<![CDATA[[SecurityRatty] tag: hosts]]> http://securityratty.com/tag/hosts Fri, 18 Jul 2008 02:23:49 +0000 iRatty Engine http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss <![CDATA[Automatic Email Harvesting 2.0]]> http://securityratty.com/article/215d1f3ffdea93e64224f10dcdb310d4 http://securityratty.com/article/215d1f3ffdea93e64224f10dcdb310d4
Just when you think that email harvesting matured into user names harvesting in a true Web 2.0 style with the recently uncovered harvested IM screen names, and Youtube user lists for spammers, phishers and malware authors to take advantage of, someone has filled in the gap that's been around as long as email harvesting has been a daily routine for spammers - dealing with text obfuscations which still remain highly popular online, once it became evident that spammers are in fact crawling for default mailto lines. This email harvesting module can be run a separate script, or get integrated as a module within any botnet, is capable of harvesting the following text obfuscations often used in order to prevent spamming crawlers :

mail@gmail.com
mail[at]gmail.com
mail[at]gmail[dot]com
mail [space]gmail [space]com
mail(@)gmail.com
mail(a)gmail.com
mail AT gmail DOT com

The overall availability and easy of obtaining a huge percentage of valid email addresses within an organizaton, is not just resulting in the increasing segmentation and localization of spam, phishing and malware campaigns, it's increasing the profit margins for the spamming providers which is now not just offering verified to be 100% valid email addresses, but also, can providing the foundations for spear phishing and targeted attacks.

Quality assurance in spaming is still in its introduction phrase, with customers starting to put the emphasis on the number of emails that actually made it through the spam filters, than the number of emails sent as a benchmark for increasing the probability of bypassing anti spam filters. Taking into consideration the big picture, sniffing for email addresses streaming out of malware infected hosts, and stealing huge email databases by exploiting vulnerable online communities, seems to be the tactics of choice for the majority of individuals whose responsibility is to continuously provide fresh and valid email addresses.
]]> Tue, 26 Aug 2008 04:01:51 +0000 email email addresses valid email addresses spam filters spam huge email databases anti spam filters mail spacegmail spacecom mail Automatic Email Harvesting 2.0 <![CDATA[Web Based Botnet Command and Control Kit 2.0]]> http://securityratty.com/article/4f945955ba8a424fe6b9352583602062 http://securityratty.com/article/4f945955ba8a424fe6b9352583602062
The average web based command and control kit for a botnet consisting of single user, single campaign functions only, has just lost its charm, with a recent discovery of a proprietary botnet kit whose features clearly indicate that the kit's coder know exactly which niches to fill - presumably based on his personal experience or market research into competing products.

What are some its key differentiation factors? Multitasking at its best, for instance, the kits provides the botnet master with the opportunity to manage numerous different task such as several malware campaigns and DDoS attacks simultaneously, where each of these gets a separate metrics page.  

Automation of malicious tasks, by setting up tasks, and issuing notices on the status of the task, when it was run and when it was ended. Just consider the possibilities for a scheduling malware and DDoS attacks for different quarters.  

Segmentation in every aspect of the tasks, for instance, a DDoS attacks against a particular site can be scheduled to launched on a specific date from infected hosts based in chosen countries only.  

Customized DDoS in the sense of empowering the botnet master with point'n'click ability to dedicate a precise number of the bots to participate, which countries they should be based in, and for how long the attack should remain active. Quality and assurance in DDoS attacks based on the measurement of the bot's bandwidth against a particular country, in this case the object of the attack, so theoretically bots from neighboring countries would DDoS the country in question far more efficiently.  

Historical malware campaign performance, is perhaps the most quality assurance feature in the entire kit, presumably created in order to allow the person behind it to measure which were the most effective malware and DDoS campaigns that he executed in the past. From an OSINT perspective, sacrificing his operational security by maintaing detailed logs from previous attacks is a gold mine directly establishing his relationships with previous malware campaigns.

Bot Description:  
1. Completely invisible Bot work in the system.
2. Not loads system.
3. Invisible in the process.
4. Workaround all firewall.
5. Bot implemented as a driver.
Functions Bot (constantly updated): 
1. Downloading a file (many options).
2. HTTP DDoS (many options, including http authentication).
The web interface 
-- Convenient manager tasks.
-- Every task can be stopped, put on pause, etc. ...
-- Interest and visual scale of the task.  
-- A task manager for DDoS and Loader
    
-- For DDoS tasks
Bots involved in DDoS 'f.
Condition of the victim (works, fell).
2. Bots manager
-- Displays a list of bots (postranichno).
-- Obratseniya date of the first and last.
-- ID Bot.
-- Country Bot.
-- Type Bot.
-- The status Bot (online / offline).
-- Bot bandwidth to different parts of the world (europe, asia).
-- The possibility of removing bots
-- When you click on ID Bot loadable still a wealth of information about it
3. Statistics botneta
-- Statistics both common and build Bot.
-- Information on the growth and decline botneta dates (and build).
-- Bots online
-- All bots
-- Dead bots.

4. Statistics botneta country
-- All countries to work on 
-- New work by country 
-- Online work from country to country
-- Dead bots by country
5. Detailed history botneta 
6. Convenient user-friendly interface adding teams
8. Admin minimal server loads
-- Use php5/mysql
Upcoming features :
1. Form grabber (price increase substantially), for old customers will be charged as an upgrade
2. Public key cryptography
3. Clustering campaigns and DDoS attacks

Despite it's proprietary nature, it's quality and innovative features will sooner or later leak out for everyone to take advantage of, a rather common lifecycle for the majority of proprietary malware kits in general.

Related posts:
]]> Fri, 22 Aug 2008 10:02:15 +0000 ddos attacks based ddos attacks malware previous malware campaigns ddos attacks simultaneously botnet country country bot ddos Web Based Botnet Command and Control Kit 2.0 <![CDATA[Who's Behind the Georgia Cyber Attacks?]]> http://securityratty.com/article/5b529a9f3815b10331813e58bacf8129 http://securityratty.com/article/5b529a9f3815b10331813e58bacf8129 Of course the Klingons did it, or you were naive enough to even think for a second that Russians were behind it at the first place? Of the things I hate  most, it's lowering down the quality of the discussion I hate the most. Even if you're excluding all the factual evidence (Coordinated Russia vs Georgia cyber attack in progress), common sense must prevail.

