Login
sttr is command line software that allows you to quickly run various transformation operations on the string.
FreshRSS // With input prompt
sttr
// Direct input
sttr md5 "Hello World"
// File input
sttr md5 file.text
sttr base64-encode image.jpg
// Reading from different processor like cat, curl, printf etc..
echo "Hello World" | sttr md5
cat file.txt | sttr md5
// Writing output to a file
sttr yaml-json file.yaml > file-output.json
You can run the below curl to install it somewhere in your PATH for easy use. Ideally it will be installed at ./bin folder
curl -sfL https://raw.githubusercontent.com/abhimanyu003/sttr/main/install.sh | sh
curl -sS https://webi.sh/sttr | sh
curl.exe https://webi.ms/sttr | powershell
See here
If you are on macOS and using Homebrew, you can install sttr with the following:
brew tap abhimanyu003/sttr
brew install sttr
sudo snap install sttr
yay -S sttr-bin
scoop bucket add sttr https://github.com/abhimanyu003/scoop-bucket.git
scoop install sttr
go install github.com/abhimanyu003/sttr@latest
Download the pre-compiled binaries from the Release! page and copy them to the desired location.
sttr command.// For interactive menu
sttr
// Provide your input
// Press two enter to open operation menu
// Press `/` to filter various operations.
// Can also press UP-Down arrows select various operations.
sttr -h
// Example
sttr zeropad -h
sttr md5 -h
sttr {command-name} {filename}
sttr base64-encode image.jpg
sttr md5 file.txt
sttr md-html Readme.md
sttr yaml-json file.yaml > file-output.json
curl https: //jsonplaceholder.typicode.com/users | sttr json-yaml
sttr md5 hello | sttr base64-encode
echo "Hello World" | sttr base64-encode | sttr md5
These are the few locations where sttr was highlighted, many thanks to all of you. Please feel free to add any blogs/videos you may have made that discuss sttr to the list.
ROPDump is a tool for analyzing binary executables to identify potential Return-Oriented Programming (ROP) gadgets, as well as detecting potential buffer overflow and memory leak vulnerabilities.
<binary>: Path to the binary file for analysis.-s, --search SEARCH: Optional. Search for specific instruction patterns.-f, --functions: Optional. Print function names and addresses.python3 ropdump.py /path/to/binary
python3 ropdump.py /path/to/binary -s "pop eax"
python3 ropdump.py /path/to/binary -f
Law enforcement agencies in the United States and Europe today announced Operation Endgame, a coordinated action against some of the most popular cybercrime platforms for delivering ransomware and data-stealing malware. Dubbed “the largest ever operation against botnets,” the international effort is being billed as the opening salvo in an ongoing campaign targeting advanced malware “droppers” or “loaders” like IcedID, Smokeloader and Trickbot.
A frame from one of three animated videos released today in connection with Operation Endgame.
Operation Endgame targets the cybercrime ecosystem supporting droppers/loaders, slang terms used to describe tiny, custom-made programs designed to surreptitiously install malware onto a target system. Droppers are typically used in the initial stages of a breach, and they allow cybercriminals to bypass security measures and deploy additional harmful programs, including viruses, ransomware, or spyware.
Droppers like IcedID are most often deployed through email attachments, hacked websites, or bundled with legitimate software. For example, cybercriminals have long used paid ads on Google to trick people into installing malware disguised as popular free software, such as Microsoft Teams, Adobe Reader and Discord. In those cases, the dropper is the hidden component bundled with the legitimate software that quietly loads malware onto the user’s system.
Droppers remain such a critical, human-intensive component of nearly all major cybercrime enterprises that the most popular have turned into full-fledged cybercrime services of their own. By targeting the individuals who develop and maintain dropper services and their supporting infrastructure, authorities are hoping to disrupt multiple cybercriminal operations simultaneously.
According to a statement from the European police agency Europol, between May 27 and May 29, 2024 authorities arrested four suspects (one in Armenia and three in Ukraine), and disrupted or took down more than 100 Internet servers in Bulgaria, Canada, Germany, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Romania, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, United States and Ukraine. Authorities say they also seized more than 2,000 domain names that supported dropper infrastructure online.
In addition, Europol released information on eight fugitives suspected of involvement in dropper services and who are wanted by Germany; their names and photos were added to Europol’s “Most Wanted” list on 30 May 2024.
A “wanted” poster including the names and photos of eight suspects wanted by Germany and now on Europol’s “Most Wanted” list.
