Author: Stuart Crawford

Your most valuable asset has nothing to do with information or data you store, but rather within your human resources departments – which may also be your greatest weakness.

Cybercriminals don’t sleep. Nope. In fact, it’s when we sleep that cybercriminals are the most active! There is a good stretch of time during which they can cause significant damage before we rise to start our day, much less notice. While the rest of us are sleeping, cybercriminals are like attendees at an all-night rave with glow-in-the-dark colors splashed about the otherwise-pitch-black room, in the form of paint, black lights, and glow sticks worn by the party goers. Loud music pumps up the energy well into the wee hours of the morning, until just before Average Joes rise at the sound of their alarm clocks to prep for the workday.

Unlike the revelers at the rave, cybercriminals – hackers – aren’t dancing the night away in black leather and copious amounts of hair gel, although we can’t guarantee their wardrobe or style choices. What we can guarantee is their activity: seeking a network with even the tiniest cybersecurity vulnerability which they plan to exploit to their every advantage. This is where your greatest asset comes in: human resources. These human resources are not the team members that oversee onboarding, payroll, benefits administration, or anything like that. We literally mean the resources on your staff that is human! The people that get the daily tasks done are an organization’s greatest asset, even more so than the most dedicated and loyal customers that spend the most money.

Think of these human resources like cheerleaders in a human pyramid: the company is only as strong as the weakest link. This group of individuals is the frontline of defense when it comes to a network’s cybersecurity, and no individual is foolproof. That’s the goal of any hacker, to find that one email address or Internet user that isn’t as solid on defense and wriggle inside with covert tactics.

Most professional organizations install some form, or multiple forms, of antivirus protection at the user-level, as just one of the methods to safeguard against cybersecurity vulnerabilities. End-user antivirus software has remained one of the most effective and reliable methods to protect against infiltration, but antivirus programs have three major faults:

• Antivirus programs are only as “good” as the programmers that designed them.
• Antivirus programs are only effective when installed and used properly by the end user.
• Criminals don’t follow the rules.

That last part is the most important of everything you need to keep in mind for your cybersecurity needs. Hackers have their own set of rules, and those rules change faster than anyone can keep up – including antivirus software developers.

How does antivirus software work? Software installed to protect at the user level, known as endpoint protection, is design to detect and block a virus or malware from taking root on a user’s computer, or worse, accessing a network to which the user is connected. If a user encounters a threat, the antivirus software detects the threat and blocks it using a string of text – an algorithm – it recognizes as a known virus. The virus file tries to take one action or sequence of actions, known to the antivirus software, and the algorithm recognizes this behavior and prompts the user to take action against the suspicious behavior.

The threat landscape is evolving, and new viruses and threats are constantly emerging – faster than antivirus software programs can keep up. Increasing security challenges present ongoing opportunities to strengthen cybersecurity. Brand new viruses emerge and antivirus programs react with new updates to maintain optimal protection for the user’s computer or network. The problem is that the antivirus software industry is in a constant reactive state. Detecting in advance is more proactive, but it relies on predicting criminal behavior. The good news is some viruses behave similarly because of their design, and this helps antivirus programs detect “families” of viruses, including some newer versions.

The trouble is like we mentioned before, is that criminals don’t follow rules. Cybercriminals already know how antivirus software programs work, and the most effective means by which to ensnare a victim to gain access to a network. The number of new viruses being detected each year drastically decreases, which poses the question of whether fewer viruses are being created or antivirus software programs are less effective. It’s not a great position to be in, and a question no business owner ever wants to be forced to answer.

There are many arguments that claim virus detection software programs aren’t as effective in the last 12 months as compared to the previous time frame. Current overall detection rates for the last 12 months are averaging right near 70% of the time. Considering this number is nearly three out of every four instances where a threat is detected before it has the chance to impact a user or network, it’s not a terrible statistic, but it’s still incredibly scary. The potential damage a virus that slips through these cracks can cause is immeasurable.

• Reports have shown the average number of professional emails received per day is near 125. Of these, about 75 are legitimate, which means that roughly half of all emails received are spam. These only represent the number of messages that clear security filters.

After digesting these scary numbers, consider an even scarier number: the IT budget for an organization. This is the number by which an organization’s ultimate cybersecurity strength is measured.

• Do enough resources get allocated to training end users?
  • If your human resources – end users – are those responsible for not falling victim to a cyber-attack, help prevent them from being the weakest link that allows access to your network.
• Does enough of the budget account for emerging cybersecurity needs?

Your human resources are your greatest asset, but only if properly armed with the right tools and knowledge to protect themselves, a network, and the organization for whom they work. The right cybersecurity awareness training and education can be the thin line between an organization’s success – and failure.

