Security Monitoring and Alert Correlation for Network Intrusion Detection

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Security Monitoring and Alert Correlation for Network Intrusion Detection Security Monitoring and Alert Correlation for Network Intrusion Detection Dissertation zur Erlangung des Doktorgrades an der Fakultät für Mathematik, Informatik und Naturwissenschaften Fachbereich Informatik IT-Sicherheit und -Sicherheitsmanagement der Universität Hamburg vorgelegt von Steffen Haas geb. 1992 in Mainz eingereicht am 30.10.2020 Betreuer: Prof. Dr. Mathias Fischer Erstgutachter: Prof. Dr. Mathias Fischer Zweitgutachter: Prof. Dr. Michael Meier Tag der Disputation: 04.03.2021 Zusammenfassung Angriffe auf IT-Systeme können zu erheblichen Störungen mit netzwerkweiten Auswirkungen führen. Standardmäßig basiert die Angriffserkennung auf einem Intrusion Detection System (IDS). Ein Security Operations Center (SOC) kann die Menge an resultierenden Alerts jedoch nicht analysieren. Aufgrund dieser Flut an Alerts, werden die wirklich gefährlichen Angriffe mit wenigen Alerts, wie die Advanced Persistent Threats (APTs), nicht erkannt. Unternehmen setzen als Lösung Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) Systeme zur Korrelation von Alerts und anderen sicherheitsrelevanten Daten ein. Diese Systeme fassen jedoch meistens nur den Sicherheitsstatus der IT-Systeme zusammen. Eine Priorisierung der Alerts und ein Kenntlichmachen der darin enthaltenen Angriffe erfolgt damit nicht. Dies wird zusätzlich durch die beschränkte Sichtbarkeit der oft eingesetzen Netzwerk-basierten Intrusion Detection Systeme (NIDSes) erschwert. Grund dafür ist, dass sich nicht alle Angriffsaspekte im Netzwerkverkehr manifestieren und der interne Netzwerkverkehr dem NIDS verborgen bleibt. Diese Dissertation präsentiert Mechanismen für eine umfassende Erkennung und Rekonstruktion von Angriffen. Die Beiträge setzen auf zwei unterschiedlichen Ebenen an. Zum einen produziert das Sicherheitsmonitoring qualitativ hochwertige Daten, die dann zur Erstellung von Alerts genutzt werden können. Zum anderen zeigen Korrelationsmechanismen Zusammenhänge zwis- chen Alerts auf und fassen die rekonstruierten Angriffe zusammen. Ganz konkret verbindet eine gemeinsame Host- und Netzwerküberwachung entsprechende Daten in Echtzeit. Eine erweiterte Sichtbarkeit wird dabei durch die Attributierung von Netzwerkflüssen zu Hostapplikationen erreicht. Die Korrelation von Netzwerkflüssen untereinander ermöglicht außerdem eine robuste Erkennung von verteilten Angriffen auch bei eingeschränkter Sichtbarkeit. Die vorgeschlagene Korrelation von Alerts unterscheidet zwischen den Alerts von Massenangriffen und den weniger häufig auftretenden Alerts von APTs. Nach dem Zusammenbringen und Aggregieren von Alerts des gleichen Angriffs, werden die Angriffe weiter korreliert, um die Angriffsschritte und deren Zusammenhänge hervorzuheben. Für die Skalierbarkeit in großen Netzen setzen die vorgestell- ten Mechanismen auf einer verteilten Überwachungs- und Korrelationsplatform auf, was bei entsprechendem Einsatz zu einer flächendeckenden Angriffserkennung führt. Der Betrieb als Collaborative Intrusion Detection System (CIDS) wird durch einen weiteren Mechanismus ermöglicht, der Zusammenfassungen von Alerts für deren Austausch erstellt. Die entwickelten Ansätze wurden umfassend individuell als auch in Kombination auf der Basis von realem Einsatz, Testumgebung und Simulation evaluiert. Weiterhin wurden die Beiträge zusammen entlang einer bestimmten Abfolge diskutiert. Das Gesamtsystem erkennt Angriffe mit hoher Genauigkeit durch die Korrelation verschiedener Informationen. In einem realen Einsatz war die Attributierung bei mehr als 96% der TCP Verbindungen erfolgreich. In einer realistischen Simulation wurde ein Peer-to-Peer (P2P) Botnetz auch dann robust erkannt, wenn die NetFlows den Netzwerkverkehr von nur 5% der Bots abbilden. Zugleich fasst das System diese, das gesamte Netzwerk bedrohende, Angriffe zusammen. Echte Alerts ließen sich in Experimenten durch Aggregation auf 0,6% der ursprünglichen Anzahl verringern. Beim Einsatz des Systems als CIDS, führten die Zusammenfassungen von Alerts zu einer Reduktion des Datenverkehrs beim Austausch auf etwa 1% der Originaldaten. 