<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Microsoft o365 MFA not secured in Threats</title>
    <link>https://community.isc2.org/t5/Threats/Microsoft-o365-MFA-not-secured/m-p/52044#M593</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;a href="https://community.isc2.org/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/311867713"&gt;@denbesten&lt;/a&gt;I think if you look across the cloud providers, AWS, Azure and GCP:&amp;nbsp; Azure is based on Active Directory and Federation, but if the controls are immature, and attacked, it will fall.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Both AWS and GCP use JSON ,and in particular they are adding "Attributes" which provide far more refined policies specific to a organisations needs and integration requirements.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Yes, Azure needs to make more investment, but this should not be placed on the clients, it should come from the provider.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regards&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Caute_Cautim&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 19 Jul 2022 04:11:19 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Caute_cautim</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2022-07-19T04:11:19Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Microsoft o365 MFA not secured</title>
      <link>https://community.isc2.org/t5/Threats/Microsoft-o365-MFA-not-secured/m-p/52022#M590</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;In case you are not aware, there were recent news of attacks bypassing o365 MFA.&amp;nbsp; Microsoft had published a blog to explain the attack below.&amp;nbsp; It seems to suggest the solution is to spend more money to upgrade your Microsoft license to M365 E3/E5 to enable risky sign-in conditional access and subscribe to Microsoft cloud defender?? But why did the company produced a&amp;nbsp; product with serious flaw in the first place?&amp;nbsp; What's your view?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://www.helpnetsecurity.com/2022/07/13/office-365-phishing-mfa/" target="_blank"&gt;Phishers steal Office 365 users' session cookies to bypass MFA, commit payment fraud - Help Net Security&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://www.microsoft.com/security/blog/2022/07/12/from-cookie-theft-to-bec-attackers-use-aitm-phish" target="_blank"&gt;https://www.microsoft.com/security/blog/2022/07/12/from-cookie-theft-to-bec-attackers-use-aitm-phish&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 16 Jul 2022 03:43:32 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.isc2.org/t5/Threats/Microsoft-o365-MFA-not-secured/m-p/52022#M590</guid>
      <dc:creator>CY</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-07-16T03:43:32Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Microsoft o365 MFA not secured</title>
      <link>https://community.isc2.org/t5/Threats/Microsoft-o365-MFA-not-secured/m-p/52024#M591</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I don't view this as "produced defective product", but rather as an escalation in an ongoing arms-race.&amp;nbsp; As the adversary continues to evolve, so must the defenses.&amp;nbsp;In this particular example, I have to believe that Microsoft is following their own advice and blocking risky access to login.microsoftonline.com itself, beyond just asking customers to beef-up their IdP.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;This scenario makes me glad to have defense-in-depth.&amp;nbsp; I have a SAML/MFA provider for authentication, an email filtering service to detect spam/phishes, and a web filter to detect malicious web sites.&amp;nbsp; All three layers are from different manufacturers, and all would need to fail for this particular attack to succeed.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;That said, there is also the theory that one should not let a good crisis go to waste.&amp;nbsp; Now that the trade rags have alerted my bosses to weaknesses in the auth layer, it is a&amp;nbsp;good time to propose tweaking up the nerd-knobs on the email and web layers.&amp;nbsp; And who knows, I might just "forget" to turn them back down after MS has deployed their mitigation.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 17 Jul 2022 06:10:13 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.isc2.org/t5/Threats/Microsoft-o365-MFA-not-secured/m-p/52024#M591</guid>
      <dc:creator>denbesten</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-07-17T06:10:13Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Microsoft o365 MFA not secured</title>
      <link>https://community.isc2.org/t5/Threats/Microsoft-o365-MFA-not-secured/m-p/52044#M593</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;a href="https://community.isc2.org/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/311867713"&gt;@denbesten&lt;/a&gt;I think if you look across the cloud providers, AWS, Azure and GCP:&amp;nbsp; Azure is based on Active Directory and Federation, but if the controls are immature, and attacked, it will fall.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Both AWS and GCP use JSON ,and in particular they are adding "Attributes" which provide far more refined policies specific to a organisations needs and integration requirements.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Yes, Azure needs to make more investment, but this should not be placed on the clients, it should come from the provider.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regards&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Caute_Cautim&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Jul 2022 04:11:19 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.isc2.org/t5/Threats/Microsoft-o365-MFA-not-secured/m-p/52044#M593</guid>
      <dc:creator>Caute_cautim</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-07-19T04:11:19Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