17 Product Groups Named-Their Production Halted and Update Support Ended After Irrefutable Evidence Uncovered Flaw in Intel Chips.

The information about the Spectre attacks came to light back in January 2018. Intel and other technology firms and vendors were made aware of research findings by Paul Kocher from Spectreattack.com and Jann Horn from Google Project Zero.

Paul’s collaboration team regarding the chip flaw and the notorious Spectre Attacks were:

• Daniel Genkin (the University of Pennsylvania and University of Maryland)
• Mike Hamburg (Rambus)
• Moritz Lipp (Graz University of Technology)
• Yuval Yarom (University of Adelaide and Data61)

The research findings from Paul Kocher’s team and Jann Horn supported what the U.S. Department of Commerce’s agency, NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) found. At NIST’s, National Vulnerability Database website is the research published on January 4, 2018.

Take note of these excerpts, the indirect branch prediction and branch prediction in both announcements:

CVE-2017-5715

Current Description: “Systems with microprocessors utilizing speculative execution and indirect branch prediction may allow unauthorized disclosure of information to an attacker with local user access via a side-channel analysis.”

CVE-2017-5753

Current Description: “Systems with microprocessors utilizing speculative execution and branch prediction may allow unauthorized disclosure of information to an attacker with local user access via a side-channel analysis.”

After the findings arrived, on January 3, 2018, Intel responds to Paul and Jann’s security research findings with this disbelieving statement: “Intel believes these exploits do not have the potential to corrupt, modify or delete data.”

With the proof in front of them, Intel believed the research reports were flawed and incorrect. The idea of these acts caused by a “bug”, or a “flaw” was not possible. Their explanation was, “there are many types of computing devices, using different vendor’s operating systems and processors. All are at risk of being exploited.”

But Paul’s team exploited speculative execution and had solid proof.

They experimented on multiple x86 processor architectures. They used the Intel Ivy Bridge (i7-3630QM). The Intel Haswell (i7-4650U). The Intel Skylake (unspecified Xeon on Google Cloud) and finally an AMD Ryzen processor.

In every test, the team observed the Spectre vulnerability across all of these CPUs. Similar results on both 32- and 64-bit modes, and both Linux and Windows. Some ARM processors also support speculative execution, and the initial testing confirmed, ARM processors could not pass the test.

When they attacked using native code, they were able to read the entire victim’s memory address space, including the secrets stored within it, with ease.

When they attacked using Java code, they successfully read data from the address space of the browser process running it, with zero effort.

The research evidence was irrefutable.

Their results showed there was a flaw in Intel chips.

A day later, January 4, 2018, Intel issues updates to protect systems from security exploits. They released this statement: “Intel has developed and is rapidly issuing updates for all types of Intel-based computer systems — including personal computers and servers — that render those systems immune from both exploits (referred to as “Spectre” and “Meltdown”) reported by Google Project Zero.”

Three months later on April 2, 2018, Intel’s Microcode Revision Guidance is released and what’s inside exposed the truth. In this 19-page pdf document, you will find 17 product groups listed, (color-coded in red), productions halted, and update support has ended.

Looking through the guide, you will find the columns listed by Product Names, Public Name, CPUID, Platform ID, Production Status, Pre-Mitigation Production MCU, STOP deploying these MCU revs, and New Production MCU Rev.

The pages with the discontinued products are below:

• Page 4: Bloomfield and Bloomfield Xeon
• Page 7: Clarksfield
• Page 8: Gulftown and Harpertown Xeon CO & EO
• Page 11: Jasper Forest
• Page 12: Penryn/QC
• Page 15: SoFIA 3GR
• Page 16: Wolfdale CO, MO, EO & RO, Wolfdale Xeon CO & EO
• Page 17: Yorkfield & Yorkfield Xeon

When you review the columns, you will see one labeled STOP deploying these MCU revs. Intel’s definition for this column is as follows:

• Intel recommends discontinuing using these select versions of MCU that were previously released with mitigations for Variant 2 (Spectre) due to system stability issues.

Intel also states in their Microcode Revision Guidance Legend:

• “After a comprehensive investigation of the microarchitectures and microcode capabilities for these products, Intel has determined to not release”
• “Microcode updates for these products for one or more reasons including, but not limited to the following:”
• “Micro-architectural characteristics that preclude a practical implementation of features mitigating Variant 2 (CVE-2017-5715)”
• “Limited Commercially Available System Software support.”
• “Based on customer inputs, most of these products are implemented as “closed systems” and therefore are expected to have a lower likelihood of exposure to these vulnerabilities.”

