Cyfera teCHNOLOGY

Cyfera Technology for your business

Welcome to Cyfera Technology! Set this site as your homepage so you have the latest information about all things related to the company.

About us

At Cyfera Technology, we are dedicated to delivering exceptional, reliable, and valuable services tailored to our clients' unique needs. Our mission is to educate and empower businesses by demystifying complex cybersecurity and AI concepts, seamlessly integrating them into their business processes and technologies. By enhancing their cybersecurity posture, we help our clients achieve their strategic objectives with confidence.

 

Our team comprises a diverse and versatile group of professionals with extensive expertise across various business and technology domains, including information technology, IT infrastructure, IT audit, cybersecurity, and vendor risk management. Our consultants have worked with a range of industries, from financial services, banking, and insurance to manufacturing and software development, bringing a wealth of practical experience and industry-specific knowledge to every engagement.

 

At Cyfera Technology, we pride ourselves on our ability to adapt and innovate, ensuring that our clients remain at the forefront of industry standards and best practices. We offer a comprehensive suite of services, from cybersecurity risk assessments and compliance audits to AI-driven data analytics and customized training programs. Our proactive approach ensures that our clients not only meet regulatory requirements but also enhance their operational efficiency and resilience against cyber threats.

 

We believe in building long-term partnerships with our clients, characterized by trust, transparency, and mutual respect. Our commitment to continuous improvement and client satisfaction drives us to deliver solutions that are not only effective but also sustainable. Let Cyfera Technology be your trusted advisor in navigating the complexities of cybersecurity and AI, and together, we'll create a safer, smarter, and more secure future. 

Contacts

Name *
Email *
Message *

Common Misconceptions About Zero Trust

 

Zero trust is a security framework that challenges traditional network security models by assuming that any device or user on the network could potentially be compromised. Despite its growing popularity, there are still several misconceptions about zero trust. Let's clarify some of the most common ones:

 

1. Zero Trust Means No Trust

 

While the name "zero trust" might suggest a complete lack of trust, it's actually about conditional trust. It means that no device or user is inherently trusted, and access is granted based on continuous verification and authorization. 

 

 
2. Zero Trust is a Single Product

 

Zero trust is not a specific product or technology. It's a framework that requires a combination of technologies, policies, and procedures to be implemented effectively. This can include identity and access management, microsegmentation, network access control, and data protection.  

 

 
3. Zero Trust is Only for Large Enterprises

 

While zero trust can be complex to implement for large organizations, it's equally applicable to smaller businesses. The principles of zero trust can be adapted to fit different organizational needs and resources.  

 

 
4. Zero Trust is a Silver Bullet

 

Zero trust is a significant step towards improving security, but it's not a guaranteed solution for all cyber threats. It's essential to combine zero trust with other security measures, such as regular patching, employee training, and incident response planning.

 
 
5. Zero Trust is Too Expensive

 

While implementing zero trust might require an initial investment, the long-term benefits can outweigh the costs. By preventing breaches and data loss, zero trust can help organizations avoid costly downtime and reputational damage.

 

 

By understanding these common misconceptions and their underlying truths, organizations can make informed decisions about adopting zero trust and effectively implement it to enhance their cybersecurity posture.

 

 

Core Principles of Zero Trust

 

At the heart of zero trust is a fundamental shift in security thinking. Instead of trusting everything within a network perimeter, the zero trust model assumes that any device or user could be compromised. This leads to several core principles:

 
1. Continuous Verification

 

  • Authentication: Every user and device must be authenticated before accessing resources.

  • Authorization: Only authorized users and devices with the necessary permissions should be granted access.

  • Dynamic Authorization: Access privileges should be adjusted based on changing conditions, such as user role or location.

 
2. Least Privilege Access

 

  • Need-to-Know: Users should only have access to the data and applications they need to perform their jobs.

  • Privilege Separation: Critical functions should be divided among multiple users to prevent a single point of failure.

 
3. Micro-Segmentation

 

  • Isolation: Networks should be divided into smaller segments to limit the impact of a breach.

  • Granular Control: Access controls can be applied at a fine-grained level to restrict lateral movement within the network.

 
4. Data-Centric Security

 

  • Data Classification: Data should be classified based on its sensitivity and protected accordingly.

  • Encryption: Data should be encrypted both at rest and in transit to protect it from unauthorized access.

 

Key Technologies for Implementing Zero Trust

 

  • Identity and Access Management (IAM): Centralized management of user identities and access privileges.

  • Network Access Control (NAC): Enforces policies for network access based on user identity, device health, and other factors.

  • Micro-segmentation: Divides the network into smaller segments to limit lateral movement of threats.

  • Data Loss Prevention (DLP): Prevents sensitive data from being exfiltrated from the network.

  • Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR): Detects and responds to threats on endpoints, such as laptops and smartphones.

