improper multi-factor authentication (MFA) configuration

 

The user wants an explanation of the provided image, which is a LinkedIn post about a cyber insurance claim denial.

The image is a LinkedIn post by someone named Prateek Panda. In the post, he explains that a cyber insurance company denied a $18.3 million ransomware claim because the victim company had an improper multi-factor authentication (MFA) configuration.

The key points of the post are:

• Claim Denial Reason: The insurance provider denied the claim because, even though the company stated it had MFA, the breached account was not protected by MFA. This violated the terms of their policy.

• MFA as a Requirement: The post highlights that while cyber insurers often require MFA, it's not enough to simply have it. It must be properly enforced on all privileged or high-risk accounts to be effective and to satisfy the insurance policy's conditions.

• The Disconnect: The author notes that this is a common problem: there's often a gap between an organization's stated security controls and their actual implementation. Security controls must be applied to "all systems, all the time" for them to be truly effective.

• Beyond MFA: The author adds that even proper MFA isn't a complete solution anymore. He advocates for phishing-resistant MFA to protect against advanced attacks like Adversary-in-the-Middle (AiTM) attacks, where attackers can trick users into approving MFA prompts and then hijack their sessions.