Microsoft Patch Tuesday – December 2014

      No Comments on Microsoft Patch Tuesday – December 2014
This month the vendor is releasing seven bulletins covering a total of 24 vulnerabilities. Thirteen of this month’s issues are rated ‘Critical’.

Twitter Card Style: 

summary

ms-tuesday-patch-key-concept-colored-light.png

Hello, welcome to this month’s blog on the Microsoft patch release. This month the vendor is releasing seven bulletins covering a total of 24 vulnerabilities. Thirteen of this month’s issues are rated ’Critical’.

As always, customers are advised to follow these security best practices:

  • Install vendor patches as soon as they are available.
  • Run all software with the least privileges required while still maintaining functionality.
  • Avoid handling files from unknown or questionable sources.
  • Never visit sites of unknown or questionable integrity.
  • Block external access at the network perimeter to all key systems unless specific access is required.

Microsoft’s summary of the December releases can be found here:
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/security/bulletin/ms14-dec

The following is a breakdown of the issues being addressed this month:

  1. MS14-075 Vulnerabilities in Microsoft Exchange Server Could Allow Security Feature Bypass (3009712)

    Outlook Web Access Token Spoofing Vulnerability (CVE-2014-6319) MS Rating: Moderate

    A token spoofing vulnerability exists in Exchange Server when Microsoft Outlook Web Access (OWA) fails to properly validate a request token.

    OWA XSS Vulnerability (CVE-2014-6325) MS Rating: Important

    An elevation of privilege vulnerability exists when Microsoft Exchange Server does not properly validate input. An attacker who successfully exploited this vulnerability could run script in the context of the current user.

    OWA XSS Vulnerability (CVE-2014-6326) MS Rating: Important

    An elevation of privilege vulnerability exists when Microsoft Exchange Server does not properly validate input. An attacker who successfully exploited this vulnerability could run script in the context of the current user.

    Exchange URL Redirection Vulnerability (CVE-2014-6336) MS Rating: Important

    A spoofing vulnerability exists in Microsoft Exchange when Microsoft Outlook Web Access (OWA) fails to properly validate redirection tokens.

  2. MS14-080 Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer (3008923)

    Internet Explorer Memory Corruption Vulnerability (CVE-2014-6327) MS Rating: Critical

    A remote code execution vulnerability exists when Internet Explorer improperly accesses an object in memory. This vulnerability may corrupt memory in such a way that an attacker could execute arbitrary code in the context of the current user.

    Internet Explorer Memory Corruption Vulnerability (CVE-2014-6329) MS Rating: Critical

    A remote code execution vulnerability exists when Internet Explorer improperly accesses an object in memory. This vulnerability may corrupt memory in such a way that an attacker could execute arbitrary code in the context of the current user.

    Internet Explorer Memory Corruption Vulnerability (CVE-2014-6330) MS Rating: Critical

    A remote code execution vulnerability exists when Internet Explorer improperly accesses an object in memory. This vulnerability may corrupt memory in such a way that an attacker could execute arbitrary code in the context of the current user.

    Internet Explorer Memory Corruption Vulnerability (CVE-2014-6366) MS Rating: Critical

    A remote code execution vulnerability exists when Internet Explorer improperly accesses an object in memory. This vulnerability may corrupt memory in such a way that an attacker could execute arbitrary code in the context of the current user.

    Internet Explorer Memory Corruption Vulnerability (CVE-2014-6369) MS Rating: Critical

    A remote code execution vulnerability exists when Internet Explorer improperly accesses an object in memory. This vulnerability may corrupt memory in such a way that an attacker could execute arbitrary code in the context of the current user.

    Internet Explorer Memory Corruption Vulnerability (CVE-2014-6373) MS Rating: Critical

    A remote code execution vulnerability exists when Internet Explorer improperly accesses an object in memory. This vulnerability may corrupt memory in such a way that an attacker could execute arbitrary code in the context of the current user.

    Internet Explorer Memory Corruption Vulnerability (CVE-2014-6374) MS Rating: Critical

    A remote code execution vulnerability exists when Internet Explorer improperly accesses an object in memory. This vulnerability may corrupt memory in such a way that an attacker could execute arbitrary code in the context of the current user.

    Internet Explorer Memory Corruption Vulnerability (CVE-2014-6375) MS Rating: Critical

    A remote code execution vulnerability exists when Internet Explorer improperly accesses an object in memory. This vulnerability may corrupt memory in such a way that an attacker could execute arbitrary code in the context of the current user.