1 Abstract Attacks on IT systems can have network-wide impacts with tremendous consequences. For attack detection, the standard solution is to deploy an intrusion detection system (IDS). However, it reports too many alerts to be all analyzed by the security operations center (SOC), even with the help of alert correlation. This creates alert fatigue and the really sophisticated attacks, the advanced persistent threats (APTs), that trigger only a few inconspicuous alerts, go unnoticed. To mitigate the alert correlation problems, companies utilize security tools like security information and event management (SIEM) systems that correlate alerts and other security-relevant data. Although these systems provide extensive data analytics, they just summarize the overall security status of IT systems but fail to appropriately prioritize alerts and to make attacks in the alert data visible. A solution to achieve this is additionally impeded by the restricted visibility of the commonly deployed network intrusion detection systems (NIDSes), because not all attack aspects manifest in the network traffic. Furthermore, the NIDS location enables to capture the Internet traffic of the monitored network but not the traffic between hosts inside the network. This dissertation presents mechanisms that enable a comprehensive detection and reconstruction of attacks. The novel contributions work towards a better overall detection accuracy at two different stages of the intrusion detection process. First, security monitoring is enhanced to produce high-quality monitoring data and to leverage it for an accurate reporting of alerts. Second, novel alert correlation mechanisms identify relations among the alerts and summarize the reconstructed attacks. In particular, a joint monitoring of hosts and the network correlates respective monitoring data in real-time. An extended visibility is established through the attribution of network flows to host processes. In addition, detectors leverage correlated network flows to robustly detect the characteristics of some distributed attacks despite restricted visibility in the monitoring data. The proposed alert correlation separates alerts belonging to high-volume attacks from the infrequent, i.e., spatially and temporally dispersed, alerts belonging to a stealthy APT. After aggregating and bringing together alerts of the same attack, they are correlated to reconstruct the attacks, highlighting the performed steps and how they interconnect. To scale with large networks, the proposed mechanisms integrate into a distributed monitoring and correlation platform that allows comprehensive intrusion detection when deployed to several locations inside the network. The deployment as a collaborative intrusion detection system (CIDS) is supported by another mechanism that efficiently exchanges summaries of alerts. The developed approaches have been extensively evaluated individually and in combination with each other on the basis of real-world deployments, testbeds, and simulations. Furthermore, the contributions are discussed altogether along a detection pipeline. The overall system accurately detects attacks by correlating a variety of information. It achieved a real-time attribution for more than 96% of TCP connections in a real-world deployment. In realistic simulations, a peer-to-peer (P2P) botnet was detected robustly, as NetFlows covering the traffic from only 5% of the bots were sufficient. At the same time, the concise attack summary highlights attacks that threaten the network at large. Alert correlation