Cyber security predictions for 2024

341 Comments

1. October 2, 2024 at 5:57 am

   Tomi Engdahl says:

   Risk Management
   Fortifying the Weakest Link: How to Safeguard Against Supply Chain Cyberattacks

   As organizations have fortified their defenses against direct network attacks, hackers have shifted their focus to exploiting vulnerabilities in the supply chain to gain backdoor access to systems.

   https://www.securityweek.com/fortifying-the-weakest-link-how-to-safeguard-against-supply-chain-cyberattacks/

   Reply
2. October 2, 2024 at 5:58 am

   Tomi Engdahl says:

   Cloud Security
   Cracking the Cloud: The Persistent Threat of Credential-Based Attacks

   Credentials are still the most common entry point for bad actors, even as businesses deploy multi-factor authentication (MFA) to strengthen defenses.

   https://www.securityweek.com/cracking-the-cloud-the-persistent-threat-of-credential-based-attacks/

   Reply
3. October 2, 2024 at 5:59 am

   Tomi Engdahl says:

   If credentials already pose a significant security concern, the question then becomes, what to do? One X-Force recommendation is fairly obvious: use AI to defend against AI. Other recommendations are equally obvious: strengthen incident response capabilities; and use encryption to protect data at rest, in use, and in transit.

   But these alone do not prevent bad actors getting into the system through credential keys to the front door. “Build a stronger identity security posture,” says X-Force. “Embrace modern authentication methods, such as MFA, and explore passwordless options, such as a QR code or FIDO2 authentication, to fortify defenses against unauthorized access.”

   It’s not going to be easy. “QR codes are not considered phish resistant,” Chris Caridi, strategic cyber threat analyst at IBM Security X-Force, told SecurityWeek. “If a user were to scan a QR code in a malicious email and then proceed to enter credentials, all bets are off.”

   But it’s not entirely hopeless. “FIDO2 security keys would provide protection against the theft of session cookies; and the public/private keys factor in the domains associated with the communication (a spoofed domain would cause authentication to fail),” he continued. “This is a great option to protect against AITM.”

   https://www.securityweek.com/cracking-the-cloud-the-persistent-threat-of-credential-based-attacks/

   Reply
4. October 6, 2024 at 7:43 pm

   Tomi Engdahl says:

   https://www.infoworld.com/article/3497016/what-is-http-3-the-next-generation-web-protocol.html

   Reply
5. October 6, 2024 at 7:44 pm

   Tomi Engdahl says:

   OpenZiti: Secure, open-source networking for your applications
   OpenZiti is a free, open-source project that embeds zero-trust networking principles directly into applications.
   https://www.helpnetsecurity.com/2024/09/09/openziti-secure-open-source-networking/

   Reply
6. October 6, 2024 at 7:51 pm

   Tomi Engdahl says:

   https://www.dna.fi/yrityksille/blogi/-/blogs/onko-yrityksesi-varautunut-kyberuhkiin-10-vinkkia-kyberturvan-varmistamiseksi?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_content=LAA-artikkeli-onko-yrityksesi-varautunut-kyberuhkiin-10-vinkkia-kyberturvan-varmistamiseksi&utm_campaign=AK_LAA_24-40-43_kyberturva2025_artikkelikampanja_&fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0BMAABHSB8B9GFsrf_COYR0S29mv8oyAVKJvayb58Jvw–TW1w5K6u_8xBcX8k6w_aem_N8FqQnxV7vrZWL0XTLKPIQ

   Reply
7. October 6, 2024 at 7:52 pm

   Tomi Engdahl says:

   https://www.dna.fi/yrityksille/kyberturva-2025-aamiaistilaisuus

   Reply
8. October 6, 2024 at 7:53 pm

   Tomi Engdahl says:

   VPN providers don’t protect your privacy online. Here’s what can.
   https://techcrunch.com/2024/09/30/vpn-providers-do-not-protect-your-privacy-online-here-is-what-can/

   If you’ve heard that a VPN provider can help protect your privacy and security online, don’t believe the hype. The truth is that most people don’t actually need a VPN.

   By funneling all of your internet traffic through their own servers, VPN providers expose their customers to the very privacy risks they claim to help defend against, including having their internet browsing records stolen by cybercriminals or obtained by legal order.

