Phishing attacks continue to play a dominant role in the digital threat landscape. In its 2020 Data Breach Investigations Report (DBIR), for instance, Verizon Enterprise found that phishing was the second topmost threat action variety in security incidents and the topmost threat action variety in data breaches. It therefore comes as no surprise that more […]… Read More
The post 6 Common Phishing Attacks and How to Protect Against Them appeared first on The State of Security.
Cybercriminals are targeting vulnerabilities created by the pandemic-driven worldwide transition to remote work, according to Secureworks. The report is based on hundreds of incidents the company’s IR team has responded to since the start of the pandemic. Threat level is unchanged While initial news reports predicted a sharp uptick in cyber threats after the pandemic took hold, data on confirmed security incidents and genuine threats to customers show the threat level is largely unchanged. Instead, … More
The post Is poor cyber hygiene crippling your security program? appeared first on Help Net Security.
75% of all 56 U.S. states and territories leading up to the presidential election, showed signs of a vulnerable IT infrastructure, a SecurityScorecard report reveals. Since most state websites offer access to voter and election information, these findings may indicate unforeseen issues leading up to, and following, the US election. Election infrastructure: High-level findings Seventy-five percent of U.S. states and territories’ overall cyberhealth are rated a ‘C’ or below; 35% have a ‘D’ and below. … More
The post Most US states show signs of a vulnerable election-related infrastructure appeared first on Help Net Security.
Google delivered over 33,000 alerts to its users during the first three quarters of 2020 to warn them of attacks from nation-state actors.
Google delivered 33,015 alerts to its users during the first three quarters of 2020 to warn them of phishing attacks, launched by nation-state actors, targeting their accounts.
Google sent 11,856 government-backed phishing warnings during Q1 2020, 11,023 in Q2 2020, and 10,136 in Q3 2020.
Shane Huntley, Director at Google’s Threat Analysis Group (TAG), revealed that her team has shared its findings with the campaigns and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
The trend in the nation-state attacks is consistent with what others have subsequently reported.
“Overall, we’ve seen increased attention on the threats posed by APTs in the context of the U.S. election. U.S government agencies have warned about different threat actors, and we’ve worked closely with those agencies and others in the tech industry to share leads and intelligence about what we’re seeing across the ecosystem.” reads the report published by Google TAG.
Since last summer, TAG team has tracked a large spam network linked to China that is running an influence operation on multiple platforms, primarily on YouTube. The threat actor behind this campaign was primarily acquiring or hijacking existing accounts and using them to spread content crafted for their intent.
According to Google, the alerts are shown to up to 0.1% of all Gmail accounts. The company’s alert advises Gmail users to take several measures to secure their accounts, such as enrolling in the Advanced Protection Program, keeping software up to date, enabling Gmail 2-step verification, as well as using Google Authenticator and/or a physical security key for 2-step verification.
As the course of the COVID-19 pandemic evolves, Google experts warn of threat actors evolving their tactics as well. During the last summer, Google observed threat actors from China, Russia, and Iran targeting pharmaceutical companies and researchers involved in the development of a vaccine.
In September, Google experts started to observe attacks carried out by multiple North Korea-linked APT groups aimed at COVID-19 researchers and pharmaceutical companies, especially those based in South Korea.
This week, the Google Cloud team revealed that in September 2017 it has mitigated DDoS attack that reached 2.54 Tbps, the largest DDoS attack of ever.
This attack is the largest DDoS attack recorded to date and according to a report published by the Google Threat Threat Analysis Group (TAG) it was carried out by a state-sponsored threat actor.
(SecurityAffairs – hacking, Google TAG)
Mandiant Threat Intelligence recently promoted a threat cluster to a named FIN (or financially motivated) threat group for the first time since 2017. We have detailed FIN11's various tactics, techniques and procedures in a report that is available now by signing up for Mandiant Advantage Free.
In some ways, FIN11 is reminiscent of APT1; they are notable not for their sophistication, but for their sheer volume of activity. There are significant gaps in FIN11’s phishing operations, but when active, the group conducts up to five high-volume campaigns a week. While many financially motivated threat groups are short lived, FIN11 has been conducting these widespread phishing campaigns since at least 2016. From 2017 through 2018, the threat group primarily targeted organizations in the financial, retail, and hospitality sectors. However, in 2019 FIN11’s targeting expanded to include a diverse set of sectors and geographic regions. At this point, it would be difficult to name a client that FIN11 hasn’t targeted.
Mandiant has also responded to numerous FIN11 intrusions, but we’ve only observed the group successfully monetize access in few instances. This could suggest that the actors cast a wide net during their phishing operations, then choose which victims to further exploit based on characteristics such as sector, geolocation or perceived security posture. Recently, FIN11 has deployed CLOP ransomware and threatened to publish exfiltrated data to pressure victims into paying ransom demands. The group’s shifting monetization methods—from point-of-sale (POS) malware in 2018, to ransomware in 2019, and hybrid extortion in 2020—is part of a larger trend in which criminal actors have increasingly focused on post-compromise ransomware deployment and data theft extortion.
Notably, FIN11 includes a subset of the activity security researchers call TA505, but we do not attribute TA505’s early operations to FIN11 and caution against using the names interchangeably. Attribution of both historic TA505 activity and more recent FIN11 activity is complicated by the actors’ use of criminal service providers. Like most financially motivated actors, FIN11 doesn’t operate in a vacuum. We believe that the group has used services that provide anonymous domain registration, bulletproof hosting, code signing certificates, and private or semi-private malware. Outsourcing work to these criminal service providers likely enables FIN11 to increase the scale and sophistication of their operations.
To learn more about FIN11’s evolving delivery tactics, use of services, post-compromise TTPs, and monetization methods, register for Mandiant Advantage Free. The full FIN11 report is also available through our FireEye Intelligence Portal (FIP). Then for even more information, register for our exclusive webinar on Oct. 29 where Mandiant threat intelligence experts will take a deeper dive into FIN11, including its origins, tactics, and potential for future activity.
As the world of AI and deepfake technology grows more complex, the risk that deepfakes pose to firms and individuals grows increasingly potent. This growing sophistication of the latest software and algorithms has allowed malicious hackers, scammers and cyber criminals who work tirelessly behind the scenes to stay one step ahead of the authorities, making […]… Read More
The post Deepfake Voice Technology Iterates on Old Phishing Strategies appeared first on The State of Security.
Dealing with the aftermath of ransomware attacks is like Russian roulette. Submitting the ransom might seem like it’s the sole option for recovering locked data. But paying the ransom doesn’t mean that your organization will get its affected data back. Let’s not forget that ransomware also continues to evolve as a threat category. Beginning in […]… Read More
Phishing has been around for ages and continues to be one of the most common threats that businesses and home users face today. But it’s not like we haven’t all been hearing about the dangers of phishing for years. So why do people still click?
That’s what we wanted to find out when we conducted our most recent survey. We checked in with thousands of office workers across seven different countries to get a global perspective on phishing and people’s individual click habits. Then we partnered with Dr. Prashanth Rajivan, assistant professor at the University of Washington, to gain a deeper understanding of phishing and those habits, as well as how things have shifted during COVID-19 in our new report: COVID-19 Clicks: How Phishing Capitalized on a Global Crisis.
In this blog post, we’ve summarized this comprehensive report and included tips for how to stay safe, but we strongly encourage you to check out the full writeup.
Why do people still click?
3 in 10 people worldwide clicked a phishing link in the past year. Among Americans, it’s 1 in 3.
According to Dr. Rajivan, what we need to consider is that human beings aren’t necessarily good at dealing with uncertainty, which is part of why cybercriminals capitalize on upheaval (such as a global pandemic) to launch attacks.
“People aren’t great at handling uncertainty. Even those of us who know we shouldn’t click on emails from unknown senders may feel uncertain and click anyway. That’s because we’ve likely all clicked these kinds of emails in the past and gotten a positive reward. The probability of long-term risk vs. short-term reward, coupled with uncertainty, is a recipe for poor decision-making, or, in this case, clicking what you shouldn’t.”– Prashanth Rajivan, Ph.D.
Tip # 1
- For businesses: Ensure workers have clear distinctions between work and personal time, devices, and obligations. This helps reduce the amount of uncertainty that can ultimately lead to phishing-related breaches.
- For individuals: Hackers often exploit security holes in older software versions and operating systems. Update software and systems regularly to help shut the door on malware.
Has phishing increased since COVID-19 began
At least one in five people have received a phishing email related to COVID-19.
There’s no doubt that the global COVID-19 pandemic has changed a lot about how we live and work. According to our survey, 54% of workers spend more time working from home than they did before the pandemic. With more people connecting to the internet outside of corporate networks and away from the watchful eyes of IT teams, it’s to be expected that cybercriminals would take advantage.
“[We’ve seen] massive spikes […] in phishing URLs targeting COVID-related topics. For example, with more people spending time at home, use of streaming services has gone up. In March alone, we saw a 3000% increase in phishing URLs with ‘youtube’ in the name.– Grayson Milbourne, security intelligence director, Carbonite + Webroot, OpenText Companies
Regardless, the majority of people surveyed still think they are at least the same level of prepared or more prepared to spot phishing email attempts, now that they’ve spent more time working from home
“People are taking increased physical safety measures in the pandemic, including mask wearing, social distancing, more frequent hand-washing, etc. I think this heightened level of precaution and awareness could cause people to slightly overestimate their overall safety, including their safety regarding online threats.”– Prashanth Rajivan, Ph.D.
- For businesses: Know your risk factors and over prepare. Once you’ve assessed the risks, you can create a stronger data breach response plan.
- For individuals: Stay on your toes. By being vigilant and maintaining a healthy dose of suspicion about all links and attachments in messages, you can significantly decrease your phishing risk.
People say they know better. Do they really?
81% of people say they take steps to determine if an email message is malicious. Yet 76% open emails and click links from unknown senders.
