Hybrid Work Exposes New Vulnerabilities in Print Security

The shift to a distributed work model has exposed organizations to new threats, and a low but continuing stream of printer-related vulnerabilities isn't helping.

1 Min Read
a printer printing out a document with the title internet security
Alamy

At a Glance

  • Studies show a growing number of printer-related data breaches, with SMBs being particularly vulnerable.
  • Printers can serve as an entry point for attackers, highlighting the need for better asset management and security diligence.
  • Cloud-based print services have increased data security concerns — e.g., for resting data like print jobs in queues.

The shift to hybrid work models has exposed new vulnerabilities in corporate print infrastructure and heightened security risks at many organizations.

The risks run the gamut and include employees using insecure and unmanaged printers, remote workers sending print jobs over public networks, inadequate user authentication and print job release processes, exposed local spools and caches, and inconsistent patching practices.

A relatively low but steady volume of print-related vulnerabilities have exacerbated these issues. Recent examples of such vulnerabilities include CVE-2024-38199 (a remote code execution [RCE] vulnerability in the Windows or Line Printer Daemon [LPD] Service), CVE-2024-21433 (a Windows Print Spooler elevation of privilege vulnerability), and CVE-2024-43529 (a similar vulnerability that Microsoft disclosed in its October security update). The threats are certainly not Windows-specific, either. Recently, researchers discovered a set of potentially severe flaws in Common Unix Printing System (CUPS), a legacy protocol largely used in Linux, Unix, and heterogeneous environments.

Though few of these flaws have presented as major a threat as the PrintNightmare RCE flaw from 2021 in the Windows Print Spooler service, they have complicated the challenge of managing modern print infrastructure. Attackers, including nation-state actors, have sometimes abused printer software vulnerabilities — like CVE-2022-38028 — to substantial effect in their campaigns.

Related:BCDR Basics: A Quick Reference Guide for Business Continuity & Disaster Recovery

Continue Reading This Article on Dark Reading

Read more about:

Dark Reading

About the Authors

Jai Vijayan

Contributing writer, Dark Reading

Jai Vijayan is a seasoned technology reporter with over 20 years of experience in IT trade journalism. He was most recently a senior editor at Computerworld, where he covered information security and data privacy issues for the publication. Over the course of his 20-year career at Computerworld, Jai also covered a variety of other technology topics including big data, Hadoop, Internet of Things, e-voting and data analytics. Prior to Computerworld, Jai covered technology issues for The Economic Times in Bangalore, India. Jai has a master's degree in statistics and lives in Naperville, Illinois.

Dark Reading

Long one of the most widely read cyber security news sites on the Web, Dark Reading, a sister site to ITPro Today, is now the most trusted online community for security professionals like you. Dark Reading's community members include thought-leading security researchers, CISOs, and technology specialists, along with thousands of other security professionals.

Sign up for the ITPro Today newsletter
Stay on top of the IT universe with commentary, news analysis, how-to's, and tips delivered to your inbox daily.

You May Also Like