Timesdelhi.com

July 18, 2018
Category archive

cybercrime

US Air Force drone documents found for sale on the dark web for $200

in cybercrime/dark web/Delhi/drones/Government/hacks/India/insikt group/military/Politics/TC by

You never quite know what you’ll find on the dark web. In June, a threat intelligence team known as Insikt Group at security research firm Recorded Future discovered the sale of sensitive U.S. military information in the course of monitoring criminal activity on dark web marketplaces.

Insikt explains that an English-speaking hacker purported to have documentation on the MQ-9 Reaper unmanned aerial vehicle. Remarkably, the hacker appears to have been selling the goods for “$150 or $200.”

According to Insikt Group, the documents were not classified but also contained sensitive materials, including “the M1 Abrams maintenance manual, a tank platoon training course, a crew survival course, and documentation on improvised explosive device (IED) mitigation tactics.” Insikt notes that the other set of documents appears to have been stolen from a U.S. Army official or from the Pentagon, but the source was not confirmed.

The hacker appeared to have joined the forum explicitly for the sale of these documents and acknowledged one other incident of military documents obtained from an unaware officer. In the course of its investigation, Insikt Group determined that the hacker obtained the documents by accessing a Netgear router with misconfigured FTP login credentials. When the team corresponded with the hacker to confirm the source of hacked drone documents, the attacker disclosed that he also had access to footage from a MQ-1 Predator drone.

Here’s how he did it:

Utilizing Shodan’s popular search engine, the actors scanned large segments of the internet for high-profile misconfigured routers that use a standard port 21 to hijack all valuable documents from compromised machines.

Utilizing the above-mentioned method, the hacker first infiltrated the computer of a captain at 432d Aircraft Maintenance Squadron Reaper AMU OIC, stationed at the Creech AFB in Nevada, and stole a cache of sensitive documents, including Reaper maintenance course books and the list of airmen assigned to Reaper AMU. While such course books are not classified materials on their own, in unfriendly hands, they could provide an adversary the ability to assess technical capabilities and weaknesses in one of the most technologically advanced aircrafts.

Insikt Group notes that it is “incredibly rare” for hackers to sell military secrets on open marketplaces. “The fact that a single hacker with moderate technical skills was able to identify several vulnerable military targets and exfiltrate highly sensitive information in a week’s time is a disturbing preview of what a more determined and organized group with superior technical and financial resources could achieve,” the group warns.

News Source = techcrunch.com

The United States needs a Department of Cybersecurity

in China/Column/computer security/Congress/cyberattack/cybercrime/Cyberwarfare/Delhi/department of defense/Department of Homeland Security/department of justice/executive/Federal Bureau of Investigation/Government/hacking/India/national security/Politics/Russia/San Francisco/Security/spy/United States/Washington by

This week over 40,000 security professionals will attend RSA in San Francisco to see the latest cyber technologies on display and discuss key issues. No topic will be higher on the agenda than the Russian sponsored hack of the American 2016 election with debate about why the country has done so little to respond and what measures should be taken to deter future attempts at subverting our democracy.

For good reason. There is now clear evidence of Russian interference in the election with Special Counsel Mueller’s 37-page indictment of 13 Russians yet the attack on US sovereignty and stability has gone largely unanswered.  The $120 million set aside by Congress to address the Russian attacks remains unspent. We expelled Russian diplomats but only under international pressure after the poisoning of a former Russian spy and his daughter.

Recent sanctions are unlikely to change the behavior of the Putin administration. To put it bluntly, we have done nothing of substance to address our vulnerability to foreign cyberattacks. Meanwhile, our enemies gain in technological capability, sophistication and impact.

Along with the Russians, the Chinese, North Koreans, Iranians and newly derived nation states use cyber techniques on a daily basis to further their efforts to gain advantage on the geopolitical stage. It is a conscious decision by these governments that a proactive cyber program advances their goals while limiting the United States.

Krisztian Bocsi/Bloomberg via Getty Images

We were once dominant in this realm both technically and with our knowledge and skillsets. That playing field has been leveled and we sit idly by without the will or focus to try and regain the advantage. This is unacceptable, untenable and will ultimately lead to potentially dire consequences.

In March of this year, the US CyberCommand released  a vision paper called “Achieve and Maintain Cyberspace Superiority.” It is a call to action to unleash the country’s cyber warriors to fight  for our national security in concert with all other diplomatic and economic powers available to the United States.

