InfoSec and Compliance – With 20 years of blogging experience, DISC InfoSec blog is dedicated to providing trusted insights and practical solutions for professionals and organizations navigating the evolving cybersecurity landscape. From cutting-edge threats to compliance strategies, this blog is your reliable resource for staying informed and secure. Dive into the content, connect with the community, and elevate your InfoSec expertise!
A deepfake video conference call paired with social engineering tricks has led to the theft of over US$25 million from a multinational firm, the South China Morning Post has reported.
The scheme and the deepfake video conference call
The attack started with messages sent to several of the firm’s employees, but it seems that only one – employed in the finance department of the company’s Hong Kong branch’s – was ultimately bamboozled.
According to the SCMP, the employee’s suspicion were raised when they received the message, purportedly by the company’s UK-based Chief Financial Officer, asking the employee to carry out a secret transaction. But they have been later quelled by a group video conference to which the employee was invited.
Present in the video conference were the company’s CFO, other company staff and even outsiders – or so it seemed.
In reality, the fraudsters used previous video and audio footage and artificial intelligence technology to create the illusion these individuals were present on the call and make these digital recreations “speak” to pull off the illusion.
Baron Chan Shun-ching, a superintendent with Hong Kong Police’s cyber security division, told the SCMP that “during the video conference, the scammers asked the victim to do a self-introduction but did not actually interact with the person. The fake images on screen mainly gave orders before the meeting ended abruptly.”
After the call, the scammers delivered additional instructions via IM, emails and one-on-one video calls. As instructed, the employee sent a total of HK$200 million to five local bank accounts.
Several other employees at the same company branch have also contacted by the scammers, the Hong Kong police said, but did not share how those interactions unfolded.
Deepfakes are getting more difficult to spot
AI-generated deepfakes (whether audio or video) are increasingly being leveraged by scammers and other crooks.
Most people overestimate their deepfake detection skills. This is all new territory, and deepfakes are getting more realistic and more difficult to spot by the day.
“We want to alert the public to these new deception tactics. In the past, we would assume these scams would only involve two people in one-on-one situations, but we can see from this case that fraudsters are able to use AI technology in online meetings, so people must be vigilant even in meetings with lots of participants,” Chan Shun-ching said during a press event.
The Hong Kong Police has advised the public to ask questions during these meetings, ask the participants to move, and confirm requests made during those calls via alternative communication channels.
The recent discovery of a significant flaw in the GNU C Library (glibc), a fundamental component of major Linux distributions, has raised serious security concerns. This flaw grants attackers root access, posing a critical threat to the security of Linux systems.
Vulnerability in GNU C Library (glibc): The GNU C Library, commonly known as glibc, is an essential part of Linux distributions. It provides the core libraries for the system, including those used for file handling, mathematical computations, and system calls.
Root Access Granted: The flaw discovered in glibc allows attackers to gain full root access to Linux machines. Root access means having complete control over the system, enabling an attacker to perform any action, including installing software, accessing all files, and modifying system configurations.
CVE ID: CVE-2023-6246
Description: This vulnerability is related to a dynamic memory buffer overflow and is classified as a Local Privilege Escalation (LPE) issue. It was found in glibc’s __vsyslog_internal() function, which is called by the widely-used syslog and vsyslog functions.
Impact: The flaw allows unprivileged attackers to gain root access on various major Linux distributions in their default configurations. This level of access can enable attackers to take complete control over the affected system.
Severity: Given its potential for granting root access, this vulnerability is considered highly severe.
HOW THE FLAW WORKS
Local Privilege Escalation: The vulnerability is a local privilege escalation (LPE) issue. This means that an attacker who already has access to the system (even with limited privileges) can exploit this flaw to gain root-level access.
Exploitation Requirements: To exploit this flaw, attackers need a Set-User-ID (SUID) binary. SUID is a special type of file permission that allows users to execute a program with the permissions of the file owner, which in many cases is the root user.
IMPACT AND SEVERITY
Widespread Impact: Given the ubiquitous use of glibc in Linux distributions, the impact of this vulnerability is widespread, affecting a vast number of systems and applications.
High Severity: The flaw is considered high severity due to its potential to grant attackers complete control over the affected systems.
MITIGATION AND RESPONSE
Disabling SUID Binaries: One suggested mitigation is to disable SUID binaries using “no new privileges” mode, which can be implemented with tools like systemd or bwrap.
Patch and Update: Users and administrators are urged to apply patches and updates provided by their Linux distribution as soon as they become available. Staying updated is crucial in preventing the exploitation of this vulnerability.
The discovery of the glibc flaw that grants root access to major Linux distributions is a stark reminder of the importance of system security and the need for constant vigilance. Users and administrators must take immediate action to mitigate the risk by applying patches and employing security best practices. As Linux continues to be a backbone for many systems and networks, ensuring its security is paramount for the integrity of countless applications and services.
The FritzFrog botnet, originally identified in 2020, is an advanced peer-to-peer botnet built in Golang that can operate on both AMD and ARM-based devices. With constant updates, the malware has developed over time, adding and enhancing features.
A new strain of the FritzFrog botnet was discovered exploiting the Log4Shell vulnerability to target all hosts in the internal network.
Additionally, by using weak SSH credentials, the malware attacks servers that are accessible over the internet.
“Newer variants now read several system files on compromised hosts to detect potential targets for this attack that have a high likelihood of being vulnerable,” Akamai shared with Cyber Security News.
The Exploitation Chain
The only infection vector used by FritzFrog was SSH brute force; however, more recent iterations of the malware have added the Log4Shell exploitation dubbed “Frog4Shell”.
A vulnerability called Log4Shell was found in the popular open-source Log4j web tool in 2021. Governments and security firms carried out a global initiative to patch the technology.
Presently, the malware targets every host on the internal network as part of its routine for spreading. The malware is attempting to connect to every address on the local network to accomplish this.
According to the researchers, internal computers, which were less likely to be exploited, were frequently overlooked and went unpatched—a situation that FritzFrog takes advantage of.
FritzFrog scanning the local network to identify targets
“This means that even if the “high-profile” internet-facing applications have been patched, a breach of any asset in the network by FritzFrog can expose unpatched internal assets to exploitation,” researchers said.
FritzFrog searches for HTTP servers on ports 8080, 8090, 8888, and 9000 to find possible Log4Shell targets. The malware is currently targeting as many vulnerable Java applications as possible.
Log4Shell exploitation flow
Additionally, FritzFrog enhanced its capacity to identify targets for SSH brute force, which is its primary infection vector.
FritzFrog will now attempt to identify specific SSH targets by counting multiple system logs on each of its victims, in addition to targeting randomly generated IP addresses.
The malware now includes a module that exploits CVE-2021-4034, a privilege escalation in the polkit Linux component. On susceptible servers, this module allows the malware to operate as root.
“Since it is installed by default on most Linux distributions, many unpatched machines are still vulnerable to this CVE today,” researchers said.
Recommendation
The network segmentation can stop the lateral movement of the malware. Software-based segmentation has the potential to be a long-lasting protective measure that is comparatively easy to implement.
For use on SSH servers, a FritzFrog detection script is given that searches for the following FritzFrog indicators:
a. Running processes named nginx, ifconfig, php-fpm, apache2, or libexec, whose executable file no longer exists on the file system (as seen below)
One of the best ways to stay safe and secure when using your computers and other electronic devices is to be aware of the risks. For the past decade, that’s precisely what I’ve been doing.
Most risks are obvious: use strong passwords, don’t download and install software from untrustworthy websites, or hand your unlocked device to a third party.
However, there are less obvious — yet equally dangerous — risks that can result in device or network intrusion, or even device destruction.
Watch out: Some of the most effective and dangerous hacking tools are hard to tell apart from benign devices. They can even be cute.
According to a recent Dynatrace report, only 50% of CISOs believe that development teams have thoroughly tested the software for vulnerabilities before deploying it into the production environment.
This is a statistic that needs to change and the only way to change it is to make sure developers are on the same page as security practitioners.