When we asked Dr. Rajivan why these numbers don’t line up, he said the difference is between knowing what you should do and actually doing it
“There are huge differences between knowing what to do and actually operationalizing that knowledge in appropriate scenarios. I suspect many people don’t really take the actions they reported, at least not on a regular basis, when they receive suspicious emails.”– Prashanth Rajivan, Ph.D.
- For businesses: Back up data and ensure employees can access and retrieve data no matter where they are. Accidents happen; what matters most is being able to recover quickly and effectively. Don’t forget to back up collaboration tools too, such as Microsoft® Teams and the Microsoft® 365 suite.
- For individuals: Make sure important data and files are backed up to secure cloud storage or an external hard drive. In the case of a hard drive, make sure it’s only connected while backing up, so you don’t risk backing up infected or encrypted files. If it’s a cloud back up, use the kind that lets you to restore to a specific file version or point in time.
What’s the way forward?
All over the world, workers say that in order to be better prepared to handle cyberattacks, they need more education.
According to global respondents, more knowledge and better understanding is key for stronger cyber resilience. The top three things people everywhere said would help them better prepare themselves to handle cyber threats like phishing were: knowing which tools could help prevent an attack, knowing what to do if you fall victim to an attack, and understanding the most common types of attacks.
Dr. Rajivan points out that, if businesses are asking individuals to make changes to their own behavior for the greater safety of all, then they need to make it clear they are willing to invest in their people.
“By creating a feeling of personal investment in the individuals who make up a company, you encourage the employees to return that feeling of investment toward their workplace. That’s a huge part of ensuring that cybersecurity is part of the culture. Additionally, if we want to enable employees to assess risk properly, we need to cut down on uncertainty and blurring of context lines. That means both educating employees and ensuring we take steps to minimize the ways in which work and personal life get intertwined.”– Prashanth Rajivan, Ph.D.
- For businesses: Invest in your people. Empower your people with regular training to help them successfully avoid scams and exercise appropriate caution online.
- For individuals: Educate yourself. Even if your company provides training, Dr. Rajivan recommends we all subscribe to cybersecurity-related content in the form of podcasts, social media, blogs, and reputable information sources to help keep strong, cyber resilient behavior top-of-mind.
Want more details on click habits and shifting risks during COVID-19?
Read our full report, COVID-19 Clicks: How Phishing Capitalized on a Global Crisis, to start building out your cybersecurity education today. And be sure to check back here on the Webroot blog for the latest in news in phishing prevention.
The post Unexpected Side Effects: How COVID-19 Affected our Click Habits appeared first on Webroot Blog.
Phishing scams are among the most common and dangerous type of attack that organisations face.
Indeed, Verizon’s Data Breach Digest found that 90% of all data breaches involve phishing.
But what makes these attacks so successful? An Osterman Research report suggests there are six causes of phishing.
1. Users are the weakest link
Even if most of us think we would be able to spot a phishing scam when we receive one, it only takes a momentary lapse in judgement for us to fall victim.
The panic one experience when they receive a message claiming that, for example, there has been suspicious activity on the recipient’s account will in many cases cause people to overlook signs that the message is malicious.
But by that point it’s too late, with the victim already clicking links, opening attachments and handing over their username and password.
The good news is this is a weakness that organisations and individuals have the power to address. All they have to do learn about the way phishing works and the clues to look out for.
Unfortunately, most users don’t receive the necessary training. Indeed, researchers have found that 52% of users receive training no more than twice per year, and 6% of users have never received security awareness training.
The result? IT departments are not at all confident in their users’ ability to recognise incoming threats, or in their organisation’s ability to stop phishing campaigns and related attacks.
2. Organisations aren’t doing enough
Staff awareness training isn’t the only step that organisations can take to better protect themselves from phishing scams.
The report highlights three key areas of weakness:
- Insufficient backup processes
In the event of a ransomware attack, most organisations have insufficient backup processes. This leaves them unable to quickly restore content on servers, user workstations and other endpoints to a healthy state.
- Lack of user testing
Most organisations do not have adequate procedures in place to test their users, leaving them unable to determine which staff members are the most susceptible to an attack.
Conducting a simulated phishing attack can help you establish whether your employees are vulnerable to phishing emails, enabling you to take immediate remedial action to improve your cyber security posture.
- BYOD security risks
Many organisations lack a BYOD (Bring Your Own Device) policy, meaning that, should a cyber criminal compromise an employee’s device, they will be able to gain access to sensitive data not only on that device but to leverage their access across the network.
3. Criminal organisations are well funded
The massive success that cyber criminals have had in recent years means they have plenty of funds to invest in scams.
As such, they can invest in technical resources to root out make their scams run more efficiently – whether that’s in the number of scams they can send, the authenticity of their bogus messages or the complexity of their campaigns.
It’s also enabled cyber criminals to branch out into new attack vectors. For example, there has been a significant increase in social media in recent years.
This is particularly dangerous, because most advice about phishing relates to email-based scams – or, occasionally, to phone scams (‘vishing’). People are therefore less likely to spot the techniques that fraudsters use on social media.
4. Cyber criminals are shifting their focus
The availability of stolen data on the dark web has decreased its commercial value.
Scammers can now buy payment card data on the dark web for as little as $9 (about £6.80), so there’s less profit to be had for those stealing and selling this information.
In response, cyber criminals have changed tactics, looking to make money through organisations directly thanks to ransomware attacks.
These types of attack are no more complicated for a cyber criminal to pull off, but the rewards can be much greater.
Although experts warn organisations not to pay ransoms, it’s certainly tempting to wire transfer a lump sum in the hopes that you’ll get your systems back online rather than face the headaches that come with incident response.
5. Phishing tools are low-cost and widespread
There are an increasing number of tools that are designed to help amateurs with little IT knowledge get into the cyber crime industry.
The availability of phishing kits and the rise of ransomware-as-a-service has resulted in an explosion of ransomware and other exploits coming from an ever growing network of amateur cyber criminals.
6. Malware is becoming more sophisticated
Over time, phishing and various types of malware have become more sophisticated.
The problems of phishing, spear-phishing, CEO fraud, business email compromise and ransomware are simply going to get worse without appropriate solutions and processes to defend against them.
Protect your organisation against phishing
Educated and informed employees are your first line of defence. Empower them to make better security decisions with our complete staff awareness e-learning suite.
A cost-effective way of managing all your staff awareness training in one place, the complete suite contains eight e-learning courses to help you transform your employees from threats to assets.
A version of this blog was originally published on 27 March 2017.
The post Phishing attacks: 6 reasons why we keep taking the bait appeared first on IT Governance UK Blog.
Taking security training courses and passing certification exams are common ingredients in the makeup of the vast majority of accomplished cybersecurity and information security professionals. As such, two security incidents last month raised more than just a surprising eyebrow or two within the UK security industry.
The first involved the renown and well respected United States security training company, The SANS Institue, announcing that a successful email phishing attack against one of its employees resulted in 28,000 personal records being stolen. SANS classified this compromise as "consent phishing", namely where an employee is tricked into providing malicious Microsoft Office 365 OAuth applications access to their O365 accounts. In June 2020, Microsoft warned 'consent phishing' scams were targeting remote workers and their cloud services.
The second incident involved British cybersecurity firm NCC Group, after The Register reported NCC marked CREST penetration testing certification exam 'cheat cheats' were posted on Github. El Reg stated the leaked NCC marked document "offered step-by-step guides and walkthroughs of information about the Crest exams. With those who posted the documents claiming that the documents contained a clone of the Crest CRT exam app that helped users to pass the CRT exam in the first attempt." CREST, a globally recognised provider of penetration testing accreditations, conducted their own investigation into the Github post and then suspended their Certified Infrastructure Tester (CCF Inf) and Certified Web Application Tester (CCT App) exams.
Reuters reported British trade minister Liam Fox email account was compromised by Russian hackers through a spear-phishing attack. This led to leaks of sensitive US-UK trade documents in a disinformation campaign designed to influence the outcome of the UK general election in late 2019.
UK foreign exchange firm Travelex is still revelling from the double 2020 whammy of major ransomware outbreak followed by the impact COVID-19, and has managed to stay in business thanks a bailout arranged by their business administrators PWC.
Uber's former Cheif Security Officer has been charged with obstruction of justice in the United States, accused of covering up a massive 57 million record data breach in 2016. Uber eventually admitted paying a hacking group $100,000 (£75,000) ransom to delete the data they had stolen.
The British Dental Association advised its dentist members that their bank account details and correspondence with them were stolen by hackers. A BDA spokeswoman told BBC News it was possible that information about patients was also exposed, but remained vague about the potential context. The cyber breach was likely caused by a hack of the BDA website given it was taken offline for a considerable amount of time after reporting the breach.
|Crime Dot Com: From Viruses to Vote Rigging, How Hacking Went Global|
- Beating the Emotet Malware with SSL Interception
- Countering Cybercrime in the Next Normal
- Book Review: Crime Dot Com, From Viruses to Vote Rigging, How Hacking Went Global
- Cyber Security Roundup for August 2020
- Securing the COVID-19 'New Normal' of Homeworking
- Security Training Firm SANS Institute Data Breach after an employee fell for ‘Consent Phishing’
- Travelex Strikes Rescue deal but 1,300 UK jobs go following the impact of Ransomware Attack & COVID 19
- Uber Ex-Security Boss Accused of Covering up Hack Attack
- Suspected Russian Hackers Stole UK Trade Minister’s Personal Emails
- Cosmetics Giant Avon Leaks 19 Million Records due to Misconfigured Cloud Server
- British Dental Association members targeted by Hackers
- Internal NCC Training Data and CREST Exam Questions Leaked on Github
- Regulators levy $80 Million Fine on Capital One for Massive Breach
- Stricken Electronics Firms Weigh Reward and Cost of Paying Cyber Ransoms
- New Zealand Stock Exchange Halted by DDoS Cyber-Attack
- Hacker Leaks Passwords For 900+ Enterprise Pulse Secure VPN Servers
- Insecure satellite Internet is Threatening Ship and Plane Safety
- Tea at the Ritz Soured by Credit Card Scammers
- NCSC departing Boss reflects on China, Russia and Trust in Tech
- British Army 'could drop tanks in favour of Cyber Capabilities', says report
- GCHQ Cyberspies Foil Get-Rich-Quick Scams
AWARENESS, EDUCATION AND THREAT INTELLIGENCE
|Attackers are taking advantage of heightened anxiety and homeworking|
It’s sad, but it’s no surprise that phishing attacks have increased due to COVID-19– and businesses need to be prepared. Attackers are taking advantage of an environment of heightened anxiety and disrupted work settings to trick people into making mistakes, and they’re unlikely to stop until at least the main wave of the pandemic has passed.
