Connect with us

E-Business

Gartner Reveals Five Styles of Advanced Threat Defense

Published

on

gartner.jpg
Kindly share this post

The threat of advanced targeted attacks, also known as advanced persistent threats, or APTs, has spawned a wave of innovation in the security market.

According to a document share by Lawrence Orans, Jeremy D’Hoinne, analysts at Gartner, a company that provides security managers with a framework to select and deploy the most-effective threat defense technologies, part of the key findings show that traditional defense-in-depth components are still necessary, but are no longer sufficient in protecting against advanced targeted attacks and advanced malware.

According to Lawrence Orans, Jeremy D’Hoinne, “Today’s threats require an updated layered defense model that utilizes “lean forward” technologies at three levels: network, payload (executables, files and Web objects) and endpoint; combining two or all three layers offers highly effective protection against today’s threat environment and many vendors fit squarely in one style, but also have some characteristics of adjacent styles. The trend will be for vendors to “bleed through” multiple styles as solutions mature”.

Analysis of the Key Findings

Traditional defense tools are failing to protect enterprises from advanced targeted attacks and the broader problem of advanced malware.

In 2013, enterprises will spend more than $13 billion on firewalls, intrusion prevention systems (IPSs), endpoint protection platforms and secure Web gateways (see Note 1).

Yet, advanced targeted attacks (ATAs) and advanced malware continue to plague enterprises. ATAs are considered advanced because of their ability to bypass traditional security mechanisms.

Five Styles of Advanced Threat Defense: Strengths & Weaknesses

Style 1 — Network Traffic Analysis

This style includes a broad range of techniques for Network Traffic Analysis. For example, anomalous DNS traffic patterns are a strong indication of botnet activity.

NetFlow records (and other flow record types) provide the ability to establish baselines of normal traffic patterns and to highlight anomalous patterns that represent a compromised environment.

Some tools combine protocol analysis and content analysis. The sample vendors we list all use internally developed signatureless techniques that have been effective in detecting advanced threats.

The strengths include, real-time detection; includes signatureless and signature-based techniques and endpoint agents are not required.

But the challenges include, it requires careful tuning and knowledgeable staff to avoid false positives; limited ability to block attacks (applies to out-of-band tools) and does not monitor traffic from off-network mobile endpoints.

Style 2 — Network Forensics

Network Forensics tools provide full-packet capture and storage of network traffic, and provide analytics and reporting tools for supporting incident response, investigative and advanced threat analysis need

The ability of these tools to extract and retain metadata differentiates these security-focused solutions from the packet capture tools aimed at the network operations buyer.

The strengths: Can deliver a high ROI (due to reducing incident response time and personnel); can reconstruct and replay flows and events over days or weeks, due to high-capacity storage options (for example, 200TB) and detailed reports can be used to help meet regulatory requirements, such as e-discovery or Payment Card Industry, for in-depth analysis and continuous monitoring of network traffic.

However, the challenges are the tools are complex, and skilled personnel are required to operate them; costs rise with the amount of data and the retention time; reports that analyze large amounts of data are time-intensive and may need to be run off-hours and does not capture traffic from off-network mobile endpoints.

Style 3 — Payload Analysis

Using a sandbox environment, the Payload Analysis technique is used to detect malware and targeted attacks on a near-real-time basis.

Payload Analysis solutions provide detailed reports about malware behavior, but they do not enable a postcompromise ability to track endpoint behavior over a period of days, weeks or months. Enterprises that seek that capability will need to use the incident response features of the solutions in Style 5 (Endpoint Forensics). The sandbox environment can reside on-premises or in the cloud.

Cloud-based Payload Analysis is a valid approach, but it is also a low barrier to entry for vendors.

Off-the-shelf hypervisors and virtualization technology, vendors can easily create sandbox environments and label them as Payload Analysis solutions.

Feedback from Gartner clients indicates that there is a wide range in the ability of these cloud-based Payload Analysis solutions to accurately detect malware.

As per the strengths, it is very effective in detecting malware that successfully bypasses signature-based solution; detailed reports highlight registry changes, API calls, process behavior and other information about the behavior of the malware (these reports are helpful for postcompromise analysis, but are not a substitute for the in-depth tools outlined in Style 2 and Style 5).