“It has been discovered through the investigations so far that one of the main suspects has earned at least EUR 69 million in cryptocurrency by renting out criminal infrastructure sites to deploy ransomware,” Europol wrote. “The suspect’s transactions are constantly being monitored and legal permission to seize these assets upon future actions has already been obtained.”
There have been numerous such coordinated malware takedown efforts in the past, and yet often the substantial amount of coordination required between law enforcement agencies and cybersecurity firms involved is not sustained after the initial disruption and/or arrests.
But a new website erected to detail today’s action — operation-endgame.com — makes the case that this time is different, and that more takedowns and arrests are coming. “Operation Endgame does not end today,” the site promises. “New actions will be announced on this website.”
A message on operation-endgame.com promises more law enforcement and disruption actions.
Perhaps in recognition that many of today’s top cybercriminals reside in countries that are effectively beyond the reach of international law enforcement, actions like Operation Endgame seem increasingly focused on mind games — i.e., trolling the hackers.
Writing in this month’s issue of Wired, Matt Burgess makes the case that Western law enforcement officials have turned to psychological measures as an added way to slow down Russian hackers and cut to the heart of the sweeping cybercrime ecosystem.
“These nascent psyops include efforts to erode the limited trust the criminals have in each other, driving subtle wedges between fragile hacker egos, and sending offenders personalized messages showing they’re being watched,” Burgess wrote.
When authorities in the U.S. and U.K. announced in February 2024 that they’d infiltrated and seized the infrastructure used by the infamous LockBit ransomware gang, they borrowed the existing design of LockBit’s victim shaming website to link instead to press releases about the takedown, and included a countdown timer that was eventually replaced with the personal details of LockBit’s alleged leader.
The feds used the existing design on LockBit’s victim shaming website to feature press releases and free decryption tools.
The Operation Endgame website also includes a countdown timer, which serves to tease the release of several animated videos that mimic the same sort of flashy, short advertisements that established cybercriminals often produce to promote their services online. At least two of the videos include a substantial amount of text written in Russian.
The coordinated takedown comes on the heels of another law enforcement action this week against what the director of the FBI called “likely the world’s largest botnet ever.” On Wednesday U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) announced the arrest of YunHe Wang, the alleged operator of the ten-year-old online anonymity service 911 S5. The government also seized 911 S5’s domains and online infrastructure, which allegedly turned computers running various “free VPN” products into Internet traffic relays that facilitated billions of dollars in online fraud and cybercrime.
An open-source, prototype implementation of property graphs for JavaScript based on the esprima parser, and the EsTree SpiderMonkey Spec. JAW can be used for analyzing the client-side of web applications and JavaScript-based programs.
This project is licensed under GNU AFFERO GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE V3.0. See here for more information.
JAW has a Github pages website available at https://soheilkhodayari.github.io/JAW/.
Release Notes:
JAW-V2 branch.JAW-V1 branch.The architecture of the JAW is shown below.
JAW can be used in two distinct ways:
Arbitrary JavaScript Analysis: Utilize JAW for modeling and analyzing any JavaScript program by specifying the program's file system path.
Web Application Analysis: Analyze a web application by providing a single seed URL.
Use the collected web resources to create a Hybrid Program Graph (HPG), which will be imported into a Neo4j database.
Optionally, supply the HPG construction module with a mapping of semantic types to custom JavaScript language tokens, facilitating the categorization of JavaScript functions based on their purpose (e.g., HTTP request functions).
Query the constructed Neo4j graph database for various analyses. JAW offers utility traversals for data flow analysis, control flow analysis, reachability analysis, and pattern matching. These traversals can be used to develop custom security analyses.
JAW also includes built-in traversals for detecting client-side CSRF, DOM Clobbering and request hijacking vulnerabilities.
The outputs will be stored in the same folder as that of input.
The installation script relies on the following prerequisites: - Latest version of npm package manager (node js) - Any stable version of python 3.x - Python pip package manager
Afterwards, install the necessary dependencies via:
$ ./install.sh
For detailed installation instructions, please see here.