The challenges
Making developers accept the importance of security in their software development process comes with numerous challenges. They can be split into four categories:
Tool-related challenges
Practice-related challenges
Infrastructure-related challenges
People-related challenges
Integrating security tools into existing DevOps tools can be complicated. “A significant barrier in implementing security into [DevSecOps] is the differences in tool-sets between security and other teams,” researchers Roshan N. Rajapaksea, Mansooreh Zahedia, M. Ali Babara and Haifeng Shenc noted. Also, each team member has their own preferences in tools based on specific advantages.
Some toolsets may also be inadequate, and without standards or documentation developers will have even more difficulties with the integration.
Practice-related challenges involve automation and deployment. DevOps processes are mostly automated, but security requires human action, i.e., manual security practices that are difficult to automate.
Developers are also all about pushing the product as soon as possible, yet, by implementing DevSecOps, the development process needs to slow down to allow possible vulnerabilities to be fixed.
When it comes to infrastructure, a complex cloud environment can slow down secure software development, while a multi-cloud environment can pose difficulties when securing data. Highly regulated environments (air-gapped environments, medical infrastructure, etc.) can also make DevSecOps adoption difficult.
Finally, there’s the people-related challenges: developers may have difficulties with the imminent changes that DevSecOps bring to the development process, and may lack security skills required to carry out certain security practices in DevSecOps.
CISOs and developers (69% and 64%, respectively) both see that the lack of communication and collaboration between developers and security teams is a significant problem.
Implementing DevSecOps will also not work without the right knowledge, which developers have yet to build.
The solutions
To make developers accept DevSecOps, they need to be heard, which means making sure they have a say when security decisions are made. This can contribute to a more productive and constant collaboration and communication between security and development engineers, while also defining roles and responsibilities.
Shifting left is a must, but developers need to know exactly what is expected of them when it comes to secure coding.
“A big part of improving the DevSecOps experience is not introducing more tooling, but getting clear on the process and expectations of how developers should use the tools they already have. Clear communication about policies ensures an organized and consistent approach to implementing security throughout the SDLC,” says Nick Liffen, director at GitHub Advanced Security.
Training is an important part of DevSecOps implementation, but developers need to be reassured that their job will not be disrupted when security gets integrated into coding.
To further motivate them, it’s good to let them see that knowing how to code securely can contribute to both the company’s success and their personal growth.
Learning that being a DevSecOps professional is a good career choice can additionally boost their motivation.
“Between 2021 and 2028, the DevSecOps market is expected to grow at a CAGR of 24.1%. DevSecOps professionals have several job opportunities as a result of this rapid rise. This demand is expected to grow as more companies adopt DevSecOps practices,” said Misbah Thevarmannil, content lead at Practical DevSecOps.
Aembit Becomes the First Workload IAM Platform to Integrate with the Industry-Leading CrowdStrike Falcon Platform to Drive Workload Conditional Access
Aembit, the Workload Identity and Access Management (IAM) platform that enables DevOps and security teams to discover, manage, enforce and audit access between workloads, today announced the availability of a new integration with the industry-leading CrowdStrike Falcon® platform to give enterprises the ability to dynamically manage and enforce conditional access policies based on the real-time security posture of their applications and services.
This integration signifies a significant leap in Aembit’s mission to empower organizations to apply Zero Trust principles to make workload-to-workload access more secure and manageable.
Workload IAM transforms enterprise security by securing workload-to-workload access through policy-driven, identity-based, and secretless access controls, moving away from the legacy unmanaged, secrets-based approach.
Through this partnership, the Aembit Workload IAM solution checks to see if a CrowdStrike Falcon agent is running on the workload and evaluates its real-time security posture to drive workload access decisions to applications and data.
With this approach, now enterprises can protect their workloads from unauthorized access, even against the backdrop of changing conditions and dynamic access requirements. Additional customer benefits from this partnership include:
Managed Workload-to-Workload Access: Enforce and manage workload access to other applications, SaaS services, and third-party APIs based on identity and policy set by the security team, driving down risk.
Seamless Deployment: Drive consolidation by effortlessly integrating the Aembit Workload IAM Platform with the Falcon platform in a few clicks, providing a unified experience for managing workload identities while understanding workload security posture.
Zero Trust Security Model: Embrace a Zero Trust approach, ensuring that every access request, regardless of the source, is verified before granting access rights. Aembit’s solution enforces the principle of least privilege based on identity, policy, and workload security posture, minimizing potential security vulnerabilities.
Visibility and Monitoring: Gain extensive visibility into workload identities and access permissions, enabling swift detection and response to potential security threats. Monitor and audit access logs based on identity for comprehensive security oversight.
This industry-first collaboration builds on the recent CrowdStrike Falcon Fund strategic investment in Aembit, underscoring the global cybersecurity leader’s commitment to fostering innovation within the space. The investment reflects the recognition of the growing demands for securing workload access.
Josh Summitt, the creator of Faction, has always disliked the process of writing reports, preferring to focus on uncovering bugs. A key frustration for him was the redundant step of using a separate note-taking app for storing screenshots and findings before compiling the final report.
He envisioned an integrated solution where the report generation tool would serve as the note-taking platform, incorporating all the standard templates typically used in reports. He hopes Faction will help others save time, reduce stress, and improve their information security workflow.
“I built Faction to be extendable in ways like you would extend BurpSuite. It’s designed to be flexible and extended to fit seamlessly in any environment. It is easy for internal teams to build and support their small modules versus a large code base. In addition, I hope the project will get a growing list of prebuilt modules developed by the community to expand capabilities without requiring internal development,” Summitt told Help Net Security.
Faction features
With Faction, you can:
Streamline penetration testing and security assessment reporting through automation.
Facilitate peer review and monitor modifications in reports.
Design docx templates for various assessments and follow-up retests.
Collaborate in real-time with assessors using the web application and extensions for Burp Suite.
Oversee assessment teams and monitor organizational progress.
Monitor the remediation of vulnerabilities with tailored SLA warnings and notifications.
Leverage a comprehensive Rest API for seamless integration with other tools.
Other features:
LDAP, OAuth 2.0 and SMTP Integration.
Extendable with Custom Plugins similar to Burp Extender.
Custom Report Variables.
Future plans
The developer is currently working on enhancing the extendability of Faction by introducing a full app store, reminiscent of those found in platforms like Slack and Burp. This expansion will allow for the inclusion of additional features such as custom UI elements.
“Faction has had a strong focus on penetration testing from an application security mindset. I want to expand that to be more Red and Blue Team inclusive. Not that it won’t work for these teams out of the box but it could be more flexible,” Summitt added.
2024 is shaping up to be a record-breaking year for data breaches, according to Experian. Despite 2023 being labeled as a ‘successful’ year for malicious actors, the upcoming months may bring forth developments that could further disrupt the cybersecurity landscape.
Supply chain vulnerabilities amplified
There’s no question third-party data breaches have made headlines. With increased data collection, storage, and movement, there are plenty of partners down the supply chain that could be targeted. We predict attacks on systems four, five or six degrees from the source as vendors outsource data and technology solutions who outsource to another expert and so on.
Digital transformation is expanding threat surfaces. SaaS platforms and public cloud infrastructures, are pushing the perimeter out into the internet itself—putting users at greater risk.
When trying to achieve a goal, it’s said that taking small steps can lead to big results. Hackers could apply that same rule. Instead of making drastic moves and trying to reap instant reward such as with ransomware, bad actors may manipulate or alter the tiniest bits of data to stay under the radar such as changing a currency rate or adjusting the coordinates for transportation, which can have a major impact.
It’s widely known who the major players are globally that sponsor attacks and a new country in South Asia may join the international stage with their large population of engineers and programmers. While reportedly having been in the game focusing cyberattacks regionally due to political tensions, this country may broaden their sights in the future.
Plutonium, terbium, silicon wafers — these rare earth materials that are the building blocks for today’s hardware are rapidly becoming the most sought-after resources on the planet. Any disruption to an strained supply chain could send the industry (and the economy that relies on these materials) spinning.
This presents an intriguing opportunity for threat actors seeking mass disruption or nations looking to corner markets.