Also, there is an optional blocking capability for outbound callback to command and control centers for those on-premises-based (noncloud) solutions that can be placed in the line of traffic.

The challenges abound because behavioral analysis can take several seconds or minutes to complete, previously undetected malware is allowed to pass through, potentially compromising one or more endpoints; some evasion techniques can defeat the behavioral analysis technique.

For example, sleep timers, in which the malware code executes on a delayed basis (hours or days), may result in the malware going undetected during the time it is resident in the sandbox. Some vendors have techniques for detecting and thwarting sleep timer evasions.

It does not provide validation that the malware executed on endpoints. Just because the malware behaved a certain way in a simulated environment does not guarantee that it will behave that way on real endpoints.

Some malware does not install and execute as expected on every endpoint.

Many solutions only support a limited range of payloads. Some support executables (.exe files) only.

Most solutions only support Microsoft Windows, although some cloud-based approaches support Android. At the time of this writing, none support Apple Mac OS X.

Privacy and data protection concerns may prevent some enterprises from implementing cloud-based sandboxes.

Style 4 — Endpoint Behavior Analysis

There is more than one approach to Endpoint Behavior Analysis to defend against targeted attacks.

Several vendors focus on the concept of application containment to protect endpoints by isolating applications and files in virtual containers.

Other innovations in this style include system configuration, memory and process monitoring to block attacks, and techniques to assist with real-time incident response.

An entirely different strategy for ATA defense is to restrict application execution to only known good applications, also known as “whitelisting” (see “How to Successfully Deploy Application Control”).

The application containment approach allows malware to execute, but it does so in a contained environment where it cannot access content and information outside of its container. For example, the containers intercept kernel system calls and block malicious activity such as thread injection attacks.

By isolating Web browsing sessions, this approach protects users from malicious websites, including drive-by download sites and “watering holes.”

These solutions require an agent on every endpoint. (For more information, see “Technology Overview for Virtualization and Containment Solutions for Advanced Targeted Attacks.”).

The strengths are: blocks zero-day attacks and previously unseen malware (applies to application containment solutions); protects systems whether they are on or off the corporate network; provides basic forensic capabilities through analysis of blocked malware.

While the challenges are: deploying and managing endpoint agents can be operationally intensive and creates challenges in bring your own device (BYOD) environments; endpoint agents have varying restrictions for supporting operating systems, file types, applications and browsers and containment solutions utilize additional CPU and memory resources.

The more containers in use, the greater the impact, according to Gartner.

Style 5 — Endpoint Forensics

Endpoint Forensics serves as a tool for incident response teams. Endpoint agents collect data from the hosts they monitor.

These solutions are helpful for pinpointing which computers have been compromised by malware, and highlighting specific behavior of the malware.

Some solutions use various indicators of compromise (IOCs) to detect malicious behavior on the endpoint.

Examples of IOCs include suspicious Microsoft Windows registry key creation, DNS requests or installed binaries.

The strengths are, it helps automate the time-consuming task of incident response; monitors activity on hosts when they are on or off corporate networks; some agents provide limited containment features (for example, preventing previously detected malware from running again or on other endpoints in the company) and limited remediation capabilities.

The challenges include, a lack of ability to block zero-day attacks in real time; deploying and managing endpoint agents can be operationally intensive; at the time of this writing, support for non-Windows endpoints is limited and events are not always prioritized and typically require knowledgeable staff to investigate.

 


Kindly share this post

Nigeria CommunicationsWeek believes that technology makes life more exciting and helps improve the lives of people around Nigeria and indeed the world. So since 2007, we have devoted our energy to independent reportage of technology and how they affect lives.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Comments

E-Business

Kaspersky Reports 15% Growth in Malicious email Attacks in 2025

Published

on

Kindly share this post

According to Kaspersky telemetry, almost every second email – 44.99% of global traffic – was spam in 2025. Spam consists not only of unsolicited emails, but can also include various email threats such as scam, phishing and malware.

In 2025, individuals and corporate users encountered over 144 million malicious and potentially unwanted email attachments, representing a 15% increase compared to the previous year figures.