You can run an instance of the pipeline in a background screen via:
$ python3 -m run_pipeline --conf=config.yaml
The CLI provides the following options:
$ python3 -m run_pipeline -h
usage: run_pipeline.py [-h] [--conf FILE] [--site SITE] [--list LIST] [--from FROM] [--to TO]
This script runs the tool pipeline.
optional arguments:
-h, --help show this help message and exit
--conf FILE, -C FILE pipeline configuration file. (default: config.yaml)
--site SITE, -S SITE website to test; overrides config file (default: None)
--list LIST, -L LIST site list to test; overrides config file (default: None)
--from FROM, -F FROM the first entry to consider when a site list is provided; overrides config file (default: -1)
--to TO, -T TO the last entry to consider when a site list is provided; overrides config file (default: -1)
Input Config: JAW expects a .yaml config file as input. See config.yaml for an example.
Hint. The config file specifies different passes (e.g., crawling, static analysis, etc) which can be enabled or disabled for each vulnerability class. This allows running the tool building blocks individually, or in a different order (e.g., crawl all webapps first, then conduct security analysis).
For running a quick example demonstrating how to build a property graph and run Cypher queries over it, do:
$ python3 -m analyses.example.example_analysis --input=$(pwd)/data/test_program/test.js
This module collects the data (i.e., JavaScript code and state values of web pages) needed for testing. If you want to test a specific JavaScipt file that you already have on your file system, you can skip this step.
JAW has crawlers based on Selenium (JAW-v1), Puppeteer (JAW-v2, v3) and Playwright (JAW-v3). For most up-to-date features, it is recommended to use the Puppeteer- or Playwright-based versions.
This web crawler employs foxhound, an instrumented version of Firefox, to perform dynamic taint tracking as it navigates through webpages. To start the crawler, do:
$ cd crawler
$ node crawler-taint.js --seedurl=https://google.com --maxurls=100 --headless=true --foxhoundpath=<optional-foxhound-executable-path>
The foxhoundpath is by default set to the following directory: crawler/foxhound/firefox which contains a binary named firefox.
Note: you need a build of foxhound to use this version. An ubuntu build is included in the JAW-v3 release.
To start the crawler, do:
$ cd crawler
$ node crawler.js --seedurl=https://google.com --maxurls=100 --browser=chrome --headless=true
See here for more information.
To start the crawler, do:
$ cd crawler/hpg_crawler
$ vim docker-compose.yaml # set the websites you want to crawl here and save
$ docker-compose build
$ docker-compose up -d
Please refer to the documentation of the hpg_crawler here for more information.
To generate an HPG for a given (set of) JavaScript file(s), do:
$ node engine/cli.js --lang=js --graphid=graph1 --input=/in/file1.js --input=/in/file2.js --output=$(pwd)/data/out/ --mode=csv
optional arguments:
--lang: language of the input program
--graphid: an identifier for the generated HPG
--input: path of the input program(s)
--output: path of the output HPG, must be i
--mode: determines the output format (csv or graphML)
To import an HPG inside a neo4j graph database (docker instance), do:
$ python3 -m hpg_neo4j.hpg_import --rpath=<path-to-the-folder-of-the-csv-files> --id=<xyz> --nodes=<nodes.csv> --edges=<rels.csv>
$ python3 -m hpg_neo4j.hpg_import -h
usage: hpg_import.py [-h] [--rpath P] [--id I] [--nodes N] [--edges E]
This script imports a CSV of a property graph into a neo4j docker database.
optional arguments:
-h, --help show this help message and exit
--rpath P relative path to the folder containing the graph CSV files inside the `data` directory
--id I an identifier for the graph or docker container
--nodes N the name of the nodes csv file (default: nodes.csv)
--edges E the name of the relations csv file (default: rels.csv)
In order to create a hybrid property graph for the output of the hpg_crawler and import it inside a local neo4j instance, you can also do:
$ python3 -m engine.api <path> --js=<program.js> --import=<bool> --hybrid=<bool> --reqs=<requests.out> --evts=<events.out> --cookies=<cookies.pkl> --html=<html_snapshot.html>
Specification of Parameters:
<path>: absolute path to the folder containing the program files for analysis (must be under the engine/outputs folder).--js=<program.js>: name of the JavaScript program for analysis (default: js_program.js).--import=<bool>: whether the constructed property graph should be imported to an active neo4j database (default: true).--hybrid=bool: whether the hybrid mode is enabled (default: false). This implies that the tester wants to enrich the property graph by inputing files for any of the HTML snapshot, fired events, HTTP requests and cookies, as collected by the JAW crawler.--reqs=<requests.out>: for hybrid mode only, name of the file containing the sequence of obsevered network requests, pass the string false to exclude (default: request_logs_short.out).--evts=<events.out>: for hybrid mode only, name of the file containing the sequence of fired events, pass the string false to exclude (default: events.out).--cookies=<cookies.pkl>: for hybrid mode only, name of the file containing the cookies, pass the string false to exclude (default: cookies.pkl).--html=<html_snapshot.html>: for hybrid mode only, name of the file containing the DOM tree snapshot, pass the string false to exclude (default: html_rendered.html).For more information, you can use the help CLI provided with the graph construction API:
$ python3 -m engine.api -h
The constructed HPG can then be queried using Cypher or the NeoModel ORM.
