Latest news with #DataBreach


Al Bawaba
an hour ago
- Business
- Al Bawaba
ManageEngine Enhances AD360 With Risk Exposure Management and Local User MFA Features to Strengthen Identity Threat Defenses
ManageEngine, a division of Zoho Corporation and a leading provider of enterprise IT management solutions, today announced the general availability of identity risk exposure management and local user MFA features in AD360, its converged identity and access management (IAM) platform. The release enables security teams to detect privilege escalation risks and secure unmanaged local accounts, two common identity attack vectors that attackers continue to exploit at remains the primary attack vector in modern enterprises, as shown by Verizon's 2025 Data Breach Investigations Report, which found that credential abuse was the initial access vector in 22 % of breaches. The report also highlighted widespread abuse of poorly managed local accounts and privilege paths across over 12,000 confirmed breaches."With this release, ManageEngine AD360 moves beyond traditional IAM by embedding identity threat defenses into core identity operations. By turning identity data into actionable security insights, we're helping customers make IAM the first line of defense, not a check box," said Manikandan Thangaraj, vice president of ManageEngine. While most IAM tools focus on provisioning and policy enforcement, AD360 adds risk exposure mapping via attack path analysis as well as local MFA enforcement, helping enterprises close attack paths that often go undetected. This marks a key step in identity management evolving from an access control layer into an active security Capabilities• Identity risk exposure management: Graph based analysis maps lateral movement and privilege escalation paths in Active Directory (AD), automatically prioritizing risky configurations and recommending remediation steps. The graph engine models AD objects as nodes and privilege inheritance as lines, revealing multi step attack chains in real time, with actionable suggestions that IT teams can implement to close exposed paths.• Local user MFA: This feature extends adaptive MFA to local accounts on non domain joined servers, DMZ assets, and test environments, thwarting credential stuffing and persistence techniques. • ML driven access recommendations: During provisioning and access review campaigns, machine learning analyzes permission patterns and suggests adjustments to implement least privilege access, helping prevent excess entitlements. Additionally, ManageEngine has enhanced AD360's access certification module, which now includes expanded entitlements for comprehensive review coverage, and the risk assessment capabilities feature new indicators for improved identity risk monitoring across AD and Microsoft 365 environments. These enhancements are designed to streamline compliance reporting and strengthen access governance across the enterprise. The new capabilities support NIST SP 800-207 on Zero Trust architecture, align with PCI DSS Version 4.0 Requirement 8, and facilitate SOX, HIPAA, and GDPR controls.


Telegraph
5 days ago
- Politics
- Telegraph
‘I'd do it again', says Grant Shapps over secret Afghan scheme
Sir Grant Shapps has said he would 'do the same thing all over again' over the Afghan data leak super-injunction. The senior Tory politician, who was defence secretary when the injunction was first put in place, said the move to keep data breach a secret was 'entirely justified' to protect the lives of thousands of Afghans. He made his first public comments on the data debacle after it emerged that the leak had also included the details of more than 100 Britons, including spies and members of the special forces. Sir Grant said he would 'walk over hot coals to protect those guys' and the super-injunction was needed in order to keep people safe. It was revealed earlier this week when the super-injunction was lifted that a dataset containing the personal information of 25,000 Afghans who had applied for the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (Arap) had been released 'in error' in February 2022 by a defence official. The Tory government became aware of the leak in August 2023 and Sir Ben Wallace, the then defence secretary, made the decision to apply for an injunction. Sir Grant took over as defence secretary on August 31 2023 and the High Court granted a super-injunction at the start of September. The government established a covert relocation scheme to bring the affected Afghan soldiers and their family members to the UK, amid fears they could be targeted by the Taliban, at a cost of £7billion. Around 4,500 people have been brought to the UK or are in transit so far under the secret route. 'Would walk over hot coals to protect those guys' Sir Grant defended the decision to use a super-injunction to keep the breach and the relocation scheme a secret. He told the BBC Radio 4 Today programme on Friday morning: 'I would just make this point, that there are things that the state just has to do secretly otherwise you would get to the point where people would say 'well why aren't you releasing the nuclear codes?' 'You simply can't release everything and this was one of those times where, faced with a decision of protecting lives, both Brits and Afghanis, I would do the same thing all over again. 'I would walk over hot coals to protect those guys.' The use of a super-injunction by the government to keep something so significant a secret has prompted major questions about transparency after Parliament was kept in the dark. Sir Grant said he was 'surprised' that the super-injunction was kept in place for so long. He also said he would support the initial defence assessment of the data leak which formed the basis of the super-injunction being handed over to the Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament for scrutiny. Asked the question about sharing the document with the committee, Sir Grant said: 'I will say two things. First of all, yes I would. And secondly this injunction, the super-injunction, was in place for longer than I was defence secretary, so it has been in place a lot longer under the current government than it was under us. 'I am surprised it has lasted quite so long. My expectation was, as the risks start to lessen over time and people are removed from the theatre, from Afghanistan, and measures are taken to protect the Brits on the list, that it would carry on quite so long. 'I'd thought that it was probably going to come to an end last summer or the autumn perhaps at maximum. 'So I am surprised it has taken quite so long and it is absolutely right that those committees are able to look into it properly.' Sir Grant said he believed the public understood that 'there are times where you simply have to act in the most maximalist way in order to stop people from being murdered and executed and that is quite simply what properly happened in this case'.