As you can see, Intel’s exhaustive investigation could not discredit Paul, Jann and NIST’s research and proof. Intel decided, due to microarchitectures and microcode capabilities, for the specific products listed, not to move forward and release microcode updates for these products.

If you own a PC, Mac, or Cell phone, a Spectre attack can affect your device. If you use Cloud Services, your provider’s infrastructure may be vulnerable to a Spectre attack and theft of customer’s data. If your device uses any of Intel’s older microprocessors, you may be shopping around for a new machine.

Social media is big business and has the potential to drive millions of visitors to websites, engage directly with customers on a public platform, and solve – or create – problems in real time. What is the future of “social business”?

Twenty years ago, marketing and promotions were simple and straightforward. The majority of efforts were focused on print: newspaper and magazine advertising, The Yellow Pages, direct mail, billboards, and perhaps flyers. Email marketing was in its infancy, and digital marketing wasn’t quite yet an industry – though there are firms that argue this time frame. Metrics were relatively predictable, and results were in the form of sales and revenue.

• Yes, The Yellow Pages telephone directories still offer printed books. Publishers of “phone books”, as they’re often referred to, reduced paper usage by half before 2013, and major efforts are in place to ensure unused or outdated materials are recycled.

This is not the case today! There are so many facets to “digital marketing” that it’s safe to say the industry is constantly evolving. Yes, constantly. The rules change just as often, and the de facto rule-maker is Google. Google has the famous “Google algorithm”, by which all search parameters are defined. If a business or brand doesn’t meet Google’s search preferences, they’ve wasted their time and won’t make the first page of a user’s search results – and when was the last time you clicked past the first page of results in an average Google search?

There are ads within emails and ads on websites, and even “sponsored results” in an Internet search. Consumers have ads coming at them from every angle of the Internet, so why would social media – including the King of Social Media, Facebook – be any different? It’s not. In fact, a Facebook user is valued even more highly than a search user. The Facebook user is already engaged with a website, and it’s one where the content that loads is customized and personalized for each user. Google tries to do this with search results, but there’s only so much Google can do with a string of words and no context. Both Google and Facebook have the user’s history of cookies, but Facebook has the incredibly valuable position of knowing a user’s friends, families, what content a user likes – literally “likes” by clicking the blue-and-white thumbs-up symbol – and what news stories, photos, and content a user clicks on and engages with. In this context, Google’s metric is the click in terms of the value of a visitor, whereas Facebook’s value of a click is a highly-engaged user already on the website and opting to give more of their time and attention. The ultimate competition comes down to the value of a visitor versus the value of a click.

After evolving from a social platform into a platform that can be highly monetized, Facebook turned the digital marketing industry upside down with the newly-invented notion of advertising right in front of Facebook users. Any organization or brand that has ever paid for advertising on Facebook is used to Facebook changing things up by now – after all, Facebook changes their approach on a regular basis. After seizing the lead and maintaining this very profitable position for years – and years – the brain trust recently announced a bold decision to simplify their overall approach – after long being the primary innovator in social media and marketing and carving the path which others follow today.

Facebook Advertisers Are Users, Too

Facebook users fondly recall a time when privacy settings at the user level resembled a “stealth” mode when users had the ability to set their account information, including their names and other details, as completely private and would not show in other Facebook user searches. The added bonus was the implied guarantee that photos, posts, and other user content had this same level of protection. Sometime around 2009, Facebook implemented a pretty major privacy settings overhaul and many users who long enjoyed stealth status were suddenly thrust into the spotlight – and was no longer “invisible”. In all fairness, Facebook gave plenty of advance notice this change was coming. Their public reason was that Facebook is a social media platform, not a private website where a user could have total control – and this is a fair position. Facebook is a free website for users, but it’s not a nonprofit organization. Ever evolving, their approach has tweaked and allowed users to choose various privacy settings for posts, images, etc., which are highly customizable if the user chooses to take the time.

In 2017, Facebook recognized a growing dissatisfaction from its users and tried to pinpoint the cause. After much speculation, Facebook realized the greatest impact to the user experience is the allowance of brands to intermingle with users in their feeds, detracting from the social purpose of the channel. Thus, more major changes were in store. Facebook announced a desire to go “back to basics” and return the focus of a user’s feed to posts shared by friends and family members and make it harder for brands to get their content seen (unless advertisers were willing to pay). The result was that post reach – the number of people that see a post in their feed – plummeted. The plan was for average Facebook users to see fewer news stories, cat videos, political posts, or branded content, but rather see more photos shared by friends of birthday parties, graduations, and other significant events entirely unrelated to corporate messaging.