You should place and run your queries in analyses/<ANALYSIS_NAME>.
You can use the NeoModel ORM to query the HPG. To write a query:
example_query_orm.py in the analyses/example folder.$ python3 -m analyses.example.example_query_orm
For more information, please see here.
You can use Cypher to write custom queries. For this:
example_query_cypher.py in the analyses/example folder.$ python3 -m analyses.example.example_query_cypher
For more information, please see here.
This section describes how to configure and use JAW for vulnerability detection, and how to interpret the output. JAW contains, among others, self-contained queries for detecting client-side CSRF and DOM Clobbering
Step 1. enable the analysis component for the vulnerability class in the input config.yaml file:
request_hijacking:
enabled: true
# [...]
#
domclobbering:
enabled: false
# [...]
cs_csrf:
enabled: false
# [...]
Step 2. Run an instance of the pipeline with:
$ python3 -m run_pipeline --conf=config.yaml
Hint. You can run multiple instances of the pipeline under different screens:
$ screen -dmS s1 bash -c 'python3 -m run_pipeline --conf=conf1.yaml; exec sh'
$ screen -dmS s2 bash -c 'python3 -m run_pipeline --conf=conf2.yaml; exec sh'
$ # [...]
To generate parallel configuration files automatically, you may use the generate_config.py script.
The outputs will be stored in a file called sink.flows.out in the same folder as that of the input. For Client-side CSRF, for example, for each HTTP request detected, JAW outputs an entry marking the set of semantic types (a.k.a, semantic tags or labels) associated with the elements constructing the request (i.e., the program slices). For example, an HTTP request marked with the semantic type ['WIN.LOC'] is forgeable through the window.location injection point. However, a request marked with ['NON-REACH'] is not forgeable.
An example output entry is shown below:
[*] Tags: ['WIN.LOC']
[*] NodeId: {'TopExpression': '86', 'CallExpression': '87', 'Argument': '94'}
[*] Location: 29
[*] Function: ajax
[*] Template: ajaxloc + "/bearer1234/"
[*] Top Expression: $.ajax({ xhrFields: { withCredentials: "true" }, url: ajaxloc + "/bearer1234/" })
1:['WIN.LOC'] variable=ajaxloc
0 (loc:6)- var ajaxloc = window.location.href
This entry shows that on line 29, there is a $.ajax call expression, and this call expression triggers an ajax request with the url template value of ajaxloc + "/bearer1234/, where the parameter ajaxloc is a program slice reading its value at line 6 from window.location.href, thus forgeable through ['WIN.LOC'].
In order to streamline the testing process for JAW and ensure that your setup is accurate, we provide a simple node.js web application which you can test JAW with.
First, install the dependencies via:
$ cd tests/test-webapp
$ npm install
Then, run the application in a new screen:
$ screen -dmS jawwebapp bash -c 'PORT=6789 npm run devstart; exec sh'
For more information, visit our wiki page here. Below is a table of contents for quick access.
Pull requests are always welcomed. This project is intended to be a safe, welcoming space, and contributors are expected to adhere to the contributor code of conduct.
If you use the JAW for academic research, we encourage you to cite the following paper:
@inproceedings{JAW,
title = {JAW: Studying Client-side CSRF with Hybrid Property Graphs and Declarative Traversals},
author= {Soheil Khodayari and Giancarlo Pellegrino},
booktitle = {30th {USENIX} Security Symposium ({USENIX} Security 21)},
year = {2021},
address = {Vancouver, B.C.},
publisher = {{USENIX} Association},
}
JAW has come a long way and we want to give our contributors a well-deserved shoutout here!
@tmbrbr, @c01gide, @jndre, and Sepehr Mirzaei.
