Sunday, July 2, 2017

Yet more reasons to disagree with experts on nPetya

In WW II, they looked at planes returning from bombing missions that were shot full of holes. Their natural conclusion was to add more armor to the sections that were damaged, to protect them in the future. But wait, said the statisticians. The original damage is likely spread evenly across the plane. Damage on returning planes indicates where they could damage and still return. The undamaged areas are where they were hit and couldn't return. Thus, it's the undamaged areas you need to protect.

This is called survivorship bias.

Many experts are making the same mistake with regards to the nPetya ransomware. 

I hate to point this out, because they are all experts I admire and respect, especially @MalwareJake, but it's still an error. An example is this tweet:

Errors happen. But look at the discipline put into the spreading code. That worked as intended. Only the ransomware components have bugs?
— Jake Williams (@MalwareJake) July 1, 2017

The context of this tweet is the discussion of why nPetya was well written with regards to spreading, but full of bugs with regards to collecting on the ransom. The conclusion therefore that it wasn't intended to be ransomware, but was intended to simply be a "wiper", to cause destruction.

But this is just survivorship bias. If nPetya had been written the other way, with excellent ransomware features and poor spreading, we would not now be talking about it. Even that initial seeding with the trojaned MeDoc update wouldn't have spread it far enough.

In other words, all malware samples we get are good at spreading, either on their own, or because the creator did a good job seeding them. It's because we never see the ones that didn't spread.


With regards to nPetya, a lot of experts are making this claim. Since it spread so well, but had hopelessly crippled ransomware features, that must have been the intent all along. Yet, as we see from survivorship bias, none of us would've seen nPetya had it not been for the spreading feature.












from Yet more reasons to disagree with experts on nPetya

More Automation. More #MSProfits.

Savvy MSPs know that automation improves efficiency and strengthens their bottom line. In a nutshell, automation enables an MSP to reduce the amount of time its technicians spend handling routine or repetitive tasks,...read more

The post More Automation. More #MSProfits. appeared first on Webroot Threat Blog.



from More Automation. More #MSProfits.

Book Review: Site Reliability Engineering. How Google runs production systems

Intro The following points come from a book by many Googleans and related colleagues such as Betsy Beyer, Chris Jones, Jennifer Petoff and Niall Richard Murphy title "Site Reliability Engineering: How Google runs productions systems".DisclaimerDisclaim...

from Book Review: Site Reliability Engineering. How Google runs production systems

Saturday, July 1, 2017

Friday, June 30, 2017

Play Real Money Poker On Android Usa

Should you would want to perform any of our free slots to try to win genuine hard cash, remember to see our genuine moolah slots portion. We pay quite a lot of your time researching the most suitable online casinos that give you a high quality choice of slots to play for legitimate capital.LeBron James [...]

from Play Real Money Poker On Android Usa

Fast Lightweight Autonomy

Good, or Evil? You Be The Judge. Permalink

from Fast Lightweight Autonomy

Obfuscation in the Wild: Targeted Attackers Lead the Way in Evasion Techniques

Throughout 2017 we have observed a marked increase in the use of command line evasion and obfuscation by a range of targeted attackers. Cyber espionage groups and financial threat actors continue to adopt the latest cutting-edge application whitelisting bypass techniques and introduce innovative obfuscation into their phishing lures. These techniques often bypass static and dynamic analysis methods and highlight why signature-based detection alone will always be at least one step behind creative attackers.

In early 2017, FIN8 began using environment variables paired with PowerShell’s ability to receive commands via StdIn (standard input) to evade detection based on process command line arguments. In the February 2017 phishing document “COMPLAINT Homer Glynn.doc” (MD5: cc89ddac1afe69069eb18bac58c6a9e4), the file contains a macro that sets the PowerShell command in one environment variable (_MICROSOFT_UPDATE_CATALOG) and then the string “powershell -” in another environment variable (MICROSOFT_UPDATE_SERVICE). When a PowerShell command ends in a dash then PowerShell will execute the command that it receives via StdIn, and only this dash will appear in powershell.exe’s command line arguments. Figure 1 provides the commands that were extracted using Mandiant consultant Nick Carr’s FIN8 macro decoder.