Sometimes, the degree of incompetence can in fact be pretty entertaining, and greatly explains why certain countries are lacking behind others with years in their inability to understand the rules of information warfare, or the basic premise of unrestricted warfare, that there are no rules on how to achieve your objectives.

So who's behind the Georgia cyber attacks, encompassing of plain simple ping floods, web site defacements, to sustained DDoS attacks, which no matter the fact that Geogia has switched hosting location to the U.S remain ongoing? It's Russia's self-mobilizing cyber militia, the product of a collectivist society having the capacity to wage cyber wars and literally dictating the rhythm in this space. What is militia anyway :

"civilians trained as soldiers but not part of the regular army; the entire body of physically fit civilians eligible by law for military service; a military force composed of ordinary citizens to provide defense, emergency law enforcement, or paramilitary service, in times of emergency; without being paid a regular salary or committed to a fixed term of service; an army of trained civilians, which may be an official reserve army, called upon in time of need; the national police force of a country; the entire able-bodied population of a state; or a private force, not under government control; An army or paramilitary group comprised of citizens to serve in times of emergency"

Next to the "blame the Russian Business Network for the lack of large scale implementation of DNSSEC" mentality, certain news articles also try to wrongly imply that there's no Russian connection in these attacks, and that the attacks are not "state-sponsored", making it look like that there should be a considerable amount of investment made into these attacks, and that the Russian government has the final word on whether or not its DDoS capabilities empowered citizens should launch any attacks or not. In reality, the only thing the Russian government was asking itself during these attacks was "why didn't they start the attacks earlier?!".

Thankfully, there are some visionary folks out there understanding the situation. Last year, I asked the following question - What is the most realistic scenario on what exactly happened in the recent DDoS attacks aimed at Estonia, from your point of view? and some of the possible answers still fully apply in this situation :

- It was a Russian government-sponsored hacktivism, or shall we say a government-tolerated one

- Too much media hype over a sustained ICMP flood, given the publicly obtained statistics of the network traffic

- Certain individuals of the collectivist Russian society, botnet masters for instance, were automatically recruited based on a nationalism sentiments so that they basically forwarded some of their bandwidth to key web servers

- In order to generate more noise, DIY DoS tools were distributed to the masses so that no one would ever know who's really behind the attacks

- Don't know who did it, but I can assure you my kid was playing !synflood at that time

- Offended by the not so well coordinated removal of the Soviet statue, Russian oligarchs felt the need to send back a signal but naturally lacking any DDoS capabilities, basically outsourced the DDoS attacks

- A foreign intelligence agency twisting the reality and engineering cyber warfare tensions did it, while taking advantage of the momentum and the overall public perception that noone else but the affected Russia could be behind the attacks

- I hate scenario building, reminds me of my academic years, however, yours are pretty good which doesn't necessarily mean I actually care who did it, and pssst - it's not cyberwar, as in cyberwar you have two parties with virtual engagement points, in this case it was bandwidth domination by whoever did it over the other. A virtual shock and awe

- I stopped following the news story by the time every reporter dubbed it the first cyber war, and started following it again when the word hacktivism started gaining popularity. So, hacktivists did it to virtually state their political preferences

Departamental cyber warfare would never reach the flexibity state of people's information warfare where everyone is a cyber warrior given he's empowered with access to the right tools at a particular moment in time.

Related posts:
People's Information Warfare Concept
Combating Unrestricted Warfare
The Cyber Storm II Cyber Exercise
Chinese Hacktivists Waging People's Information Warfare Against CNN
The DDoS Attacks Against CNN.com
China's Cyber Espionage Ambitions
North Korea's Cyber Warfare Unit 121
Chinese Hackers Attacking U.S Department of Defense Networks
Electronic Jihad v3.0 - What Cyber Jihad Isn't
Electronic Jihad's Targets List
Teaching Cyber Jihadists How to Hack
Empowering the Script Kiddies
OSINT Through Botnets
Corporate Espionage Through Botnets
Malware Infected Hosts as Stepping Stones
Hacktivism Tensions - Israel vs Palestine Cyberwars
The Current, Emerging, and Future State of Hacktivism
Internet PSYOPS - Psychological Operations
]]> Thu, 14 Aug 2008 06:16:34 +0000 attacks georgia cyber attacks warfare departamental cyber warfare cyber warfare tensions information warfare concept information warfare russian russian oligarchs Who's Behind the Georgia Cyber Attacks? <![CDATA[76Service - Cybercrime as a Service Going Mainstream]]> http://securityratty.com/article/35bdaf104e9aecf7703834d959f39050 http://securityratty.com/article/35bdaf104e9aecf7703834d959f39050
Disintermediating the intermediaries in the cybercrime ecosystem, ultimately results in more profitable operations. Controversial to the concept of outsourcing, some cybercriminals are in fact so self-sufficient, that the stereotype of a mysterious 76service server offered for rent could in fact easily cease to exist in an ecosystem so vibrant that literally everyone can partion their botnet and start offering access to it on a multi-user basis. Evil? Obviously. Extending the lifecycle of a proprietary malware tool? Definitely.

The infamous 76service, a cybercrime as a service web interface where customers basically collect the final output out of the banking malware botnet during the specific period of time for which they've purchases access to the service, is going mainstream, with 76Service's Spring Edition apparently leaking out, and cybercriminals enjoying its interoperability potential by introducing different banking trojans in their campaigns.

In this post, I'll discuss the 76service's spring.edition that has been combined with a Metaphisher banking malware, an a popular web malware exploitation kit, with two campaigns currently hosting 5.51GB of stolen banking data based on over 1 million compromised hosts 59% of which are based in Russia. Screenshots courtesy of an egocentric underground show-off.

Some general info on the 76service :

"Subscribers could log in with their assigned user name and password any time during the 30-day project. They’d be met with a screen that told them which of their bots was currently active, and a side bar of management options. For example, they could pull down the latest drops—data deposits that the Gozi-infected machines they subscribed to sent to the servers, like the 3.3 GB one Jackson had found. A project was like an investment portfolio. Individual Gozi-infected machines were like stocks and subscribers bought a group of them, betting they could gain enough personal information from their portfolio of infected machines to make a profit, mostly by turning around and selling credentials on the black market. (In some cases, subscribers would use a few of the credentials themselves). Some machines, like some stocks, would under perform and provide little private information. But others would land the subscriber a windfall of private data. The point was to subscribe to several infected machines to balance that risk, the way Wall Street fund managers invest in many stocks to offset losses in one company with gains in another."