   Reply
9. October 6, 2024 at 8:01 pm

   Tomi Engdahl says:

   Älä ota kesädomainia! – verkkotunnukset ovat arvokasta omaisuutta
   Tietoturva Nyt!
   Julkaistu 03.10.2024 15:37
   Verkkotunnukset ovat nykyisin merkittävää aineetonta omaisuutta ja niistä kannattaa pitää huolta. Verkkotunnuksen päätyminen toisen käsiin voi olla kiusallista tai jopa vaarantaa tietoturvaa, eikä verkkotunnusta yleensä saa helposti takaisin.
   https://www.kyberturvallisuuskeskus.fi/fi/ajankohtaista/ala-ota-kesadomainia-verkkotunnukset-ovat-arvokasta-omaisuutta

   Reply
10. October 6, 2024 at 8:02 pm

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/microsoft-defender-now-automatically-detects-unsecure-wi-fi-networks/

    Reply
11. October 6, 2024 at 8:02 pm

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    Opportunities for Early Detection and Prediction of Ransomware Attacks against Industrial Control Systems
    https://www.mdpi.com/1999-5903/15/4/144?utm_campaign=journnews_ccbj_futureinternet&utm_medium=social_journ&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0BMAABHcyBrwHEdi1WkFRTIW0MiSY8cwjdoqDoctA897zRomiDcQkeEJjUrEjDpA_aem_69wQ9C8O6BLdhrOnQAbYoQ

    Reply
12. October 6, 2024 at 8:03 pm

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    https://nerdynet.com/nain-mdr-eroaa-perinteisista-kyberturvallisuusratkaisuista/

    Reply
13. October 7, 2024 at 9:59 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    Fortifying the Weakest Link: How to Safeguard Against Supply Chain Cyberattacks

    As organizations have fortified their defenses against direct network attacks, hackers have shifted their focus to exploiting vulnerabilities in the supply chain to gain backdoor access to systems.

    https://www.securityweek.com/fortifying-the-weakest-link-how-to-safeguard-against-supply-chain-cyberattacks/

    Tackling Supply Chain Hazards

    Failures in systems and processes by third parties can lead to catastrophic reputational and operational damage. It is no longer sufficient to merely implement basic vendor management procedures. Organizations must also take proactive measures to safeguard against third-party control failures. So how can this be achieved?

    Advanced Supplier Risk Management: Ensure all suppliers and third-party vendors adhere to strict cybersecurity protocols. Assess their compliance with relevant standards (e.g., ISO 27001, NIST, GDPR). Evaluate vendors based on the sensitivity of the data they handle and the criticality of the services they provide. Consider requiring suppliers to use independent verification services to test software applications before procurement and deployment.

    Secure the Software Development Pipeline: Protect administrative access to the tools and applications used by DevOps teams. Enable secure application configuration via secrets and authenticate applications and services with high confidence. Mandate that software suppliers certify and extend security controls to cover microservices, cloud, and DevOps environments.

    Regular Software and System Updates: Ensure that your systems and those of your suppliers are regularly updated and patched for known vulnerabilities. Prevent the use of unsupported or outdated software that could introduce new vulnerabilities.

    Harden Your Environment: Configure cloud environments to reject authorization requests involving tokens that deviate from accepted norms. For on-premises systems, follow the National Security Agency’s guidelines by deploying a Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS)-validated Hardware Security Module (HSM) to store token-signing certificate private keys. HSMs significantly reduce the risk of key theft by threat actors.

    Implement Strong Access Controls: Limit third-party vendor access to only the data and systems necessary for their operations. Ensure they cannot access other areas of your network. Require multi-factor authentication for vendors accessing your systems. Adopting a Zero Trust approach ensures continuous verification of all users—both internal and external—before granting access.

    Utilize Security Tools and Technologies: Segment your network to prevent attackers from moving laterally if they manage to breach one section. Use Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) solutions to detect malicious activities on devices connected via third parties. Encrypt sensitive data shared with suppliers, both at rest and in transit. A robust cybersecurity posture requires readiness for data security breaches, especially as data moves through various channels like email, cloud, and AI tools. Thus, business continuity and disaster recovery (BCDR) solutions have become essential components of the modern technology stack.

    Adopt Frameworks and Best Practices: Implement the NIST cybersecurity framework to help identify, protect, detect, govern, respond to, and recover from cyber threats. Also consider adopting supply chain-specific frameworks like the Shared Assessments Standardized Information Gathering (SIG) or ISO 28001 for supply chain security management.