experiments condensed real-world alerts into aggregations that correspond to 0.6% of the original amount of alerts. Using alert summaries reduced the exchange volume in a CIDS to about 1% of the full alert data. 3 Danksagung An dieser Stelle möchte ich mich bei all denjenigen bedanken, die mich auf meinem Weg zur Promotion begleitet und auf unterschiedliche Weise unterstützt haben. Für die intensive Betreuung dieser Arbeit bin ich meinem Doktorvater Mathias Fischer sehr dankbar. Seine durchgehende Unterstützung in Form von Anmerkungen und Diskussionen hat sowohl die Suche und Aufarbeitung meines Dissertationsthemas, als auch die Konzeptionierung und Ausarbeitung meiner Forschungsbeiträge sowie diese Doktorarbeit maßgeblich geprägt. Darüber hinaus möchte ich meinen Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Arbeitsgruppe IT-Sicherheit und Sicherheitsmanagement sowie des gesamten Arbeitsbereichs Security and Privacy an der Universität Hamburg danken. Auch besonders aufgrund des kollegialen, sozialen und herzlichen Arbeitsklimas kann ich auf eine großartige Doktorandenzeit zurückblicken. Nicht nur bin ich dafür dankbar, in meinen Kolleginnen und Kollegen neue Freunde gefunden zu haben, auch gebührt ihnen Dank für ihre Unterstützung meiner Arbeit. Insbesondere möchte ich Florian Wilkens für den regen Austausch von Forschungsideen und die Zusammenarbeit an gemeinsamen Publikationen danken. Auch für die thematische Überschneidung mit Matthias Marx und die daraus resultierenden Diskussionen bin ich sehr dankbar. Ebenso danke ich David Jost für die unzähligen Male, die er mir unermüdlich beim Fehlersuchen und bei allerlei technischen Problemen geholfen hat. Nicht unerwähnt lassen, möchte ich auch Doganalp Ergenc, der stets für eine gelassene und gleichzeitig motivierende Stimmung in unserem Büro gesorgt hat. Neben allen weiteren Kolleginnen und Kollegen, sowie Korrekturlesenden dieser Arbeit, gilt mein Dank Robin Sommer für die langjährige
Recommended publications
  • Malpedia: a Collaborative Effort to Inventorize the Malware Landscape
    Malpedia: A Collaborative Effort to Inventorize the Malware Landscape Daniel Plohmann @push_pnx [email protected] 2017-12-07 | Botconf, Montpellier Martin Clauß martin.clauß@fkie.fraunhofer.de Steffen Enders [email protected] Elmar Padilla [email protected] 1 © Cyber Analysis and Defense Department, Fraunhofer FKIE $whoami Daniel Plohmann Security Researcher @ Fraunhofer (Europe‘s largest organisation for applied research) Research Scope: Malware Analysis Reverse Engineering Automation 2 © Cyber Analysis and Defense Department, Fraunhofer FKIE Outline Summary Motivation (or: how it began) Approach The Malpedia Corpus & Platform A Comparative Structural Analysis of Windows Malware Future Plans / Conclusion 3 © Cyber Analysis and Defense Department, Fraunhofer FKIE Summary 4 © Cyber Analysis and Defense Department, Fraunhofer FKIE Summary TL;DR What is Malpedia? A free, independent, pooled resource for confidently labeled, unpacked reference samples for malware families and versions Meta data tracker for info such as references (analysis reports, blogs, …), YARA rules, actors, tied to these families Status (2017-12-01): 2491 samples for 669 families, multi-platform (WIN, ELF, APK, OSX, …) Our Contributions Definition of requirements for malware corpora and a reference corpus + platform implementing these A Comprehensive, quantitative static analysis of structural features for 446 Windows malware families 5 © Cyber Analysis and Defense Department, Fraunhofer FKIE Motivation … or
    [Show full text]
  • Biuletyn 2016 1.Pdf