Research shows that phishing is a major security issue under normal circumstances. Egress’ recent Insider Data Breach survey found that 41% of employees who had accidentally leaked data had done so because of a phishing email. More worryingly due to their level of access to data and systems, senior personnel are typically the most likely group to fall victim to phishing attacks, with 61% of directors saying that they’d caused a breach in this way.
And education and training can only go so far. Of course, we must continue to encourage employees to be vigilant to suspicious emails and to do things like hovering over links before clicking on them. We also need to reduce blame culture and free up employees to report genuine mistakes without fear.
But this can only go so far. People will always make mistakes. The good news is that advanced technology like contextual machine learning can remediate the targeted attacks, like conversation hijacking, that usually do the most damage to businesses.
Productivity and Security
Even in our tech-savvy world, there are still organisations that don’t have VPN access set up or enough laptops, mobile devices or processes to enable home working. But while IT teams try to quickly sort this situation out, we’re seeing employees finding workarounds, for example by sharing files using FTP sites or sending data to personal devices to work on.
We talk a lot about ‘human layer security’ technologies, which find the right balance between productivity and security. Right now, as well as looking at technologies to help securely move meetings, events and other activities online, businesses should also check that usually easy routine tasks can still be carried out safely – such as sharing large files or sending sensitive data via email. In particular, technologies like contextual machine learning and AI can identify what typically ‘good’ security behaviour looks like for individual users and then prevent abnormal behaviours that put data at risk.
For example, with people working on smaller screens and via mobile devices, it’s more likely they might attach the wrong document to an email or include a wrong recipient. Contextual machine learning can spot when incidents like this are about to happen and correct the user’s behaviour to prevent a breach before it happens.
People are the new perimeter when it comes to data security – their decisions and behaviours can put data at risk every day, especially at a time of global heightened anxiety.
We know from our 2020 Insider Data Breach Survey that over half of employees don’t think their organisation has sole ownership over company data – instead believing that it is in-part or entirely owned by the individuals and teams who created it. And we also know that people are more likely to take risks with data they feel belongs to them than data they believe belongs to someone else. When they don’t have access to the right tools and technology to work securely – or they think the tools they do have will slow them down, especially at a time when the need for productivity is at its highest – they’re more likely to cut corners.
Maintaining good security practices is essential – and the good news is there are technologies on the market that can help ensure the right level of security is applied to sensitive data without blocking productivity.
Six Tips to improve Data Security while Working from Home
We can all agree that times are incredibly tough right now. For security professionals looking to mitigate some of the risks, here are six practical tips are taken from the conversations we’re having with other organisations right now:
- Look for security software that doesn’t hamper productivity. It’s generally the aim of the game anyway – but right now, employees are feeling increased pressure to prove their productivity. If you’re finding yourself selecting new solutions, it’s never been more crucial to select technologies that don’t add difficult extra steps for them or anyone they’re working with outside the organisation.
- Choose collaboration/productivity solutions that have security baked into them. The other side to the coin of the point above, really: when choosing any new solution to implement at this time, make sure that security measures are part of a product’s standard design, and not an after-thought.
- Automate security wherever possible. If it’s possible, take decisions out of end users’ hands to ensure the security of sensitive information in line with policy, reducing the risk of someone accidentally or intentionally not using security software.
- Engage employees over security best practices. Phishing is a good example of this. Some inbound risks will evade the filters on your network boundary and end up in users’ mailboxes. Effort to proactively engage employees through e-learning and other educational measures can help them to know what to do with emails they think are suspicious (for example, hovering over links before clicking on them).
- Look to AI and machine learning to help solve advanced risks. Use cases like conversation hijacking, misdirected emails or people attaching the wrong files to documents can now be mitigated by intelligent technology like contextual machine learning, which determines what “good security behaviour” looks like for each individual, and alerts them and administrators to abnormal incidents – effectively stopping breaches before they happen.
- Implement no-fault reporting. People often don’t report security incidents because they’re concerned about the repercussions. Where it’s appropriate to do so, implement no-fault reporting to encourage individuals to report incidents in a timely manner, so you can focus on remediating the problem as quickly as possible.
The upheaval of 2020 has forced us all to reimagine familiar pathways, and parents are no exception. Cautious about sending their kids back into the classroom, families across the country are banding together to form remote “learning pods.”
Learning pods are small groups of families with like-aged children that agree to educate their kids together. Parents also refer to learning pods as micro-schools, pandemic pods, and bubbles. According to parents, a pod environment will allow students to learn in a structured setting and safely connect with peers, which will also be a boost to their mental health following months of isolation.
According to media reports, each pod’s structure is different and designed to echo the unique distance learning challenges of each family. In some pods, parents will determine the curriculum. In others, a teacher or tutor will. As well, parents have set some pods up so they can take turns teaching and working. Some will have a cost attached to cover teacher fees and materials. Working parents are also creating “nanny share” pods for pre-school aged children.
Facebook is the place to connect for families seeking pod learning options. There are now dozens of private Facebook “pod” groups that enable parents to connect with one another and with teachers who have also opted out of returning to the classroom.
While parents may structure pods differently, each will need to adopt standard digital security practices to protect students and teachers who may share online resources. If pod learning is in your family’s future, here are a few safeguards to discuss before the pod-based school year begins.
To keep the family discussion about online safety fun, here are 6 Flashcard Tips from MBot to print out and discuss with your kids.
Digital Safety & Learning Pods
Be on the lookout for malware. Malware attempts, since COVID, continue to rise. Pod learners may use email, web-based collaboration tools, and outside home networks more, which can expose them to malware risks. Advise kids never to click unsolicited links contained in emails, texts, direct messages, or pop-up screens. Even if they know the sender, coach them to scrutinize the email or text. To help protect your child’s devices against malware, phishing attacks, and other threats while pod learning, consider updating your security solutions across all devices.
Use strong passwords. Back-to-school is a great time to review what makes a strong password. Opt for two-factor authentication to add another layer of protection between you and a potential attacker.
Consider a VPN. Your home network may be safe, but you can’t assume other families follow the same protocols. Cover your bases with a VPN. A virtual private network (VPN) is a private network your child can log onto safely from any location.
Filter and track digital activity. One digital safeguard schools usually have that a home environment may not, are firewalls. Schools erect firewalls to keep kids from accessing social networks and gaming sites during school hours. For this reason, families opting for pod learning might consider parental controls. Parental controls allow families to filter or block web content, log daily web activity, set time limits, and track location.
Learning pods are still taking shape at the grassroots level, and there are still a lot of unknowns. Still, one thing is clear: Remote education options also carry an inherent responsibility to keep students safe and secure while learning online.
(Download some fun, free content for kids. Here are 6 online safety flashcard tips from MBot. Just print out and discuss with your kids).
The post How to Keep Remote Learning Pod Students Safe Online appeared first on McAfee Blogs.
With Business Email Compromises (BECs) showing no signs of slowing down, it is becoming increasingly important for security analysts to understand Office 365 (O365) breaches and how to properly investigate them. This blog post is for those who have yet to dip their toes into the waters of an O365 BEC, providing a crash course on Microsoft’s cloud productivity suite and its assortment of logs and data sources useful to investigators. We’ll also go over common attacker tactics we’ve observed while responding to BECs and provide insight into how Mandiant Managed Defense analysts approach these investigations at our customers using PowerShell and the FireEye Helix platform.
Office 365 is Microsoft’s cloud-based subscription service for the Microsoft Office suite. It is built from dozens of applications tightly embedded into the lives of today’s workforce, including:
- Exchange Online, for emails
- SharePoint, for intranet portals and document sharing
- Teams and Skype for Business, for instant messaging
- OneDrive, for file sharing
- Microsoft Stream, for recorded meetings and presentations
As more and more organizations decide to adopt Microsoft’s cloud-based offering to meet their needs, unauthorized access to these O365 environments, or tenants in Microsoft’s parlance, has become increasingly lucrative to motivated attackers. The current high adoption rate of O365 means that attackers are getting plenty of hands on experience with using and abusing the platform. While many tactics have remained largely unchanged in the years since we’ve first observed them, we’ve also witnessed the evolution of techniques that are effective against even security-conscious users.
In general, the O365 compromises we’ve responded to have fallen into two categories:
- Business Email Compromises (BECs)
- APT or state-sponsored intrusions
Based on our experience, BECs are a common threat to any organization's O365 tenant. The term “BEC” typically refers to a type of fraud committed by financially motivated attackers. BEC actors heavily rely on social engineering to carry out their schemes, ultimately defrauding organizations and even personnel.
One common BEC scheme involves compromising a C-suite executive’s account via phishing. Once the victim unwittingly enters their credentials into a web form masquerading as the legitimate Office 365 login portal, attackers log in and instruct others in the organization to conduct a wire transfer, perhaps under the guise of an upcoming acquisition that has yet to be publicly announced. However, we’ve also observed more effective schemes where attackers compromise those in financial positions and patiently wait until an email correspondence has begun about a due payment. Attackers seize this opportunity by sending a doctored invoice (sometimes based on a legitimate invoice that had been stolen earlier) on behalf of the compromised user to another victim responsible for making payments. These emails are typically hidden from the compromised user due to attacker-created Outlook mailbox rules. Often times, by the time the scheme is inevitably discovered and understood days or weeks later, the money is unrecoverable—highlighting the importance of contacting law enforcement immediately if you’ve fallen victim to a fraud.