    Contractual and Legal Safeguards: Incorporate cybersecurity requirements into vendor contracts, including mandatory security controls, data protection measures, and breach notification obligations. For high-risk vendors, require third-party audits or independent security assessments.

    Reply
14. October 8, 2024 at 6:07 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    MFA Isn’t Failing, But It’s Not Succeeding: Why a Trusted Security Tool Still Falls Short

    Multi-factor authentication is a necessary safeguard, but its limitations show why organizations can’t rely on it alone to prevent breaches.

    https://www.securityweek.com/mfa-isnt-failing-but-its-not-succeeding-why-a-trusted-security-tool-still-falls-short/

    To say that multi-factor authentication (MFA) is a failure is too extreme. But we cannot say it is successful – that much is empirically obvious. The important question is: Why?

    MFA is universally recommended and often required. CISA says, “Adopting MFA is a simple way to protect your organization and can prevent a significant number of account compromise attacks.” NIST SP 800-63-3 requires MFA for systems at Authentication Assurance Levels (AAL) 2 and 3. Executive Order 14028 mandates all US government agencies to implement MFA. PCI DSS requires MFA for accessing cardholder data environments. SOC 2 requires MFA. The UK ICO has stated, “We expect all organizations to take fundamental steps to secure their systems, such as regularly checking for vulnerabilities, implementing multi-factor authentication…”

    Yet, despite these recommendations, and even where MFA is implemented, breaches still occur. Why?
    What’s the problem?

    Think of MFA as a second, but dynamic, set of keys to the front door of a system. This second set is given only to the identity wishing to enter, and only if that identity is authenticated to enter. It is a different second key delivered for each different entry.

    The principle is clear, and MFA should be able to prevent access to inauthentic identities. But this principle also relies on the balance between security and usability. If you increase security you decrease usability, and vice versa. You can have very, very strong security but be left with something equally difficult to use. Since the purpose of security is to enable business profitability, this becomes a conundrum.

    Strong security can impinge on profitable operations. This is especially relevant at the point of access – if staff are delayed entry, their work is also delayed. And if MFA is not at maximum strength, even the company’s own staff (who simply want to get on with their work as quickly as possible) will find ways around it.

    “Simply put,” says Jason Soroko, senior fellow at Sectigo, “MFA raises the difficulty for a malicious actor, but the bar often isn’t high enough to prevent a successful attack.” Discussing and solving the required balance in using MFA to reliably keep bad guys out while quickly and easily letting good guys in – and to question whether MFA is really needed – is the subject of this article.
    Weaknesses

    The primary problem with any form of authentication is that it authenticates the device being used, not the person attempting access. “It’s often misunderstood,” says Kris Bondi, CEO and co-founder of Mimoto, “that MFA isn’t verifying a person, it’s verifying a device at a point in time. Who is holding that device isn’t guaranteed to be who you expect it to be.”

    The most common MFA method is to deliver a use-once-only code to the entry applicant’s mobile phone. But phones get lost and stolen (physically in the wrong hands), phones get compromised with malware (allowing a bad actor access to the MFA code), and electronic delivery messages get diverted (MitM attacks).

    To these technological weaknesses we can add the ongoing criminal arsenal of social engineering attacks, including SIM swapping (persuading the carrier to transfer a phone number to a new device), phishing, and MFA fatigue attacks (triggering a flood of delivered but unexpected MFA notifications until the victim eventually approves one out of frustration). The social engineering threat is likely to increase over the next few years with gen-AI adding a new layer of sophistication, automated scale, and introducing deepfake voice into targeted attacks.

    These weaknesses apply to all MFA systems that are based on a shared one-time code, which is basically just an additional password. “All shared secrets face the risk of interception or harvesting by an attacker,” says Soroko. “A one-time password generated by an app that has to be typed into an authentication web page is just as vulnerable as a password to key logging or a fake authentication page.”

    There are more secure methods than simply sharing a secret code with the user’s mobile phone. You can generate the code locally on the device (but this retains the basic problem of authenticating the device rather than the user), or you can use a separate physical key (which can, like the mobile phone, be lost or stolen).

    “Yes, MFA works to raise the level of difficulty of attack, but its success depends on the method and context,” adds Soroko. “However, attackers bypass MFA through social engineering, exploiting ‘MFA fatigue’, man-in-the-middle attacks, and technical flaws like SIM swapping or stealing session cookies.”