It’s a start but a vision statement is not enough.  Without a proper organizational structure, the United States will never achieve operational excellence in its cyber endeavors.  Today we are organized to fail.  Our capabilities are distributed across so many different parts of the government that they are overwhelmed with bureaucracy, inefficiency and dilution of talent.

The Department of Homeland Security is responsible for national protection including prevention, mitigation and recovery from cyber attacks. The FBI, under the umbrella of the Department of Justice,  has lead responsibility for investigation and enforcement. The Department of Defense, including US CyberCommand, is in charge of national defense.  In addition, each of the various military branches  have their own cyber units. No one who wanted to win would organize a critical  capability in such a distributed and disbursed manner.

How could our law makers know what policy to pass? How do we recruit and train the best of the best in an organization, when it might just be a rotation through a military branch? How can we instantly share knowledge that benefits all when these groups don’t even talk to one another? Our current approach does not and cannot work.

Image courtesy of Colin Anderson

What is needed is a sixteenth branch of the Executive — a Department of Cybersecurity — that  would assemble the country’s best talent and resources to operate under a single umbrella and a single coherent policy.  By uniting our cyber efforts we would make the best use of limited resources and ensure seamless communications across all elements dealing in cyberspace. The department would  act on behalf of the government and the private sector to protect against cyberthreats and, when needed, go on offense.

As with physical defense, sometimes that means diplomacy or sanctions, and sometimes it means executing missions to cripple an enemy’s cyber-operations. We  have the technological capabilities, we have the talent, we know what to do but unless all of this firepower is unified and aimed at the enemy we might as well have nothing.

When a Department of Cybersecurity is discussed in Washington, it is usually rejected because of the number of agencies and departments affected. This is code for loss of budget and personnel. We must rise above turf battles if we are to have a shot at waging an effective cyber war. There are some who have raised concerns about coordination on offensive actions but they can be addressed by a clear chain of command with the Defense Department to avoid the potential of a larger conflict.

We must also not be thrown by comparisons to the Department of Homeland Security and conclude a Cybersecurity department would face the same challenges. DHS was 22 different agencies thrust into one. A Department of Cybersecurity would be built around a common set of skills, people and know-how all working on a common issue and goal. Very different.

Strengthening our cyberdefense is as vital as having a powerful standing army to defend ourselves and our allies. Russia, China and others have invested in their cyberwar capabilities to exploit our systems almost at will.

Counterpunching those efforts requires our own national mandate executed with Cabinet level authority. If we don’t bestow this level of importance to the fight and set ourselves up to win, interference in US elections will not only be repeated …  such acts will seem trivial in comparison to what could and is likely to happen.

News Source = techcrunch.com

Lessons from cybersecurity exits

in Adobe/Bain Capital/Business/ceo/chief information security officer/CIO/Column/computer security/CTO/cyber/cybercrime/Cyberwarfare/Delhi/Director/Economy/Entrepreneurship/head/India/IPOs/LinkedIn/Marc Andreessen/mulesoft/national security/nea/Okta/palo alto networks/partner/Phantom Cyber/PhishMe/Politics/Private equity/sailpoint/Sendgrid/splunk/Symantec/TPG Growth/trident capital/True Ventures/Twilio/unicorn/venrock/Venture Capital/zscaler by

To: ceo@cybersecuritystartup.com

Subject: Lessons from cybersecurity exits

Dear F0und3r:

What a month this has been for cybersecurity! One unicorn IPO and two nice acquisitions – Zscaler’s great debut on wall street,  a $300 million acquisition of Evident.io by Palo Alto Networks and a $350 million acquisition of Phantom Cyber by Splunk has gotten all of us excited.

Word on the street is that in each of those exits, the founders took home ~30% to 40% of the proceeds. Which is not bad for ~ 4 /5 years of work. They can finally afford to buy two bedroom homes in Silicon Valley.

Evident.IO Investment Rounds and Return estimates

Date

Select Investors

Round Size

Pre

Post

Dilution

Estimated Returns / Multiple of Invested Capital

Sep 2013

True Ventures

$1.5m

$5.25m

$6.75 m

22%

44X

Nov 2014

Bain Capital

$9.8 m

$18.1m

$28.0 m

35%

10.7X

Apr 2016

Venrock

$15.7 m

$35.0 m

$50.7 m

30%

6X

Feb 2017

GV

$22.0 m

$73.6 m

$95.5

23%

3.1X

My math is not that good but looks like even some VCs made a decent return. Back of the envelope scribbles indicate that True Ventures scored an estimated ~44X multiple on its seed investment. Others like Bain snagged a ~10X on the A round investment and Venrock which led the Series B round took home ~6X.