    Internet Explorer Memory Corruption Vulnerability (CVE-2014-6376) MS Rating: Critical

    A remote code execution vulnerability exists when Internet Explorer improperly accesses an object in memory. This vulnerability may corrupt memory in such a way that an attacker could execute arbitrary code in the context of the current user.

    Internet Explorer Memory Corruption Vulnerability (CVE-2014-8966) MS Rating: Critical

    A remote code execution vulnerability exists when Internet Explorer improperly accesses an object in memory. This vulnerability may corrupt memory in such a way that an attacker could execute arbitrary code in the context of the current user.

    XSS Filter Bypass Vulnerability in Internet Explorer (CVE-2014-6328) MS Rating: Important

    An XSS filter bypass vulnerability exists in the way Internet Explorer disables an HTML attribute in otherwise appropriately filtered HTTP response data. This vulnerability could allow initially disabled scripts to run in the wrong security context, leading to information disclosure.

    XSS Filter Bypass Vulnerability in Internet Explorer (CVE-2014-6365) MS Rating: Important

    An XSS filter bypass vulnerability exists in the way Internet Explorer disables an HTML attribute in otherwise appropriately filtered HTTP response data. This vulnerability could allow initially disabled scripts to run in the wrong security context, leading to information disclosure.

    Internet Explorer ASLR Bypass Vulnerability (CVE-2014-6368) MS Rating: Important

    A security feature bypass vulnerability exists when Internet Explorer does not use the Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR) security feature, allowing an attacker to more reliably predict the memory offsets of specific instructions in a given call stack. This vulnerability could allow an attacker to bypass the Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR) security feature.

    VBScript Memory Corruption Vulnerability (CVE-2014-6363) MS Rating: Critical

    A remote code execution vulnerability exists in the way that the VBScript engine, when rendered in Internet Explorer, handles objects in memory. The vulnerability may corrupt memory in such a way that an attacker could execute arbitrary code in the context of the current user.

  3. MS14-081 Vulnerabilities in Microsoft Word and Microsoft Office Web Apps Could Allow (3017301)

    Index Remote Code Execution Vulnerability (CVE-2014-6356) MS Rating: Critical

    A remote code execution vulnerability exists in the way that Microsoft Word does not properly handle objects in memory while parsing specially crafted Office files. System memory may be corrupted in such a way that an attacker could execute arbitrary code.

    Use After Free Word Remote Code Execution Vulnerability (CVE-2014-6357) MS Rating: Critical

    A remote code execution vulnerability exists in the way that Microsoft Word does not properly handle objects in memory while parsing specially crafted Office files. System memory may be corrupted in such a way that an attacker could execute arbitrary code.

  4. MS14-082 Vulnerabilities in Microsoft Office Could Allow Remote Code Execution (3017349)

    Microsoft Office Component Use After Free Vulnerability (CVE-2014-6364) MS Rating: Important

    A remote code execution vulnerability exists in the context of the current user that is caused when Microsoft Word does not properly handle objects in memory while parsing specially crafted Office files.

  5. MS14-083 Vulnerabilities in Microsoft Excel Could Allow Remote Code Execution (3017347)

    Global Free Remote Code Execution in Excel Vulnerability (CVE-2014-6360) MS Rating: Important

    A remote code execution vulnerability exists in the way that Microsoft Excel does not properly handle objects in memory while parsing specially crafted Office files. System memory may be corrupted in such a way that an attacker could execute arbitrary code.

    Excel Invalid Pointer Remote Code Execution Vulnerability (CVE-2014-6361) MS Rating: Important

    A remote code execution vulnerability exists in the way that Microsoft Excel does not properly handle objects in memory while parsing specially crafted Office files. System memory may be corrupted in such a way that an attacker could execute arbitrary code.

  6. MS14-084 Vulnerability in VBScript Scripting Engine Could Allow Remote Code Execution (3016711)

    VBScript Memory Corruption Vulnerability (CVE-2014-6363) MS Rating: Critical

    A remote code execution vulnerability exists in the way that the VBScript engine, when rendered in Internet Explorer, handles objects in memory. The vulnerability may corrupt memory in such a way that an attacker could execute arbitrary code in the context of the current user.

