DOCSLIB.ORG

Attacking from Inside

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read 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. of the regular software security stack — an Another crucial aspect of a wiper attack is the organization dramatically increases its fear, uncertainty and doubt that it generates. resilience against these kind of attacks. In the past, wiper attacks have been used by malicious actors with a dual purpose: Generate INTRODUCTION social destabilization and sending a public message, while also destroying all traces of Malware with destructive payloads has their activities. Given that the malicious actor been around since the early days of virus has just revealed its presence, the doubt and development. However, the delivery methods uncertainty about what happened before the and the destructive level have evolved. For attack raises a lot of questions. the past five years, we have seen the rise of ransomware with CryptoLocker and TeslaCrypt, • How did they get in? among others. These have earned huge • How long were they here? amounts of money for their operators. In • Did they exfiltrate any of our data? these cases, the operators would go through • Can we recover safely? a great deal of effort to establish a reputation regarding the recovery of data. The questions above become a CISO’s worst nightmare, preying on the mind while trying to But just as ransomware was on the rise in the support the recovery of business operations as mainstream, more attackers also began to use quickly and safely as possible. targeted wiper malware. A wiper is a malware with the sole intention of destroying systems A wiper’s destructive capability can vary, and/or data, usually causing great financial ranging from the overwriting of specific files, and/or reputation damage. The motivation to the destruction of the entire filesystem. behind these attacks may be political, aimed at The amount of data impacted will be a direct generating publicity, or it can also be pure and consequence of the technique used. Which, of simple artifact destruction with the intention of course, will have direct impact on the business preventing a forensic investigation. In the latter, — the harder the data/system recovery process this is usually preceded by data-gathering and becomes, the bigger the business impact. exfiltration operations, which recently became It is important to distinguish the data impact CISOs' biggest concerns regarding cyber attacks. © 2018 Cisco. All rights reserved. | [email protected] | talosintelligence.com page 2 of 11 One of the first incidents of wiper malware that amount. This is just enough to destroy was the Shamoon attack in 2012, after which the headers of the files, which renders them several additional events have occurred, useless. Other wipers will write a certain such as Shamoon2, BlackEnergy and Nyetya/ amount of bytes every other amount. For NotPetya where the pure destruction/disruption instance, the malware will write 100 kilobytes of operations seemed to be the objective. of data every five megabytes sequentially through the hard disk. This means that the wiper will destroy files at random without any ANATOMY OF A WIPER predictable pattern. Both methods may be followed by the destruction of the master file DESTRUCTIVE PAYLOAD table, which is where the Windows file system A wiper can go through several steps during (NTFS for recent versions) keeps records of its activity, depending on its capabilities the file locations and associated metadata. and techniques used to perform the data/ This last step makes advanced recovery tools system destruction. The effectiveness of the practically impossible to use due to the lack of destructive component of a wiper is directly information to recover the files. related to the speed at which it can perform As mentioned before, in order to perform these the activities. Usually a wiper has three activities, the wiper may need to use a custom attack vectors: files (data), boot section of the bootloader, which will perform the destruction operating system and backups of system and upon reboot, thus bypassing the operating data. The backup destruction is commonly system protections. done by deleting the volume shadow copies But there is another way. In the Shamoon attacks, and the backups. This can be done easily by the authors used a trial version of a legitimate the execution of some legitimate operating driver to get access to the filesystem, bypassing system command-line tools. The boot section the operating system API. This bypasses any can be done in two ways, depending on the protections to files enforced by the operating purpose. It can simply erase the first 10 system, and allows for the destruction of files sectors of the physical disks (master boot while the system is still running. record location), or the malware can rewrite these first 10 sectors with a new boot loader Obviously, these techniques require the that will perform additional damage. Either adequate privilege level and/or operating way, the original operating system becomes system. That is why some wipers will fall back unbootable. Usually, along with master boot from one technique to the other depending on record destruction, the wipers will also use