Sky News
5 days ago
- Politics
- Sky News
Sir Lindsay Hoyle should have made ministers tell MPs about Afghan data leak, says Harriet Harman
Commons Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle knew about Afghan data leak and should have made ministers tell MPs, Dame Harriet Harman has claimed. Speaking to Beth Rigby on the Electoral Dysfunction podcast, the Labour peer said the Speaker - whose job she ran for in 2019 - should have asked for a key select committee to be made aware. A spokesperson for the Speaker said he was "himself under a super-injunction" and so "would have been under severe legal restrictions". A massive data breach by the British military that was only made public this week exposed the personal information of close to 20,000 Afghan individuals, endangering them and their families. Successive governments tried to keep the leak secret with a super-injunction, meaning the UK only informed everyone affected on Tuesday - three-and-a-half years after their data was compromised. The breach occurred in February 2022, when Boris Johnson was prime minister, but was only discovered by the British military in August 2023. A super-injunction, which prevented the reporting of the mistake, was imposed in September of that year. The previous Conservative government set-up a secret scheme in 2023 - which can only now be revealed - to relocate Afghan nationals impacted by the data breach but who were not eligible for an existing programme to relocate and assist individuals who had worked for the British government in Afghanistan. Some 6,900 Afghans - comprising 1,500 people named on the list as well as their dependents - are being relocated to the UK as part of this programme. Dame Harriet said: "The Speaker was warned, 'If somebody's going to say something which breaches this injunction, will you please shut them up straight away if an MP does this', and he agreed to do that. "But what he should have done at the time is he should have said, but parliamentary accountability is important. I'm the Speaker. I'm going to stand up for parliamentary accountability. And you must tell the Intelligence and Security Committee and allow them to hold you to account. "What's happened now is now that this is out in the open, the Intelligence and Security Committee is going to look at everything. So, it will be able to see all the papers from the MoD [Ministry of Defence]." Pressed on whether she meant the Speaker had failed to do his job, Dame Harriet replied: "Yes, and it's a bit invidious for me to be saying that because, of course, at that time, Lindsay Hoyle was elected a speaker, I myself ran to be speaker, and the House chose him rather than me. "So it's a bit bad to make this proposal to somebody who actually won an election you didn't win. But actually, if you think about the Speaker's role to stand up for parliament, to make sure that government is properly scrutinised, when you've got a committee there, which is security cleared to the highest level, appointed by the prime minister, and whose job is exactly to do this." A spokesperson for the Speaker said: "As has been made clear, Mr Speaker was himself under a super-injunction, and so would have been under severe legal restrictions regarding speaking about this. "He would have had no awareness which organisations or individuals were and were not already aware of this matter. "The injunction could not constrain proceedings in parliament and between being served with the injunction in September 2023 and the 2024 general election, Mr Speaker granted four Urgent Questions on matters relating to Afghan refugees and resettlement schemes. "Furthermore, as set out in the Justice and Security Act 2013, the Speaker has no powers to refer matters to the Intelligence and Security Committee."


