DOCSLIB.ORG

2016 ICIT Ransomware Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2016 ICIT Ransomware Report Expert research contributed by the following ICIT Fellows: Danyetta Magana (ICIT Fellow – President, Covenant Security Solutions) Igor Baikolov (ICIT Fellow – Chief Scientist, Securonix) Brian Contos (ICIT Fellow – Vice President & Chief Security Strategist, Securonix) John Menkhart (ICIT Fellow – Vice President, Federal, Securonix) George Kamis, (ICIT Fellow – CTO, Forcepoint Federal) Stacey Winn (ICIT Fellow - Senior Product Marketing Manager, Public Sector, Forcepoint) Thomas Boyden (ICIT Fellow – Managing Director, GRA Quantum) Kevin Chalker (ICIT Fellow – Founder & CEO, GRA Quantum) John Sabin (ICIT Fellow – Director of Network Security & Architecture, GRA Quantum) 1 Contents Introduction: .............................................................................................................................................................. 3 Origins of Ransomware: ........................................................................................................................................ 6 Overview of Ransomware: ................................................................................................................................... 8 Types of Ransomware: .......................................................................................................................................... 9 Locker Ransomware: ........................................................................................................................................ 9 Crypto Ransomware: ...................................................................................................................................... 10 Active Examples of Crypto ransomware: ............................................................................................... 12 Hybrid Ransomware: ...................................................................................................................................... 16 Delivery Channels: ................................................................................................................................................. 16 Traffic distribution system (TDS): ............................................................................................................ 16 Malvertisement: ................................................................................................................................................ 17 Phishing Emails: ................................................................................................................................................ 17 Downloaders: ..................................................................................................................................................... 17 Social Engineering: .......................................................................................................................................... 18 Self-Propagation: .............................................................................................................................................. 18 Ransomware as a Service (RaaS): .............................................................................................................. 18 Targets for Ransomware: ................................................................................................................................... 19 The Average User: ............................................................................................................................................ 20 Businesses: .......................................................................................................................................................... 20 Law Enforcement and Government Agencies: ..................................................................................... 21 Emergency Services: ....................................................................................................................................... 22 Healthcare Organizations: ............................................................................................................................ 22 Educational Institutions: ............................................................................................................................... 22 Religious Organizations: ................................................................................................................................ 22 Financial Institutions: ..................................................................................................................................... 23 Target Systems: ...................................................................................................................................................... 23 Personal computers: ....................................................................................................................................... 23 Mobile devices: .................................................................................................................................................. 24 Servers: ................................................................................................................................................................. 25 IoT Devices: ......................................................................................................................................................... 25 Critical Systems: ................................................................................................................................................ 26 The Economy of Ransomware: ........................................................................................................................ 26 2 Payment Mediums: .......................................................................................................................................... 28 How Profitable is Ransomware?: ............................................................................................................... 29 Mitigation: ................................................................................................................................................................. 29 Have a Dedicated Information Security Team: .................................................................................... 29 Training and Awareness: .............................................................................................................................. 30 Layered Defenses: ............................................................................................................................................ 30 Policies and Procedures: ............................................................................................................................... 31 When Compromises Occur: ............................................................................................................................... 31 Option1: Engage the Incident Response Team: ................................................................................... 32 Option 2: Try to Implement a Solution without an Information Security Team: ................... 32 Option 3: Attempt to Recover the Data: .................................................................................................. 33 Option 4: Do Nothing: ..................................................................................................................................... 33 Option 5: Pay the Ransom: ........................................................................................................................... 33 Option 6: A Hybrid Solution: ........................................................................................................................ 34 Conclusion: ............................................................................................................................................................... 34 Sources: ...................................................................................................................................................................... 35 Appendix A: Ransomware File Extension and Identifiable Notes ..................................................... 39 File extensions appended to files: ................................................................................................................. 39 Known ransom note files: ................................................................................................................................ 39 Appendix B: Locky Domains For February 2016 through March 2016: ......................................... 40 3 Introduction: 2016 is the year ransomware will wreak havoc on America’s critical infrastructure community. New attacks will become common while unattended vulnerabilities that were silently exploited in 2015 will enable invisible adversaries to capitalize upon positions that they have previously laid claim. “To Pay or Not to Pay”, will be the question fueling heated debate in boardrooms across the Nation and abroad. Ransomware is less about technological sophistication and more about exploitation of the human element. Simply, it is a digital spin on a centuries old criminal tactic. Early in the evolution of structured path systems, the most direct roadways that connected civilization were predominantly used by more privileged members of society and armies. Eventually those who could afford horses or carriages
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ransom Where?