Privacy, Redefined

The change to the Facebook feed was a welcome change to users and required a major adjustment to social media marketing efforts for companies. Details of how the changes rolled out and the reasons for these changes trickled into news stories until major news broke that Facebook sold private user information on more than 87 million Facebook accounts to an organization involved in the political arena in 2016. Users worldwide felt violated that a trusted entity would share such private details – a harsh reminder that Facebook is a for-profit entity and users need to read the “fine print” and not just agree to Terms and Conditions without reading. Your digital life is not your own when using a website owned by someone other than yourself.

So, what can Facebook users do to protect themselves? Without deleting your Facebook account, it’s wise to do a once-over on user privacy settings every few months to verify what might have changed and safeguard your information.

• Check your privacy settings
• Facebook offers a variety of user settings allowing for a spectrum of privacy, though most remain a mystery to users. Under “Settings”, click “Privacy” and control how visible information like posts, account information like phone numbers and email addresses, and friend requests and more are.
• Keep friends close
• Friends’ activity can impact others. If a user allows tagging in a friend’s activity, this is then affected by their privacy settings and is subject to sharing or visibility by others.
• Beware third-party apps
• At first, it seemed benign to click “accept” when a third-party app or quiz intrigued a user enough to click content, with the innocent warning that the app would thus be granted access to a user’s profile and list of friends. That list of friends became an incredibly valuable commodity in an environment where privacy settings were controlled by a user – a tricky little workaround.
• Users can adjust these settings quickly and easily but often didn’t go back to limit access.
• Review security alerts
• Users can opt for security alerts when Facebook detects a new login from a different device or browser. Two-factor authentication is also an option. To enable, access the same “Settings” menu, and click “Security and Login” from the left navigation and choose “Setting Up Extra Security”.

Security considerations impact all Facebook users, regardless if a user is also an advertiser. Before abandoning Facebook entirely, employ additional efforts to protect user data and your privacy. This type of “social security” has nothing to do with the government-issued card Americans carry, and a few additional steps will help secure user information and improve the Facebook user experience.

From humble beginnings in a garage as the brainchild of two men to an asset valuation of nearly $250 billion in 2018, Microsoft is no stranger to breaking records.

Do you think Paul Allen and Bill Gates knew what lie ahead in 1975? Nope. Couldn’t have.

In those days, developing a BASIC interpreter for the Altair 8800 seemed impossible – because no one else had done it, including Allen and Gates, yet they promised the finished product and were able to deliver in two months. Between 1975 and now, the Microsoft Windows product is a professional mainstay and continues to dominate the desktop computing market. Add to this their Microsoft Surface product line-up, and between the desktop or laptop PC or the operating system it’s running, Microsoft is The Man. And we didn’t even get to the Microsoft Office line-up yet.

Between Microsoft Office, for which organizations purchased physical software plus per-seat licenses for users roughly a decade ago, and today’s Office 365, accessible online from anywhere, Microsoft caters to the modern professional. The Office Suite has expanded in recent years, beyond Word, Excel, and PowerPoint, to include a variety of productivity apps, including OneNote, Microsoft Teams – formerly Skype for Business – for a collaborative platform, and Outlook. All Microsoft applications offer seamless integration with other Microsoft apps, as well as a variety of external apps to blend the user experience with the goal of simplifying processes to increase efficiency and productivity – therefore, revenue.

Whether it’s standalone apps or the subscription-based Office 365, Microsoft products are the staples at every professional workplace in first-world countries today. Microsoft’s SharePoint and OneDrive, and their super-seamless integration with a multitude of productivity apps, simplify communication and connectivity in the professional world. From creating documents and spreadsheets to storing and sharing with colleagues, Microsoft has you covered.

Microsoft doesn’t like to just do something first – the team behind Microsoft Teams wants to do something first and best. Case in point, Microsoft is the first global cloud provider to receive the Certification for Protected data in Australia – a great achievement. The underlying significance of this is all levels of government and critical national infrastructure in Australia will be able to accelerate and increase use of secure cloud computing and storage. By comparison, Amazon began expanding its Amazon Web Services cloud-based storage solutions in the same area in 2012, but Microsoft is still first to be awarded this certification.

Remember when we mentioned subscription-based Office 365? Microsoft Azure and Office 365 are also getting accolades: both can now boast of Protected Certification by the Australian Signals Directorate (ASD), as well as inclusion in the Certified Cloud Services List (CCSL). Microsoft has been working in direct partnership with the Australian government toward this major milestone for a few years, and this achievement grants the opportunity for immense digital transformation in the public sector in both New Zealand and Australia.