the conditions of the victim’s system. operating system command-line utilities to Recently, we have also saw Olympic Destroyer destroy the recovery console. Both actions — disabling all services on the operating system. boot section and backup destruction — can be This alone does not destroy data, but it makes performed quickly. The activity that takes the the recovery of the system almost impossible longest to perform is the actual file destruction. without reinstallation, which creates a service To be more efficient, most wipers don’t unavailability. overwrite the entire hard disk. There are wipers that will create a list of targeted files. Others PROPAGATION MECHANISM will list all files in specific folders. Some of them will only rewrite a certain amount of bytes A wiper is not only made of the destructive at the beginning of each file. They will overwrite module. In the latest incident, Olympic the file completely if the files are smaller than Destoryer, a wiper (see figure 1) was released in the form of wiper worms, performing self- © 2018 Cisco. All rights reserved. | [email protected] | talosintelligence.com page 3 of 11 replication and lateral movement inside the Figure 1. Timeline of Wiper attacks since 2012. networks. Replication modules usually are used in conjunction with credential-harvesting SHAMOON1 modules. The malware will harvest credentials Aug. 2012 from the system, which are then used to perform Targets: Refineries in KSA remote copy and execution of the wiper, hopping from system to system. The most popular way to do this remote execution is the usage of the DARK SEOUL psexec tool and the Windows Management March 2013 Instrumentation command-line utility (WMIC) Targets: Broadcast and — both legitimate administration mechanisms 2013 ATMs in South Korea present in the Windows operating system. The usage of legitimate tools and credentials makes it harder for the system administrators to detect the malicious activity in such a small time frame. It is important to keep in mind that the wipers will try to be as fast as they can on their 2014 destructive activity. Some of the worms also carry the code to exploit GUARDIANS OF PEACE vulnerabilities that allow remote code execution, Nov.2014 when all other means of propagation fail. Target: Sony PAST INCIDENTS 2015 TIMELINE BLACK ENERGY Nov. 2015 For the past eight to 10 years, whenever wipers Targets: have been used, there is almost always some ICS, Energy Sector in Ukraine kind of political connection that has been made by the media. 2016 This tendency is supported by the fact that there is no clear financial gain from the SHAMOON2 Nov. 2016 attackers, and there is a huge amount of Target: Refineries in Saudi capability lost following the wiper action. Arabia Our timeline (figure 1) shows that since 2012, WANNA CRY at least one big wiper attack has happened May 2017 2017 per year. A wiper usually has public visibility Targets: Worldwide attack and/or political motivations. But during some incidents, wipers have been used after NYETYA June 2017 data exfiltration to cover attacker’s tracks. The public disruption of services gives high Target: Ukreain generic ally, spread all over the world visibility to the attack, which is often the purpose.
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]
  • 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]
  • The Middle East Under Malware Attack Dissecting Cyber Weapons
    The Middle East under Malware Attack Dissecting Cyber Weapons Sami Zhioua Information and Computer Science Department King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals Dhahran, Saudi Arabia [email protected] Abstract—The Middle East is currently the target of an un- have been designed by the same unknown entity 1. The next precedented campaign of cyber attacks carried out by unknown malware of this lineage was Flame [7] which was discovered parties. The energy industry is praticularly targeted. The in May 2012 by Kaspersky Lab while investigating another attacks are carried out by deploying extremely sophisticated malware. The campaign opened by the Stuxnet malware in piece of malware called Wiper [8]. Flame features very 2010 and then continued through Duqu, Flame, Gauss, and unusual characteristics such as large size, large number of Shamoon malware. This paper is a technical survey of the modules, self adapting, etc. As Duqu, Flame’s objective is attacking vectors utilized by the three most famous malware, data collection and espionnage. Gauss [9] is another data namely, Stuxnet, Flame, and Shamoon. We describe their main stealing malware discovered in June 2012 by Kaspersky Lab modules, their sophisticated spreading capabilities, and we discuss what it sets them apart from typical malware. The focusing on banking information. Flame and Gauss exhibit main purpose of the paper is to point out the recent trends striking similarities and several technical evidences indicate infused by this new breed of malware into cyber attacks. that they come from the same “factories” that produced Stuxnet and Duqu [9]. The latest malware-based attack Keywords-Malwares; Information Security; Targeted At- tacks; Stuxnet; Duqu; Flame; Gauss; Shamoon targeting the middle east was the Shamoon attack on Saudi Aramco [10].