“Cybercriminals are continually working smarter, not harder,” said Michael Bruemmer, VP, Global Data Breach Resolution at Experian. “They are leveraging new technologies like artificial intelligence and applying their talents in different ways to be more strategic and stay a step ahead. Organizations should not ignore even the slightest security abnormalities and be more aware of what global interests may make them a target.”
Winning from the inside
Like drug cartels, cybergangs are forming sophisticated organizations as joining like-minded actors can be incredibly advantageous. This spans globally with countries potentially helping each other to advance common goals and interests. We’ll see more hackers for trade, crews looking to expand their monopolies, and cyberwarfare alliances.
In 2024, enterprising threat actors may target more publicly traded companies to gain insights to cheat the stock market or plan their attacks and sell their stash before value nosedives. Rather than breach an organization and play in the underground with stolen data, threat actors could leverage data extraction and their talents in plain sight as everyday investors.
“Today, perpetrators can come from anywhere in the world and bring with them robust resources and expertise,” added Jim Steven, Head of Crisis and Data Response Services at Experian Global Data Breach Resolution in the United Kingdom. “There are many global crime syndicates and nation-backed operations, so companies need to invest in sophisticated prevention and response methods to protect themselves.”
Chief Information Security Officers (CISOs) hold a critical and challenging role in today’s rapidly evolving cybersecurity landscape. Here are the common security challenges CISOs face…
As organizations increasingly rely on technology to drive their operations, CISOs face complex security challenges that demand their expertise and strategic decision-making.
These challenges arise from the constant emergence of sophisticated cyber threats, the need to protect sensitive data, and the ever-evolving regulatory landscape.
The role of a CISO requires balancing proactive risk mitigation with the ability to respond swiftly to incidents and breaches.
This article will delve into the top challenges CISOs face, including protecting digital assets, managing security incidents, ensuring compliance, dealing with insider threats, and the relentless pursuit of cyber resilience.
By understanding these challenges, CISOs can develop robust cybersecurity strategies and lead their organizations toward a secure and resilient future.
Who is a CISO?
Chief Information Security Officer (CISO) is a senior executive responsible for overseeing and administering an organization’s information security plan.
A CISO’s primary responsibility is safeguarding the confidentiality, availability, and integrity of an organization’s information assets and systems.
They are accountable for creating and enforcing strategies, policies, and procedures to defend against cyber threats, protect sensitive data, and mitigate security risks.
CISOs play a crucial role in maintaining an organization’s security posture by establishing and enforcing security standards, conducting risk assessments, and implementing appropriate security controls.
They collaborate with other executives, IT teams, and stakeholders to align security initiatives with business objectives and ensure that security measures are integrated into the organization’s operations.
In addition to their technical expertise, CISOs often engage in risk management, incident response planning, security awareness training, and compliance with regulatory requirements.
They stay updated on the latest cybersecurity trends, threats, and technologies to address emerging risks and implement appropriate security measures effectively.
The role of a CISO has become increasingly important as cyber threats evolve in complexity and frequency.
CISOs are responsible for safeguarding the organization’s sensitive information, maintaining the trust of customers and stakeholders, and ensuring business continuity in the face of cybersecurity challenges.
What are all the Roles and Responsibilities of CISO?
Developing and Implementing Information Security Strategy: The CISO is responsible for developing and implementing an overarching information security strategy aligned with the organization’s business objectives. This includes setting security goals, defining security policies and procedures, and establishing risk management frameworks.
Leading the Security Team: The CISO manages and provides leadership to the security team, including hiring, training, and supervising security personnel. They ensure the team has the necessary skills, resources, and support to carry out their responsibilities effectively.
Overseeing Security Operations: The CISO oversees day-to-day security operations, including incident response, vulnerability management, threat intelligence, and security monitoring. They ensure appropriate controls, technologies, and processes are in place to protect the organization’s assets.
Risk Management: The CISO is responsible for identifying and assessing security risks to the organization’s information systems and assets. They develop and implement risk management strategies to safeguard critical data and systems, including risk mitigation, transfer, and acceptance.
Compliance and Regulatory Requirements: The CISO ensures that the organization complies with relevant security regulations, industry standards, and legal requirements. They stay updated on emerging regulations and ensure appropriate controls and processes are in place to meet compliance obligations.
Security Incident Response: The CISO leads the organization’s response to security incidents, including data breaches, malware attacks, and other security breaches. They establish incident response plans, coordinate efforts, and collaborate with relevant stakeholders, such as legal, PR, and law enforcement agencies.
Security Awareness and Training: The CISO promotes a culture of security awareness throughout the organization. They develop and deliver security awareness programs and training initiatives to educate employees on security best practices and minimize human-related security risks.
Vendor and Third-Party Risk Management: The CISO assesses and manages security risks associated with third-party vendors and partners. They establish vendor security requirements, conduct due diligence, and monitor compliance with security standards and contractual obligations.
Security Governance and Reporting: The CISO provides regular reports and updates on the organization’s security posture to executive management, board members, and other relevant stakeholders. They ensure that security metrics and key performance indicators (KPIs) are established to measure the effectiveness of security programs.
Incident Investigation and Forensics: In the event of security incidents, the CISO oversees the investigation and forensic analysis to identify the root cause, assess the impact, and prevent future occurrences. As required, they collaborate with internal and external resources, such as forensic experts and law enforcement agencies.
CISOs face various common security challenges as they strive to protect their organizations’ digital assets and information. Perimeter 81 Guide helps CISOsto prevent their network from being at Risk. Some of the key challenges they encounter include:
Sophisticated Cyberattacks: CISOs must defend against increasingly sophisticated cyber threats, including advanced persistent threats (APTs), ransomware attacks, social engineering, and zero-day exploits. These attacks can bypass traditional security measures and require constant vigilance and adaptive security strategies.
Insider Threats: CISOs need to address the risks posed by insiders, including employees, contractors, or partners who have authorized access to systems and data. Insider threats can involve accidental data breaches, negligence, or malicious intent, requiring a balance between enabling productivity and implementing controls to prevent unauthorized access or data leakage.
Compliance and Regulatory Requirements: CISOs must ensure their organizations comply with industry-specific regulations, such as GDPR, HIPAA, PCI-DSS, or SOX, and evolving privacy laws. Navigating complex compliance requirements and maintaining a robust security posture to meet these standards can be a significant challenge.
Cloud Security: As organizations increasingly adopt cloud services and infrastructure, CISOs must address the unique security challenges associated with cloud computing. This includes securing data stored in the cloud, managing access controls, and ensuring the security of cloud service providers (CSPs) and their environments.
Security Skills Gap: CISOs often need more skilled cybersecurity professionals. The industry’s rapid growth and evolving threat landscape have resulted in high demand for cybersecurity talent, making recruiting and retaining qualified professionals challenging.
Third-Party Risk: Organizations rely on third-party vendors and suppliers, introducing potential security risks. CISOs must assess the security posture of third parties, establish contractual security obligations, and monitor their adherence to security standards to mitigate the risk of breaches through these external connections.
Security Awareness and Training: Human error remains a significant factor in cybersecurity incidents. CISOs must promote a strong security culture, provide regular training and awareness programs, and educate employees about cybersecurity best practices to minimize the risk of social engineering, phishing attacks, and other user-related vulnerabilities.
Incident Response and Recovery: CISOs must develop and test robust incident response plans to manage and recover from security incidents effectively. This involves identifying and containing breaches, conducting forensic investigations, and implementing remediation measures to minimize the impact and prevent future incidents.
Emerging Technologies: Adopting technologies like the Internet of Things (IoT), artificial intelligence (AI), and blockchain introduces new security challenges. CISOs must understand the security implications of these technologies, assess risks, and implement appropriate controls to protect against potential vulnerabilities and attacks.
Budget and Resource Constraints: CISOs often face budget limitations and the need to prioritize security initiatives. Balancing the allocation of resources to address immediate security needs while investing in long-term security capabilities can be a significant challenge.