We see a similar pattern with Phantom Cyber, which got acquired by Splunk for $350 million. A little bird told me that they had booking in the range of $10 million. But before we all get too self-congratulatory, lets ask – why did these companies sell at $300 million to $350 million when everyone in the valley wants to ride a unicorn? Clearly, funds like GV, Bain and Kleiner could have fueled more rounds to make unicorns out of Evident.io and Phantom Cyber.

Phantom Cyber Investment Rounds and Return estimates

Date

Select Investors

Round Size

Pre

Post

Dilution

Estimated Returns / Multiple of Invested Capital

April 2015

Foundation Capital

$2.7m

$8.3 m

$11.04 m

14.50%

31.7

Sep 2015

Blackstone

$6.5m

$26.7 m

$33.2 m

15.90%

10.5

Jan 2017

KPCB

$13.5m

$83.0 m

$96.5 m

13.90%

3.6

(Data Source: Pitchbook)

Some of the board members might have peeked at the exit data gathered by the hardworking analysts at Momentum Cyber, a cybersecurity advisory firm. Look at security exit trends from 2010-2017. You might notice that ~68% of security exits were below $100 million. And as much as 85% of exits occur below $300 million.

Agreed that there are very few exceptional security CEO’s like Jay Chaudhry who grew up in a Himalayan village, and led ZScaler to an IPO. This was Jay’s fifth startup and he kept over 25.5% of the proceeds, with another 28.3% owned by his trust. TPG Growth owned less than 10%. After all, he himself funded a substantial part of the company (which raised a total of $110 million).  But not everyone is as driven, successful and it’s ok to sell if the exit numbers are meaningful. Remember what that bard of avon once said:

For I must tell you friendly in your ear,

Sell when you can; you are not for all markets.

(Shakespeare, As you Like It, Act 3, Scene V)

(68% of security exits occur below $100 million. M & A Data from 2010-2017. Source: Momentum Cyber)

My friend Dino Boukouris, a director at Momentum Cyber, offers some sage advice to all founders who are smitten by unicorns. “Before a founder raises their next round, I would reflect on the market’s ability to purchase companies. The exit data says it all. As you raise more capital, your exit value goes up, timing gets stretched and the number of buyers who can afford you drops.” Dino has a point, you see. As we inflate valuations, your work, my dear CEO, becomes much harder.

If you don’t believe Dino, let’s look at another recent exit, PhishMe, which was acquired by a private equity consortium for $400 million. That’s a nice number, correct? At the first look, you’ll notice that the dilution and financial return patterns are similar to that of Phantom. Except that PhishMe took 7 years and consumed $58 million of capital, while Phantom took 3 years and consumed $22.7 million. Timing and capital efficiency matter as much as exit value. It’s not just the exit value ~ but how long and how much. Back to my man, Dino who will gently remind you that for the 175 M & A transactions in 2017, the median value was $68 milion. Read that last sentence again — very slowly. $68 million. Ouch!

PhishMe Investment Rounds

Date

Round size

Select Investors

Pre-money Valuation

Post

Dilution

Returns / Multiple of Invested Capital

July 2012

$2.5m

Paladin

$10 m

12.5 m

12.20%

32.0

March 2015

$13 m

Paladin

$61 m

$74 m

13 %

5.4

July 2016

$42.5 m

Bessemer

$155 m

197 m

21%

2.0

(Data Source: Pitchbook)

Two years ago  in Cockroaches versus Unicorns – The Golden Age of Cybersecurity Startups cybersecurity founders were urged to avoid the unicorn hubris. A lot of bystanders, your ego included, will cheer you as you get higher valuations. But aren’t we all rational human beings, always making data based decisions?

Marc Andreessen will remind you that his best friend, Jim Barksdale, once said “If we have data, let’s look at data. If all we have are opinions, let’s go with mine.”   Since 2012, my VC friends have funded 1242 cybersecurity companies, investing a whopping $17.8bn. But chief information security officers say that they don’t need 1242 security products. One exhausted CISO told me they get fifteen to seventeen cold calls a day. They hide away from LinkedIn, being bombarded relentlessly.

