Skip to main content
. 2020 Sep 25;3(1):11–21. doi: 10.1016/j.bsheal.2020.09.007

Table 2.

Social engineering hacks.

Social engineering in the cyber-domain Social engineering targeting the bioscience fields
Pretexts are some of the quickest ways of getting past a company's switchboard and winning its people's trust.
• E.g., via a fake email from a purported colleague who offers ‘help’ with resetting your password, or the security department of your bank alerting you about suspicious activities in your account.
• Pretexting is the basis of social security attacks - in this context “the intentional manipulation of people into performing certain actions and divulging confidential information” [72].
On the pretext of helping to safeguard cyberbiosecurity challenges, attackers could
• Offer a solution to the new cyberbio challenges - which are mainly un-assessed and for which no adequate official solutions exist.
• Masquerade it as an officially-looking tool and written in a language that is comprehensible to those interested in applying it.
• Secretly introduce harmful computer code that could enable theft of sensitive information or access to critical CPS based infrastructure components.
Many devastating IT hacks are based on mere deception [62], e.g.
• Fake websites and phishing scams are trying to lure their victims into buying high-demand products such as masks, hand sanitizers or vitamins.
• They may be riddled behind the scenes with malware, (computer) viruses, and ransomware.
The entire life-science field is particularly vulnerable to such psychological hacks promoting fake products:
• There is a great demand for products and services such as research and bioinformatics tools or various model systems.
• Phishing scams may appear to come from official organizations such as the CDC (Centers for Disease Control) or the WHO (World Health Organization); fake webites may masquerade as authentic R&D data providers including preprint servers; newly developed websites registered with catch-phrases such as ‘corona’ may be legitimate sources of information.
• All these may have been maliciously designed to carry out spam campaigns, phishing, or to spread harmful software.
Fake internal contacts (mostly by email):
• Fake HR or IT contacts are often used to steal usernames and passwords.
• The impersonation of HR or IT departments often allows attackers to gain access to sensitive data and information.
If attackers canimpersonate HR or IT departments, this could allow them to
• Steal secret R&D data and information.
• Enter the target system to upload malicious cyber programs that could be used to sabotage the physical processes underlying biotechnological systems (Section 2).
• Use stolen credentials to impersonate another user in that network to enable the corruption of environmentally or health-related processes, sensors, or data.
Cyberattacks are not always 100% committed online. Social engineering schemes can allow attackers to hack into large businesses or organizations (exemplified here via the July 2020 Twitter attack [72]).
• The hacker was able to take control of a cell phone number by convincing a carrier to assign a number to a new phone.
• The attacker hacked into Twitter accounts of famous people and organizations. For some of the hacked accounts, the attacker could initiate a password reset, login to the account, and send Tweets [72].
• The attacker was able to view personal information including email addresses and phone numbers, which are displayed to some users of Twitter's internal support tools [72].
Businesses and CPS networks throughout the bioscience fields are susceptible to analogous attacks via fake phone or email contacts, e.g.
• Attackers could mislead certain employees and exploit human vulnerabilities to hack into the accounts of some employees.
• By using the credentials of only a few hacked employees, attackers may be able to access the internal computer system.
• This knowledge may enable them to target additional employees with access to system management tools.
• These credentials can give them access to internal network tools and enable them to sabotage cyber-based controls of CPS (Fig. 3, Fig. 4).