    Ransom where? Holding data hostage with ransomware May 2019 Author With the evolution of digitization and increased interconnectivity, the cyberthreat landscape has transformed from merely a security and privacy concern to a danger much more insidious by nature — ransomware. Ransomware is a type of malware that is designed to encrypt, Imani Barnes Analyst 646.572.3930 destroy or shut down networks in exchange [email protected] for a paid ransom. Through the deployment of ransomware, cybercriminals are no longer just seeking to steal credit card information and other sensitive personally identifiable information (PII). Instead, they have upped their games to manipulate organizations into paying large sums of money in exchange for the safe release of their data and control of their systems. While there are some business sectors in which the presence of this cyberexposure is overt, cybercriminals are broadening their scopes of potential victims to include targets of opportunity1 across a multitude of industries. This paper will provide insight into how ransomware evolved as a cyberextortion instrument, identify notorious strains and explain how companies can protect themselves. 1 WIRED. “Meet LockerGoga, the Ransomware Crippling Industrial Firms” March 25, 2019; https://www.wired.com/story/lockergoga-ransomware-crippling-industrial-firms/. 2 Ransom where? | May 2019 A brief history of ransomware The first signs of ransomware appeared in 1989 in the healthcare industry. An attacker used infected floppy disks to encrypt computer files, claiming that the user was in “breach of a licensing agreement,”2 and demanded $189 for a decryption key. While the attempt to extort was unsuccessful, this attack became commonly known as PC Cyborg and set the archetype in motion for future attacks.
    [Show full text]
  • ERP Applications Under Fire How Cyberattackers Target the Crown Jewels
    ERP Applications Under Fire How cyberattackers target the crown jewels July 2018 v1.0 With hundreds of thousands of implementations across the globe, Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) applications are supporting the most critical business processes for the biggest organizations in the world. This report is the result of joint research performed by Digital Shadows and Onapsis, aimed to provide insights into how the threat landscape has been evolving over time for ERP applications. We have concentrated our efforts on the two most widely-adopted solutions across the large enterprise segment, SAP and Oracle E-Business Suite, focusing on the risks and threats organizations should care about. According to VP Distinguished Analyst, Neil MacDonald “As financially motivated attackers turn their attention ‘up the stack’ to the application layer, business applications such as ERP, CRM and human resources are attractive targets. In many organizations, the ERP application is maintained by a completely separate team and security has not been a high priority. As a result, systems are often left unpatched for years in the name of operational availability.” Gartner, Hype Cycle for Application Security, 2017, July 2017 1 1 Gartner, Hype Cycle for Application Security, 2017, Published: 28 July 2017 ID: G00314199, Analyst(s): Ayal Tirosh, https://www.gartner.com/doc/3772095/hype-cycle-application-security- 02 Executive Summary With hundreds of thousands of implementations across the globe, Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) applications support the most critical business processes and house the most sensitive information for the biggest organizations in the world. The vast majority of these large organizations have implemented ERP applications from one of the two market leaders, SAP and Oracle.