  7. MS14-085 Vulnerability in Microsoft Graphics Component Could Allow Information Disclosure (3013126)

    Information Disclosure Vulnerability (CVE-2014-6355) MS Rating: Important

    An information disclosure vulnerability exists in the Microsoft Graphics Component that could allow an attacker to more reliably predict the memory offsets of specific instructions in a given call stack. The vulnerability is caused when the Microsoft Graphics Component improperly handles the decoding of JPEG images in memory. An attacker could use this information disclosure vulnerability to gain information about the system that could then be combined with other attacks to compromise the system.

More information on the vulnerabilities being addressed this month is available at Symantec’s free SecurityFocus portal and to our customers through the DeepSight Threat Management System.

5 ways to protect your business against SQL injection

Twitter Card Style: 

summary

sql-injection-blog.jpgYour database has been breached, malware has infected your systems and sensitive records are available for anyone to download on the internet. Your first action is to launch an investigation to find out more about the breach. The report shows that the vulnerability has been exploited for months and all forensic logs have been deleted.      

SQL injection isn’t new and it has been around for more than 10 years. However, most companies still plunge huge amounts of dollars into IDS/IPS, firewalls, security gateways and anti-virus software. Web application attacks are growing at an alarming rate and most security teams focus is network security and not business critical data that is found in databases. Unless there’s a breach, then focus tend to shift but it’s simply too late.

 

How does SQL-injection work?

SQL injection is a very simple attack that is easy to execute. Basically the attacker adds a SQL statement into a web form and tries to modify, extract, add or delete information from the database.

Michael Giagnovoco uses a very simple analogy.  I go to court and register my name as “Christoffer, you are now free to go.” The judge then says “Calling Christoffer, you are now free to go” and the bailiff lets me go, because the judge instructed him to do so.

In this example the “you are now free to go” instruction was injected into a data field intended only for a name. Then the rogue input data was executed as an instruction. That’s basically the principle behind how SQL injection operates.

 

How does SQL-injection impact my business?

As all other types of attacks SQL injection has evolved. When the first instances of SQL injection were discovered the attackers simply tried to dump all records from a database. Today, SQL injection is usually part of an attack toolkit that hackers downloads and uses to launch several types of attacks. It’s no longer a challenge to dump the database records but the challenge has moved to installing malware behind expensive firewalls and other security measures in place deep inside the victim organization. The installed malware is far more dangerous and destructive than a simple database attack. Imagine a hacker eavesdropping on sensitive communication, dumping the windows password file to gain access to restricted systems or stealing the private keys for your SSL and Code Signing certificates? The private keys for Code Signing certificates can be protected by Symantec Secure App Service but unfortunately not all sensitive assets have proper security measures and are vulnerable to theft.

 

How does SQL-injection impact consumers?

Imagine that you’re about to log onto your favorite e-commerce site, greathappybargains.com. You enter your user name and password. When you look at your order history you find several orders that you didn’t make. What happened could be the result of a SQL-injection attack. Due to poor programming, some sites allows an attacker to log onto the site posing as the previous user, you. If your credit card info is linked to a user account you can be certain that the hacker has access to that information by now. Did you use the same user name and password for other e-commerce accounts? Chances are that those accounts are compromised as well using the information from the first breach.

How do I protect my company from an SQL-injection?

  1. Install a Web Application Firewall (WAF).
  • Keep in mind that a WAF can’t interpret an obscured SQL injection attack as it is based on signatures
  1. Use Symantec Malware Scan
  • It comes free with all Symantec SSL certificates and provides a daily scan of your web applications and provides you with a detailed report if a SQL injection vulnerability is found
  1. Hire a penetration tester to test all web applications tied to a relational database.
  • Great option but time consuming and testing needs to be conducted continuously.
  1. Re-write all web applications
  • Doable but consumes resources and budget. Training your staff in secure coding is critical and a good investment. 
  1. Apply a database defense in depth strategy
  • The only way to protect your business from the SQL injection threat is to monitor all SQL statements at the database tier using an arsenal of tools.

There is no such thing as perfect security but following these steps will get you closer to it. Follow us on Facebook and Twitter to stay up to date on SQL injection techniques and how you can help better keep your environment safe.  Take the first step by contacting us today about applying a Web Application Firewall and a DDoS Mitigation Service today.

Destover: ???????????????????????????