Both Certification statuses are timed well with Microsoft’s announcement on the availability of Azure Australia Central. Two new highly-secure Microsoft Azure cloud regions are located in Australia-owned facilities, designed to facilitate mission-critical operations and demands for critical elements of national infrastructure. The Australian government has established clear intentions with these Certifications and announcements, to expand the adoption of cloud solutions. The public display of confidence in Azure and Office 365 offers a high level of assurance in both Microsoft and cloud optimization.

Australia released a formal strategy recently to demonstrate the cloud’s economical digital storage solutions, offering an ideal opportunity to shift reliance to a faster and reusable environment. Cloud-based storage solutions are free from limitations and constraints imposed by on-site options, with the added bonus of being customizable and convenient.

Microsoft invested in Australia with these data centers, and demonstrate a commitment to the public sector as well as the high degree of trust other organizations can have in Microsoft as a cloud service provider.

The cloud is nothing new, and the appetite for cloud-based solutions is growing in every corner of the globe. Microsoft isn’t the only global cloud solution provider, but this move signals a level of trust that few other brands can boast – or deliver upon. Every day, news of “the cloud” reaches journalistic outposts – Time, CNN, MSNBC, you get the idea. Dozens of entities have filled the channel, claiming to offer the same level of service and security that industry leaders, like Microsoft, can – but, in reality, few do. Why? It’s likely a combination of factors: expertise, financial fortitude and flexibility, all upon which a solid reputation is built.

• Key players in the Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) industry deliver infrastructure services on an outsourced basis to enterprise operations, providing hardware and storage solutions, servers and data center space These components each feature the benefits Australia focused on in their selection of Microsoft as their IaaS provider: security, scalability, reliability, economy, and expertise.

Is security the most critical component of the cloud? Many would argue that each benefit is nearly equal, but security and reliability are the two with the greatest impact and should, therefore, have the greatest focus when choosing a cloud solutions service provider. It’s easy to see why Australia went with the industry giant.

What’s next? Will other national governments follow Australia’s lead? Cloud is clearly the direction to take for trusted resources in data storage, with Microsoft being the lead innovator. Cloud is highly scalable, flexible, and reliable, and the future of data storage!

10 Steps Healthcare Facilities Should Take to Ensure the Security of ePHI When Employees Use Smartphones

It’s estimated that 74 percent of hospital workers use tablets or other mobile devices to collect and share information about patients.¹ And although smartphones and other mobile devices can provide many benefits in the healthcare setting, using them also presents a number of risks.

Unless they are used safely, electronic Protected Health Information (ePHI) can be exposed, and malware and viruses can enter a facility’s IT network. Without adequate safeguards in place, this can lead to costly HIPAA violations.

Hospitals, medical clinics and healthcare entities must comply with HIPAA Privacy and Security Rules to protect and secure patients’ information, even when using mobile devices like a smartphone.

Banning smartphones isn’t the answer. When a patient is in pain, every minute counts. If there isn’t an order for pain medication in the patient’s record, a nurse must consult with their physician. In this instance, using a mobile phone can speed up the process. However, this, and other smartphone communications must be handled in a secure manner to protect the healthcare facility’s IT systems, and safeguard patient privacy.

Smartphone Data Breaches and HIPAA/HITECH

CIOs and technology professionals in healthcare facilities are concerned that the increase in smartphone usage increases the chances of security breaches where ePHI is revealed. The HIPAA Privacy Rule mandates that covered entities “reasonably safeguard” PHI from any intentional or unintentional use or disclosure that is in violation of the rule’s standards. It also outlines provisions for ensuring the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of PHI that is transferred or held in electronic form.

Covered entities include not only healthcare facilities but individual providers.

The HIPAA Security Rule outlines provisions for ensuring the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of PHI that is transferred or held in electronic form.

HIPAA concerns include:

• Theft or loss of a smartphone that has PHI on it.
• Staff or volunteers taking and distributing unauthorized photos.
• Staff revealing PHI on social network pages—for example, by posting text or photos that could be classified as individually identifiable health information.
• Unauthorized individuals accessing the healthcare facility’s systems.
• Staff or physicians forwarding an unencrypted email that contains PHI from their organizational account to a personal account that does not have reasonable safeguards to protect PHI.

Data breaches involving patient information can lead to costly fines and settlements–and even criminal penalties. And the health information privacy laws and regulations in some states are even more extensive than federal HIPAA regulations.

Under the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act of 2009, breaches of unsecured PHI must be reported to the affected individual, to the U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services, and in certain cases, to the media. Both HIPAA and HITECH emphasize the importance of privacy and security with the use of ePHI when using smartphones and mobile devices.

