February 27, 2018 By David Bisson 2 min read

More than half of external attackers use social engineering as their point of entry into target organizations, a new study on incident response revealed.

According to F-Secure’s “Incident Response Report,” 52 percent of external attackers used social engineering to infiltrate target companies. The remaining 48 percent exploited technical weaknesses.

Social Engineering Attacks by the Numbers

The majority of social engineering instances occurred in targeted attacks, the study found. The financial, manufacturing, security and technology industries all experienced campaigns in which bad actors picked a target and went after it. In fact, some verticals, such as the gaming, public and service sectors, encountered only targeted campaigns.

Not all attacks were targeted, however. There were also opportunistic campaigns in which nefarious individuals struck simply because they saw an opportunity to do so. These attacks accounted for 45 percent of incident response investigations disclosed by the company’s security consultants.

F-Secure’s experts observed numerous subtypes of incidents. The most common subcategory was attacks in which threat actors abused a weakness in an organization’s internet infrastructure (21 percent). That’s just 1 percent higher than insider threats (20 percent), followed by malicious email attachments (18 percent), phishing/spear phishing (16 percent) and brute force (9 percent).

Security consultants also witnessed wide discrepancies in attackers’ progress. In 29 percent of cases, bad actors succeeded only in breaching the perimeter. Many others went further than that and capitalized on their headway by deploying malware (20 percent) and exfiltrating data (12 percent).

Room for Improvement in Incident Response

In total, 79 percent of these reported attacks were successful, while 13 percent were false positives resulting from “IT problems or other issues being misunderstood as security incidents by the reporting organization.”

F-Secure principal security consultant Tom Van de Wiele said he believes these findings reflect the challenge of figuring out whether an incident occurred. “Once an organization has the facts based on detection capabilities, and not rumors or assumptions, then the process can continue with the next step, which is usually containment and eradication,” he said, as quoted in an F-Secure blog post.

The authors of the report advised companies to invest in better detection capabilities, such as an endpoint detection and response solution. They also emphasized the importance of using threat intelligence to more quickly and efficiently respond to security incidents and eliminate false positives.

More from

NIST’s role in the global tech race against AI

4 min read - Last year, the United States Secretary of Commerce announced that the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has been put in charge of launching a new public working group on artificial intelligence (AI) that will build on the success of the NIST AI Risk Management Framework to address this rapidly advancing technology.However, recent budget cuts at NIST, along with a lack of strategy implementation, have called into question the agency’s ability to lead this critical effort. Ultimately, the success…

Researchers develop malicious AI ‘worm’ targeting generative AI systems

2 min read - Researchers have created a new, never-seen-before kind of malware they call the "Morris II" worm, which uses popular AI services to spread itself, infect new systems and steal data. The name references the original Morris computer worm that wreaked havoc on the internet in 1988.The worm demonstrates the potential dangers of AI security threats and creates a new urgency around securing AI models.New worm utilizes adversarial self-replicating promptThe researchers from Cornell Tech, the Israel Institute of Technology and Intuit, used what’s…

Passwords, passkeys and familiarity bias

5 min read - As passkey (passwordless authentication) adoption proceeds, misconceptions abound. There appears to be a widespread impression that passkeys may be more convenient and less secure than passwords. The reality is that they are both more secure and more convenient — possibly a first in cybersecurity.Most of us could be forgiven for not realizing passwordless authentication is more secure than passwords. Thinking back to the first couple of use cases I was exposed to — a phone operating system (OS) and a…

Topic updates

Get email updates and stay ahead of the latest threats to the security landscape, thought leadership and research.
Subscribe today