    Implementing strong MFA just adds layer upon layer of complexity required to get it right, and it’s a moot philosophical question whether it is ultimately possible to solve a technological problem by throwing more technology at it (which could in fact introduce new and different problems). It is this complexity that adds a new problem: this security solution is so complex that many companies don’t bother to implement it or do so with only trivial concern.

    “MFA has been in use for more than 20 years,” notes Bondi. “As with any tool, the longer it is in existence, the more time bad actors have had to innovate against it. And, frankly, many MFA approaches haven’t evolved much over time.”

    Two examples of attacker innovations will demonstrate: AitM with Evilginx; and the 2023 hack of MGM Resorts.

    For and against MFA

    So, given that MFA clearly gets defeated, and given that it only authenticates the device not the user, should we abandon it?

    The answer is a resounding ‘No’. The problem is that we misunderstand the purpose and role of MFA. All the recommendations and regulations that insist we must implement MFA have seduced us into believing it is the silver bullet that will protect our security. This simply isn’t realistic.

    Consider the concept of crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED).

    Simplified, the theory suggests that a space built with access control, territorial reinforcement, surveillance, continuous maintenance, and activity support will be less subject to criminal activity. It will not stop a determined burglar; but finding it hard to get in and stay hidden, most burglars will simply move to another less well designed and easier target. So, the purpose of CPTED is not to eliminate criminal activity, but to deflect it.

    This principle translates to cyber in two ways. Firstly, it recognizes that the primary purpose of cybersecurity is not to eliminate cybercriminal activity, but to make a space too difficult or too costly to pursue. Most criminals will look for somewhere easier to burgle or breach, and – sadly – they will almost certainly find it. But it won’t be you.

    Secondly, note that CPTED talks about the complete environment with multiple focuses. Access control: but not just the front door. Surveillance: pentesting might locate a weak rear entry or a broken window, while internal anomaly detection might uncover a burglar already inside. Maintenance: use the latest and best tools, keep systems up to date and patched. Activity support: adequate budgets, good management, proper recompense, and so on.

    These are just the basics, and more could be included. But the primary point is that for both physical and cyber CPTED, it is the whole environment that needs to be considered – not just the front door.

    That’s how we should consider MFA: an essential part of security, but only a part. It won’t defeat everyone but will perhaps delay or divert the majority. It is an essential part of cyber CPTED to reinforce the front door with a second lock that requires a second key.

    Since the traditional front door username and password no longer delays or diverts attackers (the username is usually the email address and the password is too easily phished, sniffed, shared, or guessed), it is incumbent on us to strengthen the front door authentication and access so this part of our environmental design can play its part in our overall security defense.

    The obvious way is to add an additional lock and a one-use key that isn’t created by nor known to the user before its use. This is the approach known as multi-factor authentication. But as we have seen, current implementations are not foolproof. The primary methods are remote key generation sent to a user device (usually via SMS to a mobile device); local app generated code (such as Google Authenticator); and locally held separate key generators (such as Yubikey from Yubico).

    Each of these methods solve some, but none solve all, of the threats to MFA. None of them change the fundamental issue of authenticating a device rather than its user, and while some can prevent easy interception, none can withstand persistent, and sophisticated social engineering attacks. Nevertheless, MFA is important: it deflects or diverts all but the most determined attackers.

    If one of these attackers succeeds in bypassing or defeating the MFA, they have access to the internal system. The part of environmental design that includes internal surveillance (detecting bad guys) and activity support (assisting the good guys) takes over. Anomaly detection is an existing approach for enterprise networks. Mobile threat detection systems can help prevent bad guys taking over mobile phones and intercepting SMS MFA codes.

    Zimperium’s 2024 Mobile Threat Report published on September 25, 2024, notes that 82% of phishing sites specifically target mobile devices, and that unique malware samples increased by 13% over last year. The threat to mobile phones, and therefore any MFA reliant on them is increasing, and will likely worsen as adversarial AI kicks in.

    As we’ve seen, MFA will not stop the determined attacker. “You need sensors and alarm systems on the devices,” he continues, “so you can see if anyone is trying to test the boundaries and you can start getting ahead of these bad actors.”

    The important takeaway from this discussion is that you cannot rely on MFA to keep your systems safe – but it is an essential part of your overall security environment. Security is not just protecting the front door. It starts there, but must be considered across the whole environment. Security without MFA can no longer be considered security.