The 76service empowers everyone who is either not willing to spend time and resources for building and maintaining a botnet, launching campaigns, and SQL injecting hundreds of thousands of sites in order to take advantage of the long tail of malware infected sites that theoretically can outpace the traffic that could come from a SQL injected high-profile site.

Next to the spring.edition, the winter edition's price starts from $1000 and goes to $2000, which is all a matter of who you're buying it from, unless of course you haven't come across leaked copies :

"Assuming that the dealer offering what he claimed was the 76service kit was correct, the profit is not only in the kit, but in selling value added services like exploitation, compromised servers/accounts, database configuration, and customization of the interface. Prices start between $1000 to $2000 and go up based on added services. The underground payment methods generally involve hard-to-track virtual currencies, whose central authority is in a jurisdiction where regulation is liberal to non-existent, and feature non-reversible transactions. The individual or group called "76service" was easy to track down on the Web, but not in person."

It's interesting to monitor how services aiming to provide specific malicious services are vertically integrating by expanding their portfolio of related services -- taka a spamming vendor that will offer the segmented email databases, the advanced metrics, and the localization of the spam messages to different languages -- or letting the buyer have full control of anything that comes out of a particular botnet for a specific period of time in which he has bought access to it. For instance, DDoS for hire matured into botnet for hire, which evolved into today's "What type of stolen data do you want?" for hire mentality I'm starting to see emerging, next to the usual interest in improving the metrics and thereby the probability for a more succesful campaign.

Ironically, this cybercrime model is so efficient that the people behind it cannot seem to be able to process all of the stolen data, which like a great deal of underground assets loses its value if not sold as fast as possible. The result of this oversupply of stolen data are the increasing number of services selling raw logs segmented based on a particular country for a specific period of time.

Time for a remotely exploitable vulnerability in yet another malware kit about to go mainstream? Definitely, unless of course backdooring it and releasing it doesn't achieve the obvious results of controlling someone else's cybercrime ecosystem.

Related posts:
The Underground Economy's Supply of Goods and Services
The Dynamics of the Malware Industry - Proprietary Malware Tools
Using Market Forces to Disrupt Botnets
Multiple Firewalls Bypassing Verification on Demand
Managed Spamming Appliances - The Future of Spam
Localizing Cybercrime - Cultural Diversity on Demand
E-crime and Socioeconomic Factors 
Malware as a Web Service 
Coding Spyware and Malware for Hire
Are Stolen Credit Card Details Getting Cheaper?
Neosploit Team Leaving the IT Underground
The Zeus Crimeware Kit Vulnerable to Remotely Exploitable Flaw
Pinch Vulnerable to Remotely Exploitable Flaw
Dissecting a Managed Spamming Service
Managed "Spamming Appliances" - The Future of Spam

]]> Wed, 13 Aug 2008 04:08:43 +0000 76service service malware malware kit cybercrime malware botnet botnet mysterious 76service server web service 76Service - Cybercrime as a Service Going Mainstream <![CDATA[Summarizing July's Threatscape]]> http://securityratty.com/article/2860027a1eaa69350d814429c3bf6070 http://securityratty.com/article/2860027a1eaa69350d814429c3bf6070
July's threatscape -- consider going through June's summary as well -- once again demonstrated that nothing is impossible, the impossible just takes a little longer where the incentive would be the ultimate monetization of the process.

Russian hacktivists attacking Lithuania and Georgia, several Storm Worm campaigns, a couple of new malware tools, Neosploit team abandoning support for their web malware exploitation kit, CAPTCHA for several of the most popular free email providers getting efficiently attacked in order to resell the bogus accounts registered in the process, several copycat SQL injects next to the evasion techniques applied by the copycats, botnets continuing to commit click fraud and generate revenue for those who own or have rented them, an infamous money mule recruitment service taking advantage of the fast-fluxed network provided by the ASProx botnet - pretty interesting month indeed.

01. Decrypting and Restoring GPcode Encrypted Files -
The GPcode authors read the news too, and are catching up with the major weaknesses pointed out in their previous release in order to come with a virtually unbreakable algorithm. And since more evidence of who's behind the GPcode ransomware was gathered, vendors and independent researchers realized that the latest release is also susceptible to a plain simple flaw, namely the encrypted files were basically getting deleting and not securely erased making them fairly easy to recover.

02. Chinese Bloggers Bypassing Censorship by Blogging Backward -
When you know how it works, you can either improve, abuse or destroy it in that very particular order. Chinese bloggers are always very adaptive in respect to spreading their message by obfuscating their messages in a way that common keywords filtering software wouldn't be able to pick them.

03. Gmail, Yahoo and Hotmail’s CAPTCHA Broken -
This has been an urban legend for a while, but with more services starting to offer hundreds of thousands of pre-registered accounts at these providers, it's surprising that spam and phishing emails coming from legitimate email providers is increasing. The "vendors" behind these propositions are naturally starting to "vertically integrate" by offering value-added services for extra payments, namely, scripts to automatically abuse the pre-registered accounts for automatic registration of splogs and anything else malicious or blackhat SEO related.

04. The Antivirus Industry in 2008 -
If it were anyone else but a security vendor to come up with such a realistic cartoon aiming to stimulate innovation by emphasizing on how prolific and sophisticated malware groups have become, it would have been a biased cartoon. However, this one is courtesy of a security vendor, and it's pretty objective.

05. Lithuania Attacked by Russian Hacktivists, 300 Sites Defaced -
This attack is a good example of a decent PSYOPS operation. Of course they have already build the capabilities to deface and even execute DDoS attacks against Lithuania, so why not put them in a "stay tuned" mode, by speculating on the upcoming attack and then executing it making it look like they delived what they've promised? This a lone gunman mass defacement given that the sites were all hosted on a single ISP, with no indication of any kind of coordination whatsoever. The same for the Georgia President’s web site which was under DDoS attack from Russian hackers later this month. Despite that the hacktivists behind it dedicated a separate C&C for the attack, one that hasn't been used in any type of previous attacks so far, they did a minor mistake by using a secondary command and control location that's known to have been connected with a particular "botnet on demand" service in the past. The second attack once again proves that you don't need to build capacity when you can basically outsource the process to someone else.