What are the Security Compliance CISO Should Follow
As a Chief Information Security Officer (CISO), there are several security compliance frameworks and regulations that you should consider following, depending on the nature of your organization and its operations. Here are some of the key security compliance frameworks and regulations:
General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR): If your organization deals with the personal data of individuals in the European Union (EU), GDPR sets requirements for the protection, processing, and transfer of personal data. It includes principles for data minimization, consent, data breach notification, and the rights of individuals.
Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS): PCI DSS applies to organizations that handle credit card information. It sets requirements for securing payment card data, including network security, encryption, access controls, and regular vulnerability assessments.
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA): HIPAA applies to organizations in the healthcare industry that handle protected health information (PHI). It establishes requirements for the privacy and security of PHI, including access controls, encryption, risk assessments, and breach notification.
Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX): SOX applies to publicly traded companies in the United States. It sets requirements for financial reporting and establishes controls and processes to ensure the accuracy and integrity of financial statements. While not solely focused on security, it includes provisions for protecting financial data.
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Cybersecurity Framework: The NIST Cybersecurity Framework provides guidelines and best practices for managing cybersecurity risks. It covers risk assessment, security controls, incident response, and continuous monitoring.
ISO 27001: ISO 27001 is an international standard that provides a framework for establishing, implementing, maintaining, and continually improving an information security management system (ISMS). It covers various aspects of information security, including risk management, access controls, incident management, and security awareness.
Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA): FISMA applies to U.S. federal agencies and sets requirements for securing federal information and systems. It mandates risk assessments, security controls, incident response planning, and continuous monitoring.
Security Challenges CISOs Face to Manage Security Team
Managing a security team as a Chief Information Security Officer (CISO) requires effective leadership, communication, and coordination. Here are some key aspects to consider when managing a security team:
Establish Clear Roles and Responsibilities: Clearly define the roles and responsibilities of each team member to ensure everyone understands their specific duties and areas of expertise. This clarity helps streamline operations and avoid confusion.
Set Goals and Objectives: Define strategic goals and objectives for the security team aligned with the organization’s overall security strategy. Communicate these goals to the team and regularly track progress to ensure everyone is working towards the same objectives.
Provide Guidance and Mentorship: Offer team members guidance, mentorship, and professional development opportunities. Encourage skill development, certifications, and staying up-to-date with the latest security trends and technologies—support team members in their career growth.
Foster Collaboration and Communication: Promote a collaborative and open communication culture within the team. Encourage knowledge sharing, cross-functional collaboration, and effective communication channels. Regular team meetings, brainstorming sessions, and updates are valuable for aligning efforts.
Support Decision-Making: Empower team members to make decisions within their areas of responsibility. Provide guidance and support when needed, but encourage autonomy and ownership in decision-making. Foster an environment where team members feel comfortable taking calculated risks.
Establish Incident Response Procedures: Develop clear incident response procedures and ensure the team is well-prepared to handle security incidents effectively. Conduct regular drills, tabletop exercises, and simulations to test and improve the team’s incident response capabilities.
Stay Informed and Adapt: Stay up-to-date with the latest security threats, industry trends, and best practices. Encourage continuous learning and professional development for the team. Adapt security strategies and measures as the threat landscape evolves.
Collaborate with Other Departments: Work closely with other departments, such as IT, legal, HR, and executive management, to ensure security initiatives are aligned with business objectives and integrated into overall organizational operations. Build relationships and foster a culture of security awareness throughout the organization.
Regularly Evaluate and Improve: Regularly evaluate the team’s performance, processes, and procedures. Collect feedback from team members and stakeholders to identify areas for improvement. Implement changes and adjustments as necessary to enhance the team’s effectiveness and efficiency.
Lead by Example: Demonstrate strong leadership skills, integrity, and a commitment to security best practices. Lead by example in adhering to security policies and procedures. Encourage a positive and supportive work environment.
CISOs face many common security challenges as protectors of their organization’s digital assets and information.
From sophisticated cyberattacks and insider threats to compliance requirements and resource constraints, these challenges highlight the complex and evolving nature of the cybersecurity landscape.
CISOs must navigate these challenges by adopting a proactive and strategic approach to security, leveraging advanced technologies, fostering a strong security culture, and collaborating with stakeholders.
To overcome these challenges, CISOs must stay abreast of emerging threats, continuously evaluate and improve their security measures, and prioritize investments in critical security capabilities.
They must also foster strong partnerships with internal teams, third-party vendors, and industry peers to collectively address security challenges and share best practices.
While the security challenges CISOs face may seem daunting, they also present opportunities for innovation and growth.
By effectively addressing these challenges, CISOs can enhance their organizations’ security posture, safeguard critical assets, and instill confidence in customers and stakeholders.
Ultimately, the role of a CISO requires a comprehensive and adaptable approach to cybersecurity, where staying one step ahead of threats and continuously improving security measures are paramount.
By embracing these challenges, CISOs can help shape a secure and resilient future for their organizations in an increasingly interconnected and threat-filled digital landscape.
The digital landscape is under siege. Surging browser-based phishing attacks, a 198% increase in just the second half of 2023, paint a chilling picture of cyber threats outsmarting traditional security.
Menlo Security’s 2023 State of Browser Security Report unveils this alarming trend, sounding the alarm for organizations and individuals alike.
The Rise Of Evasive Attacks
Gone are the days of easily identifiable phishing scams.
Cybercriminals are now armed with highly evasive techniques, bypassing conventional defenses like network filters and email scanners.
These HEATs (Highly Evasive Adaptive Threats), making up 30% of all browser-based attacks, employ tactics like:
SMS Phishing (Smishing): Luring victims with seemingly legitimate text messages.
Adversary in the Middle (AITM): Intercepting and manipulating web traffic on the fly.
Image-Based Phishing: Embedding malicious code within seemingly harmless images.
Brand Impersonation: Mimicking trusted websites to steal login credentials.
Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA) Bypass: Finding ways to circumvent even two-factor security.
Traditional security, built for known threats, stumbles against the lightning speed of zero-hour attacks.
These novel phishing campaigns, observed at over 11,000 in just 30 days, exploit the vast and vulnerable attack surface of modern browsers.
Worryingly, 75% of these attacks hide on trusted websites, cloaked in a veneer of legitimacy.
Despite technological advancements, the human element remains the weakest link.
Phishing preys on our inherent trust and cognitive biases, tricking us into divulging sensitive information.
This makes browser security the ultimate line of defense, protecting users at the point of interaction with the web.
Menlo Security: Shining A Light On The Dark Web
The report paints a stark picture, but not a hopeless one. Menlo Security offers a beacon of hope with its advanced browser security solutions.
Leveraging cutting-edge AI and machine learning, Menlo’s technology detects and thwarts even the most sophisticated evasive attacks.
Key Takeaways for a Safer Web:
Evasive threats demand a new approach: Traditional security falls short. Look to advanced browser security solutions powered by AI.
Zero-hour attacks lurk everywhere: Don’t let trusted websites lull you into a false sense of security. Remain vigilant and practice safe browsing habits.
Your browser is the frontline: Prioritize comprehensive browser security to shield yourself from evolving cyber threats
David Miller, Policy Advocate: “This report calls for increased collaboration between cybersecurity researchers, technology companies, and policymakers. We need to share threat intelligence, develop best practices, and create regulatory frameworks that incentivize stronger browser security measures.”
Organizations should adopt efficient incident response plans, regularly monitor email traffic for anomalies, and stay updated on emerging threats to stay ahead of the evolving email threat landscape withTrustifiAI-powered Email security solutions.
A US court has rejected spyware vendor NSO Group’s motion to dismiss a lawsuit filed by Apple that alleges the developer violated computer fraud and other laws by infecting customers’ iDevices with its surveillance software.
Apple sued NSO, developer of the notorious Pegasus spyware, back in November 2021 and asked the court to permanently ban NSO from using any Apple software, services, or devices. The lawsuit alleges that company violated the US Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), California’s Unfair Competition Law, and the terms of use for Apple’s own iCloud when its spyware was installed on victims’ devices without their knowledge or consent. NSO now must answer Apple’s complaint by February 14.
