Daily Archives: January 8, 2021

Weekly Update 225

Weekly Update 225

And we're finally home. After 8,441km of driving finished off by a comfy flight home whilst the car catches a ride on a carrier, we're done. I talk about why we didn't finish the drive in the latter part of this week's video (basically boiled down to border uncertainties due to COVID outbreaks), but we still did all the big things we'd hoped for on this holiday. And now that we're firmly home again, it's back to business as usual with more breaches, more IoT and despite it being an all-new year, more of all the same stuff. Enjoy ūüôā

Weekly Update 225
Weekly Update 225
Weekly Update 225
Weekly Update 225

References

  1. I ordered a LaMetric as soon as I wrapped up this video (should be a cool little IoT addition to my office)
  2. I'm getting pretty excited about the Prusa 3D printer that's on its way (this is a great vid if you're unfamiliar with their story)
  3. A bunch of really sensitive info has been breached relating to Tasmanian ambulance callouts ("the private details of every Tasmanian who has called an ambulance since November last year have been published online")
  4. Ho Mobile in Italy had 2.5M customer records breached (the data is up for sale for the express purpose of hijacking victims' phone numbers via SIM swapping)
  5. I'm still doing guitar lessons (I hate this obnoxious behaviour, but I love the way people responded in the live stream ūüėä)
  6. Sponsored by: Credential stuffing is currently the biggest threat to organisations, find out how you can protect your network right now with safepass.me

APT Horoscope

This delightful essay matches APT hacker groups up with astrological signs. This is me:

Capricorn is renowned for its discipline, skilled navigation, and steadfastness. Just like Capricorn, Helix Kitten (also known as APT 35 or OilRig) is a skilled navigator of vast online networks, maneuvering deftly across an array of organizations, including those in aerospace, energy, finance, government, hospitality, and telecommunications. Steadfast in its work and objectives, Helix Kitten has a consistent track record of developing meticulous spear-phishing attacks.

ALERT: North Korean hackers targeting South Korea with RokRat Trojan

A North Korean hacking group has been found deploying the RokRat Trojan in a new spear-phishing campaign targeting the South Korean government. Attributing the attack to APT37 (aka Starcruft, Ricochet Chollima, or Reaper), Malwarebytes said it identified a malicious document last December that, when opened, executes a macro in memory to install the aforementioned remote access tool (RAT). "The

New Attack Could Let Hackers Clone Your Google Titan 2FA Security Keys

Hardware security keys‚ÄĒsuch as those from Google and Yubico‚ÄĒare considered the most secure means to protect accounts from phishing and takeover attacks. But a new research published on Thursday demonstrates how an adversary in possession of such a two-factor authentication (2FA) device can clone it by exploiting an electromagnetic side-channel in the chip embedded in it. The vulnerability (

WhatsApp Will Disable Your Account If You Don’t Agree Sharing Data With Facebook

"Respect for your privacy is coded into our DNA," opens WhatsApp's privacy policy. "Since we started WhatsApp, we've aspired to build our Services with a set of strong privacy principles in mind." But come February 8, 2021, this opening statement will no longer find a place in the policy. The Facebook-owned messaging service is alerting users in India of an update to its terms of service and 

A Sysmon Event ID Breakdown

Jordan Drysdale // tl;dr This blog is being provided to demonstrate the capabilities of Sysmon logging broken down by event ID. The IDs will be captured in context and matched to their sysmon-modular configuration section for tuning opportunities.  Please allow me a shout out here to the author of the sysmon-modular repository on Github. Olaf […]

The post A Sysmon Event ID Breakdown appeared first on Black Hills Information Security.

Russia’s SolarWinds Attack and Software Security

The information that is emerging about Russia’s extensive cyberintelligence operation against the United States and other countries should be increasingly alarming to the public. The magnitude of the hacking, now believed to have affected more than 250 federal agencies and businesses — ¬≠primarily through a malicious update of the SolarWinds network management software — ¬≠may have slipped under most people’s radar during the holiday season, but its implications are stunning.

According to a Washington Post report, this is a massive intelligence coup by Russia’s foreign intelligence service (SVR). And a massive security failure on the part of the United States is also to blame. Our insecure Internet infrastructure has become a critical national security risk¬≠ — one that we need to take seriously and spend money to reduce.

President-elect Joe Biden’s initial response spoke of retaliation, but there really isn’t much the United States can do beyond what it already does. Cyberespionage is business as usual among countries and governments, and the United States is aggressively offensive in this regard. We benefit from the lack of norms in this area and are unlikely to push back too hard because we don’t want to limit our own offensive actions.