    szkolenia badania raport zgłoszenie DBI.pl CERT.pl inicjatywy domena .pl bezpieczeństwo honeypot seminarium biometria eksperci konferencje dyżurnet.pl digitalizacja nauka BIPSE SPIS treści KONFERENCJE 5 Razem tworzymy lepszy Internet 7 Globalne wyzwanie – bezpieczny Internet dla dzieci i młodzieży 8 SECURE 2015 – Cyberpolicjanci kontra cyberprzestępcy WYDARZENIA 10 Piknik Naukowy 10 Festiwal Nauki 10 CyberPol – szkolenia dla Policji 11 Seminarium eksperckie 11 Konferencja naukowa „Nastolatki wobec internetu” 11 Sukces polskiej biometrii RAPORTY 12 Roczny raport CERT Polska za 2014 rok 13 Raport Dyżurnet.pl 15 Rekordowy III kwartał w rejestrze domeny .pl BADANIA 17 Nastolatki wobec internetu PROJEKTY 21 Malware kontra lodówka 22 Bezpieczne uwierzytelnienie we współczesnym świecie 24 Digitalizacja, cyfryzacja czyli dostępność…. BEZPIECZEńStwO 28 Cyberprzestępcy podszywają się pod Pocztę Polską 29 Dorkbot już nam nie zagraża ROZMOWA Z … 30 Senior dla kultury NR 1/2016 Redakcja: Anna Maj, Monika Gajewska-Pol Projekt okładki, skład i przygotowanie do druku: Anna Nykiel Adres: ul. Wąwozowa 18, 02-796 Warszawa, Redakcja zastrzega sobie prawo do skrótu tel. (22) 38 08 200, e-mail: [email protected] i opracowania redakcyjnego otrzymanych tekstów. Biuletyn Szanowni Państwo, Mam przyjemność zaprosić Państwa do lektury najnow- celu ochronę przed zagrożeniami najmłodszych użyt- szego numeru „Biuletynu NASK”. Prezentujemy w nim kowników internetu. W ramach realizowanego przez nasze osiągnięcia, najważniejsze wydarzenia minione- NASK projektu Safer Internet funkcjonuje zespół go roku, opisujemy ciekawe i ważne projekty oraz naj- Dyżurnet.pl, przyjmujący zgłoszenia o niebezpiecz- nowsze opracowane przez nas rozwiązania naukowe. nych treściach internetowych, które zagrażają dzie- ciom i młodzieży korzystającym z sieci. W czasie swo- NASK jest instytutem badawczym, który realizuje jej dziesięcioletniej działalności zespół przeanalizował liczne projekty naukowe oraz komercyjne, szczególnie blisko 45 tysięcy zgłoszeń.
    [Show full text]
  • Cyberaanval Op Nederland Citadel-Malwareonderzoek “Pobelka” Botnet
    Cyberaanval op Nederland Citadel-malwareonderzoek “Pobelka” botnet Cyberaanval op Nederland | Citadel-malwareonderzoek “Pobelka” botnet Pagina 1 Inhoudsopgave Inleiding ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Telegraaf.nl ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 3 Pobelka ........................................................................................................................................................................................................ 4 Doelgericht ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 4 Nederland............................................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Java exploits .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Cyberincidenten ..................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Miscellaneous: Malware Cont'd & Start on Bitcoin
    Miscellaneous: Malware cont’d & start on Bitcoin CS 161: Computer Security Prof. Raluca Ada Popa April 19, 2018 Credit: some slides are adapted from previous offerings of this course Viruses vs. Worms VIRUS WORM Propagates By infecting Propagates automatically other programs By copying itself to target systems Usually inserted into A standalone program host code (not a standalone program) Another type of virus: Rootkits Rootkit is a ”stealthy” program designed to give access to a machine to an attacker while actively hiding its presence Q: How can it hide itself? n Create a hidden directory w /dev/.liB, /usr/src/.poop and similar w Often use invisiBle characters in directory name n Install hacked Binaries for system programs such as netstat, ps, ls, du, login Q: Why does it Become hard to detect attacker’s process? A: Can’t detect attacker’s processes, files or network connections By running standard UNIX commands! slide 3 Sony BMG copy protection rootkit scandal (2005) • Sony BMG puBlished CDs that apparently had copy protection (for DRM). • They essentially installed a rootkit which limited user’s access to the CD. • It hid processes that started with $sys$ so a user cannot disaBle them. A software engineer discovered the rootkit, it turned into a Big scandal Because it made computers more vulneraBle to malware Q: Why? A: Malware would choose names starting with $sys$ so it is hidden from antivirus programs Sony BMG pushed a patch … But that one introduced yet another vulneraBility So they recalled the CDs in the end Detecting Rootkit’s