      No Comments on Destover: ???????????????????????????
Destover のいくつかのサンプルは Volgmer と C&C サーバーを共用しており、Jokra や Shamoon との類似点も見られます。

Twitter Card Style: 

summary

Destover 1 edit.jpg

FBI は先週、Backdoor.Destover という破壊的なマルウェアに対する緊急警告を発表しました。Destover には、韓国を標的とした過去の攻撃といくつか共通点が見られます。Destover のいくつかのサンプルで使われているコマンド & コントロール(C&C)サーバーは、韓国内の標的を攻撃するために作成された、Trojan.Volgmer のあるバージョンで使われていたものと同じです。C&C サーバーが共用されていることで、この 2 つの攻撃の背後に同じグループが存在する可能性が浮上します。

Volgmer は標的型のマルウェアです。おそらく単一のグループが第 1 段階の偵察ツールとして限定的な攻撃に使用していると思われ、システム情報を収集し、さらに別のファイルをダウンロードして実行することができます。重要なのは、Destover と C&C サーバーを共用するバージョンの Volgmer は、特に韓国の標的を攻撃するよう設定されていて、韓国語版のコンピュータ上でのみ実行されることです。

また、Destover では、2013 年に発生した韓国に対する Jokra 攻撃と同じ手口やコンポーネント名も使われています。しかし、現時点では、これらの攻撃のつながりを示す確かな証拠は見つかっておらず、模倣犯である可能性も捨てきれません。さらには、Shamoon 攻撃との共通点も見られ、どちらの攻撃でも市場で入手可能な同一のドライバが利用されています。しかし、両者の背後に同一のグループが存在する可能性はきわめて低く、むしろ Destover 攻撃が Shamoon 攻撃の手口を真似たのでしょう。

Destover の活動
Destover は、特に大きな破壊力を備えたマルウェアであり、感染先のコンピュータの内容を完全に消去することが可能です。FBI の緊急警告でもこのことに触れられており、ある目立った攻撃において、少なくとも 1 つの Destover の亜種が利用されたと考えられています。

Destover に関する FBI の報告書には、いくつかの悪質なファイルが記載されています。

  • diskpartmg16.exe
  • net_ver.dat
  • igfxtrayex.exe
  • iissvr.exe

感染したコンピュータで最初に作成されるファイルが diskpartmg16.exe で、このファイルが実行されると、net_ver.dat および igfxtrayex.exe が作成されます。

「diskpartmg16.exe」は、実行されると、ある IP アドレス範囲内で特定の多数の IP アドレスに接続するとともに、「USSDIX[コンピュータ名]」という形式のコンピュータ名に接続します。つまり、この Destover の亜種は無差別な攻撃を意図したものではなく、特定の組織に所属するコンピュータのみを攻撃するよう設定されているのです。

Destover の破壊的なペイロードは igfxtrayex.exe によって配信され、igfxtrayex.exe は、実行されると、次のような操作を実行する場合があります。

  • 固定ドライブおよびリモートドライブ上のすべてのファイルを削除する
  • パーティションテーブルを改ざんする
  • 追加モジュール(iissvr.exe)をインストールする
  • ポート 8080 と 8000 で多数の IP アドレスに接続する

一方、Iissvr.exe は、ポート 80 で待機するバックドアです。攻撃者が侵入先のコンピュータに接続したときに、次のメッセージを表示します。

 

“We’ve already warned you, and this is just a beginning.

We continue till our request be met.

We’ve obtained all your internal data including your secrets and top secrets.

If you don’t obey us, we’ll release data shown below to the world.

Determine what will you do till November the 24th, 11:00 PM(GMT).

Post an email address and the following sentence on your twitter and facebook, and we’ll contact the email address.

 

Thanks a lot to God’sApstls [sic] contributing your great effort to peace of the world.

And even if you just try to seek out who we are, all of your data will be released at once.”

(今まで警告してきたが、これは始まりに過ぎない。

要求が叶えられるまで攻撃を継続する。

機密情報や極秘情報など、あらゆる内部データを入手済みだ。

要求に従わない場合、以下のデータを全世界に公開する。

11 月 24 日午後 11 時(GMT)までに、どうするか決めろ。

電子メールアドレスと次の文章を Twitter と Facebook に投稿すれば、こちらからメールで連絡する。

 

世界平和のために多大な貢献をした God’sApstls(原文ママ)に深く感謝する。

我々の身元を詮索しようとしただけでも、全データをただちに公開する)