Pegasus infected Apple customers’ devices via a zero-click exploit called FORCEDENTRY, according to Cupertino. Once it lands on phones, the spyware allows users to snoop on phone calls, messages, and access the phone’s camera and microphone without permission.
Despite the surveillance-software maker’s claims that it only sells to government agencies, and even then, only to investigate terrorism or other serious crimes, the software has repeatedly been used to spy on journalists, activists, political dissidents, diplomats and government officials. This has led to US sanctions against the company and several lawsuits.
Last March, NSO asked the court to toss Apple’s lawsuit, arguing that Cupertino should be required to sue the developer in Israel, its home jurisdiction. It also claimed that Apple can’t sue over CFAA violations because the iGiant itself didn’t suffer any damages or loss [PDF].
The court, in its ruling on Monday, dismissed these arguments, noting that “the anti-hacking purpose of the CFAA fits Apple’s allegations to a T, and NSO has not shown otherwise.”
“A ‘loss’ is ‘any reasonable cost to any victim, including the cost of responding to an offense, conducting a damage assessment, and restoring the data, program, system, or information to its condition prior to the offense, and any revenue lost, cost incurred, or other consequential damages incurred because of interruption of service’ … That is precisely the loss Apple has alleged here,” the judge continued [PDF].
When asked about the judge’s ruling, an NSO Group spokesperson said the software maker will fight on.
“The motion to dismiss is part of the legal process in this case,” the NSO spokesperson told The Register. “The technology in question is critical to law enforcement and intelligence agencies in their efforts to maintain public safety. We are confident that once the arguments are presented, the Court will rule in our favor.”
Apple, meanwhile, took the win, and a spokesperson told The Register that this lawsuit is just one of the ways the iGiant is fighting back against spyware vendors.
These include the new Lockdown Mode security feature, the threat notifications it sends to users who may be targets in nation-state attacks, and a $10 million grant to support civil society organizations that research spyware threats and conduct advocacy on the topic through the Ford Foundation.
The cybersecurity field continuously generates new terms and concepts as it evolves with time. It also repurposes words to describe new concepts. There’s a never-ending flow of jargon that some refer to as an alphabet soup of complexity. From NGAV to XDR, it appears unlikely for cybersecurity to run out of new acronyms and terminologies.
Meanwhile, some popular terms used in cybersecurity can have contradicting meanings. These are the so-called contronyms, which may add some spice to the insipidity of tech terms. Here’s a list of some famous cybersecurity words or phrases many would probably think they are already familiar with but are likely to be surprised to learn about their other meanings.
HACKING
Most people tend to equate hacking to cybercrime, an attempt to illegally access, damage, or take over a computer system. This is not surprising given that most news articles that mention hacking use the term in its negative connotation, referring to cyber attacks aimed at bypassing access controls or security measures to prevent the unauthorized use of IT resources.
However, hacking can mean something positive or useful. In cybersecurity, system hacking can refer to an authorized effort to break existing security measures to test their effectiveness and spot weaknesses. The term often used for this action is “ethical hacking,” but hacking by itself is neither good nor bad. It’s how it is used that spells the difference.
Hacking in both its malicious and ethical instances follows the same stages. Also, they use similar techniques, from password cracking to phishing, the deployment of rootkits and trojans, exploitation of buffer overflows, privilege escalation, and the use of keyloggers. These steps and techniques are observed in attempts to exploit vulnerabilities and detect security weaknesses so that they can be plugged or resolved.
PATCHING
In contrast to hacking, patching is often perceived as a positive term. It is mostly known as the application of a software patch to address a vulnerability or add new functions. Software publishers regularly release patches for their software in response to developments in the cyber threat landscape and to provide improvements in their software products.
Negatively, patching refers to the unauthorized modification of a software or system by taking advantage of system vulnerabilities. Cybercriminals can infiltrate or corrupt software pipelines, allowing them to send out malicious software patches to unsuspecting users. This works because many tend to excessively trust their automated software pipelines or they carelessly obtain their software updates from unofficial sources.
SNIFFING
Among those involved in network administration, sniffing is a legitimate process that entails the tracking and analysis of network traffic. This is done to undertake a troubleshooting task, monitor network performance, or facilitate network security-related actions. It is one of the vital actions in Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS).
However, sniffing can also refer to malicious packet sniffing, wherein an attacker intercepts the packets transmitted through a network. Sniffing allows bad actors to steal login credentials and other sensitive information. It can help them gain access to online accounts or steal crucial data. Sniffing is often used as a form of cyber attack on devices that connect to the internet through public WiFi networks.
Sniffing in the negative context is not new. It has been used as an attack for decades. Cybersecurity advocates pointed out the threat of sniffing more than a decade ago amid the proliferation of businesses that offer free public WiFi connection without strong security.
SCRIPTING
Scripting refers to the writing and deployment of scripts for the automation of repetitive tasks. It is used to automate routine actions, which enables the efficient management of systems. Scripting is also employed in penetration testing to simulate cyber attacks on a system. Similarly, it is used in log analysis and monitoring, day-to-day security operations, forensics and incident response, and cross-platform compatibility testing.
However, scripting can also be malicious, as used by threat actors. Cybercriminals can turn to malicious scripting to automate the execution of files that have been successfully introduced into a system. Successfully deceiving a computer user into downloading a file is not enough for the malicious file to inflict damage. Scripts are necessary to unleash the effects of malicious files and detect security vulnerabilities.
BACKDOOR
The term backdoor is usually known for its negative implication. Most news and articles refer to backdoors in an unfavorable context. This should not come as a surprise since backdoors are often used by cybercriminals. They serve as a way to bypass normal authentication for any computer-related system, facilitating unauthorized access or the introduction of malicious files to a computer or network.
However, backdoors can be a feature intentionally added to the software. They can be deliberately put in an app to provide an optional means of access in cases when conventional access methods are unavailable. This “necessary” version of a backdoor was in the spotlight some years ago when the US FBI asked Apple to purposely build a backdoor on their iPhones.
KILL CHAIN
The cyber kill chain is a framework developed by Lockheed Martin as part of its patented Intelligence Driven Defense model for cyber attack identification and prevention. It consists of a series of steps that represent the different stages of a cyber attack, from early reconnaissance to command and control and “actions on objectives.” This model helps organizations visualize and comprehend the different stages of an attack, focusing on critical points in the attack, developing strategies to mitigate threats, and boosting incident response capabilities.
Essentially, the kill chain is a process that is supposed to help organizations prepare for cyber attacks, successfully fend off an assault, and mitigate problems that emerge in the wake of a cyber attack. However, the phrase kill chain, in colloquial use, may refer to a successful cyber attack.
AN EXERCISE IN CYBERSECURITY JARGON COMPLEXITY
It may sound confusing, but contronyms exist everywhere. Interestingly, these words still make sense despite the auto-contradiction. In cybersecurity, contronyms reflect the complexity and flexibility of language, showing how words can change in meaning depending on their context and usage.
Isn’t it counterintuitive for cybersecurity terms to bear contradicting meanings? Possibly. However, what is ultimately important is the understanding that cybersecurity terms are far from straightforward. It is a must to properly get acquainted with them to understand what they really mean, especially with the rise of a plethora of acronyms and jargon introduced by security solution providers. Many of which tend to be marketing-speak or misnomers.
North Korean Hackers Weaponize Fake Research to Deliver RokRAT Backdoor
Media organizations and high-profile experts in North Korean affairs have been at the receiving end of a new campaign orchestrated by a threat actor known as ScarCruft in December 2023.
“ScarCruft has been experimenting with new infection chains, including the use of a technical threat research report as a decoy, likely targeting consumers of threat intelligence like cybersecurity professionals,” SentinelOne researchers Aleksandar Milenkoski and Tom Hegel said in a report shared with The Hacker News.
The North Korea-linked adversary, also known by the name APT37, InkySquid, RedEyes, Ricochet Chollima, and Ruby Sleet, is assessed to be part of the Ministry of State Security (MSS), placing it apart from Lazarus Group and Kimsuky, which are elements within the Reconnaissance General Bureau (RGB).