The personal finances of staff aren’t off limits to attackers either. We’ve observed several cases of W-2 scams, in which attackers send a request to HR for W-2 information from the victim’s account. Once obtained, this personally identifiable information is later used to conduct tax fraud.
Conversely, APT intrusions are typically more sophisticated and are conducted by state-sponsored threat actors. Rather than for financial gain, APT actors are usually tasked to compromise O365 tenants for purposes of espionage, data theft, or destruction. Given the wealth of sensitive information housed in any given organization’s O365 tenant, APT actors may not even need to touch a single endpoint to complete their mission, sidestepping the many security controls organizations have implemented and invested in.
O365 Logs and Data Sources
In this section, we’ll touch on the multitude of logs and portals containing forensic data relevant to an O365 investigation.
Before we can begin investigating an O365 case, we’ll work with our clients to get an “Investigator” account provisioned with the roles required to obtain the forensic data we need. For the purposes of this blog post, we’ll quickly list the roles needed for an Investigator account, but during an active Managed Defense investigation, a designated Managed Defense consultant will provide further guidance on account provisioning.
At a minimum, the Investigator account should have the following roles:
Exchange Admin Roles
- View-only audit logs
- View-only configuration
- View-only recipients
- Mailbox Search
- Message Tracking
- eDiscovery Manager role
Azure Active Directory Roles
- Global Reader
Unified Audit Log (UAL)
The Unified Audit Log records activity from various applications within the Office 365 suite, and can be considered O365’s main log source. Entries in the UAL are stored in JSON format. We recommend using the PowerShell cmdlet Search-UnifiedAuditLog to query the UAL as it allows for greater flexibility, though it can also be acquired from the Office 365 Security & Compliance Center located at protection.office.com. In order to leverage this log source (and the Admin Audit Log), ensure that the Audit Log Search feature is enabled.
The UAL has a few nuances that are important to consider. While it provides a good high-level summary of activity across various O365 applications, it won’t log comprehensive mailbox activity (for that, acquire the Mailbox Audit Log). Furthermore, the UAL has a few limitations, namely:
- Results to a single query are limited to 5000 results
- Only 90 days of activity are retained
- Events may take up to 24 hours before they are searchable
Mailbox Audit Log (MAL)
The Mailbox Audit Log, part of Exchange Online, will capture additional actions performed against objects within a mailbox. As such, it’s a good idea acquire and analyze the MAL for each affected user account with the PowerShell cmdlet Search-MailboxAuditLog. Note that entries in the MAL will be retained for 90 days (by default) and timestamps will be based on the user’s local time zone. The MAL’s retention time can always be increased with the PowerShell cmdlet Set-Mailbox along with the AuditLogAgeLimit parameter.
At the time of writing this post, Microsoft has recently released information about enhanced auditing functionality that gives investigators insight into which emails were accessed by attackers. This level of logging for regular user accounts is only available for organizations with an Office 365 E5 subscription. Once Advanced Auditing is enabled, mail access activity will be logged under the MailItemsAccessed operation in both the UAL and MAL.
Administrator Audit Log
If the Audit Log Search feature is enabled, this supplemental data source logs all PowerShell administrative cmdlets (including command-line arguments) executed by administrators. If you suspect that an administrator account was compromised, don’t overlook this log! The PowerShell cmdlet Search-AdminAuditLog is used to query these logs, but note that the Audit Log Search feature must be enabled and the same 90 day retention limit will be in place.
Azure AD Logs
Azure AD logs can be accessed from the Azure portal (portal.azure.com) under the Azure Active Directory service. Azure AD Sign-in logs contain detailed information about how authentications occur and O365 application usage. Azure AD audit logs are also a valuable source of information, containing records of password resets, account creations, role modifications, OAuth grants, and more that could be indicative of suspicious activity. Note that Azure AD logs are only available for 30 days.
Cloud App Security Portal
For cases where OAuth abuse has been observed, information about cloud applications can be found in Microsoft’s Cloud App Security portal (portal.cloudappsecurity.com). Access to this portal requires an E5 license or a standalone Cloud App license. For more background on OAuth abuse, be sure to check out our blog post: Shining a Light on OAuth Abuse with PwnAuth.
Message traces record the emails sent and received by a user. During an investigation, run reports on any email addresses of interest. The message trace report will contain detailed mail flow information as well as subject lines, original client IP addresses, and message sizes. Message traces are useful for identifying emails sent by attackers from compromised accounts, and can also aid in identifying initial phishing emails if phishing was used for initial access. To obtain the actual emails, use the Content Search tool.
Only the past 10 days of activity is available with the Get-MessageTrace PowerShell cmdlet. Historical searches for older messages can be run with the Get-HistoricalSearch cmdlet (up to 90 days by default), but historical searches typically take hours for the report to be available. Historical reports can also be generated within the Security and Compliance Center.
eDiscovery Content Searches
The Content Search tool allows investigators to query for emails, documents, and instant message conversations stored in an Office 365 tenant. We frequently run Content Search queries to find and acquire copies of emails sent by attackers. Content searches are limited to what has been indexed by Microsoft, so recent activity may not immediately appear. Additionally, only the most recent 1000 items will be shown in the preview pane.
Anatomy of an O365 BEC
As mentioned earlier, BECs are one of the more prevalent threats to O365 tenants seen by Managed Defense today. Sometimes, Mandiant analysts respond to several BEC cases at our customers within the same week. With this frontline experience, we’ve compiled a list of commonly observed tactics and techniques to advise our readers about the types of activities one should anticipate. Please note that this is by no means a comprehensive list of O365 attacks, rather a focus on the usual routes we’ve seen BEC actors take to accomplish their objective.
Phase 1: Initial Compromise
- Phishing: Emails with links to credential harvesting forms sent to victims, sometimes from the account of a compromised business partner.
- Brute force: A large dictionary of passwords attempted against an account of interest.
- Password spray: A dictionary of commonly used passwords attempted against a list of known user accounts.
- Access to credential dump: Valid credentials used from a previous compromise of the user.
- MFA bypasses: Use of mail clients leveraging legacy authentication protocols (e.g. IMAP/POP), which bypass MFA policies. Attackers may also spam push notifications to the victim by repeatedly attempting to log in, eventually leading to the victim mistakenly accepting the prompt.
Phase 2: Establish Foothold
- More phishing: Additional phishing lures sent to internal/external contacts from Outlook’s global address list.
- More credible lures: New phishing lures uploaded to the compromised user's OneDrive or SharePoint account and shared with the victim’s coworkers.
- SMTP forwarding: SMTP forwarding enabled in the victim’s mailbox to forward all email to an external address.
- Forwarding mailbox rules: Mailbox rules created to forward all or certain mail to an external address.
- Mail client usage: Outlook or third-party mail clients used by attackers. Mail will continue to sync for a short while after a password reset occurs.
Phase 3: Evasion
- Evasive mailbox rules: Mailbox rules created to delete mail or move some or all incoming mail to uncommonly used folders in Outlook, such as “RSS Subscriptions”.
- Manual evasion: Manual deletion of incoming and sent mail. Attackers may forego mailbox rules entirely.
- Mail forwarding: Attackers accessing emails without logging in if a mechanism to forward mail to an external address was set up earlier.
- Mail client usage: Outlook or third-party mail clients used by attackers. Mail can be synced locally to the attacker’s machine and accessed later.
- VPN usage: VPN servers, sometimes with similar geolocations to their victims, used in an attempt to avoid detection and evade conditional access policies.
Phase 4: Internal Reconnaissance
- Outlook searching: The victim’s mailbox queried by attackers for emails of interest. While not recorded in audit logs, it may be available to export if it was not deleted by attackers.
- O365 searching: Searches conducted within SharePoint and other O365 applications for content of interest. While not recorded in audit logs, SharePoint and OneDrive file interactions are recorded in the UAL.
- Mail client usage: Outlook or third-party mail clients used by attackers. Mail can be synced locally to the attacker’s machine and accessed later.
Phase 5: Complete Mission
- Direct deposit update: A request sent to the HR department to update the victim’s direct deposit information, redirecting payment to the BEC actor.
- W-2 scam: A request sent to the HR department for W-2 forms, used to harvest PII for tax fraud.
- Wire transfer: A wire transfer requested for an unpaid invoice, upcoming M&A, charities, etc.
- Third-party account abuse: Abuse of the compromised user’s privileged access to third-party accounts and services, such as access to a corporate rewards site.
How Managed Defense Responds to O365 BECs
In this section, we’re going to walk through how Managed Defense investigates a typical O365 BEC case.
Many of the steps in our investigation rely on querying for logs with PowerShell. To do this, first establish a remote PowerShell session to Exchange Online. The following Microsoft documentation provides guidance on two methods to do this:
- Connect to Exchange Online PowerShell with Basic authentication
- Use the Exchange Online PowerShell with modern authentication using V2 module
We start our investigations off by running broad queries against the Unified Audit Log (UAL) for suspicious activity. We’ll review OAuth activity too, which is especially important if something more nefarious than a financially motivated BEC is suspected. Any FireEye gear available to us—such as FireEye Helix and Email Security—will be leveraged to augment the data available to us from Office 365.
The following are a few initial scoping queries we’d typically run at the beginning of a Managed Defense engagement.
Scoping Recent Mailbox Rule Activity
Even in large tenants, pulling back all recent mailbox rule activity doesn’t typically produce an unmanageable number of results, and attacker-created rules tend to stand out from the rest of the noise.