The U.S. government is warning that “smart locks” securing entry to an estimated 50,000 dwellings nationwide contain hard-coded credentials that can be used to remotely open any of the locks. The lock’s maker Chirp Systems remains unresponsive, even though it was first notified about the critical weakness in March 2021. Meanwhile, Chirp’s parent company, RealPage, Inc., is being sued by multiple U.S. states for allegedly colluding with landlords to illegally raise rents.
On March 7, 2024, the U.S. Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) warned about a remotely exploitable vulnerability with “low attack complexity” in Chirp Systems smart locks.
“Chirp Access improperly stores credentials within its source code, potentially exposing sensitive information to unauthorized access,” CISA’s alert warned, assigning the bug a CVSS (badness) rating of 9.1 (out of a possible 10). “Chirp Systems has not responded to requests to work with CISA to mitigate this vulnerability.”
Matt Brown, the researcher CISA credits with reporting the flaw, is a senior systems development engineer at Amazon Web Services. Brown said he discovered the weakness and reported it to Chirp in March 2021, after the company that manages his apartment building started using Chirp smart locks and told everyone to install Chirp’s app to get in and out of their apartments.
“I use Android, which has a pretty simple workflow for downloading and decompiling the APK apps,” Brown told KrebsOnSecurity. “Given that I am pretty picky about what I trust on my devices, I downloaded Chirp and after decompiling, found that they were storing passwords and private key strings in a file.”
Using those hard-coded credentials, Brown found an attacker could then connect to an application programming interface (API) that Chirp uses which is managed by smart lock vendor August.com, and use that to enumerate and remotely lock or unlock any door in any building that uses the technology.
Update, April 18, 11:55 a.m. ET: August has provided a statement saying it does not believe August or Yale locks are vulnerable to the hack described by Brown.
“We were recently made aware of a vulnerability disclosure regarding access control systems provided by Chirp, using August and Yale locks in multifamily housing,” the company said. “Upon learning of these reports, we immediately and thoroughly investigated these claims. Our investigation found no evidence that would substantiate the vulnerability claims in either our product or Chirp’s as it relates to our systems.”
Update, April 25, 2:45 p.m. ET: Based on feedback from Chirp, CISA has downgraded the severity of this flaw and revised their security advisory to say that the hard-coded credentials do not appear to expose the devices to remote locking or unlocking. CISA says the hardcoded credentials could be used by an attacker within the range of Bluetooth (~30 meters) “to change the configuration settings within the Bluetooth beacon, effectively removing Bluetooth visibility from the device. This does not affect the device’s ability to lock or unlock access points, and access points can still be operated remotely by unauthorized users via other means.”
Brown said when he complained to his leasing office, they sold him a small $50 key fob that uses Near-Field Communications (NFC) to toggle the lock when he brings the fob close to his front door. But he said the fob doesn’t eliminate the ability for anyone to remotely unlock his front door using the exposed credentials and the Chirp mobile app.
Also, the fobs pass the credentials to his front door over the air in plain text, meaning someone could clone the fob just by bumping against him with a smartphone app made to read and write NFC tags.
Neither August nor Chirp Systems responded to requests for comment. It’s unclear exactly how many apartments and other residences are using the vulnerable Chirp locks, but multiple articles about the company from 2020 state that approximately 50,000 units use Chirp smart locks with August’s API.
Roughly a year before Brown reported the flaw to Chirp Systems, the company was bought by RealPage, a firm founded in 1998 as a developer of multifamily property management and data analytics software. In 2021, RealPage was acquired by the private equity giant Thoma Bravo.
Brown said the exposure he found in Chirp’s products is “an obvious flaw that is super easy to fix.”
“It’s just a matter of them being motivated to do it,” he said. “But they’re part of a private equity company now, so they’re not answerable to anybody. It’s too bad, because it’s not like residents of [the affected] properties have another choice. It’s either agree to use the app or move.”
In October 2022, an investigation by ProPublica examined RealPage’s dominance in the rent-setting software market, and that it found “uses a mysterious algorithm to help landlords push the highest possible rents on tenants.”
“For tenants, the system upends the practice of negotiating with apartment building staff,” ProPublica found. “RealPage discourages bargaining with renters and has even recommended that landlords in some cases accept a lower occupancy rate in order to raise rents and make more money. One of the algorithm’s developers told ProPublica that leasing agents had ‘too much empathy’ compared to computer generated pricing.”
Last year, the U.S. Department of Justice threw its weight behind a massive lawsuit filed by dozens of tenants who are accusing the $9 billion apartment software company of helping landlords collude to inflate rents.