Earlier this week, North Korean state media reported that the country had carried out a test of its “underwater nuclear weapons system” in response to drills by the U.S., South Korea, and Japan, describing the exercises as a threat to its national security.
The latest attack chain observed by SentinelOne targeted an expert in North Korean affairs by posing as a member of the North Korea Research Institute, urging the recipient to open a ZIP archive file containing presentation materials.
While seven of the nine files in the archive are benign, two of them are malicious Windows shortcut (LNK) files, mirroring a multi-stage infection sequence previously disclosed by Check Point in May 2023 to distribute the RokRAT backdoor.
There is evidence to suggest that some of the individuals who were targeted around December 13, 2023, were also previously singled out a month prior on November 16, 2023.
SentinelOne said its investigation also uncovered malware – two LNK files (“inteligence.lnk” and “news.lnk”) as well as shellcode variants delivering RokRAT – that’s said to be part of the threat actor’s planning and testing processes.
While the former shortcut file just opens the legitimate Notepad application, the shellcode executed via news.lnk paves the way for the deployment of RokRAT, although this infection procedure is yet to be observed in the wild, indicating its likely use for future campaigns.
Both LNK files have been observed deploying the same decoy document, a legitimate threat intelligence report about the Kimsuky threat group published by South Korean cybersecurity company Genians in late October 2023, in a move that implies an attempt to expand its target list.
This has raised the possibility that the adversary could be looking to gather information that could help it refine its operational playbook and also target or mimic cybersecurity professionals to infiltrate specific targets via brand impersonation techniques.
The development is a sign that the nation-state hacking crew is actively tweaking its modus operandi in an apparent effort to circumvent detection in response to public disclosure about its tactics and techniques.
“ScarCruft remains committed to acquiring strategic intelligence and possibly intends to gain insights into non-public cyber threat intelligence and defense strategies,” the researchers said.
“This enables the adversary to gain a better understanding of how the international community perceives developments in North Korea, thereby contributing to North Korea’s decision-making processes.”
Artificial Intelligence (AI) has arisen as a wildly disruptive technology across many industries. As AI models continue to improve, more industries are sure to be disrupted and affected. One industry that is already feeling the effects of AI is digital security. The use of this new technology has opened up new avenues of protecting data, but it has also caused some concerns about its ethicality and effectiveness when compared with what we will refer to as traditional or established security practices.
This article will touch on the ways that this new tech is affecting already established practices, what new practices are arising, and whether or not they are safe and ethical.
HOW DOES AI AFFECT ALREADY ESTABLISHED SECURITY PRACTICES?
It is a fair statement to make that AI is still a nascent technology. Most experts agree that it is far from reaching its full potential, yet even so, it has still been able to disrupt many industries and practices. In terms of already established security practices, AI is providing operators with the opportunity to analyze huge amounts of data at incredible speed and with impressive accuracy. Identifying patterns and detecting anomalies is easy for AI to do, and incredibly useful for most traditional data security practices.
Previously these systems would rely solely on human operators to perform the data analyses, which can prove time-consuming and would be prone to errors. Now, with AI help, human operators need only understand the refined data the AI is providing them and act on it.
IN WHAT WAYS CAN AI BE USED TO BOLSTER AND IMPROVE EXISTING SECURITY MEASURES?
AI can be used in several other ways to improve security measures. In terms of access protection, AI-driven facial recognition and other forms of biometric security can easily provide a relatively foolproof access protection solution. Using biometric access can eliminate passwords, which are often a weak link in data security.
AI’s ability to sort through large amounts of data means that it can be very effective in detecting and preventing cyber threats. An AI-supported network security program could, with relatively little oversight, analyze network traffic, identify vulnerabilities, and proactively defend against any incoming attacks.
THE DIFFICULTIES IN UPDATING EXISTING SECURITY SYSTEMS WITH AI SOLUTIONS
The most pressing difficulty is that some old systems are simply not compatible with AI solutions. Security systems designed and built to be operated solely by humans are often not able to be retrofitted with AI algorithms, which means that any upgrades necessitate a complete, and likely expensive, overhaul of the security systems.
One industry that has been quick to embrace AI-powered security systems is the online gambling industry. For those who are interested in seeing what AI-driven security can look like, visiting a casino online and investigating its security protocols will give you an idea of what is possible. Having an industry that has been an early adoption of such a disruptive technology can help other industries learn what to do and what not to do. In many cases, online casinos staged entire overhauls of their security suites to incorporate AI solutions, rather than trying to incorporate new tech, with older non-compatible security technology.
Another important factor in the difficulty of incorporating AI systems is that it takes a very large amount of data to properly train an AI algorithm. Thankfully, other companies are doing this work, and it should be possible to buy an already trained AI, fit to purpose. All that remains is trusting that the trainers did their due diligence and that the AI will be effective.
EFFECTIVENESS OF AI-DRIVEN SECURITY SYSTEMS
AI-driven security systems are, for the most part, lauded as being effective. With faster threat detection and response times quicker than humanly possible, the advantage of using AI for data security is clear.
AI has also proven resilient in terms of adapting to new threats. AI has an inherent ability to learn, which means that as new threats are developed and new vulnerabilities emerge, a well-built AI will be able to learn and eventually respond to new threats just as effectively as old ones.
It has been suggested that AI systems must completely replace traditional data security solutions shortly. Part of the reason for this is not just their inherent effectiveness, but there is an anticipation that incoming threats will also be using AI. Better to fight fire with fire.
IS USING AI FOR SECURITY DANGEROUS?
The short answer is no, the long answer is no, but. The main concern when using AI security measures with little human input is that they could generate false positives or false negatives. AI is not infallible, and despite being able to process huge amounts of data, it can still get confused.
It could also be possible for the AI security system to itself be attacked and become a liability. If an attack were to target and inject malicious code into the AI system, it could see a breakdown in its effectiveness which would potentially allow multiple breaches.
The best remedy for both of these concerns is likely to ensure that there is still an alert human component to the security system. By ensuring that well-trained individuals are monitoring the AI systems, the dangers of false positives or attacks on the AI system are reduced greatly.
ARE THERE LEGITIMATE ETHICAL CONCERNS WHEN AI IS USED FOR SECURITY?
Yes. The main ethical concern relating to AI when used for security is that the algorithm could have an inherent bias. This can occur if the data used for the training of the AI is itself biased or incomplete in some way.
Another important ethical concern is that AI security systems are known to sort through personal data to do their job, and if this data were to be accessed or misused, privacy rights would be compromised.
Many AI systems also have a lack of transparency and accountability, which compounds the problem of the AI algorithm’s potential for bias. If an AI is concluding that a human operator cannot understand the reasoning, the AI system must be held suspect.
CONCLUSION
AI could be a great boon to security systems and is likely an inevitable and necessary upgrade. The inability of human operators to combat AI threats alone seems to suggest its necessity. Coupled with its ability to analyze and sort through mountains of data and adapt to threats as they develop, AI has a bright future in the security industry.
However, AI-driven security systems must be overseen by trained human operators who understand the complexities and weaknesses that AI brings to their systems.
“Today Microsoft Incident Response are proud to introduce two one-page guides to help security teams investigate suspicious activity in Microsoft 365 and Microsoft Entra. These guides contain the artifacts that Microsoft Incident Response hunts for and uses daily to provide our customers with evidence of Threat Actor activity in their tenant.”
OSINVGPT is an AI-based system that helps security analysts with open-source investigations and tool selection. While this tool was developed by “Very Simple Research.”
This tool can assist security analysts in gathering relevant information, sources, and tools for their investigations. It even helps researchers produce reports and summaries of their results.
OSINVGPT is available on ChatGPT and is useful for security researchers as it saves both time and effort.
Here below, we have mentioned all the key aspects that OSINVGPT can do:-
Data Analysis
Interpretation
Guidance on Methodology
Case Studies
Examples
Document Analysis
Fact-Checking
Verification
Recommendations Based on External Sources
Ethical Considerations
OSINVGPT’s data analysis and interpretation involve examining information from diverse open sources to form readable narratives and address specific queries. At the same time, guidance is offered on conducting transparent and accurate open-source investigations.