    Reply
15. October 8, 2024 at 6:09 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    MITRE Announces AI Incident Sharing Project

    MITRE’s AI Incident Sharing initiative helps organizations receive and hand out data on real-world AI incidents.

    https://www.securityweek.com/mitre-announces-ai-incident-sharing-project/

    Reply
16. October 9, 2024 at 11:46 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    Ohjelmistoturvallisuuden tila 2023
    https://www.kyberturvallisuuskeskus.fi/sites/default/files/media/publication/Ohjelmistoturvallisuuden%20tila%202023.pdf

    Reply
17. October 9, 2024 at 1:45 pm

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    Incident Response
    Improving SecOps: How Simplification, Visibility, and Analytics Can Drive Success

    How simplifying complexity, enhancing visibility, and empowering analysis can address key challenges in modern cybersecurity operations and investigations.

    https://www.securityweek.com/improving-secops-how-simplification-visibility-and-analytics-can-drive-success/

    Reply
18. October 11, 2024 at 5:54 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    Looking at Security Challenges Through the Lens of Different Roles

    What are CISOs and security leaders prioritizing versus the security operators?

    https://www.securityweek.com/looking-at-security-challenges-through-the-lens-of-different-roles/

    Reply
19. October 11, 2024 at 5:55 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    Network Security
    Watch on Demand: Zero Trust Strategies Summit – All Sessions Available

    With all sessions now available on demand, the online summit is laser focused on helping organizations to level up their Identity and Zero Trust security strategies.

    https://www.securityweek.com/securityweek-to-host-zero-trust-strategies-summit-as-virtual-event-on-october-9th/

    Reply
20. October 18, 2024 at 2:51 pm

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    https://www.dna.fi/yrityksille/blogi/-/blogs/mita-tarkoittaa-nollaluottamus-ja-miten-se-suojaa-liiketoimintasi%20?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_content=BUS-artikkeli-mita-tarkoittaa-nollaluottamus-ja-miten-se-suojaa-liiketoimintasi+&utm_campaign=P_BUS_24-40-44_artikkelikampanj&fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0BMAABHQSIh3WF-XWoiuQxu7mf6REfE2tCU63YCt9dS8NljcI4lq1kC61rOZHkuA_aem_P_2KSK-HGThuCSWCpTYrtw

    Reply
21. October 18, 2024 at 2:51 pm

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    https://www.dna.fi/yrityksille/blogi/-/blogs/aloita-yrityksesi-siirtyma-kvanttisalaukseen-jo-tanaan?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_content=LAA-artikkeli-aloita-yrityksesi-siirtyma-kvanttisalaukseen-jo-tanaan&utm_campaign=AK_LAA_24-40-43_kyberturva2025_artikkelikampanja_&fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0BMAABHYwVOMnd5Oss2ZdhPxKhWILiyV0BhUlbiqN-3r5uUgOoWsOcHI9rQg_IAw_aem_j4FIkBvcwvcOBEMYtSdc8A

    Reply
22. October 18, 2024 at 4:04 pm

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    https://turva.bittiguru.fi/bgaudit/

    Reply
23. October 19, 2024 at 8:35 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    GhostStrike: Open-source tool for ethical hacking
    GhostStrike is an open-source, advanced cybersecurity tool tailored for ethical hacking and Red Team operations. It incorporates cutting-edge techniques, including process hollowing, to stealthily evade detection on Windows systems, making it an asset for penetration testing and security assessments.
    https://www.helpnetsecurity.com/2024/10/17/ghoststrike-open-source-tool-ethical-hacking/

    Reply
24. October 19, 2024 at 9:15 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    NIST Recommends New Rules for Password Security
    https://cybersecuritynews.com/nist-rules-password-security/

    The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has released updated guidelines for password security, marking a significant shift from traditional password practices.

    These new recommendations, outlined in NIST Special Publication 800-63B, aim to enhance cybersecurity while improving user experience.