In February 2024, attorneys general for Arizona and the District of Columbia sued RealPage, alleging RealPage’s software helped create a rental monopoly.
The FBI’s takedown of the LockBit ransomware group last week came as LockBit was preparing to release sensitive data stolen from government computer systems in Fulton County, Ga. But LockBit is now regrouping, and the gang says it will publish the stolen Fulton County data on March 2 unless paid a ransom. LockBit claims the cache includes documents tied to the county’s ongoing criminal prosecution of former President Trump, but court watchers say teaser documents published by the crime gang suggest a total leak of the Fulton County data could put lives at risk and jeopardize a number of other criminal trials.
A new LockBit website listing a countdown timer until the promised release of data stolen from Fulton County, Ga.
In early February, Fulton County leaders acknowledged they were responding to an intrusion that caused disruptions for its phone, email and billing systems, as well as a range of county services, including court systems.
On Feb. 13, the LockBit ransomware group posted on its victim shaming blog a new entry for Fulton County, featuring a countdown timer saying the group would publish the data on Feb. 16 unless county leaders agreed to negotiate a ransom.
“We will demonstrate how local structures negligently handled information protection,” LockBit warned. “We will reveal lists of individuals responsible for confidentiality. Documents marked as confidential will be made publicly available. We will show documents related to access to the state citizens’ personal data. We aim to give maximum publicity to this situation; the documents will be of interest to many. Conscientious residents will bring order.”
Yet on Feb. 16, the entry for Fulton County was removed from LockBit’s site without explanation. This usually only happens after the victim in question agrees to pay a ransom demand and/or enters into negotiations with their extortionists.
However, Fulton County Commission Chairman Robb Pitts said the board decided it “could not in good conscience use Fulton County taxpayer funds to make a payment.”
“We did not pay nor did anyone pay on our behalf,” Pitts said at an incident briefing on Feb. 20.
Just hours before that press conference, LockBit’s various websites were seized by the FBI and the U.K.’s National Crime Agency (NCA), which replaced the ransomware group’s homepage with a seizure notice and used the existing design of LockBit’s victim shaming blog to publish press releases about the law enforcement action.
The feds used the existing design on LockBit’s victim shaming website to feature press releases and free decryption tools.
Dubbed “Operation Cronos,” the effort involved the seizure of nearly three-dozen servers; the arrest of two alleged LockBit members; the release of a free LockBit decryption tool; and the freezing of more than 200 cryptocurrency accounts thought to be tied to the gang’s activities. The government says LockBit has claimed more than 2,000 victims worldwide and extorted over $120 million in payments.
In a lengthy, rambling letter published on Feb. 24 and addressed to the FBI, the ransomware group’s leader LockBitSupp announced that their victim shaming websites were once again operational on the dark web, with fresh countdown timers for Fulton County and a half-dozen other recent victims.
“The FBI decided to hack now for one reason only, because they didn’t want to leak information fultoncountyga.gov,” LockBitSupp wrote. “The stolen documents contain a lot of interesting things and Donald Trump’s court cases that could affect the upcoming US election.”
A screen shot released by LockBit showing various Fulton County file shares that were exposed.
LockBit has already released roughly two dozen files allegedly stolen from Fulton County government systems, although none of them involve Mr. Trump’s criminal trial. But the documents do appear to include court records that are sealed and shielded from public viewing.
George Chidi writes The Atlanta Objective, a Substack publication on crime in Georgia’s capital city. Chidi says the leaked data so far includes a sealed record related to a child abuse case, and a sealed motion in the murder trial of Juwuan Gaston demanding the state turn over confidential informant identities.
Chidi cites reports from a Fulton County employee who said the confidential material includes the identities of jurors serving on the trial of the rapper Jeffery “Young Thug” Williams, who is charged along with five other defendants in a racketeering and gang conspiracy.
“The screenshots suggest that hackers will be able to give any attorney defending a criminal case in the county a starting place to argue that evidence has been tainted or witnesses intimidated, and that the release of confidential information has compromised cases,” Chidi wrote. “Judge Ural Glanville has, I am told by staff, been working feverishly behind the scenes over the last two weeks to manage the unfolding disaster.”
LockBitSupp also denied assertions made by the U.K.’s NCA that LockBit did not delete stolen data as promised when victims agreed to pay a ransom. The accusation is an explosive one because nobody will pay a ransom if they don’t believe the ransomware group will hold up its end of the bargain.