Volgmer とのつながり
Destover のいくつかのサンプルは、過去に Trojan.Volgmer の複数の亜種によって使われた C&C サーバーに接続します。シマンテックは数カ月にわたって Trojan.Volgmer を追跡してきました。Volgmer は、感染先のコンピュータでバックドアを開く機能を備えているため、C&C サーバーと通信して、システム情報の取得、コマンドの実行、ファイルのアップロード、ファイルのダウンロードと実行などの操作を行うことができます。

興味深いことに、Destover と C&C サーバーを共用する Volgmer の亜種は、侵入先のコンピュータの地域設定が「韓国」でない場合には実行を停止するよう設定されています。

Jokra とのつながり
Destover の攻撃者が使用しているファイル名などのコンポーネントや手口は、2013 年に発生した韓国に対する Jokra 攻撃と類似しています。Jokra 攻撃では韓国の銀行や放送局などのサーバーが停止したほか、通信会社の Web サイトが改ざんされました。

Jokra 攻撃で使われたマルウェアに含まれているコードは、指定した期間が経過するまではハードディスクドライブの消去を開始しません。Destover もまた、時間を置いてデータ消去を実行するよう設定されています。さらに、韓国での報道によると、2 つの攻撃で類似する多数のファイル名が利用されているようです(リンク先は韓国語)。

Shamoon 攻撃との類似点
また、Destover には、Shamoon 攻撃との共通点もいくつか見られ、Destover と Shamoon の攻撃者によって使われているマルウェア(W32.Disttrack)は、一部のドライバを共用しています。これらは悪質なファイルではなく、市場で入手可能なドライバです。Destover と Disttrack はどちらも破壊的なマルウェアですが、両者の背後に同一のグループが存在することを示す証拠はありません。

シマンテックの保護対策
シマンテック製品およびノートン製品は、この脅威を Backdoor.Destover として検出します。

 

* 日本語版セキュリティレスポンスブログの RSS フィードを購読するには、http://www.symantec.com/connect/ja/item-feeds/blog/2261/feed/all/ja にアクセスしてください。

3009008 – Vulnerability in SSL 3.0 Could Allow Information Disclosure – Version: 2.1

Revision Note: V2.1 (December 9, 2014): Microsoft is announcing the availability of SSL 3.0 fallback warnings in Internet Explorer 11. For more information see Knowledge Base Article 3013210.Summary: Microsoft is aware of detailed information that has …

2755801 – Update for Vulnerabilities in Adobe Flash Player in Internet Explorer – Version: 33.0

Revision Note: V33.0 (December 9, 2014): Added the 3008925 update to the Current Update section.Summary: Microsoft is announcing the availability of an update for Adobe Flash Player in Internet Explorer on all supported editions of Windows 8, Windows S…

Sony PlayStation Network down due to hacker attack

Poor Sony. They are getting it from all directions these days.  On Sunday, the PlayStation Network, the online store for games, movies, and TV shows, suffered a hacker attack and was knocked offline. Visitors to the store got a message that said, ‘Page Not Found! It’s not you. It’s the Internet’s fault.’ I just visited […]

Mind the gap: Are air-gapped systems safe from breaches?

Recent research has suggested several ways air-gapped networks could be compromised, but how realistic are these attack scenarios?

Twitter Card Style: 

summary

airgap-header-662x348.png

Contributor: Candid Wueest

Industries that deal with sensitive information rely heavily on air-gapped systems to protect their critical data. However, while these systems are more secure than most others, there are ways to compromise them, potentially allowing attackers to steal the affected organizations’ highly sensitive data. From radio signal-emitting graphics cards to computers communicating through their speakers, are air gaps, once considered the Fort Knox of security measures, beginning to show cracks?

An air gap is a security measure that protects critical data by keeping one or more computers isolated from other unsecured networks, such as the internet, for example. System administrators may choose to air gap military systems, computerized medical systems, and control centers of critical infrastructure in order to protect data from attacks. Unfortunately, no system is 100 percent secure and there will always be a way to chip away at defenses. Several research reports have been making the news recently concerning ways in which air-gapped systems can be breached. Although some of the methods sound like they were taken straight out of a science fiction story, security researchers have definitely taken up the challenge of bridging the air gap.