Improper Smartphone Use Can Spread Viruses and Malware.

“Security of Mobile Computing Devices in the Healthcare Environment,” (by the HIMSS Mobile Security Work Group) warned that “as the popularity of mobile computing devices increases, so too does the possibility that someone will create malware that is intended to impact its use or compromise patient data.”

When used in a healthcare (or any) environment, smartphones should be routinely updated with the latest antivirus software and malware protection. This is not always an easy task and should be handled by a certified, IT expert (Managed Service Provider).

And because caregivers and providers are the first lines of defense, they must undergo Security Awareness Training to be educated about unsafe practices, such as opening suspicious attachments or clicking on questionable links.

Without a clear understanding regarding safety when using smartphones, and the potential negative effects (security breaches), users may ignore a healthcare facility’s security policies. This emphasizes the need for user education about the risks and consequences of not following security policies.

10 Steps Healthcare Facilities Should Take to Ensure Data Security When Employees Use Smartphones:

1. Devise and implement policies to control who can view and access smartphone data.
2. Assess the content of email messages and file attachments to automatically identify ePHI.
3. Make sure caregivers use two-factor authentication and digitally signed documents so only authorized users can access and transfer ePHI.
4. Disable SMS (Short Message Service) preview on smartphones. This prevents others from viewing text messages without authority.
5. Disable speech recognition features like Siri, Cortana or other personal assistants. If not, unauthorized users can gain access to software on smartphones.
6. Use strong passwords that are hard to guess. They should contain at least six characters with a combination of both upper and lower-case letters, with at least one number and one keyboard character.
7. Change passwords often and at least quarterly.
8. Set smartphones for automatic logoff. If the phone is lost or stolen the culprit would need the password to open it.
9. Set smartphones to limit the number of unsuccessful login attempts.
10. If a violation is detected:

• Stop and quarantine the interaction.
• Remove the attachment from the email.
• Return a message to the original sender.
• Notify a manager.
• Retract the information.
• Re-route and encrypt* the email for secure delivery.

*There are a number of ways to encrypt data in transit. Two include using a virtual private network (VPN) or a secure browser connection. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has several Special Publications regarding encryption processes for data in motion, including SP 800-52 [PDF – 3.2 MB] and SP 800-77 [PDF – 255 KB]. SP 800-52 has information about transport layer security (TLS). (Contact your IT Managed Service Provider for more information.)

Mobile Device Management

Some mobile devices have a remote disabling and wiping feature built in. Remote wiping is a security feature that enables you to remotely erase the data on your smartphone if it’s lost or stolen. When you enable it, you have the ability to permanently delete data stored on your phone.

When using smartphones in a healthcare setting, it’s imperative that your IT Provider implements and deploys a professional Mobile Device Management (MDM) Solution.

A Professional MDM Solution Protects ePHI with:

• The ability to locate, lock and wipe ePHI from a stolen or lost smartphone or mobile device.
• Continuous remote monitoring and management of all authorized mobile devices.
• Secure passcode implementation and enforced encryption.

As you can see, using smartphones always presents a number of risks, especially in a healthcare environment. And, unless you adequately safeguard patient data stored or in transit, unauthorized access to the healthcare facility’s systems could occur leading to ePHI breaches and HIPAA/HITECH violations. Executives and administrators should take necessary steps to prevent this by working with IT professionals who are certified in the latest security solutions.

Dementia and Alzheimer’s are scary for both patients and caregivers. Right now, there is no cure. Scientists are trying to find ways of prolonging patient’s lives and delaying the onset of the disease. IT Technicians are finding ways to make lives better and caring for patients easier. Some remarkable work is doing things for these individuals that has never been seen or done before.

First, A Word About The Disease

According to Alzheimer’s International, nearly 44 million people worldwide have Alzheimer’s or related dementia. More than 5 million American’s are living with it, and Between 2017 and 2025 every state is expected to see at least a 14% rise in the prevalence of Alzheimer’s. Those statistics are startling, especially since Alzheimer’s disease is irreversible.

Accounting for around 70 perfect of dementia cases, Alzheimer’s Disease is the most common cause of dementia, a group of brain disorders that results in the loss of intellectual and social skills. These changes are severe enough to interfere with day-to-day life. It progressively destroys the brain and ruins memory and thinking skills, and eventually the ability to carry out the simplest tasks.