    [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]
  • A Systematic Empirical Analysis of Unwanted Software Abuse, Prevalence, Distribution, and Economics
    UNIVERSIDAD POLITECNICA´ DE MADRID ESCUELA TECNICA´ SUPERIOR DE INGENIEROS INFORMATICOS´ A Systematic Empirical Analysis of Unwanted Software Abuse, Prevalence, Distribution, and Economics PH.D THESIS Platon Pantelis Kotzias Copyright c 2019 by Platon Pantelis Kotzias iv DEPARTAMENTAMENTO DE LENGUAJES Y SISTEMAS INFORMATICOS´ E INGENIERIA DE SOFTWARE ESCUELA TECNICA´ SUPERIOR DE INGENIEROS INFORMATICOS´ A Systematic Empirical Analysis of Unwanted Software Abuse, Prevalence, Distribution, and Economics SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF: Doctor of Philosophy in Software, Systems and Computing Author: Platon Pantelis Kotzias Advisor: Dr. Juan Caballero April 2019 Chair/Presidente: Marc Dasier, Professor and Department Head, EURECOM, France Secretary/Secretario: Dario Fiore, Assistant Research Professor, IMDEA Software Institute, Spain Member/Vocal: Narseo Vallina-Rodriguez, Assistant Research Professor, IMDEA Networks Institute, Spain Member/Vocal: Juan Tapiador, Associate Professor, Universidad Carlos III, Spain Member/Vocal: Igor Santos, Associate Research Professor, Universidad de Deusto, Spain Abstract of the Dissertation Potentially unwanted programs (PUP) are a category of undesirable software that, while not outright malicious, can pose significant risks to users’ security and privacy. There exist indications that PUP prominence has quickly increased over the last years, but the prevalence of PUP on both consumer and enterprise hosts remains unknown. Moreover, many important aspects of PUP such as distribution vectors, code signing abuse, and economics also remain unknown. In this thesis, we empirically and sys- tematically analyze in both breadth and depth PUP abuse, prevalence, distribution, and economics. We make the following four contributions. First, we perform a systematic study on the abuse of Windows Authenticode code signing by PUP and malware.
    [Show full text]
  • Ransomware Behavior Attack Construction Via Graph Theory Approach
    (IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, Vol. 11, No. 2, 2020 Ransomware Behavior Attack Construction via Graph Theory Approach Muhammad Safwan Rosli1, Raihana Syahirah Abdullah2* Warusia Yassin3, Faizal M.A4, Wan Nur Fatihah Wan Mohd Zaki5 Centre of Advanced Computing Technology, Fakulti Teknologi Maklumat dan Komunikasi, Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka, Hang Tuah Jaya, 76100 Durian Tunggal, Melaka, Malaysia1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Abstract—Ransomware has becoming a current trend of amount of resources such as RAM, machine storage which are cyberattack where its reputation among malware that cause a time consuming [3]. So, to mitigate the concern issues, massive amount recovery in terms of cost and time for researchers need to come with different approaches and ransomware victims. Previous studies and solutions have showed solutions to defend against current and future threats and also that when it comes to malware detection, malware behavior need to understand the behavior of the malware attacks and their to be prioritized and analyzed in order to recognize malware interactions with victim‟s machine [4]. attack pattern. Although the current state-of-art solutions and frameworks used dynamic analysis approach such as machine The main problem remain persists yet and it still needs to learning that provide more impact rather than static approach, keep on update where the researchers need to understand the but there is not any approachable way in representing the malware behavior whether it is in network traffic or file analysis especially a detection that relies on malware behavior. activity system in the form of statistical and dynamic. This Therefore, this paper proposed a graph theory approach which is research also stressed out the problem in visualizing malware analysis of the ransomware behavior that can be visualized into behavior since the data can be represented in an easy way to be graph-based pattern.