The ransomware group leader also confirmed information first reported here last week, that federal investigators managed to hack LockBit by exploiting a known vulnerability in PHP, a scripting language that is widely used in Web development.
“Due to my personal negligence and irresponsibility I relaxed and did not update PHP in time,” LockBitSupp wrote. “As a result of which access was gained to the two main servers where this version of PHP was installed.”
LockBitSupp’s FBI letter said the group kept copies of its stolen victim data on servers that did not use PHP, and that consequently it was able to retain copies of files stolen from victims. The letter also listed links to multiple new instances of LockBit dark net websites, including the leak page listing Fulton County’s new countdown timer.
LockBit’s new data leak site promises to release stolen Fulton County data on March 2, 2024, unless paid a ransom demand.
“Even after the FBI hack, the stolen data will be published on the blog, there is no chance of destroying the stolen data without payment,” LockBitSupp wrote. “All FBI actions are aimed at destroying the reputation of my affiliate program, my demoralization, they want me to leave and quit my job, they want to scare me because they can not find and eliminate me, I can not be stopped, you can not even hope, as long as I am alive I will continue to do pentest with postpaid.”
In January 2024, LockBitSupp told XSS forum members he was disappointed the FBI hadn’t offered a reward for his doxing and/or arrest, and that in response he was placing a bounty on his own head — offering $10 million to anyone who could discover his real name.
After the NCA and FBI seized LockBit’s site, the group’s homepage was retrofitted with a blog entry titled, “Who is LockBitSupp? The $10M question.” The teaser made use of LockBit’s own countdown timer, and suggested the real identity of LockBitSupp would soon be revealed.
However, after the countdown timer expired the page was replaced with a taunting message from the feds, but it included no new information about LockBitSupp’s identity.
On Feb. 21, the U.S. Department of State announced rewards totaling up to $15 million for information leading to the arrest and/or conviction of anyone participating in LockBit ransomware attacks. The State Department said $10 million of that is for information on LockBit’s leaders, and up to $5 million is offered for information on affiliates.
In an interview with the malware-focused Twitter/X account Vx-Underground, LockBit staff asserted that authorities had arrested a couple of small-time players in their operation, and that investigators still do not know the real-life identities of the core LockBit members, or that of their leader.
“They assert the FBI / NCA UK / EUROPOL do not know their information,” Vx-Underground wrote. “They state they are willing to double the bounty of $10,000,000. They state they will place a $20,000,000 bounty of their own head if anyone can dox them.”
In the weeks leading up to the FBI/NCA takedown, LockBitSupp became embroiled in a number of high-profile personal and business disputes on the Russian cybercrime forums.
Earlier this year, someone used LockBit ransomware to infect the networks of AN-Security, a venerated 30-year-old security and technology company based in St. Petersburg, Russia. This violated the golden rule for cybercriminals based in Russia and former soviet nations that make up the Commonwealth of Independent States, which is that attacking your own citizens in those countries is the surest way to get arrested and prosecuted by local authorities.
LockBitSupp later claimed the attacker had used a publicly leaked, older version of LockBit to compromise systems at AN-Security, and said the attack was an attempt to smear their reputation by a rival ransomware group known as “Clop.” But the incident no doubt prompted closer inspection of LockBitSupp’s activities by Russian authorities.
Then in early February, the administrator of the Russian-language cybercrime forum XSS said LockBitSupp had threatened to have him killed after the ransomware group leader was banned by the community. LockBitSupp was excommunicated from XSS after he refused to pay an arbitration amount ordered by the forum administrator. That dispute related to a complaint from another forum member who said LockBitSupp recently stiffed him on his promised share of an unusually large ransomware payout.
A posted by the XSS administrator saying LockBitSupp wanted him dead.
KrebsOnSecurity sought comment from LockBitSupp at the ToX instant messenger ID listed in his letter to the FBI. LockBitSupp declined to elaborate on the unreleased documents from Fulton County, saying the files will be available for everyone to see in a few days.
LockBitSupp said his team was still negotiating with Fulton County when the FBI seized their servers, which is why the county has been granted a time extension. He also denied threatening to kill the XSS administrator.
“I have not threatened to kill the XSS administrator, he is blatantly lying, this is to cause self-pity and damage my reputation,” LockBitSupp told KrebsOnSecurity. “It is not necessary to kill him to punish him, there are more humane methods and he knows what they are.”
