Menu
2018 will be a year of biometric hacking, state-sponsored attacks and daring cyber heists

2018 will be a year of biometric hacking, state-sponsored attacks and daring cyber heists

What does 2018 have in store for cyber security, and could it possibly be worse than 2017?

There are only a couple of near-certainties for cyber security in 2018: that the market will continue to be buoyant and that attacks will become more sophisticated.

Gartner predicts worldwide security spending will reach $96 billion in 2018, up eight per cent from 2017 – good news for the cyber security industrial complex.  

It’s easy to see why because if any year can lay claim to be the one where cyber security problems really entered mainstream discourse, 2017 is a good candidate.

The year got started with a hangover from 2016 that suggested Russian interference in the run-up to America’s election, and possible interference in the Brexit vote from co-ordinated astroturfing campaigns on social media and forums.

That wheel kept turning and now ‘state sponsored’ has become something of a synonym, whether correctly or not, for ‘Russia’ – with businesses now trashing Kaspersky contracts based on allegations against the vendor.

In an increasingly connected world, where the chaos of so many different events and actors, nations, businesses, consumers and markets, legitimate or illegitimate, it’s naturally tough to chart where things might be headed without resorting to educated guesswork.

So read on for just that: where we see cyber security going in 2018.

Rogue AI

We don’t necessarily predict that 2018 is going to be the year the kill-all-humans trope comes to life. But cyber security vendor Darktrace, which uses machine learning to proactively hunt threats, is deeply concerned that if the good guys are looking at using AI, there’s a good chance hackers will be too.

Although truly AI-augmented malware has not yet been seen in the wild, director of cyber analysis at Darktrace Andrew Tsonchev told Computerworld UK that it’s not beyond imagination to think of sophisticated phishing tools that use machine learning to better target individuals or businesses.

"This is something we are super focused on – it's what we do – and we're very aware of the benefits, so we are very worried about the stage when there is widespread access and adoption of AI-enabled malware and toolkits for attackers to use," explained Tsonchev.

"That is because by and large, applications of AI unlock decision-making, and that is what human-driven attacks do. You have an attacker in a network, on a keyboard, and they can case the joint.

"They can see what the weak points are. They can adapt the attack path they follow to the particular environment they find themselves in, that's why they're hard to detect.

"We're very worried about malware that does that: malware that uses machine learning classifiers to land and observe the network and see what it can do."

Meanwhile, director of technology for Darktrace, Dave Palmer, added that automation will add a new layer of complexity to ransomware, spearphishing and IoT-based attacks.

“These attacks won’t discriminate," he said. "Merely participating in a national economy now appears to be sufficient to make an organisation vulnerable. No company is out of scope for malicious intent, even if they think they have nothing worth stealing."

McAfee, meanwhile, agreed that 2018 will see ransomware attacks augmented with AI – and that security companies and hackers will be locked in a ‘machine learning arms race’ where attackers and vendors try to outdo one another.

Attacks on critical systems, cyber warfare

Recent attacks in eastern Europe – and in particular, Ukraine – appear to have been something of a test-bed for wider attacks on critical systems and power grids.

So far most cyber attacks seem to be financially motivated, but if something can be weaponised, there’s every chance that it will.

In 2017, sister publication Techworld talked with Martin Libicki, professor, researcher and author for Atlanticist think tank the Rand Corporation.

Libicki explained that although the Tallinn Manual provided a loose policy framework for stringing together the establishing of ‘norms’ in acts of cyber warfare, it’s probably more useful to examine the behaviour of the country that arguably led the way in cyber warfare – the USA.

Its co-ordinated attack against Iran’s nuclear centrifuges with Stuxnet showed that although a country technically takes notice of international laws on warfare, there is a lot of room for interpretation.

“Modern warfare has changed,” said Rick McElroy, security adviser for Carbon Black and an ex-Marine. “We’re really at a point from a nation-state actor perspective where we need to have a discussion.

"What is a cyber weapon? When does a cyber attack become a physical attack that involves life, and infrastructure, and money? What is the definition of that?

"The precursor to any modern warfare is cyber warfare. Look at anybody’s playbook: the US wrote it, everybody else has just adopted it, how much of this is intelligence gathering to do physical attacks? How much of it is intelligence gathering to get the upper hand on the other nation?”


Follow Us

Join the newsletter!

Or

Sign up to gain exclusive access to email subscriptions, event invitations, competitions, giveaways, and much more.

Membership is free, and your security and privacy remain protected. View our privacy policy before signing up.

Error: Please check your email address.

Tags security

Show Comments