Close Menu
  • Home
  • Articles
    • Attacks
      • BEC
      • Data Breach
      • DDoS
      • Evasion Attacks
      • Injection
      • Malware
      • MITM
      • Phishing
      • Ransomware
      • RCE
      • Social Engineering
      • Spoofing
      • Spyware
    • Business and Policy
      • BCP and DRP
      • GRC
      • Regulations
    • Data Protection
      • DLP
      • DRM
      • Encryption
      • IAM
    • Future, Trends and Insight
      • AI
      • Events & Community
      • Emerging Tech
      • Expert Panel
      • Interviews With Experts
      • Insights
      • Study & Research
    • Resources
      • Guides
      • Tools
      • Training & Education
    • Security
      • API
      • Apps
      • Cloud
      • Critical Infrastructure
      • Endpoint
      • Hardware
      • IoT
      • Mobile
      • Network
      • OT
      • Port Security
      • Security Architecture
      • Software Development
      • Supply Chain
      • Zero Trust
    • Threats and Vulnerabilities
      • Emerging Threats
      • Insider Threats
      • Risk Management
      • Threat Intelligence
      • Zero Day
  • News and Exclusives
    • Latest News
    • ISB Exclusive
    • Positive News
  • Who We Are
    • About Us
    • Information Security Buzz Expert Panel​
    • Write for Us
    • Media Pack
  • Contact Us
  • Newsletter
Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn
Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn
Information Security BuzzInformation Security Buzz
  • Home
  • Articles
    • Attacks
      • BEC
      • Data Breach
      • DDoS
      • Evasion Attacks
      • Injection
      • Malware
      • MITM
      • Phishing
      • Ransomware
      • RCE
      • Social Engineering
      • Spoofing
      • Spyware
    • Business and Policy
      • BCP and DRP
      • GRC
      • Regulations
    • Data Protection
      • DLP
      • DRM
      • Encryption
      • IAM
    • Future, Trends and Insight
      • AI
      • Events & Community
      • Emerging Tech
      • Expert Panel
      • Interviews With Experts
      • Insights
      • Study & Research
    • Resources
      • Guides
      • Tools
      • Training & Education
    • Security
      • API
      • Apps
      • Cloud
      • Critical Infrastructure
      • Endpoint
      • Hardware
      • IoT
      • Mobile
      • Network
      • OT
      • Port Security
      • Security Architecture
      • Software Development
      • Supply Chain
      • Zero Trust
    • Threats and Vulnerabilities
      • Emerging Threats
      • Insider Threats
      • Risk Management
      • Threat Intelligence
      • Zero Day
  • News and Exclusives
    • Latest News
    • ISB Exclusive
    • Positive News
  • Who We Are
    • About Us
    • Information Security Buzz Expert Panel​
    • Write for Us
    • Media Pack
  • Contact Us
  • Newsletter
Subscribe
Information Security BuzzInformation Security Buzz
Home - Study & Research - 85 Percent Of IT Professionals Believe Google Will Distrust Additional Certificate Authorities
Study & Research

85 Percent Of IT Professionals Believe Google Will Distrust Additional Certificate Authorities

ISBuzz TeamBy ISBuzz TeamApril 16, 20183 Mins Read
Share LinkedIn Twitter Facebook Copy Link Email
Share
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Copy Link
Quick AI Summary
ChatGPTClaudeGeminiGrokPerplexityDeepSeekCopilot

However, only 23 percent said they were confident in their ability to quickly find all certificates issued by a specific CA

 Venafi®, the leading provider of machine identity protection, today announced the results of a study conducted by Dimensional Research that evaluates how prepared organizations are to respond to Certificate Authority (CA) errors and browser distrust events. The study includes responses from eleven hundred IT security professionals who are knowledgeable about CAs from the U.S., U.K. and Germany, France and Australia.

Although IT security professionals are troubled by future CA incidents, very few have the tools needed to switch CAs quickly. For example, just fifteen percent of respondents believe that Google’s decision to distrust Symantec certificates is a one-time event. However, if they were affected by a major CA event, only twenty-three percent said they are completely confident in their ability to quickly find and replace all their impacted certificates.

“CAs have a very difficult job and they deal with many complexities that are outside their control,” said Mike Dodson, global head of solution architects for Venafi. “Every CA is exposed to risks; and CA compromises and errors can leave organizations scrambling to find and replace many certificates in a short amount of time. Organizations need greater control over the CAs they trust, but they also must acknowledge that they’ll never have full control. For example, browsers play a big role in how we trust CAs. Chrome and Mozilla recently decided they would no longer trust certificates issued by Symantec, and now many organizations must replace these certificates before a set deadline.”

Additional findings indicate that security professionals may be over estimating their ability to respond to a CA incident:

  • Eighty-one percent of the respondents are concerned about future incidents involving CAs.
  • Sixty-one percent of the respondents say they have a plan in place that would allow them to replace all Symantec certificates by the upcoming deadlines, but only fifty-eight percent have an accurate inventory that includes the IP address of all devices where certificates that chain up to a Symantec root were installed.
  • Nearly two thirds (sixty-two percent) are confident they don’t have certificates from unauthorized CAs but only half have controls in place to detect this.
  • Seventy-four percent believe they can find and replace all certificates affected by a CA compromise quickly, but only eight percent have automated processes in place.

Last year, researchers affiliated with Google decided that Symantec, and their affiliated CAs, had mis-issued thousands of Transport Layer Security (TLS) certificates. As a result, Chrome researchers announced a formal plan to remove trust from Symantec-issued certificates. The first deadline is April 17th, 2018 when Chrome 66 and Mozilla will distrust Symantec TLS certificates issued prior to June 1, 2016.

[su_box title=”About Venafi” style=”noise” box_color=”#336588″][short_info id=’59592′ desc=”true” all=”false”][/su_box]

ISBuzz Team
  • ISBuzz Team
    Air Canada Data Breach: BianLian Extortion Group Claims A Massive Heist Contrary To Airline’s Earlier Statement
  • ISBuzz Team
    Unprecedented DDoS Attack Rocks The Web: Tech Giants Reveal A Digital Tsunami
  • ISBuzz Team
    CISA Flags High-Severity Adobe Acrobat Reader Flaw Amid Active Exploits
  • ISBuzz Team
    Curl Security Alert: Patching A Critical Bug Averting Potential Cyber Catastrophe

The opinions expressed in this post belong to the individual contributors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Information Security Buzz.

Share. Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Copy Link

Related Posts

The Real Cost of Inconsistent Third-Party Access

December 18, 20255 Mins Read

What Happens When Devices Cross Borders? The Role of Geofencing in Global IT

August 7, 20256 Mins Read

The Evolving Importance of Identity Governance in FinTech

July 10, 20258 Mins Read
ISB-Bora-Side-Bar

No se ha podido establecer conexión. Error 429

 
ISB-Bora-Side-Bar
Black ISB Logo

Information Security Buzz is an independent resource that provides the experts’ comments, analysis, and opinion on the latest Cybersecurity news and topics

X (Twitter) LinkedIn Facebook RSS

Working With Us

  • About Us
  • Advertise With Us
  • Contact Us

Write For Us

  • How To Contribute

The Pages

  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • AI Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Copyright Notice

Information Security Buzz and all its contents are copyright © 2014-2025. All rights reserved. All third-party trademarks are recognized.

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

Manage Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
  • Manage options
  • Manage services
  • Manage {vendor_count} vendors
  • Read more about these purposes
View preferences
  • {title}
  • {title}
  • {title}