Enrique Salem (former CEO of Symantec) and Noah Carr, both with Bain Capital are celebrating the successful sale of Evident.io. They pointed out that the founders — Tim Prendergast and Justin Lundy had lived the public cloud security problem in their previous lives at Adobe. “Such deep domain expertise allowed them to gain credibility in the market. It’s not easy to earn the trust of their customers. But given their strong engineering team, they were able to build an “easy to deploy” solution that could scale to customers with 1000s of AWS / Azure accounts. Customers were more willing to be reference-able, given this aligned relationship.”

(Source: Momentum Cyber)

You, my dear CEO, should take a page from that playbook. Because Jake Flomenberg, Partner at Accel Partners says, “CISOs are suffering from indigestion. They are looking to rationalize toolsets and add very selectively. New layer X for new threat vector Y is an increasingly tough sell.” According to Cack Wilhelm Partner at Accomplice, “Security analysts have alert fatigue, and CISOs have vendor fatigue.”  You are one of those possibly, wouldn’t you agree?

Besides indigestion and fatigue, the CISO roles have become demanding. William Lin, Principal at Trident Capital Cyber, a $300m fund pointed out that “the role of CISO has bifurcated into managing risk akin to an auditor and at the same time, managing complex engineering and technology environments.”  So naturally, they are managing their time more cautiously and not looking forward to meeting one more startup.

Erik Bloch, Director of Security Products at SalesForce says that while he keeps an open mind and is willing to look at innovative startups, it takes him weeks to arrange calls with the right people, and months to scope a POC. And let’s not forget the mountain of paperworks and legal agreements. “It’s great to say you have a Fortune 100 as an early customer, but just be warned that it’ll be a long, hard road to get there, so plan appropriately” he pointed out.

So, my dear founder, as the road gets harder, funding slows down. Look at 2017 —  despite all those big hacks, Series A funding dropped by 25% in 2017. Clearly, many of our seed funded companies are not delivering those Fortune 100 POC milestones. And are unable to raise a Series A.  Weep, if we must, but let us remind ourselves that out point solutions are not that impressive to the CISOs.

All the founders I know are trying to raise a formulaic $8m Series A on $40m pre. But not every startup that wants 8 on 40 deserves it. Revenues and growth rate, those quaint metrics matter more than ever. And some investors look for the quality of your customers.  Aaron Jacobson of NEA, a multi-billion dollar venture fund says, ”A key value driver is a thought-leader CISO as a customer. This is often a good indicator of value creation.“

Stage

Expected Revenue Run Rate

Estd. Round Size

Angel

None

Up to $2m

Series A

$1.5m to $3 m

$5m to $8m

Early VC

$5 m to $8 m

$15m to $25m

Late Stage VC

$6m to $10m

$30m to $50m

When markets get crowded and all startups sound the same, investors seek quality, or move to later stages.  They like to see well proven companies, that have solved a lot of basic problems. And eliminated riskier stumbling blocks. Like product-market fit, pricing and go-to-market issues. Naturally, the later stage valuations are rising faster. Money is chasing quality, growth and returns.

Median Post-Money Valuation by stage for cybersecurity companies (Source: Pitchbook)

The security IPOs offer a sobering view. This is a long journey, not for the faint of heart. Okta moved fast, consumed ~4X more capital as compared to Sailpoint and delivered great returns.

Company

Year Founded

Years to IPO

Total Capital raised prior to IPO

Revenues (2017)

Post Money of last round prior to IPO

Market Cap at IPO

ZScaler

2008

10

$180m

$176 m

$1.05 bn

$3.6 bn

Okta

2009

8

$231 m

$160 m

$1.18 bn

$2.1 bn

Forescout

2000

17

$159 m

$220 m

$1.0 bn

$806 mn

SailPoint

2004

13

$54.7 m

$186 m

N/A

$1.1 bn

Security IPOs (Source: Momentum Cyber, Pitchbook)

Innovating with go-to-market strategies

In the near term,  the big challenge for you, dear security founder, is selling in an over crowded market. If I were you, I’d remember that innovation should not be restricted to merely technology, but can extend into sales and marketing. We lack creativity when it comes to marketing – ask Kelly Shortridge of Security ScoreCard. She should get some kind of BlackHat award for developing this godforsaken Infosec Startup Bingo. If you find any startup vendor that uses all these words, and wins this bingo, please DM me ~ I will promptly shave my head in shame. We got here because we do not possess simple marketing muscles. We copy each other while our customers roll their eyes when we pitch them.

