Emerging Technologies in Cybersecurity (C844) – Performance Assessment GRP1 Task 2 WLAN & Mobile Security Plan C844 – Task 2
Prepared by:
Name Redacted Page 1 of 5 1 / 2
Emerging Technologies in Cybersecurity (C844) – Performance Assessment GRP1 Task 2 Executive Summary The purpose of this performance assessment is to provide security recommendations in response to a scenario describing a small startup organization named Alliah. These security recommendations include describing four vulnerabilities along with their respective mitigations. Two of the vulnerabilities discussed are related to WLAN and the other two describe mobile-related vulnerabilities. Additionally, preventative security recommendations will be explored, including technical and logical controls to ensure the utmost care of the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of Alliah’s information and assets. Finally, a bring-your-own-device (BYOD) solution will be described that is most befitting for a small organization.WLAN Vulnerabilities & Recommendations Based upon the description of Alliah’s current WLAN implementation, two of the most common vulnerabilities and their respective mitigations are detailed below.The first WLAN vulnerability to address is weak or non-existent WLAN encryption. This varies in severity depending upon the WLAN configuration. In this case, since the scenario doesn’t mention the use of a secret key used to connect to the corporate Wi-Fi, it is assumed that the access points were configured with no password, meaning that the WLAN encryption is non-existent. Norton Antivirus (n.d.) lists two attacks that take advantage of this type of vulnerability, which are “Man-in-the-Middle” (MitM) attacks and “Rogue Hotspots.” Their collection of Wi-Fi articles describes MitM attacks as giving hackers a way to easily see a victim’s web traffic if they are connected to the same wireless network, including passwords, sensitive data, and any other web browsing. The articles also provide more detail about rogue hotspots, which are a Wi-Fi network almost identical to the real Wi-Fi network, designed to lure victims into using the fake one. When users connect to the fake wireless network, they become potential victims in a similar way to MitM attacks.Business.com (2018) describes a best practice for securing a WLAN using WPA2 Enterprise, which includes integrating with a Remote Authentication Dial-In User Service, known more simply as RADIUS.This implementation provides password protection and ties the authentication to individual user accounts. One of the benefits of this approach is the ease of onboard or offboarding a new employee or contractor. The alternate approach would be using WPA2 Personal and using a shared passphrase [ CITATION Nik19 \l 1033 ]. This is also a good security practice and could be used as a secondary or temporary solution but would necessitate a new shared passphrase for the entire company each time someone left the organization. Both WPA2 Personal and WPA2 Enterprise would be significantly more secure than using no password, but with a growing organization, WPA2 Enterprise is the best solution.The second WLAN vulnerability to address is the physical location of the wireless access points to prevent tampering and to ensure wireless signals are limited to the areas controlled by Alliah. According to the website WebTitan (2018), if an access point is placed in an insecure location, tampering such as resetting access points can occur. Additionally, if physical access can be gained, then the network cable connecting the access point could also be used to gain unauthorized access to the network.Barnes & O’Farrell describe a solution to address this vulnerability in their book “Hackproofing Your Wireless Network” (2002): First, to prevent tampering, install the access points in a way where they are Page 2 of 5
- / 2