    [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]
  • Best Practices to Protect Against Ransomware, Phishing & Email Fraud
    WHITE PAPER Best Practices for Protecting Against Phishing, Ransomware and Email Fraud An Osterman Research White Paper Published April 2018 SPON Osterman Research, Inc. P.O. Box 1058 • Black Diamond • Washington • 98010-1058 • USA +1 206 683 5683 • [email protected] www.ostermanresearch.com • @mosterman Executive Summary • Various types of security threats are increasing in number and severity at a rapid pace, most notably cryptojacking malware that is focused on mining coins for the roughly 1,400 cryptocurrencies currently in use. • Organizations have been victimized by a wide range of threats and exploits, most notably phishing attacks that have penetrated corporate defenses, targeted email attacks launched from compromised accounts, and sensitive or confidential information accidentally leaked through email. • Threats are becoming more sophisticated as well-financed cybercriminal gangs develop improved variants of malware and social engineering attacks. The result is that the perceived effectiveness of current security solutions is not improving – or is actually getting worse – for many organizations. • Decision makers are most concerned about endpoints getting infected with malware through email or web browsing, user credentials being stolen through email-based phishing, and senior executives’ credentials being stolen through email-based spearphishing. • Four of the five leading concerns expressed by decision makers focus on email as the primary threat vector for cybercriminal activity, and nearly one-half of attacks are focused on account takeovers. Many organizations • Most decision makers have little confidence that their security infrastructure can adequately address infections on mobile devices, are not CEO Fraud/BEC, and preventing users personal devices from introducing malware into the corporate network.
    [Show full text]
  • Gothic Panda Possibly Used Doublepulsar a Year Before The
    Memo 17/05/2019 - TLP:WHITE Gothic Panda possibly used DoublePulsar a year before the Shadow Brokers leak Reference: Memo [190517-1] Date: 17/05/2019 - Version: 1.0 Keywords: APT, DoublePulsar, China, US, Equation Group Sources: Publicly available sources Key Points Gothic Panda may have used an Equation Group tool at least one year before the Shadow Brokers leak. It is unknown how the threat group obtained the tool. This is a good example of a threat actor re-using cyber weapons that were originally fielded by another group. Summary According research conducted by Symantec, the Chinese threat actor known as Gothic Panda (APT3, UPS, SSL Beast, Clandestine Fox, Pirpi, TG-0110, Buckeye, G0022, APT3) had access to at least one NSA-associated Equation Group tool a year before they were leaked by the Shadow Brokers threat actor. On April 14, 2017, a threat actor called the Shadow Brokers released a bundle of cyber-attack tools purportedly coming from the US NSA, also referred to as the Equation Group. Among the released material there was the DoublePulsar backdoor implant tool, which was used alongside EternalBlue in the May 2017 destructive WannaCry attack. DoublePulsar is a memory-based kernel malware that allows perpetrators to run arbitrary shellcode payloads on the target system. It does not write anything on the hard drive and will thus disappear once the victim machine is rebooted. Its only purpose is to enable dropping other malware or executables in the system. According to Symantec, Gothic Panda used the DoublePulsar exploit as early as in 2016, a full year before the Shadow Brokers release.