    [Show full text]
  • Mind Your Own Business: a Longitudinal Study of Threats and Vulnerabilities in Enterprises
    Mind your Own Business: A Longitudinal Study of Threats and Vulnerabilities in Enterprises Abstract—Enterprises own a significant fraction of the hosts to, financial assets, and security investment. Thus, it is very connected to the Internet and possess valuable assets, such as likely that the best practices mentioned above do not equally financial data and intellectual property, which may be targeted apply to all of them. by attackers. They suffer attacks that exploit unpatched hosts and install malware, resulting in breaches that may cost millions Currently, it is not clear how the security posture of in damages. Despite the scale of this phenomenon, the threat and enterprises differ according to different factors and whether vulnerability landscape of enterprises remains under-studied. The enterprises are indeed more secure than consumer hosts, i.e., security posture of enterprises remains unclear, and it’s unknown if their security investment is paying off. In this paper, we aim whether enterprises are indeed more secure than consumer hosts. to throw light into these questions by conducting a large-scale To address these questions, we perform the largest and longest longitudinal measurement study of enterprise security. We an- enterprise security study up to date. Our data covers nearly alyze the enterprise threat landscape including the prevalence 3 years and is collected from 28K enterprises, belonging to 67 industries, which own 82M hosts and 73M public-facing servers. of malware and PUP in enterprise hosts and how common security practices, such as vulnerability patching and operating Our measurements comprise of two parts: an analysis of system updates are handled.
    [Show full text]
  • Attacking from Inside
    WIPER MALWARE: ATTACKING FROM INSIDE Why some attackers are choosing to get in, delete files, and get out, rather than try to reap financial benefit from their malware. AUTHORED BY VITOR VENTURA WITH CONTRIBUTIONS FROM MARTIN LEE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY from system impact. Some wipers will destroy systems, but not necessarily the data. On the In a digital era when everything and everyone other hand, there are wipers that will destroy is connected, malicious actors have the perfect data, but will not affect the systems. One cannot space to perform their activities. During the past determine which kind has the biggest impact, few years, organizations have suffered several because those impacts are specific to each kinds of attacks that arrived in many shapes organization and the specific context in which and forms. But none have been more impactful the attack occurs. However, an attacker with the than wiper attacks. Attackers who deploy wiper capability to perform one could perform the other. malware have a singular purpose of destroying or disrupting systems and/or data. The defense against these attacks often falls back to the basics. By having certain Unlike malware that holds data for ransom protections in place — a tested cyber security (ransomware), when a malicious actor decides incident response plan, a risk-based patch to use a wiper in their activities, there is no management program, a tested and cyber direct financial motivation. For businesses, this security-aware business continuity plan, often is the worst kind of attack, since there is and network and user segmentation on top no expectation of data recovery.
    [Show full text]
  • FSRM : Protéger Son Serveur De Fichiers Des Ransomwares Jeudi 20 Avril 2017 16:33
    FSRM : Protéger son serveur de fichiers des ransomwares jeudi 20 avril 2017 16:33 • I. Présentation • II. Installation du gestionnaire de ressources du serveur de fichiers • III. Configurer le SMTP pour recevoir les notifications • IV. Création d’un groupe d’extensions de fichiers • V. Créer un modèle de filtre de fichiers • VI. Créer un filtre de fichiers • VII. Test de la configuration • VIII. Pour aller plus loin I. Présentation Les données qu’elles soient personnelles ou professionnelles ont une valeur certaine, et ça il y a des personnes malintentionnées qu’ils l’ont bien compris et qui veulent en tirer profit avec des malwares, ou plus particulièrement avec les ransomwares qui sont la grande tendance depuis quelque temps. Pour rappel, un ransomware, en français rançongiciel, est un logiciel qui va chiffrer vos données et vous demander de l’argent pour pouvoir récupérer les données, sous peine de les perdre. Pour se protéger face à cette menace, que l’on peut représenter par Cryptolocker ou plus récemment Locky, il y a différentes couches de sécurité à mettre en place. Tout d’abord, ça passe par une protection au niveau des e-mails avec un filtre anti-spam, du filtrage web pour éviter que les utilisateurs aillent sur des sites où ils n’ont rien à faire, ou encore protéger votre serveur de fichiers, c’est d’ailleurs ce dernier point qui nous intéresse. Dans le cadre de ce tutoriel, il sera question de protéger un serveur de fichiers sous Windows Server 2012 R2 ou sur Windows Server 2008 R2, pour cela on s’appuie sur le File Server Resource Manager (FSRM) , en français « Gestionnaire de ressources du serveur de fichiers ».