Querying UAL for all mailbox rule activity in Helix:
|class=ms_office365 action:[New-InboxRule, Set-InboxRule, Enable-InboxRule] | table [createdtime, action, username, srcipv4, srcregion, parameters, rawmsg]|
Query UAL for new mail rule activity in PowerShell:
|Search-UnifiedAuditLog -StartDate (Get-Date).AddDays(-90) -EndDate (Get-Date) -ResultSize 5000 -Operations "New-InboxRule","Set-InboxRule","Enable-InboxRule" | Export-CSV \path\to\file.csv –NoTypeInformation -Encoding utf8|
Scoping SMTP Forwarding Activity
SMTP forwarding is sometimes overlooked because it appears under a UAL operation separate from mailbox rules. This query looks for the Set-Mailbox operation containing a parameter to forward mail over SMTP, indicative of automatic forwarding being enabled from OWA.
Querying UAL for SMTP forwarding in Helix:
|class=ms_office365 action=Set-Mailbox rawmsg:ForwardingSmtpAddress | table [createdtime, action, username, srcipv4, srcregion, parameters, rawmsg]|
Querying UAL for SMTP forwarding in PowerShell:
|Search-UnifiedAuditLog -StartDate (Get-Date).AddDays(-90) -EndDate (Get-Date) -ResultSize 5000 -FreeText "ForwardingSmtpAddress" | Export-CSV \path\to\file.csv –NoTypeInformation -Encoding utf8|
Analyze Compromised Users Logs
After we’ve finished scoping the tenant, we’ll turn our attention to the individual users believed to be involved in the compromise. We’ll acquire all relevant O365 logs for the identified compromised user(s) - this includes the user's UAL, Mailbox Audit Log (MAL), and Admin audit log (if the user is an administrator). We’ll review these logs for anomalous account activity and assemble a list of attacker IP addresses and User-Agents strings. We’ll use this list to further scope the tenant.
O365 investigations rely heavily on anomaly detection. Many times, the BEC actor may even be active at the same time as the user. In order to accurately differentiate between legitimate user activity and attacker activity within a compromised account, it's recommended to pull back as much data as possible to use as a reference for legitimate activity. Using the Helix query transforms groupby < [srccountry,srcregion], groupby < useragent and groupby < srcipv4 , which highlight the least common geolocations, User Agent strings, and IP addresses, can also assist in identifying anomalies in results.
Querying UAL for a user in Helix:
|class=ms_office365 firstname.lastname@example.org | table [createdtime, action, username, srcipv4, srccountry, srcregion, useragent, rawmsg] | groupby < [srccountry,srcregion]|
Querying UAL for a user in PowerShell:
|Search-UnifiedAuditLog -StartDate mm/dd/yyyy -EndDate (Get-Date) -ResultSize 5000 -UserIds email@example.com | Export-CSV \path\to\file.csv –NoTypeInformation -Encoding utf8|
Querying MAL for a user in PowerShell:
|Search-MailboxAuditLog -Identity firstname.lastname@example.org -LogonTypes Owner,Delegate,Admin -ShowDetails -StartDate (Get-Date).AddDays(-90) -EndDate (Get-Date) | Export-CSV \path\to\file.csv –NoTypeInformation -Encoding utf8|
Querying Admin Audit Log for all events within a certain date in PowerShell:
|Search-AdminAuditLog -StartDate mm/dd/yyyy -EndDate mm/dd/yyyy | Export-CSV \path\to\file.csv –NoTypeInformation -Encoding utf8|
Query UAL with New Leads
Now that we’ve built a list of suspicious IP addresses (or even entire CIDR ranges) and User-Agent strings, we’ll run new queries against the entire UAL to try to identify other compromised user accounts. We’ll repeat this step and the previous step for each newly identified user account.
One advantage to using FireEye Helix platform over PowerShell is that we can query entire CIDR ranges. This is helpful when we observe attackers coming from a VPN or ISP that dynamically assigns IP addresses within the same address block.
Queries for attacker User-Agent strings usually generate more noise to sift through than IP address searches. In practice, User-Agent queries are only beneficial if the attackers are using an uncommon browser or version of a browser. Due to limitations of the Search-UnifiedAuditLog cmdlet, we’ve had the most success using the FreeText parameter and searching for simple strings.
|class=ms_office365 (srcipv4:[188.8.131.52, 184.108.40.206/24] OR useragent:Opera) | table [createdtime, action, username, srcipv4, srccountry, srcregion, useragent, rawmsg] | groupby username|
Querying the UAL for IPs and user agents in PowerShell:
|Search-UnifiedAuditLog -StartDate mm/dd/yyyy -EndDate (Get-Date) -ResultSize 5000 -IPAddresses 220.127.116.11, 18.104.22.168 | Export-CSV \path\to\file.csv –NoTypeInformation -Encoding utf8|
|Search-UnifiedAuditLog -StartDate mm/dd/yyyy -EndDate (Get-Date) -ResultSize 5000 -FreeText "Opera" | Export-CSV \path\to\file.csv –NoTypeInformation -Encoding utf8|
Analyze Message Traces
We’ll use PowerShell to query message traces for the compromised users we’ve identified. If the email was sent within the past 10 days, use the Get-MessageTrace cmdlet, which immediately returns results and allows teams to query IP addresses. For older emails, use the Start-HistoricalSearch cmdlet and download the report later from the Mail Flow section of the Security & Compliance center.
Querying for the last 10 days of mail sent by the victim in PowerShell:
|Get-MessageTrace -StartDate (Get-Date).AddDays(-10) -EndDate (Get-Date) -SenderAddress email@example.com | Select-Object Received, SenderAddress, RecipientAddress, Subject, Status, FromIP, Size, MessageID | Export-CSV \path\to\file.csv –NoTypeInformation -Encoding utf8|
Querying for older emails (up to 90 days) in PowerShell:
|Start-HistoricalSearch -ReportTitle "Mandiant O365 investigation" -StartDate mm/dd/yyyy -EndDate mm/dd/yyyy -ReportType MessageTraceDetail -SenderAddress firstname.lastname@example.org|
As Message Trace results are reviewed, attention should be given to IP addresses to determine which emails were sent by attackers. If phishing was the suspected initial compromise vector, it’s a good idea to also query for incoming mail received within a few days prior to the first compromise date and look for suspicious sender addresses and/or subject lines.
Acquire Emails of Interest
With our list of suspicious emails identified from message traces, we’ll use the Content Search tool available in the Office 365 Security and Compliance Center acquire the email body and learn what domains were used in phishing lures (if phishing was present). Content Searches are performed by using a straightforward GUI, and the results can either be previewed in the browser, downloaded individually as EML files, or downloaded in bulk as PST files.
At this point of our investigation, the BEC should be sufficiently scoped within the tenant. To ensure any follow-on activity hasn’t occurred, we’ll take all of the attack indicators and perform our final queries across the UAL.
With that said, there are still edge cases in which attacker activity wouldn’t appear in O365 logs. For example, perhaps an additional user has submitted their credentials to a phishing page, but the attackers haven’t used them to log in yet. To ensure we don’t miss this activity, we’ll perform additional scoping across available network logs, specifically for IP addresses and domains related to the attacker’s phishing infrastructure. We’ll also leverage other FireEye products, such as the Endpoint Security platform, to search for phishing domains present on a host’s web browser history.
Unauthorized access to O365 tenant doesn’t just pose a threat to an organization, but also to its staff and business partners. Organizations without enhanced security controls in O365 are at the greatest risk of experiencing a BEC. However, as multi factor-authentication becomes more and more commonplace, we’ve witnessed an increase of MFA bypass attempts performed by increasingly proficient attackers.
It’s important to remember that social engineering plays a primary role throughout a BEC. Ensure that users are trained on how to identify credential harvesting forms, a common compromise vector. When in the midst of a BEC compromise, teams may want to promptly alert personnel in HR and finance-related roles to exercise extra caution when processing requests related to banking or wire transfers while the investigation is in progress.
The examples covered in this blog post are just a sample of what Managed Defense performs while investigating an Office 365 compromise. To take a proactive approach at preventing BECs, make sure the following best practices are implemented in a O365 tenant. Additionally, FireEye Email Security offers protections against phishing and the Helix platform’s O365 ruleset can alert on anomalous activity as soon as it happens.
Recommended Best Practices
- Ensure mailbox audit logging is enabled on all accounts
- Disable Legacy Authentication protocols
- Enable multi-factor authentication (MFA)
- Enforce strong passwords and a password expiration policy
- Forward O365 audit logs to a centralized logging platform for extended retention
- Enforce an account lockout policy in Azure/on-premise Active Directory
- Restrict mail forwarding to external domains
Special thanks to Doug Bienstock, Glenn Edwards, Josh Madeley, and Tim Martin for their research and assistance on the topic.
Twitter confirmed 130 celebrity Twitter accounts were targeted in the cyberattack on Wednesday 15th July, with 45 successfully compromised. The hacked Twitter accounts included high profile individuals such as Barack Obama, Elon Musk, Kanye West, Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, Warren Buffett, Kim Kardashian, and Joe Biden. Their accounts were used to send a tweet to scam Bitcoin out of their millions of followers.
|Scam Social Engineering Tweet sent from Bill Gates' Twitter Account|
|Security researchers at Hudson Rock spotted Twitter Hack advertisement|
Update as of 18th July 2020
Twitter confirmed the perpetrators used its administration tools to orchestrate the attack and had downloaded data from up to eight of the accounts involved, but said none of these accounts was "verified" high profile accounts.
A New York Times article suggested at least two of the attackers are from England. The attackers successfully manipulated a small number of employees and used their credentials to access Twitter's internal systems
Twitter's statement said "The attackers successfully manipulated a small number of employees and used their credentials to access Twitter's internal systems. We are continuing our investigation of this incident, working with law enforcement, and determining longer-term actions we should take to improve the security of our systems. We're embarrassed, we're disappointed, and more than anything, we're sorry."
Facts Twitter confirmed
- Attackers were not able to view previous account passwords, as those are not stored in plain text or available through the tools used in the attack.
- Attackers were able to view personal information including email addresses and phone numbers, which are displayed to some users of our internal support tools.
- In cases where an account was taken over by the attacker, they may have been able to view additional information. Forensic investigation of these activities is still ongoing.