    [Show full text]
  • Fractional Dynamics of Stuxnet Virus Propagation in Industrial Control Systems
    mathematics Article Fractional Dynamics of Stuxnet Virus Propagation in Industrial Control Systems Zaheer Masood 1, Muhammad Asif Zahoor Raja 2,* , Naveed Ishtiaq Chaudhary 2, Khalid Mehmood Cheema 3 and Ahmad H. Milyani 4 1 Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Capital University of Science and Technology, Islamabad 44000, Pakistan; [email protected] 2 Future Technology Research Center, National Yunlin University of Science and Technology, 123 University Road, Section 3, Douliou 64002, Taiwan; [email protected] 3 School of Electrical Engineering, Southeast University, Nanjing 210096, China; [email protected] 4 Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah 21589, Saudi Arabia; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: The designed fractional order Stuxnet, the virus model, is analyzed to investigate the spread of the virus in the regime of isolated industrial networks environment by bridging the air-gap between the traditional and the critical control network infrastructures. Removable storage devices are commonly used to exploit the vulnerability of individual nodes, as well as the associated networks, by transferring data and viruses in the isolated industrial control system. A mathematical model of an arbitrary order system is constructed and analyzed numerically to depict the control mechanism. A local and global stability analysis of the system is performed on the equilibrium points derived Citation: Masood, Z.; Raja, M.A.Z.; for the value of a = 1. To understand the depth of fractional model behavior, numerical simulations Chaudhary, N.I.; Cheema, K.M.; are carried out for the distinct order of the fractional derivative system, and the results show that Milyani, A.H.
    [Show full text]
  • FROM SHAMOON to STONEDRILL Wipers Attacking Saudi Organizations and Beyond
    FROM SHAMOON TO STONEDRILL Wipers attacking Saudi organizations and beyond Version 1.05 2017-03-07 Beginning in November 2016, Kaspersky Lab observed a new wave of wiper attacks directed at multiple targets in the Middle East. The malware used in the new attacks was a variant of the infamous Shamoon worm that targeted Saudi Aramco and Rasgas back in 2012. Dormant for four years, one of the most mysterious wipers in history has returned. So far, we have observed three waves of attacks of the Shamoon 2.0 malware, activated on 17 November 2016, 29 November 2016 and 23 January 2017. Also known as Disttrack, Shamoon is a highly destructive malware family that effectively wipes the victim machine. A group known as the Cutting Sword of Justice took credit for the Saudi Aramco attack by posting a Pastebin message on the day of the attack (back in 2012), and justified the attack as a measure against the Saudi monarchy. The Shamoon 2.0 attacks observed since November 2016 have targeted organizations in various critical and economic sectors in Saudi Arabia. Just like the previous variant, the Shamoon 2.0 wiper aims for the mass destruction of systems inside targeted organizations. The new attacks share many similarities with the 2012 wave, though featuring new tools and techniques. During the first stage, the attackers obtain administrator credentials for the victim’s network. Next, they build a custom wiper (Shamoon 2.0) which leverages these credentials to spread widely inside the organization. Finally, on a predefined date, the wiper activates, rendering the victim’s machines completely inoperable.
    [Show full text]
  • Chrome Flaw Allows Sites to Secretly Record Audio
    Chrome Flaw Allows Sites to Secretly Record Audio/Video Without Indication Chrome Flaw Allows Sites to Secretly Record Audio/Video Without Indication Sounds really scary! Isn’t it? But this scenario is not only possible but is hell easy to accomplish.A UX design flaw in the Google’s Chrome browser could allow malicious websites to record audio or video without alerting the user or giving any visual indication that the user is being spied on. AOL developer Ran Bar-Zik reported the vulnerability to Google on April 10, 2017, but the tech giant declined to consider this vulnerability a valid security issue, which means that there is no official patch on the way. How Browsers Works With Camera & Microphone Before jumping onto vulnerability details, you first need to know that web browser based audio-video communication relies on WebRTC (Web Real-Time Communications) protocol – a collection of communications protocols that is being supported by most modern web browsers to enable real-time communication over peer-to-peer connections without the use of plugins. However, to protect unauthorised streaming of audio and video without user’s permission, the web browser first request users to explicitly allow websites to use WebRTC and access device camera/microphone. Once granted, the website will have access to your camera and microphone forever until you manually revoke WebRTC permissions. In order to prevent ‘authorised’ websites from secretly recording your audio or video stream, web browsers indicate their users when any audio or video is being recorded. « Activating this API will alert the user that the audio or video from one of the devices is being captured, » Bar-Zik wrote on a Medium blog post.
    [Show full text]