06. The ICANN Responds to the DNS Hijacking, Its Blog Under Attack -
The ICANN finally issued a statement concerning the DNS hijacking of some of their domains, which is in fact what Comcast.net and Photobucket.com should have done as well, next to stating it was a "glitch". The ICANN also took advantage of the moment and also pointed out that their blog has also been under attack during the month. There's no better example of how the combination of tactics can result in the hijacking of the domains of the organizations implementing procedures aiming to protect against these very same attacks. And while Photobucket.com remained silent during the entire incident, the hosting provider that was used by the Netdevilz team in the two attacks, since they were also responsible for the ICANN and IANA DNS hijackings, technological and social engineeringissued a statement.

07. The Risks of Outdated Situational Awareness -
Security vendors are often in a "catch-up mode" and if I were an average Internet user not knowing that real-time situational awareness speaks for the degree to which my vendor knows what going on online, I'd be pretty excited. However, I'm not. Prevx were catching up with a service which I covered approximately two months ago, I even had the chance to constructively confront with one of the affected sites on how despite their security measures in place, this attack was still possible. Recently Prevx have once again demonstrated an outdated situational awareness by coming across a banking malware in July 2008, whereas the malware has been around since July 2007, and earlier depending on which version you're referring to.

08. Fake Porn Sites Serving Malware - Part Two -
Yet another domain portfolio of fake porn sites serving rogue codecs and live exploit URLs, just the tip of the iceberg as usual, however their centralization is greatly assisting in tracking them down.

09. Storm Worm's U.S Invasion of Iran Campaign -
Stormy Wormy is once again making the headlines with their ability to actually make up the headlines on their own.

10. Mobile Malware Scam iSexPlayer Wants Your Money -
The best scams are the ones to which you've personally agreed to be scammed with without even knowing it. Like this one, which was tracked down and analyzed a couple of hours once a uset tipped on it.

11. The Template-ization of Malware Serving Sites -
The increase of fake porn and celebrity sites is due to the overall template-ization of these, with the people behind them basically implementing several malicious doorways to ensure that the domains get rotated on the fly. Despite that they all look the same, they all sever different type of malware, and zero porn of celebrity content at all except the thumbnails.

12. Violating OPSEC for Increasing the Probability of Malware Infection -
No better way to expose your affiliations and several unknown bad netblocks so far, by adding the netblocks and the malicious domains as trusted sites upon infecting a PC with the malware. Of course, the usual suspects lead the "trusted netblocks".

13. Monetizing Compromised Web Sites -
Several years ago, a script kiddie would install Apache on a mail server, they claim that they defaced it. Today, these amusing situations are replaced by monetization of the compromised sites, by reselling the access to them to blackhat SEO-ers, malware authors, phishers, or personally starting to manage a scammy infrastructure on them, by earning money on an affiliate based model, like this particular attack.

14. Malware and Office Documents Joining Forces -
A recent DIY malware kit, sold as a proprietary tool basically crunching out malware infected office documents, whose built-in obfuscation makes them harder to detect. It will sooner or later leak out, turning into a commodity tool, a process that's been pretty evident for web malware exploitation kits as well.

15. Are Stolen Credit Card Details Getting Cheaper? -
Depends on who you're buying them from, and whether or not they offer discounts on a volume basis, namely the more you buy the cheaper the price of a card is supposed to get. With the current oversupply of stolen credit card details, what used to be an exclusive good once where they could enjoy a higher profit-margin, is today's commodity good.

16. The Neosploit Malware Kit Updated with Snapshot ActiveX Exploit -
Since alll the web malware exploitation kits are open source, and leaked in the wild at large, their modularity allows everyone to easily embed any type of exploit that they want to, resulting in Neosploit's single most beneficial feature, the fact that certain versions include all the publicly available exploits targeting Internet Explorer, Firefox and Opera. Moreover, the open source nature of the kit is resulting in a countless number of modified versions yet to be detected and analyzed, therefore keeping track of the exploits included in a malware kit can only be realistic if you take into considered the exploits that come with the default installation.

17. Obfuscating Fast-fluxed SQL Injected Domains -
Now that's a very good example of different tactics combined to attack, ensure survivability, and apply a certain degree of evasion in between.

18. The Unbreakable CAPTCHA -
There's never been a shortage of ideas, there's always been an issue of usability.

19. The Ayyildiz Turkish Hacking Group VS Everyone -
That's a pretty inspiring mission if you are to ensure your future in the next couple of years, by targeting everyone, everywhere that has ever publicly stated their disagreement with the Turkish foreign policy.

20. Money Mule Recruiters use ASProx's Fast Fluxing Services -
A true multitasking in action with a botnet that's been crunching out phishing emails, SQL injecting and now hosting a well known money mule recruitment service.

21. SQL Injecting Malicious Doorways to Serve Malware -
Constantly switching tactics and combining different ones to achive an objective that used to be accomplished by plain simple techniques, is only starting to take place. In this case, instead of a hard coded SQL injected domain, we have the typical malicious doorways the result of the converging traffic management tools with web malware exploitation kits.

22. Impersonating StopBadware.org to Serve Fake Security Warnings -
Typosquatting popular security vendors and services is nothing new, by having HostFresh providing the hosting for the parked domains promoting the rogue security software, is a privilege and flattery for the success of the Stopbadware initiative.

23. Coding Spyware and Malware for Hire -
Customerization -- not customization -- has been taking place for a while, that's the process of tailoring your upcoming products to the needs of your future customers, compared to the product concept myopia where the malware coder would code something that he believes would be valuable to the potential customers. End user agreements, issuing licenses for the malware tool, as well as forbidding the reverse engineering of the malware so that no remotely exploitable flaws could be, are among the requirements the coder assists on.

24. Lazy Summer Days at UkrTeleGroup Ltd -
Taking a random snapshot of the current malicious activity at a well known provider of hosting services for rogue security applications, live exploit URLs and botnet command&control locations, always provides an insight into what are their customers up to. In this case, centralization of their scammy ecosystem, and parking a countless number of rogue domains on the same server.