This incident illustrates the loophole with identity and access management such that if a user account is compromised, data is left unprotected. This loophole can be closed by taking a data-centric approach to security, where information is automatically protected, with authenticated encryption built right into the data. This means that even unencrypted files, when changed or moved, will immediately be encrypted so that, if stolen, they will appear to be garbage to the thief.
A compromised user account still has access to data, but it remains encrypted all the time, even when in use. When copied from its ‘safe’, access-controlled location - even if that's outside the organisation - the data remains encrypted and therefore useless. No ransom, no embarrassing disclosures, no legal action.
Liviu Arsene, Global Cybersecurity Researcher at Bitdefender said with attackers successfully compromising high-profile Twitter accounts that potentially also had two-factor authentication can only point to a coordinated cyberattack at Twitter’s employees and systems. It’s likely this could be a result of attackers exploiting the work-from-home context, in which employees are far more likely to fall prey to scams and spearphishing emails that end up compromising devices and ultimately company systems.
This high-profile Twitter breach could be the result of a spray-and-pray spear-phishing campaign that landed some opportunistic cybercriminals the could potentially be the hack of the year for Twitter. They could have done potentially far more damage. Instead, by delivering a simple Bitcoin scam, we could be looking at attackers that wanted to quickly monetize their access, instead of a highly coordinated and sophisticated operation performed by an APT group.
If this is the case, it’s likely that more companies could potentially be breached as a result of cybercriminals phishing employees. With 50% of organizations not having a plan for supporting and quickly migrating employees and infrastructure to full remote work, we’re probably going to see more data breaches that either exploit employee negligence or infrastructure misconfigurations left behind during the work from home transition.
While large organizations may have strong perimeter security defences, security professionals mostly worry that a potential breach could occur because of attackers exploiting the weakest link in the cybersecurity chain: the human component.
Tony Pepper, CEO of Egress said Twitter has suffered a co-ordinated attack targeting its employees "with access to internal systems and tools" is deeply concerning. However, screenshots obtained from two sources who took over accounts which suggest that this breach was caused by an intentionally malicious insider adds an additional layer of concern and complexity to this saga.
In our 2020 Insider Data Breach, we found that 75% of IT leaders surveyed believe employees have put data at risk intentionally in the past year and this latest breach seems to bear out those beliefs.
So, what can security professionals do to prevent this risk and keep sensitive data out of the reach of malicious threat actors? Organisations have an opportunity to do more by understanding the ‘human layer’ of security, including breach personas and where different risks lie. Technology needs to do more by providing insight into how sensitive data in the organisation is being handled and identifying risks, including human-activated threats.
By spotting the characteristics of a potentially malicious insider and being aware of what they are susceptible to and motivated by, organisations can put the tactics, techniques, and technology in place to mitigate the risk.
According to the Office of National Statistics (ONS), approximately 14.2 million people (44% of the total number of working adults) have worked from home during the coronavirus pandemic. To put these figures into perspective, this number stood at around 1.7 million in 2019, representing just 5% of the total working population.
While these statistics are unsurprising, it’s clear that the paradigm of working from home every day was sudden and significant. Few businesses can claim to have anticipated such a scenario, nor to have had the business continuity planning capabilities to contend with its consequences. For example, one of the biggest cybersecurity trends to have emerged in recent weeks is a surge in phishing attacks targeting remote workers.
As will be described in this article, phishing thrives on isolation, uncertainty and periods of change, which have all been common characteristics of the working world recently. Accordingly, Google has reported a 350% cent increase in phishing attacks from January to March of this year.
|Education is the First Line of Defence against Phishing Attacks|
1. Phishing Attacks are Socially Engineered
The anatomy of an effective phishing attack is rooted more in social engineering than technology. Phishing messages try to trick individuals into taking an action, such as clicking on a link or providing personal information, by offering scenarios of financial gains or ramifications, or the potential of work disruption or playing into a personal panic.
However, phishing messages typically have tell-tale signs that can – and should – give users pause. Attempts to obfuscate the sender, poor spelling and grammar, and malicious attachments are a few of the classic signs that the message is not genuine.
Phishing attack messages that have the highest response rates are often related to time-bound events, such as open enrolment periods or satisfaction surveys. Some other common phishing message themes include unpaid invoices, confirming personal information and problems with logins.
Before acting, think about what is being asked. For example, phishing attacks may take advantage of the fact that many workers are currently anticipating updates from their employers about returning to the workplace. The email may ask users to log in to a new system designed to allocate socially distant spaces within the workspace upon their return. This tactic exploits the user’s often unconscious confirmation bias, not only impersonating their employer but also taking advantage of their expectations around returning to work and acknowledgement of social distancing.
2. Attackers Use a Diverse Portfolio of Tactics
Attackers often attempt to impersonate a known person or entity to obtain private information or to carry out an action. This is also known as pretexting and is commonly executed by crafting a fraudulent email or text message to execute an action that is not part of the standard process.
One example is calling the service desk and pretending to be a valid user to get a password reset. Another ruse attackers frequently take advantage of is an out-of-band wire transfer or an invoice payment for a critical vendor. Small companies have traditionally been the targets, but larger companies are increasingly being targeted.
Organisations must understand that pretexting is considered fraud and is often not covered by cyber insurance policies. Therefore, it’s critical that organisations design effective business processes with oversight so there are no single points of approval or execution, and stick to them. While it may be tempting to bypass processes, such as accounts payable or IT procurement, businesses can’t afford to let their guard down – especially when large numbers of workers are logging on remotely as is the case for so many today.
3. Education is the First Line of Defence
Phishing is often discussed within the cybersecurity space, but the conversations typically don’t involve intent and rigour.
The common compliance measure usually involves in-person or virtual annual training, along with some other method of education, such as hanging posters around the workplace. This approach pre-dates highly connected computing environments and doesn’t address the urgency needed for the current threat landscape or pattern of working experienced by so many in 2020.
Organisations must conduct security awareness education with the same decisiveness and gravity that other industries do with safety training. For example, it’s not uncommon for drivers in the commercial trucking and transport sector to take monthly training modules, or for managers to participate in quarterly safety meetings.
Planning for the New Normal
At the same time, bad actors will constantly be on the lookout for opportunities to take advantage of the chaos. By paying attention to the signs, looking out for pretexting and emphasising regular training, companies can better fend off future phishing attacks.
Investing time and resources into regularly training and educating staff on information security awareness and current cyber threats is critical in building resilience in the ‘new normal’ of the post-COVID-19 working world. A crippling cyberattack is always just around the corner, but by establishing plans and capabilities that reduce risk and prevent data loss, leakage or offline systems from disrupting business continuity, the chances of survival rise exponentially.
Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison announced a sophisticated nation-state actor is causing increasing havoc by attacking the country’s government, corporate institutions, and his country's critical infrastructure operators. He said, “We know it is a sophisticated state-based cyber actor because of the scale and nature of the targeting and the tradecraft used". While Morrison didn't actually name the specific country responsible in his statement, Reuters said its sources confirmed China was the culprit. Political tensions have ramped up between Australia and China in recent months after Australia called for an investigation into China’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic. China then reacted by placing tariffs on Australian exports and banning shipments of beef from Australia.
Increased UK Huawei Tensions in June 2020
Away from the international cyber warfare scene, a coalition led by security companies is urging the UK government to revamp the much-dated Computer Misuse Act. The UK's 'anti-hacking' law is 30 years old, so written well before the internet took root in our digital society, so is not really suitable for prosecuting for modern cybercriminals, they tend to be prosecuted under financial crime and fraud laws. The coalition is calling for a change in the law includes the NCC Group, F-Secure, techUK, McAfee and Trend Micro. They argue section 1 of the Act prohibits the unauthorised access to any programme or data held in any computer and has not kept pace with advances in technology. In their letter to PM they said "With the advent of modern threat intelligence research, defensive cyber activities often involve the scanning and interrogation of compromised victims and criminals systems to lessen the impact of attacks and prevent future incidents. In these cases, criminals are obviously very unlikely to explicitly authorise such access."
Since launching a 'Suspicious Email Reporting Service' in April 2020, the UK National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) announced it has now received one million reports, receiving around 16,500 emails a day. NCSC Chief Executive Officer Ciaran Martin called the number of reports a “milestone” and “a testament to the vigilance of the British public". I think the email reporting service is another fantastic free service provided by NCSC (i.e. UK Gov) to UK citizens, so one thing the UK government is definitely getting right in the cybersecurity space at the moment.
Some men just want to watch the world burn...
- Australia PM Claims Nation-State Actor is behind a Surge of Cyberattacks
- Zoom will Extend Optional End-to-End Encryption to Free Users
- Huawei's days in the UK could be Numbered
- NCSC: One Million Phishing Messages Reported in Two Months
- UK Gov Urged to Overhaul "unfit for purpose" Computer Misuse Act
- European Bank suffers biggest PPS DDoS Attack, New Botnet Suspected
- Criminals Intercepted Payment Card details used at Claire’s Online store for Weeks
- Amazon Thwarts Largest ever DDoS Attack
- Ransomware Gang Claims Attack on LG Electronics
- South African Bank to Replaces 12 Million Cards after Employees Stole Master Key
- Snake Ransomware behind Cyberattack that put Brakes on Honda Operations for the Third Time
- Malicious Google Extensions Research points out ‘unintended consequence’ of Cloud Computing
- Lockdown sees rise in RDP Brute Force Attacks, with over 100,000 daily
- Microsoft Patches 129 Vulnerabilities
- Adobe Fixes 18 Critical Vulnerabilities
- Cisco Security Advisories address 47 Flaws, 3 Critical
- High-Severity Bugs Patched in Chrome, Firefox Browsers
- Apple Patches iOS Jailbreak Vulnerability
- North Korea has quietly built a 7,000 Cyber Army
- Dodging AV and endpoint defenses is a ‘snap’ for new Thanos Ransomware
- Ragnar Locker teams up with Maze; Zorab ransomware imitates Decryptor
- Cybercriminals Poised to Attack as Adobe ends support for Magento 1
The sudden and dramatic shift to a mobile workforce has thrust video conferencing into the global spotlight and evolved video conferencing vendors from enterprise communication tools to critical infrastructure.