    [Show full text]
  • Mcafee Foundstone Fsl Update
    2018-JUL-25 FSL version 7.6.38 MCAFEE FOUNDSTONE FSL UPDATE To better protect your environment McAfee has created this FSL check update for the Foundstone Product Suite. The following is a detailed summary of the new and updated checks included with this release. NEW CHECKS 23889 - (HT208932) Apple iCloud Vulnerabilities Prior To 7.6 Category: Windows Host Assessment -> Miscellaneous (CATEGORY REQUIRES CREDENTIALS) Risk Level: High CVE: CVE-2018-4261, CVE-2018-4262, CVE-2018-4263, CVE-2018-4264, CVE-2018-4265, CVE-2018-4266, CVE-2018-4267, CVE- 2018-4270, CVE-2018-4271, CVE-2018-4272, CVE-2018-4273, CVE-2018-4278, CVE-2018-4284, CVE-2018-4293 Description Multiple vulnerabilities are present in some versions of Apple iCloud. Observation Apple iCloud is a manager for the Apple's cloud-based storage service. Multiple vulnerabilities are present in some versions of Apple iCloud. The flaws lie in multiple components. Successful exploitation could allow an attacker to obtain sensitive information, execute arbitrary code or cause a denial of service. 23893 - (HT208938) Apple iOS Multiple Vulnerabilities Prior To 11.4.1 Category: Wireless Assessment -> NonIntrusive -> iOS Risk Level: High CVE: CVE-2018-4248, CVE-2018-4260, CVE-2018-4261, CVE-2018-4262, CVE-2018-4263, CVE-2018-4264, CVE-2018-4265, CVE- 2018-4266, CVE-2018-4267, CVE-2018-4270, CVE-2018-4271, CVE-2018-4272, CVE-2018-4273, CVE-2018-4274, CVE-2018-4275, CVE-2018-4277, CVE-2018-4278, CVE-2018-4280, CVE-2018-4282, CVE-2018-4284, CVE-2018-4290, CVE-2018-4293 Description Multiple vulnerabilities are present in some versions of Apple iOS.
    [Show full text]
  • Threat Landscape Report
    QUARTERLY Threat Landscape Report Q3 2020 NUSPIRE.COM THIS REPORT IS SOURCED FROM 90 BILLION TRAFFIC LOGS INGESTED FROM NUSPIRE CLIENT SITES AND ASSOCIATED WITH THOUSANDS OF DEVICES AROUND THE GLOBE. Nuspire Threat Report | Q2Q3 | 2020 Contents Introduction 4 Summary of Findings 6 Methodology and Overview 7 Quarter in Review 8 Malware 9 Botnets 15 Exploits 20 The New Normal 28 Conclusion and Recommendations 31 About Nuspire 33 3 | Contents Nuspire Threat Report | Q3 | 2020 Introduction In Q2 2020, Nuspire observed the increasing lengths threat actors were going to in order to capitalize on the pandemic and resulting crisis. New attack vectors were created; including VPN usage, home network security issues, personal device usage for business purposes and auditability of network traffic. In Q3 2020, we’ve observed threat actors become even more ruthless. Shifting focus from home networks to overburdened public entities including the education sector and the Election Assistance Commission (EAC). Many school districts were forced into 100% virtual or hybrid learning models by the pandemic. Attackers have waged ransomware attacks at learning institutions who not only have the financial resources to pay ransoms but feel a sense of urgency to do so in order to avoid disruptions during the school year. Meanwhile, the U.S. Elections have provided lures for phishers to attack. Nuspire witnessed Q3 attempts to guide victims to fake voter registration pages to harvest information while spoofing the Election Assistance Commission (EAC). Like these examples, cybercriminals taking advantage of prominent media themes are expected. We anticipate our Q4 2020 Threat Report 4 | Introduction Nuspire Threat Report | Q3 | 2020 to find campaigns leveraging more of the United report each quarter is a great step to gain that States Presidential election as well.