25. Email Hacking Going Commercial -
Cybercrime is in fact getting easier to outsource, and while the number of scammers trying to offer non-existent services, or at least services where they cannot deliver the goods, the business model of this service that is that you only pay once they show you a proof that they've managed to hack the email address you game them. How are they doing it? Social engineering and enticing the user to click on live exploit URL from where they'll infect the PC and obtain the email password, of course, next to definitely abusing it for many other purposes in the process.

26. Vulnerabilities in Antivirus Software - Conflict of Interest -
You can easily twist the number of vulnerabilities found in your antivirus solution, but not recognizing them as vulnerabilities at the first place. It's all a matter of what you define as a vulnerability, or perhaps what you admit as a serious vulnerability - remote code execution through a security software, or a flaw that's allowing malware to bypass the security solution itself.

27. Counting the Bullets on the (Malware) Front -
Emphasizing on the number of malware/threats/viruses/worms/slugs your solution detects may be marketable in the short-term, but is damaging the end user's understanding of the threatscape in the long-term. So, by the time he catches up with what exactly is going on, he'll recall the moment in time where he was using the number of threats his solution was detecting as the main benchmark for its usefulness. In reality through, the number is irrelevant from a pro-active point of view, with zero day malware like the one coded for hire undermining the signatures based scanning model.

28. Smells Like a Copycat SQL Injection In the Wild -
It was pretty obvious that copycats seeing the success of SQL injections the the huge number of sites susceptible to exploitation, would also starting taking advantage of the practice. Some are, however, targeting local communities and trying to avoid detection by using targeted SQL injections.

29. Click Fraud, Botnets and Parked Domains - All Inclusive -
The scheme is nothing new, what's new is that the botnet masters are trying to limit the revenues that used to go out to affiliate networks they were participating in, and are trying to own or rent the entire infrastructure on their own.

30. Over 80 percent of Storm Worm Spam Sent by Pharmaceutical Spam Kings -
With access to Storm Worm sold and resold, and new malware introduced on Storm Worm infected hosts used as foundation for the propagation of the new malware in this case, it's questionable whether or not the Storm Worm-ers themselves are sending out the junk emails, or are they people who've rented access to the botnet doing it.

31. Neosploit Team Leaving the IT Underground -
Pretty surprising at the first place, but in reality it clearly demonstrates that when you cannot enforce the end user agreement on your crimeware kit, but continue seeing it used in a very profitable malware operations, you basically shut down the support for the public version. The team is not going to stop innovating for their own purposes, and in the long-term they may in fact re-appear with an updated malware kit that's converging different services next to the product itself.

32. Dissecting a Managed Spamming Service -
Managed spamming services using botnets as the foundation for the campaigns are starting to introduce improved metrics for the delivery, as well as experienced customer support ensuring the spam messages make it through spam filters, or at least increase the probability of making the happen. This is an example of a random service emphasizing on the improved metrics they're capable of delivering.

33. Storm Worm's Lazy Summer Campaigns -
Looks like a "cybercrime intern" launched this campaign, lacking any of the usual Storm Worm evasive practices, no exploitation of client side vulnerabilities, as well as no survivability offered by their usual fast-flux nodes.
]]> Fri, 01 Aug 2008 12:08:24 +0000 malware profitable malware operations malware authors malware tools malware coder malware kit malware infection neosploit malware kit spam Summarizing July's Threatscape <![CDATA[Security Through Visibility - Montego, Lancope and NetFlow]]> http://securityratty.com/article/03c1f11d6787944e11b9ab1baec0352e http://securityratty.com/article/03c1f11d6787944e11b9ab1baec0352e

We've probably all heard that you can't secure what you can't see and that statement is even more profound when it comes to virtual environments.  This is because it is extremely challenging to see what is going on at a micro vs. macro level within a virtual environments network.  The virtualization vendors such as VMWare and Citrix have provided embedded tools into their management consoles that show a macro level of visibility but its not enough to identify security events in the environment.  Take a look at the attached picture.  It simply shows VMWare's ability to monitor virtual network performance statistics from a bits per second perspective.

Performancescreen
<-Click To Enlarge

With only this level of detail how can one determine which network applications are causing spikes.  Is it FTP traffic that is occuring at a high volume at an unuseal time of day?  If that were occuring, could that be indicative of either a breach or some sort of problem? What if FTP isn't even an authorized service in the virtual environment but there is a high volume of it?  Did someone install a rouge FTP service so they could steal information from the server at will?

These types of questions can't really be answered without a micro level of detail into the packets flowing in, out and within the virtual environment.  Now, what I am highlighting is not security in the traditional sense of prevention but using visibility as a means to first identify, then pin point the source of an issue so that it can properly be mitigated.  Having constant visibility can also ensure that other security products in the environment are performing as expected.  What if a Montego HyperSwitch with firewalling enabled is configured with many policies but someone forgot to create an FTP block policy.  One could think they are protected from rouge FTP services transmiting data out of the network, but without constant visibility monitoring, can you be certain?

Some vendors, namely Reflex Security will get you to believe that their IPS / IDS solution that is inline and running in the virtual environment is the right and only approach.  Or they will tell you to hang a virtual IDS off a span port in the virtual environment and you will at least have visibility into the attacks that are taking place.  Well, sure... You now have attack visibility but at the performance cost of your virtual environment.  Signature matching technologies are great, I'm a huge believer; however they don't scale very well in shared computing environments such as virtual ones.  IDS systems also don't typically track protocol and network service (FTP, HTTP, etc.) utilizations; which is another important part of visibility.

So, what do we do to gain visibility without the performance headache?  Well, for starters its probably best to put your IDS/IPS solutions in the physical environment where performance will be less of a concern.  In fact, you can span a virtual switch's traffic out to a physical NIC as easy as you can to a virtual one.  So why do it virtual and have to pay a 60% CPU utilization tax?  Another solution is to IDS inspect only the things you care about.  Why IDS inspect SSL traffic if you know your solution can't unencrypt SSL.  Its just a waste of compute cycles isnt it?  Policy based switching helps you with directing only the things you care about to an IDS (attack visualization product).  Montego's HyperSwitch also can help you with the traffic redirection of only the things you care about.