In 2025, APAC had the largest share of email antivirus detections: it reached 30%, followed by Europe with 21%. Next came Latin America (16%) and the Middle East (15%), Russia and CIS (12%) and Africa (6%). As for individual countries, China had the highest rate of malicious and potentially unwanted email attachments, with the share of email antivirus detections of 14%. Russia ranked second (11%), followed by Mexico (8%), Spain (8%) and Turkey (5%).

Email antivirus detections peaked moderately in June, July and November.

Key trends in email spam and phishing

Kaspersky’s annual analysis has also identified several persistent trends in the email spam and phishing threat landscape that are expected to continue into 2026:

  • Combination of various communication channels. Attackers lure email users into switching to messengers or calling fraudulent phone numbers. For instance, scam investment mailings may redirect victims to fake websites, where they are asked to provide their contact information, and then cybercriminals will follow up with a phone call.
  • Usage of diverse evasion techniques in phishing and malicious emails. Threat actors frequently try to disguise phishing URLs, for example, with the help of link protection services and QR codes. These QR codes are often embedded directly in email bodies or within PDF attachments, which not only conceals phishing links but also encourages users to scan them on mobile devices, potentially exploiting weaker security measures than corporate PCs.
  • Mailings exploiting diverse legitimate platforms. For example, Kaspersky experts discovered a fraudulent tactic that abuses OpenAI’s organisation creation and team invitation features to send spam emails from legitimate OpenAI addresses, potentially tricking users into clicking scam links or dialing fraudulent phone numbers. Additionally, a calendar-based phishing scheme, which originated in the late 2010s, resurfaced last year with a focus on corporate users.
  • Refining tactics in business email compromise (BEC) attacks. In 2025 attackers attempted to become even more persuasive by incorporating fake forwarded emails into their correspondence. These emails lacked thread-index headers or other headers, making it difficult to verify their legitimacy within an email conversation. 

“Email phishing shouldn’t be underestimated. Our report reveals that one in ten business attacks starts with phishing, with a significant proportion being Advanced Persistent Threats (APTs). In 2025, we saw an increase in the sophistication of targeted email attacks. Even the smallest details are meticulously crafted in these malicious campaigns, including the composition of sender addresses and the tailoring of content to real corporate events and processes.

“The commodification of generative AI has significantly amplified this threat, enabling attackers to craft convincing, personalised phishing messages at scale with minimal effort, automatically adapting tone, language and context to specific targets,” comments Roman Dedenok, anti-spam expert at Kaspersky.

 


Kindly share this post
Continue Reading

E-Business

Cybersafe Foundation Partners Google to Strengthen Cybersecurity Among CCIs in Africa

Published

on

Kindly share this post

The Cybersafe Foundation has collaborated with Google in strengthening cybersecurity resilience among Critical Community Institutions across Nigeria, Kenya, Ghana and South Africa with the launch of Resilio Africa.

 

Speaking at the event in Lagos, Confidence Staveley, Executive Director of the Cybersafe Foundation, noted that while many organizations recognize the risks posed by cyber threats, conversations often stall when it comes to implementation.

“Across Africa, Critical Community Institutions are facing an increase in cyberattacks often without the capacity to defend themselves. Sub-Saharan Africa is now experiencing some of the most aggressive cyber activity globally. According to a threat report by Kaspersky, the region recorded over 42 million web attacks and 95 million malware-based, on-device attacks in just the first half of 2025.

“What’s especially concerning is the nature of these attacks: spyware, password stealers, and backdoor tools dominate, with password-stealing malware increasing by more than 60%.

“In East Africa, the scale is even more stark. Kenya alone recorded 2.5 billion cyber-threat events in Q1 2025, driven largely by phishing, mobile money fraud, and misconfigured cloud services,” she stated.

According to her, the primary barrier is not a lack of willingness but limited financial capacity to fund adequate cybersecurity measures.

“The conversation drops off at the point of taking action,” she said, explaining that many institutions lack the budgets required to implement robust security systems.

She disclosed that the programme’s provision of 10,000 hours of expert cybersecurity consultation—offered at no cost to participating institutions would ordinarily represent services valued at over one million dollars. The support, funded through a grant from Google.org, will be delivered by specialists across four participating countries.