Figure 1: FIN8 environment variable commands extracted from “COMPLAINT Homer Glynn.doc” macros

To evade many detections based on parent-child process relationships, FIN8 crafted this macro to use WMI to spawn the cmd.exe execution. Therefore, WinWord.exe never creates a child process, but the process tree looks like: wmiprvse.exe à cmd.exe à powershell.exe. FIN8 has regularly used obfuscation and WMI to remotely launch their PUNCHTRACK POS-scraping malware, and the 2017 activity is an implementation of these evasion techniques at an earlier stage of compromise.

As new application whitelisting bypass techniques have surfaced, targeted attackers have quickly adopted these into their campaigns with extra layers of obfuscation to stay ahead of many defenders. Many groups leverage the regsvr32.exe application whitelisting bypass, including APT19 in their 2017 campaign against law firms. The cyber espionage group APT32 heavily obfuscates their backdoors and scripts, and Mandiant consultants observed APT32 implement additional command argument obfuscation in April 2017. Instead of using the argument /i:http for the regsvr32.exe bypass, APT32 used cmd.exe obfuscation techniques to attempt to break signature-based detection of this argument in April 2017. At FireEye we have seen them include both /i:^h^t^t^p and /i:h”t”t”p in their lures. Figure 2 shows a redacted screenshot of our Host Investigative Platform (HIP) capturing real-time attacker activity during one of our Mandiant incident response engagements for APT32 activity.


Figure 2: APT32 command obfuscation for regsvr32.exe application whitelisting bypass

Meanwhile, FIN7 has continued to wreak havoc on the restaurant, hospitality, and financial services sectors in 2017. To ensure their arsenal did not grow stale, in April 2017 FIN7 shifted to using wscript.exe to run JavaScript payloads that retrieve an additional payload hidden in the phishing document by use of the Word.Application COM object.

This week, FireEye identified FIN7 introducing additional obfuscation techniques at both the JavaScript and cmd.exe levels. These methods rely on FIN7’s preferred method of hiding shortcut files (LNK files) in their DOCX and RTF phishing documents to initiate the infection. At the time of this blog, the files implementing this technique were detected by 0 antivirus engines. For JavaScript, instead of specifying “Word.Application” for the COM object instantiation, FIN7 began concatenating the string to “Wor”+”d.Application”. In addition, JavaScript’s suspicious “eval” string was transformed into “this[String.fromCharCode(101)+’va’+’l’]”. Finally, they used a little-known character replacement functionality supported by cmd.exe. The wscript.exe command is set in a process-level environment variable “x”, but is obfuscated with the “@” character. When the “x” variable is echoed at the end of the script the “@” character is removed by the syntax “%x:@=%”. Figure 3 shows this command extracted from a LNK file embedded within a new FIN7 phishing document.


Figure 3: FIN7 command obfuscation from LNK file phishing document

In this example, FIN7 implements FIN8’s passing of commands via StdIn – this time passing it to cmd.exe instead of powershell.exe – but the evasion effect is the same. While this example will expose these arguments in the first cmd.exe’s command execution, if this environment variable were set within the LNK or a macro and pushed to cmd.exe via StdIn from VBA, then nothing would appear on the command line.

The FireEye iSIGHT Intelligence MySIGHT Portal contains detailed information on these attackers – and all financial and cyber espionage groups that we track – including analysis of their malware, tactics, and further intelligence attribution.

We fully expect targeted attackers to continue this pattern of adopting new bypass techniques and adding innovative obfuscation at both the macro and command line levels. As for what we might see next, we’d recommend reading up on DOS command line tricks so that monitoring your network isn’t the first time you see new attacker tricks. Network defenders must understand what obfuscation is possible, assess their endpoint and network visibility, and most importantly not rely on a single method to detect these attacks.



from Obfuscation in the Wild: Targeted Attackers Lead the Way in Evasion Techniques