Another method of visibility which I tend to be a fan of is one of packet analysis (aka NetFlow).  NetFlow was invented by Cisco some time ago and has gained popularity in the physical world and definately has a use in the virtual world.  NetFlow is lightweight.  Let me say that again, its light weight!  It only sends a summation of packet detail to an analytical engine which can do some number crunching, packet comparison, etc. etc. to make some sense out of whats going on.  Lancope, an Atlanta based visibility company that provides Network Visibility, Security Visibility and User Visibility has this tool on their website that is a Netflow Bandwidth calculator.  You'll see from playing with this ( http://www.lancope.com/netflowcalculator.aspx ) calculator that it doesn't consume a lot of network bandwidth to transmit these network accounting records.  It also doesn't cause a lot of CPU overhead to send these records to an analytical engine sitting somewhere in the network.

Lancope's analytical engines have the ability to do the following for you within your virtual environment:

<p><p>Slide 3</p></p> 
  1. •Monitor and Alert network behavior of VMs
  2. •Track Vmotion movement of VMs accross physical servers
  3. •Monitor and Alert on communication between VMs
  4. •Identify users accessing VMs
  5. •Identify unauthorized or rouge VMs
  6. •Monitor and Alert when VM’s go online or offline
  7. •Identify network services running on VMs
  8. •Monitor Network / Application performance of VMs
    Display active hosts accessing VMs

...and probably a slew of other things I'm not aware of.  A screen shot of their product is bellow:

Lancopescreen <- Click to enlarge

You'll notice from the screenshot that you are able to visualize who is talking to who, how much traffic they have sent and received and something called a concern index (not seen on this screenshot).

Now, a concern index is a number that increases as Lancopes analytical engines monitor suspicious activity on a session.  A high counter can be indicative of a security problem.  Its another way of identifying (visualizing) compromised hosts (virtual machines) without having to do signature matching like a heavy weight IPS engine.  Example:  Lets say you have a VM that has a BOT on it and is "owned".  The Lancope product is monitoring this long life session.  Let's say that session is established for several hours or maybe even days or months.  Lets also say that the conversation appears to be mostly unidirectional from a public ip address not belonging to your enterprise.  Lancope would increase a the concern index on this since this server hasn't typically had this type of behavior.  Once the concern index reached a certain level it could then fire off an email, send you a text message or something saying:  Warning, Warning, Danger, Danger Will Robinson!!! You're virtual server may be infected with a BOT, please investigate immediately!!!

This example is VISIBILITY which helps you with SECURITY.  There are a number of other things you can do with NetFlow and Lancope products that have less to do with security and more to do with operational efficiencies.  Things like, helping you answer questions of:  How do I know what network applications are taking up the most bandwidth?  When should I move those applications over to a server with more horsepower?  When did these VM's vmotion over here and was there a traffic condition / CPU condition that caused that to occur?  I could go on and on but thats a topic for another blog entry.

So, my suggestion is to take a look at what NetFlow has to offer.  Montego Networks supports NetFlow transmission and Lancope supports NetFlow analytics and with both you can regain what was lost visibility.

I hope this was helpful to you all!

-John Peterson

]]> Wed, 30 Jul 2008 17:57:06 +0000 network network visibility visibility environments virtual environments network security network bandwidth bandwidth virtual Security Through Visibility - Montego, Lancope and NetFlow <![CDATA[Security Through Visibility - Montego, Lancope and NetFlow]]> http://securityratty.com/article/5b6ed1101dc183f8ebcfa1e481566982 http://securityratty.com/article/5b6ed1101dc183f8ebcfa1e481566982

We've probably all heard that you can't secure what you can't see and that statement is even more profound when it comes to virtual environments.  This is because it is extremely challenging to see what is going on at a micro vs. macro level within a virtual environments network.  The virtualization vendors such as VMWare and Citrix have provided embedded tools into their management consoles that show a macro level of visibility but its not enough to identify security events in the environment.  Take a look at the attached picture.  It simply shows VMWare's ability to monitor virtual network performance statistics from a bits per second perspective.

Performancescreen
<-Click To Enlarge

With only this level of detail how can one determine which network applications are causing spikes.  Is it FTP traffic that is occuring at a high volume at an unuseal time of day?  If that were occuring, could that be indicative of either a breach or some sort of problem? What if FTP isn't even an authorized service in the virtual environment but there is a high volume of it?  Did someone install a rouge FTP service so they could steal information from the server at will?

These types of questions can't really be answered without a micro level of detail into the packets flowing in, out and within the virtual environment.  Now, what I am highlighting is not security in the traditional sense of prevention but using visibility as a means to first identify, then pin point the source of an issue so that it can properly be mitigated.  Having constant visibility can also ensure that other security products in the environment are performing as expected.  What if a Montego HyperSwitch with firewalling enabled is configured with many policies but someone forgot to create an FTP block policy.  One could think they are protected from rouge FTP services transmiting data out of the network, but without constant visibility monitoring, can you be certain?

Some vendors, namely Reflex Security will get you to believe that their IPS / IDS solution that is inline and running in the virtual environment is the right and only approach.  Or they will tell you to hang a virtual IDS off a span port in the virtual environment and you will at least have visibility into the attacks that are taking place.  Well, sure... You now have attack visibility but at the performance cost of your virtual environment.  Signature matching technologies are great, I'm a huge believer; however they don't scale very well in shared computing environments such as virtual ones.  IDS systems also don't typically track protocol and network service (FTP, HTTP, etc.) utilizations; which is another important part of visibility.

So, what do we do to gain visibility without the performance headache?  Well, for starters its probably best to put your IDS/IPS solutions in the physical environment where performance will be less of a concern.  In fact, you can span a virtual switch's traffic out to a physical NIC as easy as you can to a virtual one.  So why do it virtual and have to pay a 60% CPU utilization tax?  Another solution is to IDS inspect only the things you care about.  Why IDS inspect SSL traffic if you know your solution can't unencrypt SSL.  Its just a waste of compute cycles isnt it?  Policy based switching helps you with directing only the things you care about to an IDS (attack visualization product).  Montego's HyperSwitch also can help you with the traffic redirection of only the things you care about.