Problems for would-be attackers
If an attacker wishes to breach an air-gapped system, they face three major hurdles:

  1. Compromising a computer within the isolated network
    To breach an air-gapped system, the attacker needs to infect at least one of the air-gapped computers with malware. This could be done by using an insider in the targeted firm or an outsider, such as a consultant, who may be able to get access to the isolated area and use a malware-infected USB drive to compromise the computer. Air-gapped computers could also be compromised in supply chain attacks, where the computer’s components are intercepted and tampered with during the manufacturing or shipping processes.
  2. Sending commands to the compromised computer
    Once a computer has been compromised, the attacker has to figure out how to send commands and updates to the malware. Normally, this would be conducted over the internet; however, anyone interested in taking on an air-gapped system needs to use a little more creativity.
  3. Exfiltrating data from the compromised computer
    Unless the attacker only wants to cause some damage, they’ll need to find a way to exfiltrate the stolen data from the air-gapped network.

Let’s get creative
In light of these challenges, let’s take a look at some of the recent air-gap attack research reports and talk about how much of a realistic threat, if any, each method poses and what can be done to stay protected.

airgap-infographic01-fm-radio-signal-662x538.png

Turn on, tune in, get the data out
Researchers have recently proved how it’s possible to exfiltrate data from an air-gapped network by using FM radio signals sent from a computer’s graphics card. The researchers’ created proof-of-concept malware called AirHopper that uses the computer’s video display adapter to broadcast FM-compatible radio signals to a device with an FM receiver. The researchers were able to create an image pattern that generates a carrier wave modulated with a data signal. The image sent to the computer monitor looks indistinguishable from regular visual output but contains extra data that is transmitted as FM radio signals.

Attackers using this technique could infect computers with malware using USB devices or by way of supply-chain tampering. As for the receiver, this could be any modern smartphone, as most contain built-in FM receivers. The smartphone could belong to someone involved in the attack or someone who has had their device compromised. As smartphones are connected to the internet, they would be easier to compromise than a computer in an air-gapped network through a range of techniques like compromised websites or malicious emails.

The receiver needs to be within eight yards (seven meters) of the broadcasted radio signals in order to work. The researchers say they can transmit about 13 to 60 bytes a second in their tests, which is more than enough data to include login credentials and other sensitive information. For instance, an attacker with a receiver would only need to be in range of the compromised computer’s monitor for roughly eight seconds to download a 100-byte password file.

The technique is similar to how TEMPEST attacks are carried out; however, a TEMPEST attack only allows the attacker to spy on what is being displayed on the computer’s monitor.

Real world implications and mitigation
This technique is the most plausible for data exfiltration. Compromising smartphones is something that is well within the capabilities of cybercriminals and nation states, so exfiltrating the stolen data would not be a major hurdle. When it comes to mitigation, banning the use of mobile devices within a certain range of the air-gapped system may be one solution. However, if that is impractical, the use of electromagnetic shielding would stop any signals being transmitted from the isolated network.

Whispering malware
A recent research report detailed a system that uses inaudible sound as a means of communication, allowing data to be passed between computers that have no network connection. The researchers developed a proof-of-concept program that uses the built-in microphones and speakers found in many computers to transmit small amounts of data over a distance of roughly 65 feet (20 meters). However, this distance could be extended by a great deal using what the researchers call an acoustical mesh network of compromised computers that effectively relay the data to each other.

As most adults can hear sounds between 100Hz and 20kHz, anything outside of this range should be inaudible. According to the researchers, most commercial soundcards operate at a frequency of 48kHz though in their tests, most speakers wouldn’t work above 23kHz. This meant that the researchers needed to transmit at a frequency somewhere in the rage of 20kHz to 23kHz.

The scientists experimented with several different methods to send data between two laptops using only sound. The most effective method used a system originally developed to acoustically transmit data under water, called the adaptive communication system (ACS) modem. Bridging air-gapped systems using this method, however, only provides a bitrate of about 20 bits per second. As with the other method described in this blog, this relatively tiny transmission rate rules out the exfiltration of large files such as documents and images but does feasibly allow for sensitive data to be sent, such as passwords or encryption keys.

Real world implications and mitigation
Depending on whether or not computers within the air-gapped network are fitted with speakers and microphones, this technique could pose a moderate threat. However, as the researchers themselves note, there are several possible ways in which this type of attack vector can be mitigated. Disabling audio output and input devices is perhaps the most obvious countermeasure. The researchers recommend that system administrators should not fit air-gapped computers with audio output hardware to begin with. If needed, users could use headphones; however, these would need to be disconnected when not in use as they too can be used to transmit.