A Few Other Statistics

• In 2017, Alzheimer’s cost the United States $259 billion.
• By 2050, costs associated with dementia could be as much as $1.1 trillion.
• The global cost of Alzheimer’s and dementia is estimated to be $605 billion.
• Alzheimer’s is the 6th leading cause of death in the United States.
• Between 2017 and 2025 every state is expected to see at least a 14% rise in the prevalence of Alzheimer’s.
• By 2050, it’s estimated there will be as many as 16 million Americans living with Alzheimer’s.
• Every 66 seconds someone in the United States develops Alzheimer’s.
• 1 in 3 seniors dies with some form of dementia.

Technology at its Finest

Because of these sad stats and high numbers, IT experts have come up with some amazing devices that use modern technology to aid in the care of people suffering from memory problems. Here’s a look at a few of the latest innovations.

Clocks

Clocks precisely intended for those with Alzheimer’s and dementia can help ease the stress associated with day to day life. Someone who has dementia may confuse night and day so an easy to read clock can help them to better tell the time.

Medication Management

Medication management technology created high tech automated pill dispensers which beep and open to remind caregivers and those with dementia to take their medicine. Vibrating alarms on a watch have also been fashioned to remind when it’s time for a pill. This technology serves the busy caregiver well by helping them not to forget medication time as well.

Video Monitoring

Video monitoring technology supports both care recipient and caregiver, by allowing both people more freedom. The patient doesn’t feel watched constantly because loved one can spend a little time away, and loved ones get the comfort of being able to see their family even when they’re not in the same house.

GPS Location and Tracking Devices

People with Alzheimer’s or dementia may wander. Tracking devices can be worn by the person in some way and have alert systems that let a caregiver know if their loved one has left a certain area. This type of technology can also alert emergency personnel to aid in a quick recovery.

Picture Phones

Picture phones are specifically designed for people who cannot remember phone numbers. These phones have large numbers and are pre-programmable with frequently called phone numbers. Some of the phones come with clear buttons where photos can be placed so that the person can just push the button associated with the photos to call their loved one quickly.

Electrical Use Monitoring

This device monitors a patient’s use of electrical appliances. It plugs into a wall outlet or power strip and will alert caregivers if their commonly used appliances have not been turned on or off.

Wearable Cameras

Wearable cameras and augmented reality glasses could be the next big thing in helping patients. These devices can take hundreds of pictures every day from the user’s point of view logging their lives in this way.

A Village of Care

In Kitchener, Ontario, something wonderful is happening. Facilities have been designed to be less institutional-looking, friendlier and homier. “Schlegel Villages” is one of the first of its kind and is improving the quality of life for the people that live there.

One problem they deal with though is when at-risk seniors become confused and attempt to leave. According to Schlegel’s IT director, Chris Carde, “Some seniors with certain types of mental illness can remember the door-lock code to get out but can’t remember anything else. A confused senior wandering out into a southern Ontario winter can be a serious, even fatal, incident”.

Schlegel Villages is also implementing an e-health system to replace paper charts at its care facilities. Carde states, “Nurses would have to write down a patient’s vital signs, then enter them into a desktop computer some distance away. The new system, which will use iPads and iPad minis to enter health information directly into the database, is being greeted warmly by clinicians”.

Thinking Outside of the Box

A German senior center applied the idea of using fake bus stops to keep Alzheimer’s disease patients from wandering off. Because their short-term memory is not intact, but their long-term memory works fine, they know what the bus stop sign means, and they stop. It is a huge success in Germany, now they want to bring it to several clinics in North America.

A Final Word

Thanks to these researchers and IT innovators, the future is much brighter for patients with memory diseases and their families and care providers. This is just the beginning when it comes to making life easier. Information Technology has only just begun to scratch the surface of what can be done to help in the fight against dementia and Alzheimer’s.

Believe it or not, your medical record has the potential to be sold for thousands of dollars. And due to the digitization of health records, it’s now more prone to theft.

As more patient health records have gone digital over the years, they’ve become vulnerable to hackers—and far more valuable than credit-card data or other forms of confidential data.

Why? Because they contain insurance information that poachers can use for fraudulent billing and illegal prescriptions. These thieves can falsify insurance claims and collect checks and obtain hundreds of thousands of dollars in free care on someone else’s insurance.

The healthcare industry wasn’t prepared for this, and they are trying to play catch up to secure protected health information (PHI):

“The U.S. has a huge shortage of highly qualified cybersecurity people across all industries,” says Rod Piechowski, a senior director at the Healthcare Information & Management Systems Society, or HIMSS, a Chicago-based nonprofit with more than 50,000 members. “Being late to the game, health care just can’t compete.”

