May 14, 2015 By Shane Schick 2 min read

There have always been concerns about the security of cloud computing environments, but recent news regarding the so-called VENOM flaw may send some organizations into full-blown panic mode.

An acronym for “virtualized environment neglected operations manipulation,” the VENOM flaw was first discovered by researchers at a firm called CrowdStrike based in Irvine, California. The issue stems from a problem in the code for virtual floppy disk controllers in an open-source technology called QUEMU, which serves as a sort of window or hypervisor in virtual machine environments. While floppy drives are ancient history to many IT administrators, hackers could still use the exploit to penetrate systems that use common tools to virtualize their IT infrastructure, provided they have root or admin permissions.

ZDNet reported that major open source organizations have been quick to offer patches, including Red Hat Software, Xen and those behind the QUEMU project itself. In some cases, making the necessary changes will involve executing a series of commands and even powering-off virtual machine guests, which could have an operational impact in some organizations. Of course, that’s still preferable to a cybercriminal taking advantage of the VENOM flaw, which could threaten an enormous number of data centers.

The nature of the VENOM flaw quickly drew comparisons with last year’s Heartbleed, but in some respects it may be even worse. That’s because, as Fortune explained, there has long been a sense that virtualization technology allowed companies to isolate virtual machines in a way that would make them safer. If hackers know what they’re doing, they could use a bug like this to overwrite parts of a machine’s memory, execute code and do other damage.

Given that virtual machines allow companies to host compute resources on behalf of other firms, the VENOM flaw could also tarnish the reputations of major cloud computing firms. VentureBeat noted that Amazon, Rackspace and Google were all quick to reassure customers and prospects that their data centers are not at risk or that they had already addressed the vulnerability. Still, there may be questions about how they stay on top of potential bugs like this and how quickly they can plug any holes.

On the other hand, it’s important to stress that there have been no reports of the VENOM flaw leading to any actual data theft, and CSO Online suggested the hype and “marketing” around the potential danger has already gotten out of hand. For most organizations, however, it only takes being bitten once by a major security problem to become twice shy.

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