    [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]
  • Synchronize Documents Between Computers
    Synchronize Documents Between Computers Helladic and unshuttered Davidde oxygenizes his lent anted jaws infuriatingly. Is Dryke clitoral or vocalic when conceded some perpetualities hydrogenate videlicet? Geoff insufflates maritally as right-minded Sayre gurgles her immunochemistry slots exaltedly. Cubby will do exactly what is want Sync folders between systems on the internet It benefit cloud options as fresh but they demand be ignored if you'd telling It creates a. Sync Files Among Multiple Computers Recoverit. Cloud Storage Showdown Dropbox vs Google Drive Zapier. This means keeping files safe at the jump and syncing them control all of. Great solution for better than data synchronization history feature requires windows live id, cyber security purposes correct drivers with? If both PC are knew the complex kind no connection and when harm would happen. How to Sync Between Mac and Windows Documents Folder. It is so if they have access recently modified while both computers seamlessly across all backed up with documents or backup? File every time FreeFileSync determines the differences between input source review a target. How to synchronize a Teams folder to separate local Computer. Very much more, documents is well. So sent only sync a grant key files to new devices primarily my documents folder and custom folder of notes It's also five gigabytes of parcel and generally. Binfer is a cloudless file transfer authorities that allows you to sync files between devices without the complex being stored or replicated on any 3rd party systems Binfer. Does Windows 10 have wealth Transfer? File Sync Software Synchronize files between multiple.
    [Show full text]
  • PETYA・JIGSAW・WANNACRY・ZEPTO・LOCKY Business Resilience = Data Resilience
    PETYA・JIGSAW・WANNACRY・ZEPTO・LOCKY Business Resilience = Data Resilience Speaker Introduction Brent Reichow From Minneapolis, Minnesota (USA) April 1992 Arrived in Chiba, Japan Work History LINC Computers (EDS), NTT-WT, PSINet (C&W) Stellent (Oracle), Internet Security Systems (ISS) July 2004 Co-founded Blueshift K.K. Blueshift Business Leading provider of data protection solutions delivering secure, off-site, disk based, data backup, and disaster recovery services to small, medium and large organizations Client Markets Automotive, education, financial services, healthcare, insurance, legal services, logistics, manufacturing, marketing, media, NPO, real estate, recruiting, retail and technology URL www.dataprotection.co.jp/www.dataprotection.jp Blueshift’s Cloud Backup Business A. Initial full backup is made, compressed and encrypted data is sent to public or private data center locations B. Additional schedule or manual backups, will transfer changed data (deltas) off-site (incremental forever Public or Private Client Site Data Centers • File Server • Mail Server C. Rapid restores (deltas /changed data) WAN / INTERNET • Database Server • Virtual Machine (VM) • Multiple restoration points in time • Cloud 2 Cloud • Restore in minutes not hours G. Retention Policy Administrator • 30 day, 1 year D. Security Location 2 • Longer options • All data is encrypted with 256 bit AES • Data remains encrypted in flight and at rest F. Remote Management E. Onsite Appliance (de-duplication, compression, encryption) • Email alerting functionality • LAN speed restores with local available storage • Manage multiple servers A Billion Dollar Industry So How Does Ransomware Work? Ransomware as a Service (RaaS) - Typically the Developer Receives 30% of Ransom Paid by Victims Zepto Ransomware Attack Internet Phishing Email Workstations USB File Database NAS Server Your computer files have been encrypted Your photos, videos, documents, etc… But, don’t worry! I have not deleted them, yet.
    [Show full text]
  • Essential Faqs to Combating Ransomware
    ESSENTIAL FAQS TO COMBATING RANSOMWARE S e p t e m b e r 2016 www.ensilo.com RESEARCH PAPER TABLE OF CONTENTS What is Ransomware? 3 Does Ransomware Only Encrypt Files? 4 What Are the Common Types of Ransomware In-the-Wild? 4 How are Victims Infected? 4 At What Stage Does the Ransomware Encrypt the Data? 5 How Long Does it Take for Ransomware to Encrypt Files? 5 How are the Threat Actors Paid? 6 What Platforms does Ransomware Target? 6 Don’t the Operating System Vendors, such as Microsoft, Place 7 Protections to Prevent Ransomware from Running? Have You Seen Any Ransomware Cases? 7 Is Ransomware a Periodic Fad or a Trending Issue? 8 What Strategy Should Businesses Adopt to Combat Ransomware? 9 Samples of ransomware notes 10 About enSilo 11 RESEARCH PAPER Ransomware isn’t new. But the tactics are. Ransomware has gone from a nickel & dime operation targeting individual computers to a multimillion dollar criminal operation targeting organizations that can afford to pay enterprise-level payments. Research1 showed that a single threat actor was “making more than $30M USD annually from ransomware infections alone”. Clearly, with such a strong financial motivation behind ransomware, the threat criminals behind these types of attacks are not going to stop anytime soon. To help combat against the threat of ransomware, we’ve put together this FAQ. If you see any question you’d like to add, or just want to be heard, feel free to email us: [email protected] WHAT IS RANSOMWARE? Ransomware is an increasingly popular tactic used to steal data and disrupt a system’s operations.