During any major (and rapid) technology adoption, cyberattackers habitually follow the masses in hopes of launching an attack that could lead to a pay day or give them a competitive advantage. This has not been lost on global organisations’ security and IT teams, who are quickly working to make sure their employees’ privacy and data remains secure.
Here are some high-level tips to help keep video conferencing secure.
Update the Application
Video conferencing providers are regularly deploying software updates to ensure that security holes are mitigated. Take advantage of their diligence and update the app prior to using it every time.
Lock meetings down and set a strong password
Make sure that only invited attendees can join a meeting. Using full sentences with special characters included, rather than just words or numbers, can be helpful. Make sure you are not sharing the password widely, especially in public places and never on social media. Waiting room features are critical for privacy as the meeting host can serve as a final triage to make sure only invited participants are attending. Within the meeting, the host can restrict sharing privileges, leading to smoother meetings and ensuring that uninvited guests are not nefariously sharing materials.
Discussing sensitive information
If sensitive material must be discussed, ensure that the meeting name does not suggest it is a top-secret meeting, which would make it a more attractive target for potential eavesdroppers. Using code words to depict business topics is recommended during the cyber crime wave we are experiencing.
Restrict the sharing of sensitive files to approved file-share technologies, not as part of the meeting itself
Using an employee sharing site that only employees have access to (and has multi-factor authentication in place) is a great way to make sure sensitive files touch the right eyes only. This should be mandated as this is a huge Achilles heel.
Use a VPN to protect network traffic while using the platform
With so many employees working remotely, using a virtual private network (VPN) can help better secure internet connections and keep private information private via encryption. Public WiFi can be a gamble as it only takes one malicious actor to cause damage. Do not use public WiFi, especially in airports or train stations. Cyber criminals lurk in those locations.
If you can, utilise two networks on your home WiFi router, one for business and the other for personal use.
Make sure that your work computer is only connected to a unique network in your home. All other personal devices – including your family’s – should not be using the same network. The networks and routers in your home should be updated regularly and, again, should use a complex password. Additionally, you should be the only system administrator on your network and all devices that connect to it.
All of us have a role to play in mitigating the cyber crime wave. Please remember these best practices the next time you connect. Stay safe online
Also related - How Safe are Video Messaging Apps such as Zoom?
Though COVID-19 has had enormous effects on our society and economy, its effects on the cyber threat landscape remain limited. For the most part, the same actors we have always tracked are behaving in the same manner they did prior to the crisis. There are some new challenges, but they are perceptible, and we—and our customers—are prepared to continue this fight through this period of unprecedented change.
The significant shifts in the threat landscape we are currently tracking include:
- The sudden major increase in a remote workforce has changed the nature and vulnerability of enterprise networks.
- Threat actors are now leveraging COVID-19 and related topics in social engineering ploys.
- We anticipate increased collection by cyber espionage actors seeking to gather intelligence on the crisis.
- Healthcare operations, related manufacturing, logistics, and administration organizations, as well as government offices involved in responding to the crisis are increasingly critical and vulnerable to disruptive attacks such as ransomware.
- Information operations actors have seized on the crisis to promote narratives primarily to domestic or near-abroad audiences.
Same Actors, New Content
The same threat actors and malware families that we observed prior to the crisis are largely pursuing the same objectives as before the crisis, using many of the same tools. They are simply now leveraging the crisis as a means of social engineering. This pattern of behavior is familiar. Threat actors have always capitalized on major events and crises to entice users. Many of the actors who are now using this approach have been tracked for years.
Ultimately, COVID-19 is being adopted broadly in social engineering approaches because it is has widespread, generic appeal, and there is a genuine thirst for information on the subject that encourages users to take actions when they might otherwise have been circumspect. We have seen it used by several cyber criminal and cyber espionage actors, and in underground communities some actors have created tools to enable effective social engineering exploiting the coronavirus pandemic. Nonetheless, COVID-19 content is still only used in two percent of malicious emails.
For the time being, we do not believe this social engineering will be abetting. In fact, it is likely to take many forms as changes in policy, economics, and other unforeseen consequences manifest. Recently we predicted a spike in stimulus related social engineering, for example. Additionally, the FBI has recently released a press release anticipating a rise in COVID-19 related Business Email Compromise (BEC) scams.
State Actors Likely Very Busy
Given that COVID-19 is the undoubtedly the overwhelming concern of governments worldwide for the time being, we anticipated targeting of government, healthcare, biotech, and other sectors by cyber espionage actors. We have not yet observed an incident of cyber espionage targeting COVID-19 related information; however, it is often difficult to determine what information these actors are targeting. There has been at least one case reported publicly which we have not independently confirmed.
We have seen state actors, such as those from Russia, China and North Korea, leverage COVID-19 related social engineering, but given wide interest in that subject, that does not necessarily indicate targeting of COVID-19 related information.
Threat to Healthcare
Though we have no reason to believe there is a sudden, elevated threat to healthcare, the criticality of these systems has probably never been greater, and thus the risk to this sector will be elevated throughout this crisis. The threat of disruption is especially disconcerting as it could affect the ability of these organizations to provide safe and timely care. This threat extends beyond hospitals to pharmaceutical companies, as well as manufacturing, administration and logistics organizations providing vital support. Additionally, many critical public health resources lie at the state and local level.
Though there is some anecdotal evidence suggesting some ransomware actors are avoiding healthcare targets, we do not expect that all actors will practice this restraint. Additionally, an attack on state and local governments, which have been a major target of ransomware actors, could have a disruptive effect on treatment and prevention efforts.
The sudden and unanticipated shift of many workers to work from home status will represent an opportunity for threat actors. Organizations will be challenged to move quickly to ensure sufficient capacity, as well as that security controls and policies are in place. Disruptive situations can reduce morale and increase stress, leading to adverse behavior such as decreasing users’ reticence to open suspicious messages, and even increasing the risk of insider threats. Distractions while working at home can cause lowered vigilance in scrutinizing and avoiding suspicious content as workers struggle to balance work and home responsibilities at the same time. Furthermore, the rapid adoption of platforms will undoubtedly lead to security mistakes and attract the attention of the threat actors.
Secure remote access will likely rely on use of VPNs and user access permissions and authentication procedures intended to limit exposure of proprietary data. Hardware and infrastructure protection should include ensuring full disk encryption on enterprise devices, maintaining visibility on devices through an endpoint security tool, and maintaining regular software updates.
For more on this issue, see our blog post on the risks associated with remote connectivity.
The Information Operations Threat
We have seen information operations actors promote narratives associated with COVID-19 to manipulate primarily domestic or near-abroad audiences. We observed accounts in Chinese-language networks operating in support of the People's Republic of China (PRC), some of which we previously identified to be promoting messaging pertaining to the Hong Kong protests, shift their focus to praising the PRC's response to the COVID-19 outbreak, criticizing the response of Hong Kong medical workers and the U.S. to the pandemic, and covertly promoting a conspiracy theory that the U.S. was responsible for the outbreak of the coronavirus in Wuhan.
We have also identified multiple information operations promoting COVID-19-related narratives that were aimed at Russian- and Ukrainian-speaking audiences, including some that we assess with high confidence are part of the broader suspected Russian influence campaign publicly referred to as "Secondary Infektion," as well as other suspected Russian activity. These operations have included leveraging a false hacktivist persona to spread the conspiracy theory that the U.S. developed the coronavirus in a weapons laboratory in Central Asia, taking advantage of physical protests in Ukraine to push the narrative that Ukrainians repatriated from Wuhan will infect the broader Ukrainian population, and claiming that the Ukrainian healthcare system is ill-equipped to deal with the pandemic. Other operations alleged that U.S. government or military personnel were responsible for outbreaks of the coronavirus in various countries including Lithuania and Ukraine, or insisted that U.S. personnel would contribute to the pandemic's spread if scheduled multilateral military exercises in the region were to continue as planned.
It is clear that adversaries expect us to be distracted by these overwhelming events. The greatest cyber security challenge posed by COVID-19 may be our ability to stay focused on the threats that matter most. An honest assessment of the cyber security implications of the pandemic will be necessary to make efficient use of resources limited by the crisis itself.
For more information and resources that can help strengthen defenses, visit FireEye's "Managing Through Change and Crisis" site, which aggregates many resources to help organizations that are trying to navigate COVID-19 related security challenges.
Our increased use of video messaging apps has not gone unnoticed by cybercriminals, who are seeking to exploit the increase of use by sending phishing emails, social media scam messages and even scam text messages, with fake invitations to video messaging app meetings.
Typically, these scam messages will entice you into either opening a malicious attachment or click a web link which directs to a malicious website. The ultimate aim of these cyberattacks is to deliver malicious software, such as ransomware which locks your PC and demands a ransom payment to unlock, scam a payment, or steal your personal information which can be resold to other cybercriminals on the dark web.
So, never open an attachment or click on any links within any unexpected or suspicious emails, social media messages and text messages.
The next piece of advice is to ensure your video messaging app is always kept up-to-date. Luckily most modern smartphones and computer operating systems will automatically update your apps, but it is always worth double-checking and not to suppress any app updates from occurring, as often the app updates are fixing security flaws.
And finally, on home computers and laptops, when not using video messaging apps, either cover your webcam with a piece of tape or face your webcam towards a wall or ceiling, just in case your computer is covertly compromised and a malicious actor gains access to your computer's webcam.
One tip I didn't have time to say on the podcast, is always ensure your video chats are set to private, using a strong password to prevent ZoomBombing. Recent reportshave shown a series of “Zoombombing” incidents lately, where unwanted guests have joined in on open calls.
Bharat Mistry, Principal Security Strategist at Trend Micro on Zoom advises “Although not alone in being targeted, Zoom has been the subject of some of the highest-profile incidents so far this year. Fortunately, there are things you can do to keep your business safe.