    [Show full text]
  • View This Article on Online Activity Summaryаннаweek Ending January 13, 2017 This Week, the World's Attention
    5/22/2017 FortiGuard Threat Intelligence Brief ­ January 13, 2017 | FortiGuard View this article on online Activity Summary ­­ Week Ending January 13, 2017 This week, the world's attention has been focused on US President­elect Donald Trump and the allegations that purport to connect him to data stolen by Russian hackers during the 2016 US election. While there is still not enough information to determine whether Trump or his staff were in any way involved with this attack ­­ named GRIZZLY STEPPE in a report jointly produced by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) ­­ it is clear that they had access to classified and confidential information that had been stolen during a spear phishing campaign that took place between 2015 and 2016. It is generally harder to detect a spear phishing email from a regular phishing email as the attacker impersonates someone close to the victim, possibly someone in a position of authority. To avoid becoming a victim to this sort of attack, we at FortiGuard Labs advise you once again to instruct employees to be extremely careful when handling email attachments and links. Of course, that will not always be enough. In some cases, such as HR staff who are sent resumes from potential candidates, it is actually their job to open attachments from people they don't know. Even the least capable person at your company has an email address, and they are likely to click on attachments regardless of how many times you warn them. Implementing a secure email gateway is the best protection mechanism in these cases.
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis of the Teslacrypt Family and How to Protect Against Future
    Sophia Wang COMP 116 Final Project Analysis of the TeslaCrypt Family and How to Protect Against Future Ransomware/Cyber Attacks Abstract Ransomware accounts for a large majority of the malicious attacks in the cyber security world, with a company hit with a ransomware attack once every 40 seconds. There was a 300% increase in ransomware attacks from 2015 to 2016 — and it’s only going up from there. One family of Trojan-style ransomware technology that introduced itself in early 2015 is TeslaCrypt. TeslaCrypt affected Windows users from the US, Germany, Spain, Italy, France, and the United Kingdom, targeting mostly gamers. This form of ransomware would encrypt the victim’s files using a highly complicated encryption key and demand $250 to $1,000 for ransom. The creators of TeslaCrypt eventually released the master decryption key in May of 2016, so in the end the victims were able to recover their files and systems. This paper will explore the process by which the TeslaCrypt ransomware infected a system, the steps that were taken to ameliorate this issue, and what steps should be taken to avoid an incident like this in the future. Introduction Ransomware is a special form of malware that can infect a system through either encrypting and denying users access to their files, or restricting access and locking users out of their systems. Once the ransomware has the target’s files and/or system on lock, it demands a ransom be paid, usually through some form of cryptocurrency. In February of 2015, a new family of file-encrypting Trojan-style ransomware technology was introduced — TeslaCrypt.