    Reply
25. October 22, 2024 at 5:46 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    Rising Tides: Christien “DilDog” Rioux on Building Privacy and What Makes Hackers Unique

    Veracode and Veilid Foundation co-founder discusses the “human rights issue” of accessible privacy and what makes hackers unique.

    https://www.securityweek.com/rising-tides-christien-dildog-rioux-on-building-privacy-and-what-makes-hackers-unique/

    Reply
26. October 30, 2024 at 12:36 pm

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    https://www.howtogeek.com/you-dont-need-to-pay-for-third-party-antivirus-software-to-protect-your-pc/

    Reply
27. November 4, 2024 at 1:36 pm

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    Here’s the paper no one read before declaring the demise of modern cryptography
    The advance was incremental at best. So why did so many think it was a breakthrough?
    https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2024/10/the-sad-bizarre-tale-of-hype-fueling-fears-that-modern-cryptography-is-dead/#gsc.tab=0

    Reply
28. November 8, 2024 at 7:49 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    ICS/OT
    Siemens and Rockwell Tackle Industrial Cybersecurity, but Face Customer Hesitation

    Siemens and Rockwell Automation are taking steps to improve cybersecurity in industrial organizations, but getting customers to install security systems and upgrade ICS can still be challenging.

    https://www.securityweek.com/siemens-and-rockwell-tackle-industrial-cybersecurity-but-face-customer-hesitation/

    As the industrial sector increasingly relies on connected technologies to manage complex systems, cybersecurity has become a critical priority. Cyberattacks targeting industrial control systems (ICS) and operational technology (OT) are rising in frequency and severity, posing significant risks to manufacturing operations, supply chains, and public safety.

    Reply
29. November 8, 2024 at 7:49 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    Training & Awareness
    The Biggest Inhibitor of Cybersecurity: The Human Element

    Essential steps such as security awareness training, MFA, and Zero Trust identity management help organizations reduce the human element and stay ahead in the cybersecurity curve.

    https://www.securityweek.com/the-biggest-inhibitor-of-cybersecurity-the-human-element/

    Reply
30. November 8, 2024 at 7:49 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    CISO Strategy
    Designing a Future-focused Cybersecurity Investment Strategy

    CISOs must attempt to define a strategic approach to technology investment that will protect the business over the long term.

    https://www.securityweek.com/designing-a-future-focused-cybersecurity-investment-strategy/

    Reply
31. November 8, 2024 at 7:50 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    Application Security
    API Security Matters: The Risks of Turning a Blind Eye

    Willfully ignoring important security issues to make our lives easier is, unfortunately, something that does happen in the security field.

    https://www.securityweek.com/api-security-matters-the-risks-of-turning-a-blind-eye/

    Reply
32. November 8, 2024 at 7:52 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    Artificial Intelligence
    Back to the Future, Securing Generative AI

    While there are similar security challenges that parallel traditional security, we must understand that AI requires new ways to approach security.

    https://www.securityweek.com/back-to-the-future-securing-generative-ai/

    Over the last 10 years, the top jobs in data analysis have evolved from statistics and applied modeling, into actuarial science, into data science, into machine learning, and now here we are, Artificial Intelligence and Generative AI. AI has become ubiquitous – most people have used it and almost everyone has an opinion of it. As an engineer, I’m excited to apply all of this innovation into practical applications, and ultimately ensure it operates safely and securely.

    Generative AI is a broad term that can be used to describe any AI system that generates content. When we start to think about securing Generative AI – there are a few key concepts to understand.

    1. Generative AI can be a single model (such as a large language model) or consist of multiple models combined in various configurations.

    2. It can be single modal (ie, only text), or multi-modal (ie, text, speech, images) – this impacts what kinds of data the models are trained on.

    3. Data inputs into models can vary. Often we are talking about some form of mass data ingestion augmented with custom data. These data can either be structured and labeled, or labeled by the model based on certain patterns. When you run a model and the data is analyzed and fed through, in a matter of seconds, all of these factors coalesce into an output value. So as an example, an enterprise can deploy “generative AI” to help with their customer service using a “large language model” trained on “text and voice data from their previous customer service representatives” using a supervised method where customers have provided feedback for each of the previous interactions to rate their interaction.

    In addition to the deployment of Generative AI, we should also take into consideration two foundational parts that make up those models described above, training and inference.