    [Show full text]
  • Giant List of Web Browsers
    Giant List of Web Browsers The majority of the world uses a default or big tech browsers but there are many alternatives out there which may be a better choice. Take a look through our list & see if there is something you like the look of. All links open in new windows. Caveat emptor old friend & happy surfing. 1. 32bit https://www.electrasoft.com/32bw.htm 2. 360 Security https://browser.360.cn/se/en.html 3. Avant http://www.avantbrowser.com 4. Avast/SafeZone https://www.avast.com/en-us/secure-browser 5. Basilisk https://www.basilisk-browser.org 6. Bento https://bentobrowser.com 7. Bitty http://www.bitty.com 8. Blisk https://blisk.io 9. Brave https://brave.com 10. BriskBard https://www.briskbard.com 11. Chrome https://www.google.com/chrome 12. Chromium https://www.chromium.org/Home 13. Citrio http://citrio.com 14. Cliqz https://cliqz.com 15. C?c C?c https://coccoc.com 16. Comodo IceDragon https://www.comodo.com/home/browsers-toolbars/icedragon-browser.php 17. Comodo Dragon https://www.comodo.com/home/browsers-toolbars/browser.php 18. Coowon http://coowon.com 19. Crusta https://sourceforge.net/projects/crustabrowser 20. Dillo https://www.dillo.org 21. Dolphin http://dolphin.com 22. Dooble https://textbrowser.github.io/dooble 23. Edge https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/microsoft-edge 24. ELinks http://elinks.or.cz 25. Epic https://www.epicbrowser.com 26. Epiphany https://projects-old.gnome.org/epiphany 27. Falkon https://www.falkon.org 28. Firefox https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/new 29.
    [Show full text]
  • Analyzing Facebook, Twitter, and Google's Efforts to Combat Foreign
    PolicyBrief 2018 | No. 041 A Long Way To Go: Analyzing Facebook, Twitter, and Google’s Efforts to Combat Foreign Interference By Bradley Hanlon Executive Summary and improve verification standards for those hoping to publish political advertisements. Investments in Two years after the Russian government manipulated forward-looking measures have included internal social media to interfere in the 2016 U.S. presidential initiatives to critically assess vulnerabilities and external election, online information platforms continue to partnerships with civil society, academia, and fact- serve as mediums for such operations, including the checking organizations. They have also led to increased 2018 midterm elections. Under intense public criticism transparency about the behavior and content of accounts and congressional scrutiny, the three most prominent linked to the Russian operation against the 2016 and online information platforms – Facebook, Twitter, and 2018 elections, as well as other nation-state operations Google – have taken steps to address vulnerabilities and targeting Americans. to protect their users against information operations by actors linked to authoritarian regimes. However, given Though all of these steps are important, ongoing the ongoing nature of online authoritarian interference, vulnerabilities demand more urgent action by the the steps taken by these companies continue to fall platforms to secure the online information space against short. foreign manipulation, while ensuring American’s ability to engage freely in robust speech and debate. Six areas This report reviews and analyzes the steps taken by where Facebook, Twitter, and Google must take further online information platforms to better defend against steps include: foreign interference since 2016, adopting the framing of the Senate Intelligence Committee by focusing on • Focusing on behavior: Online information the largest and most influential online information platforms have unique insight into the platforms of Facebook, Twitter, and Google.
    [Show full text]