Sid Trivedi of Omidyar Technology Ventures wants to work with the developer focussed startups. He says, “Look at companies like Auth0. The sales efficiency on developer-focused platforms is tremendous. You can go to a CISO, CIO or CTO and point out that X number of developers are paying to use my technology. Here are their names, why don’t you talk to them? And then, let’s discuss an enterprise license for the full company?” That approach works like magic. Overwhelming majority of the software IPOs like Twilio, Mulesoft, SendGrid are developer platforms.”

If you go top-down in a hurry, you can crash and burn. I am aware of an impatient security vendor who used executive level pressure at a Fortune 50 company. They kicked their way into the POC. And got kicked out by the infosec team. The furios infosec team destroyed the vendor in a technical assessment. I was told that the product was functional but the vendor’s impatience and political gymnastics killed the deal. Let us not forget simple truth: many times CISOs turn to their subordinates for advice and decision-making, so don’t just sell to the top. Nor ignore the rest of the people in the room.

With more noise, the buyers freeze. Margins shrink. Revenues and growth slows down. Which means it’s harder to get to your milestones before your next round. Running out of cash is not fun. Nor is a down round, layoffs and such. So while this is easier said than done, please raise less and do more. And maybe, just maybe, you can keep 40% of a $350 million exit.

If you have questions or existential dilemmas, you can always find me, chatting with a friendly VC in South Park.  Or I’m always around in a trusted secure world of Signal.

Stay safe at that annual security stampede called RSA.

Kindly,

Mahendra

PS: Let’s not forget to express our gratitude to those analysts at Momentum Cyber and Pitchbook for painstakingly tracking every investment, analyzing and presenting meaningful data. They help us look at the forest, and make our journey easier. Send them a thank-you tweet, some wine, chocolates, flowers or home-baked cookies.

News Source = techcrunch.com

EU defense ministers take part in first cyber war game

in computer security/cyberattack/cybercrime/cyberspace/Cyberwarfare/Delhi/Europe/European Union/Government/hacking/India/national security/Policy/Politics/Security/TC by

European Union defense ministers have been taking part in a simulated cyber attack exercise today for the first time to practice strategic decision making and crisis-management under pressure of a (mock) cyber-attack against the bloc’s military structures.

The two-hour war game exercise, named EU CYBRID 2017, was held in Tallinn, Estonia, where the EU defense ministers are meeting for informal discussions on a range of security issues.

Cyber attacks targeting and damage civilian infrastructure, such as powerplants, was not included in this particular exercise. Although recent malware activity, such as the Wannacry ransomeware attacks, which locked some UK hospitals out of their IT systems and led to operations being canceled, likely contributed to the decision to run the exercise, said a minister of defense spokeswoman.

She said the fictitious scenario focused on threats to military operations in the Mediterranean.

According to Reuters the exercise involved the EU’s naval mission in the Mediterranean being sabotaged by hackers who cripple the mission’s command on land while also launching a campaign on social media to discredit EU operations and provoke protests.

The exercise was generally aimed at giving ministers the chance to practice situational awareness, crisis management and strategic communication between member states — with the overarching goal of moving towards establishing a policy guideline for the European Union to adopt in the event of such a cyber war situation.

Increasing defense ministers’ awareness about the potential scale of risks posed by cyber attacks appears to be an early take-away from the exercise, according to the spokeswoman.

“What we’ve seen is that the ministers were very interested in it, and it gave them an overview of the the threat and what could happen actually because the scenario was built up in such a way that the situation is escalating,” she told us. “In the beginning it might seem like a small thing… It’s pretty hard to assess how big a deal it is. They got an overview that it can escalate to a very, very serious business and that can attack also the military operations.”

“The exercise wasn’t about finding a very concrete, one solution. It was just to get the [understanding] to watch this road,” she added, emphasizing that it’s the first time such an exercise has taken place with defense ministers — and describing it as the “first step” on the road towards a better “common understanding”, which is the necessary base for the EU being able to establish guidelines to respond to (real) cyber attacks against its military structures.

Commenting on the exercise in a statement, Estonia’s minister for defense, Jüri Luik, added: “The cyber world and cyber threats do not recognise national boundaries or the barriers between organisations. It is therefore important to perform joint exercises of this kind, between European Union member states as well as the EU and NATO. We must exchange information and have a common understanding, in order to ensure improved preparedness for dealing with cyber threats.”