    [Show full text]
  • APT and Cybercriminal Targeting of HCS June 9, 2020 Agenda
    APT and Cybercriminal Targeting of HCS June 9, 2020 Agenda • Executive Summary Slides Key: • APT Group Objectives Non-Technical: managerial, strategic • APT Groups Targeting Health Sector and high-level (general audience) • Activity Timeline Technical: Tactical / IOCs; requiring • TTPs in-depth knowledge (sysadmins, IRT) • Malware • Vulnerabilities • Recommendations and Mitigations TLP: WHITE, ID#202006091030 2 Executive Summary • APT groups steal data, disrupt operations, and destroy infrastructure. Unlike most cybercriminals, APT attackers pursue their objectives over longer periods of time. They adapt to cyber defenses and frequently retarget the same victim. • Common HPH targets include: • Healthcare Biotechnology Medical devices • Pharmaceuticals Healthcare information technology • Scientific research • HPH organizations who have been victim of APT attacks have suffered: • Reputational harm Disruption to operations • Financial losses PII/PHI and proprietary data theft • HC3 recommends several mitigations and controls to counter APT threats. TLP: WHITE, ID#202006091030 3 APT Group Objectives • Motivations of APT Groups which target the health sector include: • Competitive advantage • Theft of proprietary data/intellectual capital such as technology, manufacturing processes, partnership agreements, business plans, pricing documents, test results, scientific research, communications, and contact lists to unfairly advance economically. • Intelligence gathering • Groups target individuals and connected associates to further social engineering
    [Show full text]
  • Mcafee Labs Threats Report August 2014
    McAfee Labs Threats Report August 2014 Heartbleed Heartbleed presents a new cybercrime opportunity. 600,000 To-do lists The Heartbleed vulnerability Lists of Heartbleed-vulnerable exposed an estimated 600,000 websites are helpful to users but websites to information theft. can also act as “to-do” lists for cyber thieves. Unpatched websites Black market Despite server upgrades, many Criminals continue to extract websites remain vulnerable. information from Heartbleed- vulnerable websites and are selling it on the black market. McAfee Phishing Quiz Phishing continues to be an effective tactic for infiltrating enterprise networks. Average Score by Department (percent of email samples correctly identified) Only 6% of all test takers correctly 65% identified all ten email samples as phishing or legitimate. 60% 80% 55% of all test takers fell for at least one of the seven phishing emails. 50% 88% of test takers in Accounting & 0 Finance and HR fell for at least one of the seven phishing emails. Accounting & Finance Human Resources Other Departments The McAfee Phishing Quiz tested business users’ ability to detect online scams. Operation Tovar During Operation Tovar—The Gameover Zeus and CryptoLocker takedown: For CryptoLocker For Gameover Zeus more than 125,000 more than 120,000 domains were blocked. domains were sinkholed. Since the announcement of Operation Tovar: 80,000 times Copycats ****** McAfee Stinger, a free ****** are on the rise, creating tool that detects and ****** new ransomware or removes malware financial-targeting (including Gameover Zeus malware using the leaked and CryptoLocker), was Zeus source code. downloaded more than 80,000 times. McAfee joined global law enforcement agencies and others to take down Gameover Zeus and CryptoLocker.
    [Show full text]
  • A PRACTICAL METHOD of IDENTIFYING CYBERATTACKS February 2018 INDEX
    In Collaboration With A PRACTICAL METHOD OF IDENTIFYING CYBERATTACKS February 2018 INDEX TOPICS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4 OVERVIEW 5 THE RESPONSES TO A GROWING THREAT 7 DIFFERENT TYPES OF PERPETRATORS 10 THE SCOURGE OF CYBERCRIME 11 THE EVOLUTION OF CYBERWARFARE 12 CYBERACTIVISM: ACTIVE AS EVER 13 THE ATTRIBUTION PROBLEM 14 TRACKING THE ORIGINS OF CYBERATTACKS 17 CONCLUSION 20 APPENDIX: TIMELINE OF CYBERSECURITY 21 INCIDENTS 2 A Practical Method of Identifying Cyberattacks EXECUTIVE OVERVIEW SUMMARY The frequency and scope of cyberattacks Cyberattacks carried out by a range of entities are continue to grow, and yet despite the seriousness a growing threat to the security of governments of the problem, it remains extremely difficult to and their citizens. There are three main sources differentiate between the various sources of an of attacks; activists, criminals and governments, attack. This paper aims to shed light on the main and - based on the evidence - it is sometimes types of cyberattacks and provides examples hard to differentiate them. Indeed, they may of each. In particular, a high level framework sometimes work together when their interests for investigation is presented, aimed at helping are aligned. The increasing frequency and severity analysts in gaining a better understanding of the of the attacks makes it more important than ever origins of threats, the motive of the attacker, the to understand the source. Knowing who planned technical origin of the attack, the information an attack might make it easier to capture the contained in the coding of the malware and culprits or frame an appropriate response. the attacker’s modus operandi.