Health IT professionals, although they are in great demand, haven’t been able to play a major role in employer’s’ software procurement decisions. This is unlike banking and the financial industry where their option is regularly solicited before a major IT system is implemented. And until recently cybersecurity wasn’t prioritized in healthcare the way it has been in financial services. The result is that IT professionals had no influence when it came to software security standards for medical care, and now they’re having to oversee systems that are difficult to safeguard.

If your PHI is breached, hackers have the information they need to blackmail you for the rest of your life. That’s because your EHR contains information like conditions you suffer from such as depression, anxiety or other psychological conditions, sexually transmitted diseases, or heart conditions. If released to the public, these might be an embarrassment to you or even keep you from obtaining a particular position.

How Bad Is It?

EHRs (electronic health records) are being used by over 96 percent of critical-care facilities, and 83 percent of all hospitals. While the digitization of health records enables easy access to patients’ information, if not properly safeguarded they’re also available to hackers. This poses a real threat to patient privacy.

In the year 2016, there were 450 data breaches where 27 million EHRs were affected. Of these, 120 came from the outside, while 200 (more than 65%) came from the inside.

In 2017, there were 477 healthcare breaches reported to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) or the media, which affected a total of 5.579 million patient records.

With major hospitals and healthcare organizations paying higher fines for lost patient data, the challenges of maintaining EHR security remains a huge concern. And because of this, the benefits of using them must be weighed against the risks of theft and misuse.

Presence Health in Chicago was fined USD475,000 by the U.S. Health and Human Services (HHS) because they didn’t report a 2013 breach in a timely manner. Advocate Health Care had to pay HHS a whopping USD5.5 million for a breach of patient privacy–the most ever by a single entity.

Compounding the issue, now physicians who are frustrated with the bogged down systems try to design their own workarounds to speed up processing of healthcare data. These ad hoc “shadow IT” systems are insecure and rely on unencrypted data and personal emails. It’s only a matter of time before a sophisticated hacker breaks in to steal their data.

How do hackers obtain medical records?

One of the ways they do this is through spoofing where the facility is fooled into thinking that the person accessing the information is legitimate. Plus, Microsoft researchers warn that many types of databases used for electronic medical records are vulnerable to leaking information despite the use of encryption.

Hospitals and healthcare organization use methods like data encryption and the scrambling of PHI (de-identification) to disguise data so hackers can’t read it.  However, the hackers simply steal the data and replace the encryption keys with their own to demand ransoms to unlock the data. This is called ransomware, and it’s very effective against healthcare facilities and hospitals that need ready access to patient data for their everyday operations.

Who are these hackers?

They’re not who you think they are. When we think of hackers, in our mind’s eye they are guys in hoodies working on computers in their parents’ basements. What’s hard to believe is that most attacks and data breaches don’t come from external hackers, but from the inside of an organization, where doctors, nurses or accounting personnel are negligent, abuse the system as disgruntled employees, or steal patient data for financial gain. In 2017, employee error affected 785,281 patient records and insider-wrongdoing affected 893,978.

One Promising Solution

Robert Lord, a former analytics systems designer, joined forces with Nick Culbertson, a former Special Forces operator when they were students at the John Hopkins University of Medicine. They created an Artificial Intelligence (AI) system to combat hacking of EHRs. They co-founded a cybersecurity company Protenus, to help the healthcare industry use artificial intelligence to prevent the theft of Protected Health Information and Electronic Health Records.

Lord explains:

“Your EHR contains all of your demographic information–names, historical information of where you live, where you worked, the names and ages of your relatives, financial information like credit cards and bank numbers…The medical record is the most comprehensive record about the identity of a person that exists today. We recognize that EHRs are living documents, so we’ve built an AI that is able to monitor how individuals interact with the EHR and associated systems, building a unique profile of every workforce member’s clinical and administrative workflow.”

The folks at Protenus are working on a solution that can tell the difference between routine access to EHRs or possible illegal attempts to retrieve this data. They do this by detecting unusual patterns and anomalies using AI that are then escalated to security officers. Over time, the solutions get “smarter” and learn exponentially as the customer base grows.

We’re Behind the 8 Ball When It Comes to Protecting EHRs.

Health care has lagged far behind banking and other industries when it comes to implementing security protocols. Until EHR records were mandated by Obamacare, many healthcare providers still used paper, faxes and handwritten charts. And once EHRs were finally implemented, the hackers were already a step ahead, and the medical industry is still scrambling to find ways to protect them.

Cybersecurity experts tell us that the seriousness of this can’t be overstated. The frequency of threats has taken off in the past 10 years as EHR data is increasingly networked between healthcare entities. And as we continue to struggle to secure our EHRs, increasingly savvy thieves are finding more ways to steal them.