Detailed insights and suggestions are provided using real-world examples within the knowledge base. Appropriate data is analyzed and extracted from the uploaded documents for open-source investigations.
To ensure investigation accuracy, assistance is given in fact-checking using open-source data. Recommendations based on external sources are provided for queries beyond the direct knowledge base, with a focus on ethical considerations in open-source investigations for responsible conduct.
Moreover, if you want, you can access the OSINVGPT tool from here for open-source investigation.
CISA warns that a critical authentication bypass vulnerability in Ivanti’s Endpoint Manager Mobile (EPMM) and MobileIron Core device management software (patched in August 2023) is now under active exploitation.
Tracked as CVE-2023-35082, the flaw is a remote unauthenticated API access vulnerability affecting all versions of EPMM 11.10, 11.9, and 11.8 and MobileIron Core 11.7 and below,.
Successful exploitation provides attackers access to personally identifiable information (PII) of mobile device users and can let them backdoor compromised servers when chaining the bug with other flaws.
“Ivanti has an RPM script available now. We recommend customers first upgrade to a supported version and then apply the RPM script,” the company said in August. “More detailed information can be found in this Knowledge Base articleon the Ivanti Community portal.”
Cybersecurity company Rapid7, which discovered and reported the vulnerability, provides indicators of compromise(IOCs) to help admins detect signs of a CVE-2023-35082 attack.
Shodan’s data also reveals that the more than 150 instances linked to government agencies worldwide can be directly accessed via the Internet.
Internet-exposed Ivanti EPMM user portals (Shodan)
While it has yet to provide further details on CVE-2023-35082 active exploitation, CISA added the vulnerability to its Known Exploited Vulnerabilities Catalog based on evidence of active exploitation and says there’s no evidence of abuse in ransomware attacks.
The cybersecurity agency also ordered U.S. federal agencies to patch it by February 2, as required by a binding operational directive (BOD 22-01) issued three years ago.
Ivanti has yet to update its Augustadvisories or issue another notification warning that attackers are using this security vulnerability in the wild.
Two other Ivanti Connect Secure (ICS) zero-days, an auth bypass (CVE-2023-46805) and a command injection (CVE-2024-21887) are now also under mass exploitation by multiple threat groups, starting January 11.
Victims compromised so far range from small businesses to multiple Fortune 500 companies from various industry sectors, with the attackers having already backdoored over 1,700 ICS VPN appliances using a GIFTEDVISITOR webshell variant.
Today, DDoS attacks stand out as the most widespread cyber threat, extending their impact to APIs.
When successfully executed, these attacks can cripple a system, presenting a more severe consequence than DDoS incidents targeting web applications.
The increased risk amplifies the potential for reputational damage to the company associated with the affected APIs.
How Does DDoS Affect Your APIs?
A DDoS attack on an API involves overwhelming the targeted API with a flood of traffic from multiple sources, disrupting its normal functioning and causing it to become unavailable to legitimate users.
This attack can be particularly damaging as APIs play a crucial role in enabling communication between different software applications, and disruption can impact the overall functionality of interconnected systems.
The impact of DDoS attacks is particularly severe for businesses and organizations that depend on their APIs to deliver essential services to customers. These attacks, employing methods such as UDP floods, SYN floods, HTTP floods, and others, pose a significant threat.
Typically orchestrated through botnets—networks of compromised devices under the control of a single attacker—DDoS attacks can cripple a target’s functionality.
DDoS attacks on APIs focus on the server and each part of your API service. But how do attackers manage to exploit DDoS attacks on APIs?
This Webinar on API attack simulation shows an example of a DDoS attack on APIs and how WAAP can protect the API endpoints.
Several factors can make APIs vulnerable to DDoS attacks:
Absence or insufficient Rate-Limiting: If an API lacks robust rate-limiting mechanisms, attackers can exploit this weakness by sending a massive volume of requests in a short period, overwhelming the system’s capacity to handle them.
Inadequate Authentication and Authorization: Weak or compromised authentication measures can allow malicious actors to gain unauthorized access to an API. Once inside, they may misuse the API by flooding it with requests, leading to a DDoS scenario.
Insufficient Monitoring and Anomaly Detection: Ineffective monitoring and anomaly detection systems can make identifying abnormal traffic patterns associated with a DDoS attack challenging. Prompt detection is crucial for implementing mitigation measures.
Scalability Issues: APIs that cannot scale dynamically in response to increased traffic may become targets for DDoS attacks. A sudden surge in requests can overload the system if it cannot scale its resources efficiently.
How Do WAAP Solutions Protect Against DDoS Attacks on API?
Web Application and API Protection (WAAP) platform offers in-line blocking capabilities for all layer seven traffic, comprehensively securing web applications and APIs.
To guarantee robust security, WAFs incorporated into WAAP solutions provide immediate defense by filtering, monitoring, detecting, and automatically blocking malicious traffic, thereby preventing its access to the server.
Active monitoring of traffic on an API endpoint enables the identification of abnormal traffic patterns commonly linked to DDoS attacks. Instances of sudden spikes in traffic volume serve as red flags for potential attacks, and a proficient monitoring system can promptly detect and address such increases.
In addition, WAAP enforces rate limits by assessing the number of requests from an IP address. API rate limiting is critical in mitigating DDoS damage and reducing calls, data volume, and types. Setting limits aligned with API capacity and user needs enhances security and improves the user experience.
To avoid impacting genuine users, find solutions that use behavioral analysis technologies to establish a baseline for rate limiting.
AppTrana WAAP’s DDoS mitigation employs adaptive behavioral analysis for comprehensive defense, detecting and mitigating various DDoS attacks with a layered approach. It distinguishes between “flash crowds” and real DDoS attacks, using real-time behavioral analysis for precise mitigation. This enhances accuracy compared to static rate limit-based systems.
Trend Micro’s recent threat hunting efforts have uncovered active exploitation of CVE-2023-36025, a vulnerability in Microsoft Windows Defender SmartScreen, by a new strain of malware known as Phemedrone Stealer. This malware targets web browsers, cryptocurrency wallets, and messaging apps like Telegram, Steam, and Discord, stealing data and sending it to attackers via Telegram or command-and-control servers. Phemedrone Stealer, an open-source stealer written in C#, is actively maintained on GitHub and Telegram.
CVE-2023-36025 arises from insufficient checks on Internet Shortcut (.url) files, allowing attackers to bypass Windows Defender SmartScreen warnings by using crafted .url files that download and execute malicious scripts . Microsoft patched this vulnerability on November 14, 2023, but its exploitation in the wild led to its inclusion in the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities list. Various malware campaigns, including those distributing Phemedrone Stealer, have since incorporated this vulnerability.
INITIAL ACCESS VIA CLOUD-HOSTED MALICIOUS URLS
As per the report, this involves leveraging cloud-hosted URLs that are malicious in nature. The article provides insights into how these URLs are used to initiate the attack, highlighting the strategies employed for distributing the malware and penetrating target systems. Attackers host malicious Internet Shortcut files on platforms like Discord or cloud services, often disguised using URL shorteners. Unsuspecting users who open these files trigger the exploitation of CVE-2023-36025.
The malicious .url file downloads and executes a control panel item (.cpl) file from an attacker-controlled server. This bypasses the usual security prompt from Windows Defender SmartScreen. The malware employs MITRE ATT&CK technique T1218.002, using the Windows Control Panel process binary to execute .cpl files, which are essentially DLL files.
Initial Infection via Malicious .url File (CVE-2023-36025): The attack begins when a user executes a malicious Internet Shortcut (.url) file. This file is designed to bypass Microsoft Windows Defender SmartScreen warnings, typically triggered for files from untrusted sources. The evasion is likely achieved by manipulating the file’s structure or content, making it appear benign.