Operators could employ the use of audio filtering to block sound in a specific frequency range on air-gapped computers to avoid attacks. Finally, the researchers suggest the use of an audio intrusion detection guard that would analyze audio input and output and raise a red flag if it detects anything suspicious.

airgap-infographic-audio-signal-662x538_0.png

A more elaborate air-gap compromise: Dots, dashes, drones, and printers
Recent research presented at the 2014 Black Hat Europe conference showed how a malware-infected computer on an air-gapped network could receive and send attack commands through a multi-function printer’s scanner that the computer is connected to. To transmit data, an attacker would need to shine light, visible or infrared, into the room where the scanner is and while a scan is in progress.

The researchers devised a system to send and receive binary data using Morse code and say that several hundred bits can be sent during one scan, plenty to contain commands for the malware. Detecting the light from far away would be a problem but the researchers say this can be made easier with the use of a quadcopter drone.

An attacker could use a laser to send data from up to five kilometers away, although the researchers only tested the method up to 1,200 meters. An infected computer could be made to initiate a scan at a certain time or the attacker could wait until someone uses the scanner.

Real world implications
This method doesn’t pose much of a threat to air-gapped networks as it relies on several conditions being just right for it to work. Firstly, a successful breach would rely on there being a multifunction printer with a scanner connected to the isolated network and secondly, the scanner would need to be open or at least in use. But the most glaring problem with this attack technique is that if there is no window in the room where the isolated system is contained, it’s back to the drawing board for our would-be attackers.

Mind the gap
Air gaps are considered to be a reliable way to secure sensitive data and systems but no system is without its weaknesses. The examples discussed in this blog are all related to work carried out by security researchers in an effort to raise awareness around potential security weaknesses in air-gapped networks. Luckily, these researchers present their work to the public so that relevant measures can be put in place to protect against the weaknesses they highlight. Unfortunately, cybercriminals don’t publish their work in scientific journals or give talks at security conferences, so we have no way of countering their attack techniques until they’re uncovered. If there’s one thing we can be sure of, it’s that the bad guys are always hard at work figuring out new ways to get to the stuff we don’t want them to reach.

Fake confirmation emails from Walmart, Home Depot, others in circulation

Cybercrooks target busy holiday shoppers with phishing scheme. After all that shopping on Black Friday and Cyber Monday, consumers are reporting a bunch of phishing emails that look like authentic communications from poular stores. Malware-infected emails are reportedly coming from Walmart, Home Depot, Target, and Costco. The catch is these are not from the authentic […]

Fake free codes scam affects PSN and Steam users

Some webpages are giving away free codes for Playstation Network and Steam but, are they reliable? At Avast we discovered a lot of webpages offering free codes, with a value from $20 to $50, for Playstation Network and Steam, two of the most important internet-based digital distribution platforms. Those webpages look very suspicious so we […]

Destover: Un malware destructivo relacionado con ataques en Corea del Sur

Algunas muestras de Destover comparten un servidor C&C con Volgmer y también tienen características en común con Jokra y Shamoon.

Twitter Card Style: 

summary

Destover 1 edit.jpg

Backdoor.Destover es un malware destructivo, que fue el tema central de un aviso lanzado hace algunos días por el FBI relacionado con diversos ataques que se presentaron en Corea del Sur. Algunas muestras de Destover reportan a un servidor C&C (comando y control) que también fue utilizado por una versión de Trojan.Volgmer, diseñado para atacar blancos en ese país. El servidor C&C compartido indica que un mismo grupo se podría estar detrás de ambos ataques.

Volgmer es un malware dirigido, presuntamente utilizado por un solo grupo, el cual ha sido utilizado en ataques limitados, posiblemente como una herramienta durante una etapa inicial de reconocimiento. Puede ser utilizado para recopilar información del sistema y descargar archivos para su ejecución. Es importante señalar que la versión de Volgmer, que comparte un servidor C&C con Destover, fue configurada específicamente para atacar blancos en Corea del Sur y solo se ejecuta en computadoras sudcoreanas.

Destover también comparte ciertas técnicas y nombres de componentes con los ataques Jokra, realizados contra Corea del Sur en 2013. Sin embargo, todavía no existe evidencia sólida para vincular los ataques, y una operación similar no podría ser descartada. También existen similitudes con los ataques Shamoon, con ambas ofensivas utilizando los mismos drivers, que están disponibles comercialmente. No obstante, es esta instancia, es poco probable que el mismo grupo está detrás de ambos ataques y al contrario, pareciera que los ataques Destover copiaron técnicas de Shamoon.