Another method of visibility which I tend to be a fan of is one of packet analysis (aka NetFlow).  NetFlow was invented by Cisco some time ago and has gained popularity in the physical world and definately has a use in the virtual world.  NetFlow is lightweight.  Let me say that again, its light weight!  It only sends a summation of packet detail to an analytical engine which can do some number crunching, packet comparison, etc. etc. to make some sense out of whats going on.  Lancope, an Atlanta based visibility company that provides Network Visibility, Security Visibility and User Visibility has this tool on their website that is a Netflow Bandwidth calculator.  You'll see from playing with this ( http://www.lancope.com/netflowcalculator.aspx ) calculator that it doesn't consume a lot of network bandwidth to transmit these network accounting records.  It also doesn't cause a lot of CPU overhead to send these records to an analytical engine sitting somewhere in the network.

Lancope's analytical engines have the ability to do the following for you within your virtual environment:

<p><p>Slide 3</p></p> 
  1. ???Monitor and Alert network behavior of VMs
  2. ???Track Vmotion movement of VMs accross physical servers
  3. ???Monitor and Alert on communication between VMs
  4. ???Identify users accessing VMs
  5. ???Identify unauthorized or rouge VMs
  6. ???Monitor and Alert when VM???s go online or offline
  7. ???Identify network services running on VMs
  8. ???Monitor Network / Application performance of VMs
    Display active hosts accessing VMs

...and probably a slew of other things I'm not aware of.  A screen shot of their product is bellow:

Lancopescreen <- Click to enlarge

You'll notice from the screenshot that you are able to visualize who is talking to who, how much traffic they have sent and received and something called a concern index (not seen on this screenshot).

Now, a concern index is a number that increases as Lancopes analytical engines monitor suspicious activity on a session.  A high counter can be indicative of a security problem.  Its another way of identifying (visualizing) compromised hosts (virtual machines) without having to do signature matching like a heavy weight IPS engine.  Example:  Lets say you have a VM that has a BOT on it and is "owned".  The Lancope product is monitoring this long life session.  Let's say that session is established for several hours or maybe even days or months.  Lets also say that the conversation appears to be mostly unidirectional from a public ip address not belonging to your enterprise.  Lancope would increase a the concern index on this since this server hasn't typically had this type of behavior.  Once the concern index reached a certain level it could then fire off an email, send you a text message or something saying:  Warning, Warning, Danger, Danger Will Robinson!!! You're virtual server may be infected with a BOT, please investigate immediately!!!

This example is VISIBILITY which helps you with SECURITY.  There are a number of other things you can do with NetFlow and Lancope products that have less to do with security and more to do with operational efficiencies.  Things like, helping you answer questions of:  How do I know what network applications are taking up the most bandwidth?  When should I move those applications over to a server with more horsepower?  When did these VM's vmotion over here and was there a traffic condition / CPU condition that caused that to occur?  I could go on and on but thats a topic for another blog entry.

So, my suggestion is to take a look at what NetFlow has to offer.  Montego Networks supports NetFlow transmission and Lancope supports NetFlow analytics and with both you can regain what was lost visibility.

I hope this was helpful to you all!

-John Peterson

]]> Wed, 30 Jul 2008 17:57:06 +0000 network network visibility visibility environments virtual environments network security network bandwidth bandwidth virtual Security Through Visibility - Montego, Lancope and NetFlow <![CDATA[Dissecting a Managed Spamming Service]]> http://securityratty.com/article/a86a7c12b2395b3c5ee8667c3a4d13e0 http://securityratty.com/article/a86a7c12b2395b3c5ee8667c3a4d13e0 With cybercrime getting easier to outsource these days, and with the overall underground economy's natural maturity from products to services, "managed spamming appliances" and managed spamming services are becoming rather common. Increasingly, these "vendors" are starting to "vertically integrate", namely, start diversifying the portfolio of services they offer in order to steal market share from other "vendors" offering related services like, email database cleaning, segmentation of email databases, email servers or botnets whose hosts have a pre-checked and relatively clean IP reputation, namely they're not blacklisted yet.

How much does it cost to send 1 million spam emails these days? According to a random spamming service, $100 excluding the discounts based on the speed of sending desired, namely 10-20 per second or 20-30 per second. Let's dissect the service, and emphasize on its key differentiation factors, as well as the customerization offered in the form of a dedicated server if the customer would like to send billions of emails :

"-- High quality and percentage of spam delivery 
-- Fast speed of delivery
-- Spam database on behalf of the vendor, or using your own database of harvested emails
-- Easily obtainable and segmented spam databases on per country basis
-- Randomization of the spam email's body and headers in order to achieve a higher delivery rate
-- Support for attachments, executables, and image files

The cost - $100 for a million for letters delivered spam, with the large volume of spam discounts 20% -30% -40% based on the value-added Do-it-yourself customer interfare based on a multi-user botnet command and control interface :
 
-- Automatic RBL verification
-- Support for many subjects, headers,
-- Total customization of the email sending process
-- Autogenerating junk content next to the spammers email/link in order to bypass filtering
-- Faking Outlook Message ID / Boundary / Content-ID
-- Interface added. Now do not necessarily understand all the features into the system to start the list.
-- Convenient management tasks.
-- A high percentage of punching, on the basis of good europe - 40-60% (For the United States - less because there aol and others).
-- Improved metrics, whether or not the emails have been sent, lost, unknown receipt, or have been RBL-ed

With the weight of a billion - even discounts and the possibility of making a personal server. "

Rather surprising, they state that European email users have a higher probability of receiving the spam message compared the U.S due to AOL. What they're actually trying to say is due to AOL's use of Domain Keys Identified Mail (DKIM). As far as localization of the spam to the email owner's native language is concerned, this segmentation concept has been take place for over an year now.

This service, like the majority of others rely entirely on malware infected hosts, which due to the multi-user nature of most of the malware command and control interfaces, allows them to easily add customers and set their privileges based on the type of service that they purchase. This leaves a countless number of opportunities for targeted spamming, and yes, spear phishing attacks made possible due to the segmentation of the emails based on a country, city, even company.