It’s all about taking advantage of unsecure settings in the app, (and possibly using brute-force tools to crack meeting IDs). With access to a meeting, hackers could harvest highly sensitive and/or market-critical corporate information, or even spread malware via a file transfer feature.
Hackers know users are looking en masse for ways to communicate during government lockdowns. By creating legitimate-looking Zoom links and websites, they could steal financial details, spread malware or harvest Zoom ID numbers, allowing them to infiltrate virtual meetings. One vendor discovered 2,000 new domains had been registered in March alone, over two-thirds of the total for the year so far.
- Ensure Zoom is always on the latest software version
- Build awareness of Zoom phishing scams into user training programmes. Users should only download the Zoom client from a trusted site and check for anything suspicious in the meeting URL when joining a meeting
- Ensure all home workers have anti-malware including phishing detection installed from a reputable vendor
- Ensure you also generate a meeting ID automatically for recurring meetings
- Set screen-sharing to “host only” to prevent uninvited guests from sharing disruptive content
- Don’t share any meeting IDs online
- Disable “file transfers” to mitigate risk of malware
- Make sure that only authenticated users can join meetings
- Lock the meeting once it’s started to prevent anyone new joining
- Use waiting room feature, so the host can only allow attendees from a pre-assigned register
- Play a sound when someone enters or leaves the room
- Allow host to put attendees on hold, temporarily removing them from a meeting if necessary”
Given the community interest and media coverage surrounding the economic stimulus bill currently being considered by the United States House of Representatives, we anticipate attackers will increasingly leverage lures tailored to the new stimulus bill and related recovery efforts such as stimulus checks, unemployment compensation and small business loans. Although campaigns employing themes relevant to these matters are only beginning to be adopted by threat actors, we expect future campaigns—primarily those perpetrated by financially motivated threat actors—to incorporate these themes in proportion to the media’s coverage of these topics.
Threat actors with varying motivations are actively exploiting the current pandemic and public fear of the coronavirus and COVID-19. This is consistent with our expectations; malicious actors are typically quick to adapt their social engineering lures to exploit major flashpoints along with other recurrent events (e.g. holidays, Olympics). Security researchers at FireEye and in the broader community have already begun to identify and report on COVID-19 themed campaigns with grant, payment, or economic recovered themed emails and attachments.
Example Malware Distribution Campaign
On March 18, individuals at corporations across a broad set of industries and geographies received emails with the subject line “COVID-19 Payment” intended to distribute the SILENTNIGHT banking malware (also referred to by others as Zloader). Despite the campaign’s broad distribution, a plurality of associated messages were sent to organizations based in Canada. Interestingly, although the content of these emails was somewhat generic, they were sometimes customized to reference a payment made in currency relevant to the recipient’s geography and contextually relevant government officials (Figure 1 and Figure 2). These emails were sent from a large pool of different @gmx.com email addresses and had password protected Microsoft Word document attachments using the file name “COVID 19 Relief.doc” (Figure 3). The emails appear to be auto generated and follow the format <name>.<name><SevenNumberString>@gmx.com. When these documents were opened and macros enabled, they would drop and execute a .JSE script crafted to download and execute an instance of SILENTNIGHT from http://209.141.54[.]161/crypt18.dll.
An analyzed sample of SILENTNIGHT downloaded from this URL had an MD5 hash of 9e616a1757cf1d40689f34d867dd742e, employed the RC4 key 'q23Cud3xsNf3', and was associated with the SILENTNIGHT botnet 'PLSPAM'. This botnet has been seen loading configuration files containing primarily U.S.- and Canada financial institution webinject targets. Furthermore, this sample was configured to connect to the following controller infrastructure:
Figure 1: Example lure using CAD
Figure 2: Example lure using AUD
Figure 3: Malicious Word document
Example Phishing Campaign
Individuals at financial services organizations in the United States were sent emails with the subject line “Internal Guidance for Businesses Grant and loans in response to respond to COVID-19” (Figure 4). These emails had OpenDocument Presentation (.ODP) format attachments that, when opened in Microsoft PowerPoint or OpenOffice Impress, display a U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) themed message (Figure 5) and an in-line link that redirects to an Office 365 phishing kit (Figure 6) hosted at https://tyuy56df-kind-giraffe-ok.mybluemix[.]net/.
Figure 4: Email lure referencing business grants and loans
Figure 5: SBA-themed message
Figure 6: Office 365 phishing page
Malicious actors have always exploited users’ sense of urgency, fear, goodwill and mistrust to enhance their operations. The threat actors exploiting this crisis are not new, they are simply taking advantage of a particularly overtaxed target set that is urgently seeking new information. Users who are aware of this dynamic, and who approach any new information with cautious skepticism will be especially prepared to meet this challenge.
FireEye Labs recently discovered a malicious phishing domain designed to steal a variety of information – including credentials and mobile numbers – from customers of several banks in India. Currently, we have not observed this domain being used in any campaigns. The phishing websites appear to be in the earlier stages of development and through this post we hope users will be able to identify these types of emerging threats in the future.
FireEye phishing detection technology identified a newly registered domain, “csecurepay[.]com”, that was registered on Oct. 23, 2016. The website purports to offer online payment gateway services, but is actually a phishing website that leads to the capturing of victim logon credentials – and other information – for multiple banks operating in India.
Prior to publication, FireEye notified the Indian Computer Emergency Response Team.
Phishing Template Presentation and Techniques
When navigating to the URL, the domain appears to be a payment gateway and requests that the user enter their bank account number and the amount to be transferred, as seen in Figure 1. The victim is allowed to choose their bank from a list that is provided.
Figure 1: Bank information being requested
By looking at the list, it is clear that only Indian banks are being targeted at this time. A total of 26 banks are available and these are named in the Appendix.
The next website requests the victim to enter their valid 10-digit mobile number and email ID (Figure 2), which makes the website appear more legitimate.
Figure 2: Personal information being requested
The victim will then be redirected to the spoofed online banking page of the bank they selected, which requests that they log in using their user name and password. Figure 3 shows a fake login page for State Bank of India. See the Appendix for more banks that have spoofed login pages.
Figure 3: Fake login page for State Bank of India
After entering their login credentials, the victim will be asked to key in their One Time Password (OTP), as seen in Figure 4.
Figure 4: OTP being requested
Once all of the sensitive data is gathered, a fake failed login message will be displayed to the victim, as seen in Figure 5.
Figure 5: Fake error message being displayed
Credit and Debit Card Phishing Website
Using the registrant information from the csecurepay domain, we found another domain registered by the phisher as “nsecurepay[.]com”. The domain, registered in latest August 2016, aims to steal credit and debit card information.
The following are among the list of cards that are targeted:
1. ICICI Credit Card
2. ICICI Debit Card
3. Visa/Master Credit Card
4. Visa/Master Debit Card
5. SBI Debit Card Only
At the time of this writing, the nsecurepay website was producing errors when redirecting to spoofed credit and debit card pages. Figure 6 shows the front end.
Figure 6: Nsecurepay front end
Phishing has its own development lifecycle. It usually starts off with building the tools and developing the “hooks” for luring victims into providing their financial information. Once the phishing website (or websites) is fully operational, we typically begin to see a wave of phishing emails pointing to it.
In this case, we see that phishing websites have been crafted to spoof multiple banks in India. These attackers can potentially grab sensitive online banking information and other personal data, and even provided support for multifactor authentication and OTP. Moreover, disguising the initial presentation to appear as an online payment gateway service makes the phishing attack seem more legitimate.
FireEye Labs detects this phishing attack and customers will be protected against the usage of these sites in possible future campaigns.
Fake login pages were served for 26 banks. The following is a list of some of the banks:
-Bank of Baroda - Corporate
-Bank of Baroda - Retail
-Bank of Maharashtra
Figure 7: HDFC Bank fake login page
-Jammu and Kashmir Bank
-Lakshmi Vilas Bank - Corporate
-Lakshmi Vilas Bank - Retail
-State Bank of Hyderabad
-State Bank of India
-State Bank of Jaipur
-State Bank of Mysore
-State Bank of Patiala
-State Bank of Bikaner
-State Bank of Travancore
-Tamilnad Mercantile Bank
-United Bank of India
In June 2016, we published a blog about a phishing campaign targeting the Apple IDs and passwords of Chinese Apple users that emerged in the first quarter of 2016 (referred to as the “Zycode” phishing campaign). At FireEye Labs we have an automated system designed to proactively detect newly registered malicious domains and this system had observed some phishing domains that were designed to appear as legitimate Apple domains. Most of the domains reported by this system were suspended in June 2016, which resulted in a loss of momentum for the Zycode phishing campaign. Throughout the second quarter of 2016, the Zycode phishing campaign was in hibernation.
We recently observed a resurgence of the same phishing campaign when our systems detected roughly 90 phony Apple-like domains that were registered from July 2016 to September 2016. Once again, Chinese Apple users are being targeted for their Apple IDs and passwords using the same content reported on in our earlier blog. The majority of these domains are registered in the .com TLD by email accounts from qq[.]com, and the IPs of these domains point to mainland China, as seen in Figure 1.
Figure 1: Google map showing the location of the hosted phishing domains
What has not Changed?
What has Changed?
Apparently the domains and email addresses used in previous version of the campaign were effectively taken down. Now the attackers have moved to a new malicious infrastructure; new domains, IPs and email addresses are being used for this campaign. The new domain names for the campaign are listed in Table 1, while their IPs and registrant emails are reported in Table 2 and Table 3, respectively.
Table 1: Apple phishing domains serving the Zycode phishing kit.
Table 2 shows the list of unique IPs, which are not the same as what
was seen before.
Table 2. IP addresses used by the domains.
Unique Email Addresses
The email addresses used to register these domains, showing no similarity with email addresses in the previous campaign, are shown in Table 3.
Table 3. List of unique registrant emails.
Table 4 shows the registrant names, which have no similarity with the previous registrant name information.
Table 4. List of registrant names used by the