move Stuff operators can connect email using this remote service, while managers can remotely monitor and manage orders, ensure deadlines are met and deal with delays. We Move Stuff has decided to implement MFA on their remote access service, to help protect themselves from Internet-based attacks, especially now that mandatory breach notification is arriving in 2018. We Move Stuff’s technical team has posited that MFA will significantly strengthen their security posture, so it has gained executive support. However, the technical team has chosen an SMS based authentication service, with little upfront costs, especially because every employee has a company issued mobile phone. On the surface, this sounds like a good approach, but let’s just consider some of the threats and see what improvements could also be introduced.
We Move Stuff should conduct a technical threat assessment to understand if it should be concerned. This is a crucial step in evaluating the efficacy of a security control, since it provides a factual risk calculation and assists the business in determining the breadth, depth and type of control required.
As the Essential Eight suggests, cyber security is an organisation-wide consideration and controls should be adopted that mitigate cyber risk at all layers of the business. Through their threat assessment process, We Mode Stuff has considered threats that may seek to exploit vulnerabilities in their systems through:
Threat actors are rated in terms of their capability and motivation, resulting in an understanding of how dangerous each threat actor is to their business. So, after completing the technical threat assessment, We Move Stuff finds that they are a likely target for organised criminal syndicates (highly capable and highly motivated threat actors). They determine moving goods from one state to another is a service that organised criminal entities may seek to compromise and use to their own advantage. Thus, proving an agent is who they say they are is a critical business control. In this case, any MFA solution that is as weak or weaker than standard username/password authentication is not an acceptable outcome. So, instead of tying all of the authentication capabilities to one device (the phone) they opt for an out-of-band system, using an RSA token that isn’t linked in any way to the user’s true identity, other than through the cryptographic pairing of token to user within their infrastructure.
Additional security services can also be employed to assist organisations in preventing authentication-based attacks. Protective monitoring is one such organisational security control that supports the business’s security objectives, since the introduction of a Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) tool or managed security service can detect anomalous authentication behaviour and instantly alert the incident response team. Even if We Move Stuff was targeted and a mobile phone was hacked, any additional authentication steps would be monitored and the correlated activity would result in a security investigation – which is the last thing a threat actorwants.
It is likely that We Move Stuff’s MFA solution mitigates as many as 90% of the threats targeting their business via remote attacks. When combined with a SIEM or protective monitoring service We Move Stuff’s MFA implementation has now raised their security posture to an acceptable level and made the much harder to compromise – in most cases faced with this level of control, a threat actor will look for a new target.
This is the beginning of We Move Stuff’s defence-in-depth strategy, and coupled with their firewalls, IPSs and limitations on administrator privileges, their MFA solution has, as ASD suggests, protected them from most opportunist attacks, as well as at least 85% of targeted attacks.
MFA helps mitigate the risks associated with cyber-attacks. Some implementations of MFA are better than others, so before you implement one, do a technical threat assessment and ensure you understand how any solution might be misused or leveraged by an attacker. Try not to implement an MFA solution that uses one device as its base for services (such as a mobile phone) since a device compromise circumvents all factors of control.
A SIEM or a security monitoring service can be an appropriate layer of additional defence and afford the security operations team with the visibility you need to respond to potential threats.
Multi-factor authentication solutions have significantly come down in price over the past few years, so really there is no excuse as to why you cannot implement one.
<<< Part 2a: Australia’s Essential Eight: Beyond Endpoint Control <<< Part 2b: Activating UK NCSC & US NIST Guidelines: Beyond Endpoint Control Part 4: Systematic Measurement of Cyber Controls >>> As much as we invest into cyber security controls, external threats are inevitable. In a recent Notifiable Data Breaches Report from the Office of the […]Read more
Keen campers, scouts and even the Swiss Army know – that a good penknife is indispensable. This simple device has mitigated many a disaster at one point in time or another. Whether it’s to cut through a bit of string, tighten a screw or simply to solve the problem of no bottle opener in the […]Read more
Supply chain risk is an area of cyber security that demands the ongoing attention of every enterprise; because it can make the difference between being resilient or not. It’s no surprise that insurers warn that the vulnerability of supply chains is potentially a systemic risk that can quickly propagate across supply chain dominated industries. Organisations […]Read more
It took a “tripartite cyber assessment” by the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) to identify that a sample of financial organisations had inadequate cyber security: poor security control management, a lack of business recovery planning and inadequate 3rd party risk assessment. Why were there gaps? Where is the failure? Clearly the common practice of unsubstantiated […]Read more
The discussion over data-driven vs qualitative cyber security assessment has been going for some time. Nowadays, it is at the top of the priority list for many security and senior executive teams. Managing cyber security has always been a noble ambition but without reliable measurement, the lack of actionable information makes evidence-based management decisions almost […]Read more
Attack Surface Management (ASM) characterises a business’s security risks as the monitoring and risk mitigation of a constantly changing and vulnerable “risk-surface”. Importantly, this attack surface extends to both internal and external assets and services. Some ASM solutions deliver clear visibility across both Internet facing and internal assets. Others do not. Instead, they assess external […]Read more
The UK Government has released its annual “Cyber Security Breaches Survey 2023”. It provides some valuable insights into how cyber security is currently being managed in the UK, by a range of organisations. It also speaks to how current competing economic priorities are impacting the effectiveness of some cyber security management efforts. The full report […]Read more
Solving the mismatch between cyber security reporting and directors’ requirements You are undoubtedly familiar with the headlines; you may have even become in part desensitised to them: ‘Cyber-attacks are increasingly damaging’, or ‘large amounts of personal data are most at risk’. The important take-away, however, is that modern day thieves can easily gain access to […]Read more
A system to address the untrustworthy security environment Zero trust approaches to security have been talked about for a while; but in recent times they have certainly gained more currency. As a model for protecting data and services, the simplicity of the concept is its biggest strength – assume, as a default position, there is […]Read more
The ongoing protection of Critical Infrastructure from cyber-attacks has implications for us all – whether it’s supporting our health, well-being or simply our way of life, there is good reason to reflect on the effectiveness your cyber security. Cyber security risks are nothing new and the vulnerability of critical infrastructure to them (and the heightened […]Read more
Read by directors, executives, and security professionals globally, operating in the most complex of security environments.