  • Security Orchestration, Automation, and Response (SOAR): Automates security tasks and responses to incidents.

  • Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA): Provides secure access to applications and data from any location.

  • Secure Access Service Edge (SASE): Combines wide area network (WAN) and security functions into a single cloud-based service.

 

Top AI News

powered by Surfing Waves
powered by Surfing Waves

Top Information Security News

powered by Surfing Waves
powered by Surfing Waves
powered by Surfing Waves
powered by Surfing Waves
powered by Surfing Waves
powered by Surfing Waves

Cybersecurity Vulnerabilities and Exposures

powered by Surfing Waves

Information Security Frameworks

ISO 27001

 

ISO is an independent, non-governmental international organization with a membership of 163 national standards bodies. Through its members, it brings together experts to share knowledge and develop voluntary, consensus-based, market relevant International Standards that support innovation and provide solutions to global challenges.

COBIT5

 

As an independent, nonprofit, global association, ISACA engages in the development, adoption and use of globally accepted, industry-leading knowledge and practices for information systems. Previously known as the Information Systems Audit and Control Association, ISACA now goes by its acronym only, to reflect the broad range of IT governance professionals it serves.

NIST

 

 

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) was founded in 1901 and now part of the U.S. Department of Commerce. NIST is one of the nation's oldest physical science laboratories. Congress established the agency to remove a major challenge to U.S. industrial competitiveness at the time—a second-rate measurement infrastructure that lagged behind the capabilities of the United Kingdom, Germany, and other economic rivals. 

SABSA

 

SABSA is a proven methodology for developing business-driven, risk and opportunity focused Security Architectures at both enterprise and solutions level that traceably support business objectives. It is also widely used for Information Assurance Architectures, Risk Management Frameworks, and to align and seamlessly integrate security and risk management into IT Architecture methods and frameworks.

COSO

 

 

The Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission COSO) is a joint initiative of the five private sector organizations and is dedicated to providing thought leadership through the development of frameworks and guidance on enterprise risk management, internal control and fraud deterrence.

FFIEC

 

 

In light of the increasing volume and sophistication of cyber threats, the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC) developed the Cybersecurity Assessment Tool (Assessment) to help institutions identify their risks and determine their cybersecurity preparedness. The Assessment provides a repeatable and measurable process for financial institutions to measure their cybersecurity preparedness over time.

Information Security Awareness & Education

CWE Ranking

Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE) Ranking

Rank ID Name Score
[1] CWE-79 Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting') 46.82
[2] CWE-787 Out-of-bounds Write 46.17
[3] CWE-20 Improper Input Validation 33.47
[4] CWE-125 Out-of-bounds Read 26.5
[5] CWE-119 Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer 23.73
[6] CWE-89 Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection') 20.69
[7] CWE-200 Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor 19.16
[8] CWE-416 Use After Free 18.87
[9] CWE-352 Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) 17.29
[10] CWE-78 Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection') 16.44
[11] CWE-190 Integer Overflow or Wraparound 15.81
[12] CWE-22 Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal') 13.67
[13] CWE-476 NULL Pointer Dereference 8.35
[14] CWE-287 Improper Authentication 8.17
[15] CWE-434 Unrestricted Upload of File with Dangerous Type 7.38
[16] CWE-732 Incorrect Permission Assignment for Critical Resource 6.95
[17] CWE-94 Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection') 6.53
[18] CWE-522 Insufficiently Protected Credentials 5.49
[19] CWE-611 Improper Restriction of XML External Entity Reference 5.33
[20] CWE-798 Use of Hard-coded Credentials 5.19
[21] CWE-502 Deserialization of Untrusted Data 4.93
[22] CWE-269 Improper Privilege Management 4.87
[23] CWE-400 Uncontrolled Resource Consumption 4.14
[24] CWE-306 Missing Authentication for Critical Function 3.85
[25] CWE-862 Missing Authorization 3.77

OWASP Top 10 Machine Learning Security Risks

  1. ML01:2023 Input Manipulation Attack
  2. ML02:2023 Data Poisoning Attack
  3. ML03:2023 Model Inversion Attack
  4. ML04:2023 Membership Inference Attack
  5. ML05:2023 Model Theft
  6. ML06:2023 AI Supply Chain Attacks
  7. ML07:2023 Transfer Learning Attack
  8. ML08:2023 Model Skewing
  9. ML09:2023 Output Integrity Attack
  10. ML10:2023 Model Poisoning

OWASP Top 10 for LLM Applications

LLM01 - Prompt Injection

This manipulates a large language model (LLM) through crafty inputs, causing unintended actions by the LLM. Direct injections overwrite system prompts, while indirect ones manipulate inputs from external sources.