In the long term, the people behind spamming providers, web malware exploitation kits and DIY phishing kits, will inevitably start introducing built-in features which were once available through third-party services. For instance, hosting infrastructure for the spam/phishing/live exploit URLs, or even managed fast-flux infrastructure, have the potential to become widely available if such optional features get built-in phishing kits, or start getting offered by the spamming provider itself. And since the affiliate based model seems to be working just fine, the ongoing underground consolidation will converge providers of different underground goods and services, where everyone would be driving customers to one another's services and earning revenue in the process.
]]> Wed, 30 Jul 2008 01:32:44 +0000 spam spam message spam discounts spam database spam databases spam email email emails based email servers Dissecting a Managed Spamming Service <![CDATA[Links List 7.25.08]]> http://securityratty.com/article/630a1fc26c11310563527f51eaebf464 http://securityratty.com/article/630a1fc26c11310563527f51eaebf464 The Wall Street Journal reports that the military is taking “Tech Lessons”. It seems that over the last few years, the DISA CIO has been visiting different tech companies to learn about cutting-edge technologies that might be able to help soldiers in the battlefield. CIO Garing identified social networks and mashups as great technologies for smaller projects with potentially more immediate impact than the traditional years-long IT projects of the past. He should check out NAPA and the Collaboration Project [link to Dan Munz Q&A] which highlights just how government agencies and orgs are already doing what he’s talking about.

Just what I was waiting for, open source takes on cloud computing. :)

We had a very interesting call this week with analyst firm, The 451 Group, about the cloud and who is really doing what in this space now. Trying to separate the hype from reality, just like everyone else.

After a disappointing (to analysts and the street) financial analyst call on Tuesday, VMware’s stock reached an all time low, almost back to the IPO stage. In a follow-up interview, Forbes asked the new CEO what he thinks about the stock price, the analysts saying VMware doesn’t have a solid or innovative growth plan for the future, and whether VMware should be part of EMC or not (their backhand way of bringing up the whole Diane Greene thing…he didn’t fall for it). 

Wait for it…wait for it…we have been waiting for it. VMware announced plans to launch a free version of its ESXI hypervisor starting July 28. I have to question the timing on this one. Why didn’t they do this before Hyper-v came out and try to at least undercut the Microsoft announcement? VMware is and should be the leader in this space but they act like they’re playing from behind. And to Wall Street, perception counts for a lot.

Surprisingly, there hasn’t been a lot of coverage after the June 2008 OMB mandate on IPv6 readiness. But one interesting follow-up, a feature is set to be added to IPv6 which the upgrade was supposed to eliminate. One of the design goals for IPv6 was that it would rid the Internet of network address translation (NAT), gateways that match increasingly scarce public IPv4 addresses with private IPv4 addresses used inside corporations, government agencies and other organizations.  NAT adds complexity and cost, but due to the length of time it’s taken to migrate from IPv4 to IPv6, engineers may create special NAT devices to translate between IPv4-only and IPv6-only hosts and hopefully nudge along the transition to IPv6. IEEE is all set to meet on this topic later this month.

ShareThis

]]> Fri, 25 Jul 2008 08:28:47 +0000 ipv6-only hosts ipv6 ipv6 readiness nat special nat devices financial analyst call government agencies ipv4 addresses ipv4 Links List 7.25.08 <![CDATA[Money Mule Recruiters use ASProx's Fast Fluxing Services]]> http://securityratty.com/article/56322fa6d09fc3127cbaf772115cd182 http://securityratty.com/article/56322fa6d09fc3127cbaf772115cd182 Just consider this scheme for a second. A well known money mule recruitment site Cash Transfers is maintaining a fast-flux infrastructure on behalf of the Asprox botnet, that is also providing hosting services for several hundred domains used on the last wave of SQL injection attacks. Ironically, the money mule recruitment site is sharing IPs with many of them. Who are these money launderers (cashtransfers.tk; cashtransfers.eu; type53.eu; sid57.tk; catdbw.mobi; cdrpoex.com etc.  ) anyway?

"Cash-Transfers Inc. is an online-to-offline international money transfer service. We offer a secure, fast, and inexpensive means of sending money from the UK to offline recipients worldwide. Recipients do not require a bank account or Internet connection to receive funds. We have teamed with select local disbursement partners to provide a convenient, secure, and cost-effective means of sending money to family, friends and business partners abroad. The basic requirements to send money/transfer money are:

1) Senders must have Internet access and a bank account or credit/debit card to transfer money. However, recipients do not require either a bank account or Internet connection.

2) Money sent through Cash-Transfers Inc. is available for pick up at the distribution partner instantly, or, in most countries, money can be delivered to the recipient in a matter of hours.

3) Our local agents will call your recipient (during local business hours) to provide additional details, including: forms of identification required, hours of operation, and other locations. The sender will also receive an email confirmation with transaction details and tracking information."

The fast-flux infrastructure they're currently using is also providing services to domains that are currently used, or have been used in previous SQL injection attacks. Some info on the current DNS servers used in the fast-flux :

ns10.cashtransfers.tk
ns11.cashtransfers.tk
ns1.cashtransfers.tk
ns12.cashtransfers.tk
ns2.cashtransfers.tk
ns13.cashtransfers.tk
ns3.cashtransfers.tk
ns14.cashtransfers.tk
ns4.cashtransfers.tk
ns15.cashtransfers.tk
ns5.cashtransfers.tk
ns16.cashtransfers.tk
ns6.cashtransfers.tk
ns17.cashtransfers.tk
ns7.cashtransfers.tk
ns8.cashtransfers.tk

With the distributed and dynamic hosting infrastructure courtesy of the malware infected user, scammers, spammers, phishers and malware authors are only starting to experiment with the potential abuses of such an underground ecosystem build on the foundations of compromises hosts.

Related posts:
Storm Worm's Fast Flux Networks
Managed Fast Flux Provider
Fast Flux Spam and Scams Increasing
Fast Fluxing Yet Another Pharmacy Spam
Obfuscating Fast Fluxed SQL Injected Domains
Storm Worm Hosting Pharmaceutical Scams
Fast-Fluxing SQL injection attacks executed from the Asprox botnet
]]> Fri, 18 Jul 2008 02:23:49 +0000 fast fast flux networks money fast-flux cashtransfers fast flux provider fast flux spam transfer money fast-flux infrastructure Money Mule Recruiters use ASProx's Fast Fluxing Services