Featured Image: Annika Haas / EU2017EE

News Source = techcrunch.com

Hackers nab $500,000 as Enigma is compromised weeks before its ICO

in computing/cybercrime/cyberspace/Delhi/e-commerce/fiction/ICO/India/Internet/Politics/spam/spamming/TC by

The ICO hackers are at it again. Enigma, a de-centralized platform that’s preparing to raise money via a crypto token sale, had its website and a number of social accounts compromised with the perpetrators netting nearly $500,000 in digital coin by sending out spam.

Enigma, which was started by a group of MIT graduates, did not lose any money from the attack. Whoever orchestrated it grabbed money from the Enigma community, people who joined the company’s mailing list or Slack group of over 9,000 users to learn more about its ICO in September.

The hacker posted Slack messages, altered the website and spoofed emails to a community list which were made to look official and urged money to be sent to their crypto wallet.

That’s netted the hacker 1,492 in Ether coin (worth $494,170.68) at the time of writing, according to Etherscan. That’s despite the Enigma team having warned its community that it would not collect money in this way prior to the ICO next month.

In response to the incident, the company has taken its websites and Slack group down and it is posting updates via its Telegram group and Twitter account.

Users on Reddit found that Engima CEO Guy Zyskind’s email was accessed by the hacker. His email had been part of a hacking of a different services in the past and had been dumped on the internet, but seemingly Zyskind had not taken the time to change the password. TechCrunch found an alert for the email address on haveibeenpwned.com. Likewise, there was no two-factor authentication or last line of security to keep anyone with the password out.

A spokesperson told us that “certain team passwords were compromised for the enigma.co landing page and Slack.”

They said the dedicated website for the Enigma token sale was not affected.

“It resides on a separate, more secure server which was never compromised,” the spokesperson said.

Previous ICOs have been impacted when attackers took control of ICO sites and added third-party wallet addresses to syphon money into their account. That was the case with CoinDash, which lost $7 million in July, and Veritaseum, which had $8.4 million stolen in a ‘victim-less’ hack the same month.

Enigma said it has implemented new security measures, including strong passwords and two-factor authentication for all employee email accounts, as well as “proper access control management and compartmentalization.”

It’s pretty inexcusable that these measures weren’t in place from the beginning. The breach will be particularly embarrassing given how basic it was to gain access, and since one co-founder — not Zyskind — shared his “simple solution” for preventing ICO hacks with Business Insider just last month.

The episode is also a lesson in caution for those who clamor to take part in the booming ICO market. ICOs, also known as token sales, raised more than $1.2 billion in the first half of 2017, that’s more than the total amount invested in early-stage startup funding and the trend is set to become more prominent.

Getting in on an ICO before it goes public can net investors lucrative sums of money, but with many companies — such as FileCoin, Omise, and Kyber — opting for closed community sales over open public affairs, getting in early has never been more critical. That may leave some would-be investors more open to being scammed than usual, as appears to have been the case with Enigma.

Here’s the full statement from Enigma:

1) No investor or company funds were stolen or compromised. All company funds are safely secured via multi-sig wallets comprised of hardware wallets. We believe scammers were soliciting community funds by posing as the Enigma team and posting an ETH address for users to send funds. We have announced on multiple occasions that we will not be collecting any community funds for any reason before our crowd sale on September 11. Our official pre-sale is done with accredited investors only and we require heavy legal due diligence. These funds also will not be collected until September.

2) We have retaken control of all Enigma accounts, but we have deactivated our 9000+ user community Slack for the time being as a security measure. Our official communication channels at this time will be Twitter and Telegram. @EnigmaMPC, t.me/enigmacatalyst, t.me/enigmacatalystann. Users should always wait to see critical communications confirmed across ALL channels.

3) We’ve moved up a number of critical security steps and taken additional measures to protect the community going forward. We’re now very well aware of the potential threats and are taking no chances.

1. Strong, different, random passwords for each account – whether held by an employee or official communication channels for the company
2. 2FA for all such accounts
3. Weekly password rotation, and daily rotation in the week leading to the token sale
4. Proper access control management and compartmentalization

We also intend to do a live stream doing our crowdsale September 11 to ensure the community’s trust in our team and sale. We remain a public-facing team, and we continue to firmly stand behind Enigma’s vision and future.

Featured Image: TEK IMAGE/SCIENCE PHOTO LIBRARY/Getty Images

News Source = techcrunch.com

Go to Top