Execution of a Control Panel Item (.cpl) File: Once executed, the .url file connects to an attacker-controlled server to download a .cpl file. In Windows, .cpl files are used to execute Control Panel items and are essentially Dynamic Link Libraries (DLLs). This step involves the MITRE ATT&CK technique T1218.002, which exploits the Windows Control Panel process binary (control.exe) to execute .cpl files.
Use of rundll32.exe for DLL Execution: The .cpl file, when executed through control.exe, then calls rundll32.exe, a legitimate Windows utility used to run functions stored in DLL files. This step is critical as it uses a trusted Windows process to execute the malicious DLL, further evading detection.
PowerShell Utilization for Payload Download and Execution: The malicious DLL acts as a loader to call Windows PowerShell, a task automation framework. PowerShell is then used to download and execute the next stage of the attack from GitHub.
Execution of DATA3.txt PowerShell Loader: The file DATA3.txt, hosted on GitHub, is an obfuscated PowerShell script designed to be difficult to analyze statically (i.e., without executing it). It uses string and digit manipulation to mask its true intent.
Deobfuscation and Execution of the GitHub-Hosted Loader: Through a combination of static and dynamic analysis, the obfuscated PowerShell commands within DATA3.txt can be deobfuscated. This script is responsible for downloading a ZIP file from the same GitHub repository.
Contents of the Downloaded ZIP File:
WerFaultSecure.exe: A legitimate Windows Fault Reporting binary.
Wer.dll: A malicious binary that is sideloaded (executed in the context of a legitimate process) when WerFaultSecure.exe is run.
Secure.pdf: An RC4-encrypted second-stage loader, presumably containing further malicious code.
This attack is sophisticated, using multiple layers of evasion and leveraging legitimate Windows processes and binaries to conceal malicious activities. The use of GitHub as a hosting platform for malicious payloads is also noteworthy, as it can lend an appearance of legitimacy and may bypass some network-based security controls.
PERSISTENCE AND DLL SIDELOADING
The malware achieves persistence by creating scheduled tasks and uses DLL sideloading techniques. The malicious DLL, crucial for the loader’s functionality, decrypts and runs the second stage loader. It uses dynamic API resolving and XOR-based algorithms for string decryption, complicating reverse engineering efforts.
Malicious DLL (wer.dll) Functionality: It decrypts and runs a second-stage loader. To avoid detection and hinder reverse engineering, it employs API hashing, string encryption, and is protected by VMProtect.
DLL Sideloading Technique: The malware deceives the system into loading the malicious wer.dll by placing it in the application directory, a method that exploits the trust Windows has in its own directories.
Dynamic API Resolving: To avoid detection by static analysis tools, the malware uses CRC-32 hashing for storing API names, importing them dynamically during runtime.
XOR-based String Decryption: An algorithm is used to decrypt strings, with each byte’s key generated based on its position. This method is designed to complicate automated decryption efforts.
Persistence Mechanism: The malware creates a scheduled task to regularly execute WerFaultSecure.exe. This ensures that the malware remains active on the infected system.
Second-Stage Loader (secure.pdf): It’s decrypted using an undocumented function from advapi32.dll, with memory allocation and modification handled by functions from Activeds.dll and VirtualProtect.
Execution Redirection through API Callbacks: The malware cleverly redirects execution flow to the second-stage payload using Windows API callback functions, particularly exploiting the CryptCATCDFOpen function.
Overall, this malware demonstrates a deep understanding of Windows internals, using them to its advantage to stay hidden and maintain persistence on the infected system. The combination of techniques used makes it a complex and dangerous threat.
SECOND-STAGE DEFENSE EVASION
The second-stage loader, known as Donut, is an open-source shellcode that executes various file types in memory. It encrypts payloads without compression and uses the Unmanaged CLR Hosting API to load the Common Language Runtime, creating a new Application Domain for running assemblies.Here’s an overview of how Donut is used for defense evasion and payload execution:
Donut Shellcode Loader:
Capabilities: Allows execution of VBScript, JScript, EXE files, DLL files, and .NET assemblies directly in memory.
Deployment Options: Can be embedded into the loader or staged from an HTTP or DNS server. In this case, it’s embedded directly into the loader.
Payload Compression and Encryption:
Compression Techniques: Supports aPLib, LZNT1, Xpress, and Xpress Huffman through RtlCompressBuffer.
Encryption: Uses the Chaskey block cipher for payload encryption. In this instance, only encryption is used, without compression.
Execution Process via Unmanaged CLR Hosting API:
CLR Loading: Donut configures to use the Unmanaged CLR Hosting API to load the Common Language Runtime (CLR) into the host process.
Application Domain Creation: Creates a new Application Domain, allowing assemblies to run in disposable AppDomains.
Assembly Loading and Execution: Once the AppDomain is prepared, Donut loads the .NET assembly and invokes the payload’s entry point.
The use of Donut in this attack is particularly notable for its ability to execute various types of code directly in memory. This method greatly reduces the attack’s visibility to traditional security measures, as it leaves minimal traces on the filesystem. Additionally, the use of memory-only execution tactics, coupled with sophisticated encryption, makes the payload difficult to detect and analyze. The ability to create and use disposable AppDomains further enhances evasion by isolating the execution environment, reducing the chances of detection by runtime monitoring tools. This approach demonstrates a high level of sophistication in evading defenses and executing the final payload stealthily.
PHEMEDRONE STEALER PAYLOAD ANALYSIS
Phemedrone Stealer initializes its configuration and decrypts items like Telegram API tokens using the RijndaelManaged symmetric encryption algorithm. It targets a wide range of applications to extract sensitive information, including Chromium-based browsers, crypto wallets, Discord, FileGrabber, FileZilla, Gecko-based browsers, system information, Steam, and Telegram.
COMMAND AND CONTROL FOR DATA EXFILTRATION
After data collection, the malware compresses the information into a ZIP file and validates the Telegram API token before exfiltrating the data. It sends system information and statistics to the attacker via the Telegram API. Despite the patch for CVE-2023-36025, threat actors continue to exploit this vulnerability to evade Windows Defender SmartScreen protection. The Phemedrone Stealer campaign highlights the need for vigilance and updated security measures against such evolving cyber threats.
MITIGATION
Mitigating the risks associated with CVE-2023-36025 and similar vulnerabilities, especially in the context of the Phemedrone Stealer campaign, involves a multi-layered approach. Here are some key strategies:
Apply Security Patches: Ensure that all systems are updated with the latest security patches from Microsoft, particularly the one addressing CVE-2023-36025. Regularly updating software can prevent attackers from exploiting known vulnerabilities.
Enhance Endpoint Protection: Utilize advanced endpoint protection solutions that can detect and block sophisticated malware like Phemedrone Stealer. These solutions should include behavior-based detection to identify malicious activities.
Educate Users: Conduct security awareness training for all users. Educate them about the dangers of clicking on unknown links, opening suspicious email attachments, and the risks of downloading files from untrusted sources.
Implement Network Security Measures: Use firewalls, intrusion detection systems, and intrusion prevention systems to monitor and control network traffic based on an applied set of security rules.
Secure Email Gateways: Deploy email security solutions that can scan and filter out malicious emails, which are often the starting point for malware infections.
Regular Backups: Regularly back up data and ensure that backup copies are stored securely. In case of a malware infection, having up-to-date backups can prevent data loss.
Use Application Whitelisting: Control which applications are allowed to run on your network. This can prevent unauthorized applications, including malware, from executing.
Monitor and Analyze Logs: Regularly review system and application logs for unusual activities that might indicate a breach or an attempt to exploit vulnerabilities.
Restrict User Privileges: Apply the principle of least privilege by limiting user access rights to only those necessary for their job functions. This can reduce the impact of a successful attack.
Incident Response Plan: Have a well-defined incident response plan in place. This should include procedures for responding to a security breach and mitigating its impact.
Use Secure Web Gateways: Deploy web gateways that can detect and block access to malicious websites, thereby preventing the download of harmful content.
Regular Security Audits: Conduct regular security audits and vulnerability assessments to identify and address potential security gaps in the network.
By implementing these measures, organizations can significantly reduce their risk of falling victim to malware campaigns that exploit vulnerabilities like CVE-2023-36025.