LLM02 - Insecure Output Handling

This vulnerability occurs when an LLM output is accepted without scrutiny, exposing backend systems. Misuse may lead to severe consequences like XSS, CSRF, SSRF, privilege escalation, or remote code execution.

LLM03 - Training Data Poisoning

This occurs when LLM training data is tampered, introducing vulnerabilities or biases that compromise security, effectiveness, or ethical behavior. Sources include Common Crawl, WebText, OpenWebText, & books.

LLM04 - Model Denial of Service

Attackers cause resource-heavy operations on LLMs, leading to service degradation or high costs. The vulnerability is magnified due to the resource-intensive nature of LLMs and unpredictability of user inputs.

LLM05: Supply Chain Vulnerabilities

LLM application lifecycle can be compromised by vulnerable components or services, leading to security attacks. Using third-party datasets, pre-trained models, and plugins can add vulnerabilities.

LLM06: Sensitive Information Disclosure

LLMs may inadvertently reveal confidential data in their responses, leading to unauthorized data access, privacy violations, and security breaches. It's crucial to implement data sanitization and strict user policies to mitigate this.

LLM07: Insecure Plugin Design

LLM plugins can have insecure inputs and insufficient access control. This lack of application control makes them easier to exploit and can result in consequences like remote code execution.

LLM08: Excessive Agency

LLM-based systems may undertake actions leading to unintended consequences. The issue arises from excessive functionality, permissions, or autonomy granted to the LLM-based systems.

LLM09: Overreliance

Systems or people overly depending on LLMs without oversight may face misinformation, miscommunication, legal issues, and security vulnerabilities due to incorrect or inappropriate content generated by LLMs.

LLM10: Model Theft

This involves unauthorized access, copying, or exfiltration of proprietary LLM models. The impact includes economic losses, compromised competitive advantage, and potential access to sensitive information.

OWASP Top 10 Application Security Risks - 2017

A1:2017-Injection

Injection flaws, such as SQL, NoSQL, OS, and LDAP injection, occur when untrusted data is sent to an interpreter as part of a command or query. The attacker's hostile data can trick the interpreter into executing unintended commands or accessing data without proper authorization.

A2:2017-Broken Authentication

Application functions related to authentication and session management are often implemented incorrectly, allowing attackers to compromise passwords, keys, or session tokens, or to exploit other implementation flaws to assume other users' identities temporarily or permanently.

A3:2017-Sensitive Data Exposure

Many web applications and APIs do not properly protect sensitive data, such as financial, healthcare, and PII. Attackers may steal or modify such weakly protected data to conduct credit card fraud, identity theft, or other crimes. Sensitive data may be compromised without extra protection, such as encryption at rest or in transit, and requires special precautions when exchanged with the browser.

A4:2017-XML External Entities (XXE)

Many older or poorly configured XML processors evaluate external entity references within XML documents. External entities can be used to disclose internal files using the file URI handler, internal file shares, internal port scanning, remote code execution, and denial of service attacks.

A5:2017-Broken Access Control

Restrictions on what authenticated users are allowed to do are often not properly enforced. Attackers can exploit these flaws to access unauthorized functionality and/or data, such as access other users' accounts, view sensitive files, modify other users' data, change access rights, etc.

A6:2017-Security Misconfiguration

Security misconfiguration is the most commonly seen issue. This is commonly a result of insecure default configurations, incomplete or ad hoc configurations, open cloud storage, misconfigured HTTP headers, and verbose error messages containing sensitive information. Not only must all operating systems, frameworks, libraries, and applications be securely configured, but they must be patched/upgraded in a timely fashion.

A7:2017-Cross-Site Scripting (XSS)

XSS flaws occur whenever an application includes untrusted data in a new web page without proper validation or escaping, or updates an existing web page with user-supplied data using a browser API that can create HTML or JavaScript. XSS allows attackers to execute scripts in the victim's browser which can hijack user sessions, deface web sites, or redirect the user to malicious sites.

A8:2017-Insecure Deserialization

Insecure deserialization often leads to remote code execution. Even if deserialization flaws do not result in remote code execution, they can be used to perform attacks, including replay attacks, injection attacks, and privilege escalation attacks.

A9:2017-Using Components with Known Vulnerabilities

Components, such as libraries, frameworks, and other software modules, run with the same privileges as the application. If a vulnerable component is exploited, such an attack can facilitate serious data loss or server takeover. Applications and APIs using components with known vulnerabilities may undermine application defenses and enable various attacks and impacts.

A10:2017-Insufficient Logging&Monitoring

Insufficient logging and monitoring, coupled with missing or ineffective integration with incident response, allows attackers to further attack systems, maintain persistence, pivot to more systems, and tamper, extract, or destroy data. Most breach studies show time to detect a breach is over 200 days, typically detected by external parties rather than internal processes or monitoring.

Information Security Reference Architectures