![Risk.net](https://www.risk.net/sites/default/files/styles/print_logo/public/2018-09/print-logo.png?itok=1TpHrpuP)
Web malware spreads 35%, says security survey
April witnessed a 35% proliferation of internet malware attacks, hitting the biggest sites and the web’s vast “long tail” of smaller websites, according to research by security firm Scansafe
LONDON – Web-based threats from malware - software that is designed to infiltrate or damage computer systems - are “growing exponentially”, with a 35% rise in April alone, according to monthly research by web security firm Scansafe. More than 500,000 high-profile sites such as the United Nations’ website have had their databases targeted by the latest wave of a so-called ‘SQL injection’. Meanwhile an ‘iframe injection’ is misdirecting search queries to malware downloads on a multitude of middle-tier sites that, although relatively small individually, together constitute the ‘long tail’ of the internet.
Searches made on infected sites using popular consumer security software such as McAfee SiteAdvisor failed to flag or block the sites. The research is based on billions of web requests Scansafe logs on behalf of business customers worldwide. The inability of consumer software to deflect such malware attacks is a growing threat both inside and outside the office – as more roaming employees compromise security accessing sensitive corporate material simultaneous to leisure sites.
“It is unlikely we have seen the last of either of these attacks. Given the improved targeting and growing number of compromises, web surfers will want to be increasingly cautious,” says Mary Landesman, a senior security researcher at Scansafe.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. Printing this content is for the sole use of the Authorised User (named subscriber), as outlined in our terms and conditions - https://www.infopro-insight.com/terms-conditions/insight-subscriptions/
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. Copying this content is for the sole use of the Authorised User (named subscriber), as outlined in our terms and conditions - https://www.infopro-insight.com/terms-conditions/insight-subscriptions/
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
Banks cry foul over shock decision from Basel Committee
Asset and liability management professionals question severity of criteria in revised IRRBB tests
Fresh EU push for single securities supervisor to compete with US
But MEP expresses ‘concern’ EU nations will stall revival of capital markets union
Discord deepens over fund-linked trades in FRTB
More banks use punitive approach to capital treatment under new trading book regime, irking regulators
AI, quantum computing and tokenisation set to transform finance – Menon
But significant barriers remain preventing the technologies from unlocking their full potential
Could the SEC revive the private fund adviser rule?
Industry experts deem a second life for the reviled rule unlikely
Vendors lack silver bullet for FRTB’s fund-linked issue
EU and UK legislators tried to ease capital charge by leaning on vendors, but problems persist
Does Basel’s internal loss multiplier add up?
As US agencies mull capital reforms, one regulator questions past losses as an indicator of future op risk
US Treasury official calls for SLR relief during market stress
Under Secretary Liang also urges scrutiny of “artificial incentives” for Treasury futures in 40-Act rules