Threat Landscape Report – 1St Quarter 2018
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
TLP-AMBER Threat Landscape Report – 1st Quarter 2018 (FINAL) V1.0 – 10/04/2018 This quarterly report summarises the most significant direct cyber threats to EU institutions, bodies, and agencies (EU-I or 'Constituents') in Part I, the development of cyber-threats on a broader scale in Part II, and recent technical trends in Part III. KEY FINDINGS Direct Threats • In Europe, APT28 / Sofacy threat actor (likely affiliated to Russia military intelligence GRU) targeted government institutions related to foreign affairs and attendees of a military conference. Another threat actor, Turla (likely affiliated to Russia’s security service FSB) executed a cyber-operation against foreign affairs entities in a European country. • A spear-phishing campaign that targeted European foreign ministries in the end of 2017 was attributed to a China-based threat actor (Ke3chang) which has a long track record of targeting EU institutions (since 2011). As regards cyber-criminality against EU institutions, attempts to deliver banking trojans are stable, ransomware activities are still in decline and cryptojacking on the rise. Phishing lures involve generic matters (’invoice’, ‘payment’, ‘purchase’, ‘wire transfer’, ‘personal banking’, ‘job application’) and more specific ones (foreign affairs issues, European think tanks matters, energy contracts, EU delegation, EU watch keeper). Almost all EU-I are affected by credential leaks (email address | password) on pastebin-like websites. Several credential- harvesting attempts have also been detected. Attackers keep attempting to lure EU-I staff by employing custom methods such as spoofed EU-I email addresses or weaponisation of EU-I documents. Broader Threats • Critical infrastructure. In the energy sector, the US authorities have accused Russian actors of targeting critical infrastructure (including nuclear) for several years and are expecting this to continue in 2018. The transportation sector has been subject to targeted intrusions (aviation and maritime companies), while the risk of disruption by devastating attack malware (e.g NotPetya) has proven to be real (large shipping company, airport). In the health sector, data breaches keep exposing patient data while more medical devices are reportedly vulnerable to cyber-attacks. In the banking sector, customers have been impacted by denial of service attacks against financial institutions. • Digital infrastructure and services. Vulnerabilities affect digital infrastructure software. Ethical hackers and service providers contribute to resolving security issues related to browsers, web hosting, cloud storage, social media platform and peer-to-peer software. • Defence and foreign affairs. The European defence (military data) and foreign affairs (embassy, think tanks) sectors were targeted by several actors likely based in Russia or China (see direct threats above). • Geopolitical. China exhibits new cyber capabilities and reserves high value vulnerabilities for offensive operations. Chinese threat actors executed targeted intrusions against several countries (US, Europe, Asia) and sectors (maritime, engineering, military, IT, think tanks, activists). Russia reinforces its internet sovereignty and internet surveillance capabilities. Russian actors employ sophisticated false-flag and false-front tactics for hybrid warfare and execute targeted intrusions in the military, defence, and foreign affairs sectors. The US have deployed an unprecedented set of diplomatic responses to cyber-attacks: finger pointing respectively North Korea and Russia for the destructive attacks; economic sanctions against Russian entities (including the FSB, GRU and Internet Research Agency) for cyber information operations; publicly naming Russian hackers for targeting critical infrastructures; indicting Iranian hackers for intellectual property theft. Additionally, the US NSA has reportedly monitored other nations’ offensive cyber operations with advanced custom tools. Iranian threat actors have recently exhibited improved capacities while attacking entities in Asia and the Middle East. North Korean actors keep targeting the finance sector to steal funds for the regime, but they also attempt targeted intrusions in several additional sectors (chemicals, manufacturing, electronics, aerospace, automotive, telecom). • Data protection. Data breaches can have severe political (Cambridge Analytica & Facebook) and regulatory (energy company facing fines) implications. Data breaches affect public (citizen biometrics, public service employees) and private entities (social media platform, energy, retail, bank, telecom, sport, travel, cloud services, online forum). • Techniques. “Living off the land” malwareless intrusion techniques are increasingly used by attackers who use native or legitimate tools present on a compromised system to accomplish malicious objectives and evade detection. Page 1 of 33 TLP-AMBER 10 selected attacks 1. Russia-based DragonFly has targeted organisations in the energy, nuclear, water, aviation, and critical manufacturing sectors since at least March 2016 (page 13). 2. An Iran-linked threat actor dubbed OilRig has attempted to compromise critical infrastructure, banks, airlines, and government entities in the Middle East and the US since 2015 (page 14). 3. In February, a phishing attack by Sofacy (APT28) targeted two government institutions related to Foreign Affairs (page 17). 4. Turla (Snake) attacked several Foreign Affairs entities in an EU country (page 17). 5. According to recent public reporting China-based Ke3chang targeted UK government departments and military technology in the UK in May 2017 (page 17). 6. Since early 2018, a wave of intrusions has targeted US engineering and maritime entities, especially those connected to South China Sea issues (page 20). 7. Likely Russia-based hackers employed advanced false-flag techniques to deceive attribution of OlympicDestroyer malware attack against the winter Olympic Games (page 21). 8. An Iran-based threat actor (MuddyWater, Temp.Zagros) exhibited advanced obfuscation techniques while attacking entities in Asia and the Middle East (page 22). 9. The NSA has employed a tool (Territorial Dispute) to track cyber-operations executed by other nation-state hackers (page 24). 10. A targeted intrusion exploited a zero-day vulnerability of an industrial safety control system (page 28). Page 2 of 33 TLP-AMBER Contents PART I: DIRECT THREATS AGAINST EU-I ...................................................................................................................................... 7 TARGETED INTRUSIONS ......................................................................................................................................................... 7 RANSOMWARE ...................................................................................................................................................................... 7 BANKING TROJANS ................................................................................................................................................................ 8 MINERS & CRYPTOCURRENCIES ............................................................................................................................................ 8 EXPLOIT KITS .......................................................................................................................................................................... 8 Trojans / Bots / Tools............................................................................................................................................................. 9 DENIAL OF SERVICE AND DEFACEMENT .............................................................................................................................. 10 PHISHING & DELIVERY LURES .............................................................................................................................................. 10 CREDENTIAL LEAKAGE AND HARVESTING ........................................................................................................................... 11 VULNERABILITIES ................................................................................................................................................................. 11 METHODS ............................................................................................................................................................................ 12 PART II: BROADER THREAT LANDSCAPE ................................................................................................................................... 13 SECTOR: ENERGY ................................................................................................................................................................. 13 Regulation – Protection .................................................................................................................................................. 13 Events ............................................................................................................................................................................. 13 SECTOR: TRANSPORTATION ................................................................................................................................................ 14 Government – administration ........................................................................................................................................ 14 Civil