Destover en acción

Destover es una forma particular de malware altamente destructivo, que tiene la capacidad de borrar en su totalidad a una computadora infectada. Fue el tema central de un aviso lanzado por el FBI hace unos días y se presume que por lo menos una de sus variantes podría haber sido utilizada para realizar un ataque de alto perfil.

Existen diferentes archivos maliciosos asociados con el reporte Destover del FBI:

  • diskpartmg16.exe
  • net_ver.dat
  • igfxtrayex.exe
  • iissvr.exe

Diskpartmg16.exe es el primer archivo que se crea en una computadora infectada y cuando se ejecuta, crea los archivos “net_ver.dat” y “igfxtrayex.exe”.

Cuando “diskpartmg16.exe” se ejecuta, se conecta a varias direcciones IP, dentro de un rango específico IP, así como a computadoras con nombres de en el formato “USSDIX[Machine Name]”. Esto indica que esta variante de Destover no fue desarrollada para diferenciar, y al contrario, el malware ha sido configurado para solo atacar a equipos que pertenecen a la misma organización.

La acción destructiva de Destover se lleva a cabo por parte de “igfxtrayex.exe”. En ciertas instancias, y cuando se ejecuta podría:

  • Eliminar todos los archivos en discos fijos y remotos
  • Modificar la tabla de partición
  • Instalar un módulo adicional (iissvr.exe)
  • Conectar un número direcciones IP en los puertos 8080 y 8000

Al mismo tiempo, “iissvr.exe” es una puerta trasera que escucha en el puerto 80. Cuando el atacante se comunica con la computadora comprometida, este archivo despliega un mensaje en inglés, que traducido dice:

“Ya te hemos advertido, y este es solo el comienzo.

Continuaremos hasta que se cumplan nuestras demandas.

Hemos obtenido todos tus datos internos, incluyendo tus secretos más ocultos.

Si no nos obedeces, revelaremos al mundo los datos que se muestran abajo.

Tienes hasta el 24 de noviembre a las 11:00 PM (GMT) para tomar una decisión.

Publica un correo electrónico y la siguiente frase en tu twitter y Facebook, y te contactaremos a través de esa dirección de correo:

Muchas gracias a God’sApstls [sic] por contribuir con este gran esfuerzo a la paz mundial.

Si tratas de rastrearnos, tu información será publicada de inmediato.”

Relación con Volgmer

Algunos ejemplos de Destover, analizados por Symantec, están ligados a un servidor C&C que ha sido utilizado por variantes de Trojan.Volgmer y Symantec lo ha rastreado durante varios meses. Volgmer es una amenaza capaz de abrir una puerta trasera en una computadora infectada, que permite al malware comunicarse con un servidor C&C para obtener información del sistema, ejecutar comandos, subir archivos y descargar archivos para su ejecución.

Es de llamar la atención que las variantes de Volgmer que comparten el servidor C&C con Destover, están configuradas para detener la ejecución si la región de la computadora comprometida no corresponde a Corea.

Relación con Jokra

Los agresores de Destover utilizan distintas técnicas y componentes que son similares a aquellos utilizados durante los ataques de Jokra contra Corea del Sur en 2013. Estos ataques afectaron a servidores pertenecientes a diversos bancos sudcoreanos, organizaciones de comunicación y también truncaron el sitio web de una firma local de telecomunicaciones.

El malware utilizado durante los ataques Jokra, contenía un código que comenzaba a borrar el disco duro hasta después de que expiraba cierto periodo de tiempo. Destover también está configurado para borrar los archivos de manera tardía. Además, diversos medios de comunicación sudcoreanos han reportado que varios archivos con nombres similares fueron utilizados en ambos ataques (liga en idioma coreano).

Similitudes con los ataques Shamoon

Destover también comparte cosas en común con los ataques Shamoon. Tanto Destover como el malware utilizado por los criminales de Shamoon (W32.Disttrack) comparten ciertos drivers. Estos no son archivos maliciosos y son drivers que comercialmente están disponibles. Mientras Destover y Disttrack son formas destructivas de malware, aún no hay evidencia que sugiera que el mismo grupo está detrás de ambos ataques.

Protección de Symantec

Los productos de Symantec y Norton detectan esta amenaza como Backdoor.Destover.