Staveley reaffirmed that the Cybersafe Foundation remains a non-profit organization focused on supporting vulnerable communities and institutions, and described Resilio Africa as a strategic intervention aimed at strengthening digital trust across the continent, ensuring that commerce and essential public services can operate securely in an increasingly digital society.

Although the programme currently covers Nigeria, Kenya, Ghana and South Africa, Staveley acknowledged that the cybersecurity challenges extend far beyond those countries, and expressed hope that demonstrated impact from the initial phase would attract additional funding to scale the initiative to more than the 200 critical community institutions currently targeted, including underserved Francophone nations.

“This work is free to the organizations we serve, but it is not free to deliver,” she noted, underscoring the need for sustainable funding.

Explaining her personal motivation, Staveley said she views Africa’s cybersecurity challenges as opportunities for impact. Despite her engagements on global platforms, she emphasized her commitment to Nigeria and the broader African continent, describing the region as both home and a priority.

She pointed to a growing mismatch between rising cyber threats and limited investment in cybersecurity infrastructure, arguing that bridging this gap is central to the Foundation’s mission.

Staveley also clarified that Resilio Africa will not collect or own user data from participating institutions. Instead, the programme will focus on strengthening internal controls, building capacity and guiding organizations toward improved data protection practices.

With Resilio Africa now underway, the Cybersafe Foundation aims to demonstrate how targeted support for critical community institutions can enhance digital security and build long-term resilience across Africa’s rapidly expanding digital economy.


Kindly share this post
Continue Reading

E-Business

Kaspersky Brings more Transparency to Threat Detection with New Hunt Hub

Published

on

Kindly share this post

Kaspersky has announced a major update to its Threat Intelligence Portal (TIP), introducing a new Hunt Hub section alongside an enhanced MITRE ATT&CK coverage map and a significantly expanded vulnerabilities database.

The update strengthens organisations’ ability to investigate threats, understand adversary behaviour, and proactively monitor the most relevant risks across their environments.

According to the Kaspersky Security Bulletin 2025 report, Kaspersky’s detection systems discovered an average of 500,000 malicious files per day in 2025, marking a 7% increase compared to the previous year. As cyberattacks become more sophisticated and frequent, security teams need more than alerts – they need clarity.

The newly launched Hunt Hub is designed to address growing market demand for greater transparency and deeper insight into how modern detection technologies work. Integrated into the Threat Landscape section of the Threat Intelligence Portal, Hunt Hub provides centralised access to Kaspersky’s threat hunting expertise and detection knowledge.

Hunt Hub includes Kaspersky Next EDR Expert hunts, also known as indicators of attack (IoA) or detection rules. All portal users can explore the catalogue of hunts and their descriptions, while Kaspersky Next EDR Expert customers gain extended access to detailed recommendations and detection logic presented in a convenient, SIGMA-like format. Each hunt is mapped to relevant MITRE ATT&CK tactics and techniques and linked to known threat actors, giving analysts clear context behind every detection.

By making detection logic visible and structured, Hunt Hub effectively removes the “black box” from threat detection. It allows security teams not only to respond to alerts, but also to understand why a detection was triggered and which threat it is designed to uncover – improving trust in security technologies and increasing the efficiency of threat investigation processes.

As part of the update, the MITRE ATT&CK coverage map within the Threat Landscape has been significantly enhanced. The portal now brings together product coverage across SIEM, EDR, NDR and Sandbox solutions, MITRE ATT&CK techniques with scoring, coverage percentages, and related Kaspersky Next EDR Expert hunts in a single, unified view. This enables organisations to assess how well their security stack covers relevant attack techniques and identify potential gaps in protection.

The Vulnerabilities section has also been expanded, with the CVE database now covering nearly 300,000 vulnerabilities. In addition, the portal provides more detailed information on vulnerabilities that have been exploited in real-world attacks, helping organisations prioritise remediation efforts based on actual threat activity.

“With the launch of Hunt Hub in the Kaspersky Threat Intelligence Portal, we are opening up our detection expertise and giving analysts clear visibility into how and why threats are detected. This transparency helps organisations move from reactive alert handling to informed threat hunting and proactive risk management,” comments Nikita Nazarov, Head of Threat Exploration at Kaspersky.

 


Kindly share this post
Continue Reading

Trending