Biden took a more realistic tone last week when he spoke of the need to improve US defenses. The initial focus will likely be on how to clean the hackers out of our networks, why the National Security Agency and US Cyber Command failed to detect this intrusion and whether the 2-year-old Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency has the resources necessary to defend the United States against attacks of this caliber. These are important discussions to have, but we also need to address the economic incentives that led to SolarWinds being breached and how that insecure software ended up in so many critical US government networks.

Software has become incredibly complicated. Most of us almost don’t know all of the software running on our laptops and what it’s doing. We don’t know where it’s connecting to on the Internet¬≠ — not even which countries it’s connecting to¬≠ — and what data it’s sending. We typically don’t know what third party libraries are in the software we install. We don’t know what software any of our cloud services are running. And we’re rarely alone in our ignorance. Finding all of this out is incredibly difficult.

This is even more true for software that runs our large government networks, or even the Internet backbone. Government software comes from large companies, small suppliers, open source projects and everything in between. Obscure software packages can have hidden vulnerabilities that affect the security of these networks, and sometimes the entire Internet. Russia’s SVR leveraged one of those vulnerabilities when it gained access to SolarWinds’ update server, tricking thousands of customers into downloading a malicious software update that gave the Russians access to those networks.

The fundamental problem is one of economic incentives. The market rewards quick development of products. It rewards new features. It rewards spying on customers and users: collecting and selling individual data. The market does not reward security, safety or transparency. It doesn’t reward reliability past a bare minimum, and it doesn’t reward resilience at all.

This is what happened at SolarWinds. A New York Times report noted the company ignored basic security practices. It moved software development to Eastern Europe, where Russia has more influence and could potentially subvert programmers, because it’s cheaper.

Short-term profit was seemingly prioritized over product security.

Companies have the right to make decisions like this. The real question is why the US government bought such shoddy software for its critical networks. This is a problem that Biden can fix, and he needs to do so immediately.

The United States needs to improve government software procurement. Software is now critical to national security. Any system for acquiring software needs to evaluate the security of the software and the security practices of the company, in detail, to ensure they are sufficient to meet the security needs of the network they’re being installed in. Procurement contracts need to include security controls of the software development process. They need security attestations on the part of the vendors, with substantial penalties for misrepresentation or failure to comply. The government needs detailed best practices for government and other companies.

Some of the groundwork for an approach like this has already been laid by the federal government, which has sponsored the development of a “Software Bill of Materials” that would set out a process for software makers to identify the components used to assemble their software.

This scrutiny can’t end with purchase. These security requirements need to be monitored throughout the software’s life cycle, along with what software is being used in government networks.

None of this is cheap, and we should be prepared to pay substantially more for secure software. But there’s a benefit to these practices. If the government evaluations are public, along with the list of companies that meet them, all network buyers can benefit from them. The US government acting purely in the realm of procurement can improve the security of nongovernmental networks worldwide.

This is important, but it isn’t enough. We need to set minimum safety and security standards for all software: from the code in that Internet of Things appliance you just bought to the code running our critical national infrastructure. It’s all one network, and a vulnerability in your refrigerator’s software can be used to attack the national power grid.

The IOT Cybersecurity Improvement Act, signed into law last month, is a start in this direction.

The Biden administration should prioritize minimum security standards for all software sold in the United States, not just to the government but to everyone. Long gone are the days when we can let the software industry decide how much emphasis to place on security. Software security is now a matter of personal safety: whether it’s ensuring your car isn’t hacked over the Internet or that the national power grid isn’t hacked by the Russians.

This regulation is the only way to force companies to provide safety and security features for customers — just as legislation was necessary to mandate food safety measures and require auto manufacturers to install life-saving features such as seat belts and air bags. Smart regulations that incentivize innovation create a market for security features. And they improve security for everyone.

It’s true that creating software in this sort of regulatory environment is more expensive. But if we truly value our personal and national security, we need to be prepared to pay for it.

The truth is that we’re already paying for it. Today, software companies increase their profits by secretly pushing risk onto their customers. We pay the cost of insecure personal computers, just as the government is now paying the cost to clean up after the SolarWinds hack. Fixing this requires both transparency and regulation. And while the industry will resist both, they are essential for national security in our increasingly computer-dependent worlds.

This essay previously appeared on CNN.com.

How Does Your AD Password Policy Compare to NIST’s Password Recommendations?

End-user passwords are one of the weakest components of your overall security protocols. Most users tend to reuse passwords across work and personal accounts. They may also choose relatively weak passwords that satisfy company password policies but can be easily guessed or brute-forced. Your users may also inadvertently use breached passwords for their corporate account password. The National