    [Show full text]
  • The Dridex Swiss Army Knife: Big Data Dissolves the APT & Crime Grey Area
    #RSAC SESSION ID: HT-W10 The Dridex Swiss Army knife: big data dissolves the APT & crime grey area Eward Driehuis Director of product Fox-IT @brakendelama #RSAC Understanding criminal evolution Global visibility Collaboration Investigations Feeds #RSAC May 2014 #RSAC Rewind 9 years… 2006 Slavik launches ZeuS 2009 SpyEye & Carberp compete for market share 2010 Slavik creates ZeuS2 Hands over ZeuS support to the SpyEye guy 2011 ZeuS2 code leaks 2012 Gribodemon & Carberp members arrested In 2009 Slavik had joined JabberZeuS And Evolved to GameOver / P2PZeuS #RSAC The Businessclub Legacy Businesslike Financial guy perfected money laundry Targeted commercial banking Perfected the Hybrid attack / Tokengrabber Perfected ransomware / Cryptolocker Did some “light espionage” #RSAC Business club after Slavik Dyre Businessclub (GameOver ZeuS gang until May 2014) EvilCorp (Dridex crew) #RSAC Dridex: EvilCorp’s Swiss Army knife #RSAC EvilCorp network expands Core businessclub members in EvilCorp & Dridex operators Leveraging existing money laundry networks Branching out: Dridex operators do ransomware, RATs, Credit Cards, high value targets Ties with Anunak / Carbanak #RSAC Dridex Malware Based on Bugat/Cridex/Feodo, since 2014 Speading: scattergun (spam / attachments) Modular architecture P2P, with 3 operating modes: Token Grabber, data mining, inter node comm Using businessclub technology Loader dropping many different malwares #RSAC #RSAC EvilCorp: Dridex Targets 2015 -2017 #RSAC EvilCorp: ”Gucci” accounts Harvesting data from victims Big data techniques
    [Show full text]
  • The Internet Organised Crime Threat Assessment (IOCTA) 2015
    The Internet Organised Crime Threat Assessment (IOCTA) 2015 2 THE INTERNET ORGANISED CRIME THREAT ASSESSMENT (IOCTA) 2015 THE INTERNET ORGANISED CRIME THREAT ASSESSMENT (IOCTA) 2015 3 TABLE OF FOREWORD 5 CONTENTS ABBREVIATIONS 6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7 KEY FINDINGS 10 KEY RECOMMENDATIONS 12 SUGGESTED OPERATIONAL PRIORITIES 15 INTRODUCTION 16 MALWARE 18 ONLINE CHILD SEXUAL EXPLOITATION 29 PAYMENT FRAUD 33 SOCIAL ENGINEERING 37 DATA BREACHES AND NETWORK ATTACKS 40 ATTACKS ON CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE 44 CRIMINAL FINANCES ONLINE 46 CRIMINAL COMMUNICATIONS ONLINE 50 DARKNETS 52 BIG DATA, IOT AND THE CLOUD 54 THE GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION OF CYBERCRIME 57 GENERAL OBSERVATIONS 62 APPENDICES 67 A1. THE ENCRYPTION DEBATE 67 A2. AN UPDATE ON CYBER LEGISLATION 70 A3. COMPUTER CRIME, FOLLOWED BY CYBERCRIME FOLLOWED BY …. ROBOT AND AI CRIME? 72 4 THE INTERNET ORGANISED CRIME THREAT ASSESSMENT (IOCTA) 2015 FOREWORD These include concrete actions under the three main mandated Threat Assessment (IOCTA), the annual presentation of the areas – child sexual exploitation, cyber attacks, and payment I am pleased to present the 2015 Internet Organised Crime fraud – such as targeting certain key services and products Centre (EC3). offered as part of the Crime-as-a-Service model, addressing the cybercrime threat landscape by Europol’s European Cybercrime growing phenomenon of live-streaming of on-demand abuse of children, or targeted actions with relevant private sector partners ofUsing cybercrime the 2014 for report the asperiod a baseline, under this consideration. assessment Itcovers offers the a cross-cutting crime enablers such as bulletproof hosting, illegal viewkey developments, predominantly changes from a lawand enforcement emerging threats perspective in the based field tradingagainst onlinesites on payment Darknets fraud.
    [Show full text]