Sky News
5 days ago
- Politics
- Sky News
Commons Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle knew about Afghan data leak, claims Harriet Harman
Commons Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle knew about Afghan data leak and should have made ministers tell MPs, Dame Harriet Harman has claimed. Speaking to Beth Rigby on the Electoral Dysfunction podcast, the Labour peer said the Speaker - whose job she ran for in 2019 - should have asked for a key select committee to be made aware. A spokesperson for the Speaker said he was "himself under a super injunction" and so "would have been under severe legal restrictions". A massive data breach by the British military that was only made public this week exposed the personal information of close to 20,000 Afghan individuals, endangering them and their families. Successive governments tried to keep the leak secret with a superinjunction, meaning the UK only informed everyone affected on Tuesday - three-and-a-half years after their data was compromised. The breach occurred in February 2022, when Boris Johnson was prime minister, but was only discovered by the British military in August 2023. A superinjunction which prevented the reporting of the mistake, was imposed in September of that year. The previous Conservative government set up a secret scheme in 2023 - which can only now be revealed - to relocate Afghan nationals impacted by the data breach but who were not eligible for an existing programme to relocate and assist individuals who had worked for the British government in Afghanistan. Some 6,900 Afghans - comprising 1,500 people named on the list as well as their dependents - are being relocated to the UK as part of this programme. Dame Harriet said: "The Speaker was warned, 'If somebody's going to say something which breaches this injunction, will you please shut them up straight away if an MP does this', and he agreed to do that. "But what he should have done at the time is he should have said but parliamentary accountability is important. I'm the Speaker. I'm going to stand up for parliamentary accountability. And you must tell the Intelligence and Security Committee and allow them to hold you to account. "What's happened now is now that this is out in the open, the Intelligence and Security Committee is going to look at everything. So, it will be able to see all the papers from the MoD [Ministry of Defence]." Pressed on whether she meant the Speaker had failed to do his job, Dame Harriet replied: "Yes, and it's a bit invidious for me to be saying that because, of course, at that time, Lindsay Hoyle was elected a speaker, I myself ran to be speaker, and the House chose him rather than me. "So it's a bit bad to make this proposal to somebody who actually won an election you didn't win. But actually, if you think about the Speaker's role to stand up for parliament, to make sure that government is properly scrutinised, when you've got a committee there, which is security cleared to the highest level, appointed by the prime minister, and whose job is exactly to do this." A spokesperson for the Speaker said: "As has been made clear, Mr Speaker was himself under a super injunction, and so would have been under severe legal restrictions regarding speaking about this. "He would have had no awareness which organisations or individuals were and were not already aware of this matter. "The injunction could not constrain proceedings in parliament and between being served with the injunction in September 2023 and the 2024 general election, Mr Speaker granted four Urgent Questions on matters relating to Afghan refugees and resettlement schemes. "Furthermore, as set out in the Justice and Security Act 2013, the Speaker has no powers to refer matters to the Intelligence and Security Committee."


Daily Mail
5 days ago
- Politics
- Daily Mail
Armed Forces minister at time of Afghan data leak admits he and other officials 'let the country down badly'
The Armed Forces minister at the time of the Afghan data leak last night admitted that he and other officials had 'let the country down badly'. James Heappey's rare mea culpa came after other ministers sought to distance themselves from the catalogue of errors and failures to inform Parliament about what went wrong. Mr Heappey was minister when the data breach – putting thousands of Afghans on a Taliban 'kill list' – was uncovered in 2023 and when the super-injunction to keep it secret was granted. The former Conservative MP, who gave up his seat at last year's election, also defended the official responsible for the leak, which occurred 18 months before it was discovered. A military officer working for United Kingdom Special Forces (UKSF), accidentally emailed the database of 18,714 Afghans to someone, thinking he was sending just 150 names to be checked for possible relocation to Britain. It emerged yesterday the leak also included British Special Forces officers and MI6 spies. The officer was moved to a new role but not sacked. In a 25-message-long thread on X, Mr Heappey said: 'It was gut-wrenching to find out that someone in the Ministry of Defence had screwed up so awfully although I came to find subsequently they were incredibly dedicated to those we served with in Afghanistan. 'Few had done more to get people who served alongside our Special Forces out of Afghanistan. 'It is incredibly unfair that someone who'd done so much good and changed so many lives deservedly for the better, should be responsible. 'But the worst part of all, of course, was the mortal danger we feared this breach presented to applicants whose details had been compromised. The intelligence assessment was clear: if the Taliban got their hands on the list, violent and even lethal reprisal was likely. 'The Ministry of Defence was magnificent in response to it all. But on this breach, we let the country down badly.' Mr Heappey said he was not involved in setting up any of the injunctions surrounding the data leak, but he backed the decisions to impose them. He added that issues arising from the breach resulted in fierce arguments between ministers and 'some pretty choice words' in meetings. The leak led to the creation of a secret Afghan relocation scheme – the Afghanistan Response Route (ARR) – in April 2024. Its existence was revealed on Tuesday when the near-two-year super-injunction was lifted. Yesterday former home secretary Suella Braverman and Tory justice spokesman Robert Jenrick said they strongly opposed the plan to bring more than 24,000 Afghans to Britain. It was also reported that those in the Treasury, plus the likes of Sir James Cleverly, the foreign secretary at the time, and Michael Gove, the then-communities secretary, were against it. Key figures yet to break cover include a former Special Forces chief, a Chief of the Defence Staff and Sir Grant Shapps, the defence secretary at the time the injunction was upgraded to a super-injunction and the decision was taken to launch the ARR. General Sir Gwyn Jenkins was director of Special Forces at the time of the leak. In August 2023, when it was discovered, Sir Gwyn was invited to a Cobra meeting in Whitehall. Asked by a minister if he should resign, he reportedly replied: 'Certainly not.' Downing Street has been forced to defend Sir Gwyn's role this week, putting out a statement saying he had 'no role in any aspect of the Afghan resettlement schemes'. Admiral Sir Tony Radakin was Chief of the Defence Staff when the leak was discovered and when it occurred the previous year. The same minister who asked if Sir Gwyn would resign also asked if Sir Tony was going to fall on his sword, and was similarly rebuffed.