    Reply
33. November 11, 2024 at 9:10 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    https://surfshark.com/blog/how-to-encrypt-internet-connection-traffic

    https://www.bsi.bund.de/EN/Themen/Verbraucherinnen-und-Verbraucher/Informationen-und-Empfehlungen/Onlinekommunikation/Verschluesselt-kommunizieren/verschluesselt-kommunizieren_node.html

    Reply
34. November 11, 2024 at 9:12 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    https://www.reddit.com/r/computing/comments/1vbkc8/eli5_why_arent_all_internet_communications/

    Reply
35. November 14, 2024 at 7:22 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    Citrix, Cisco, Fortinet Zero-Days Among 2023s Most Exploited Vulnerabilities

    Most of the top frequently exploited vulnerabilities in 2023 were initially exploited as zero-days, according to data from government agencies.

    https://www.securityweek.com/citrix-cisco-fortinet-zero-days-among-2023s-most-exploited-vulnerabilities/

    Reply
36. November 14, 2024 at 12:18 pm

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    Suurin osa maailman salasanoista murtuu alle sekunnissa
    https://etn.fi/index.php/13-news/16837-tuttu-qwerty123-on-edelleen-suosituin-salasana

    NordPass on julkaissut kuudetta kertaa vuotuisen 200 yleisintä salasanaa -tutkimuksensa, joka paljastaa kansainvälisesti suositut salasanat sekä 44 eri maan salasanat. Maailmalla yleisin salasana on nerokas ”123456” ja Suomen yleisimpänä jatkaa kestosuosikki ”qwerty123”.

    Lähes puolet maailman salasanoista tänä vuonna koostuu helpoista näppäinyhdistelmistä, kuten “qwerty”, “1q2w3e4r5t” ja “123456789.” Suomi ei ole tässä asiassa poikkeus, vaan tällaiset salasanat ovat Suomenkin listan kärjessä.

    Nämä salasanat ovat kirjaimellisesti idioottivarmoja, sillä 78 prosenttia maailman yleisimmistä salasanoista voidaan murtaa alle sekunnissa.

    Tästä voidaan päätellä, että suurin osa niistä, jotka valitsevat vapaa-ajalla idioottimaisia salasanoja, tekevät niin yritysten verkoissakin. NordPassin aiemmin tekemässä tutkimuksessa kävi ilmi, että yhdellä internetin käyttäjällä on keskimäärin 168 salasanaa henkilökohtaiseen käyttöön ja 87 salasanaa työkäyttöön. Tämän salasanamäärän hallitseminen on yksinkertaisesti liian haastavaa monille, ja asiantuntijat sanovatkin, että on luonnollista, että käyttäjät luovat heikkoja salasanoja ja käyttävät samoja salasanoja eri tileillä.

    Hakkerit toki kiittävät tästä laiskuudesta.

    Reply
37. November 15, 2024 at 9:04 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    Micro-Segmentation: A look at the future of network security
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmG5DVcRRSM

    This video seeks to inform on an emerging network security approach aptly named micro-segmentation. This was developed as an assignment at the University of South Florida.

    Reply
38. November 15, 2024 at 9:05 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    API Authentication: JWT, OAuth2, and More
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJA8tP74KD0

    In this video, we dive into API Authentication, covering why it’s essential, how it secures API access, and four common methods: Basic Authentication, API Key Authentication, JWT Authentication, and OAuth. We’ll explore each method’s advantages and trade-offs and explain the crucial difference between authentication and authorization. Perfect for developers, this guide will help you understand how to secure your APIs effectively.

    0:00 – Introduction to API Authentication: Importance and Overview
    0:30 – What is API Authentication?
    1:53 – Basic Authentication: Username & Password in HTTP Header
    2:19 – API Key Authentication: Unique Keys for API Requests
    2:57 – JWT Authentication: Stateless and Scalable Token System
    3:54 – OAuth Authentication: Secure Third-Party Access with Tokens
    4:48 – Authentication vs Authorization: Key Differences
    5:40 – Conclusion: Choosing the Right API Authentication Method

    Reply
39. November 15, 2024 at 9:05 am

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    OAuth 2 Explained In Simple Terms
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZV5yTm4pT8g

    Reply
40. November 17, 2024 at 12:21 pm

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    https://www.fellowmind.com/fi-fi/ajankohtaista/tietoturva-on-viime-kadessa-aina-johdon-vastuulla-nis2-kyberturvadirektiivi/

    Reply
41. November 17, 2024 at 12:30 pm

    Tomi Engdahl says:

    https://www.kyberturvallisuuskeskus.fi/fi/ajankohtaista/kyberturvallisuuskeskuksen-viikkokatsaus-442024#76879-0
    Näin tarkistat kotiverkkosi näkyvyyden internettiin

    Reply