Asked why he was so certain the FBI doesn’t know his real-life identity, LockBitSupp was more precise.
“I’m not sure the FBI doesn’t know who I am,” he said. “I just believe they will never find me.”
It seems unlikely that the FBI’s seizure of LockBit’s infrastructure was somehow an effort to stave off the disclosure of Fulton County’s data, as LockBitSupp maintains. For one thing, Europol said the takedown was the result of a months-long infiltration of the ransomware group.
Also, in reporting on the attack’s disruption to the office of Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis on Feb. 14, CNN reported that by then the intrusion by LockBit had persisted for nearly two and a half weeks.
Finally, if the NCA and FBI really believed that LockBit never deleted victim data, they had to assume LockBit would still have at least one copy of all their stolen data hidden somewhere safe.
Fulton County is still trying to recover systems and restore services affected by the ransomware attack. “Fulton County continues to make substantial progress in restoring its systems following the recent ransomware incident resulting in service outages,” reads the latest statement from the county on Feb. 22. “Since the start of this incident, our team has been working tirelessly to bring services back up.”
Update, Feb. 29, 3:22 p.m. ET: Just hours after this story ran, LockBit changed its countdown timer for Fulton County saying they had until the morning of Feb. 29 (today) to pay a ransonm demand. When the official deadline neared today, Fulton County’s listing was removed from LockBit’s victim shaming website. Asked about the removal of the listing, LockBit’s leader “LockBitSupp” told KrebsOnSecurity that Fulton County paid a ransom demand. County officials have scheduled a press conference on the ransomware attack at 4:15 p.m. ET today.
U.S. and U.K. authorities have seized the darknet websites run by LockBit, a prolific and destructive ransomware group that has claimed more than 2,000 victims worldwide and extorted over $120 million in payments. Instead of listing data stolen from ransomware victims who didn’t pay, LockBit’s victim shaming website now offers free recovery tools, as well as news about arrests and criminal charges involving LockBit affiliates.
Investigators used the existing design on LockBit’s victim shaming website to feature press releases and free decryption tools.
Dubbed “Operation Cronos,” the law enforcement action involved the seizure of nearly three-dozen servers; the arrest of two alleged LockBit members; the unsealing of two indictments; the release of a free LockBit decryption tool; and the freezing of more than 200 cryptocurrency accounts thought to be tied to the gang’s activities.
LockBit members have executed attacks against thousands of victims in the United States and around the world, according to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). First surfacing in September 2019, the gang is estimated to have made hundreds of millions of U.S. dollars in ransom demands, and extorted over $120 million in ransom payments.
LockBit operated as a ransomware-as-a-service group, wherein the ransomware gang takes care of everything from the bulletproof hosting and domains to the development and maintenance of the malware. Meanwhile, affiliates are solely responsible for finding new victims, and can reap 60 to 80 percent of any ransom amount ultimately paid to the group.
A statement on Operation Cronos from the European police agency Europol said the months-long infiltration resulted in the compromise of LockBit’s primary platform and other critical infrastructure, including the takedown of 34 servers in the Netherlands, Germany, Finland, France, Switzerland, Australia, the United States and the United Kingdom. Europol said two suspected LockBit actors were arrested in Poland and Ukraine, but no further information has been released about those detained.
The DOJ today unsealed indictments against two Russian men alleged to be active members of LockBit. The government says Russian national Artur Sungatov used LockBit ransomware against victims in manufacturing, logistics, insurance and other companies throughout the United States.
Ivan Gennadievich Kondratyev, a.k.a. “Bassterlord,” allegedly deployed LockBit against targets in the United States, Singapore, Taiwan, and Lebanon. Kondratyev is also charged (PDF) with three criminal counts arising from his alleged use of the Sodinokibi (aka “REvil“) ransomware variant to encrypt data, exfiltrate victim information, and extort a ransom payment from a corporate victim based in Alameda County, California.
With the indictments of Sungatov and Kondratyev, a total of five LockBit affiliates now have been officially charged. In May 2023, U.S. authorities unsealed indictments against two alleged LockBit affiliates, Mikhail “Wazawaka” Matveev and Mikhail Vasiliev.
Vasiliev, 35, of Bradford, Ontario, Canada, is in custody in Canada awaiting extradition to the United States (the complaint against Vasiliev is at this PDF). Matveev remains at large, presumably still in Russia. In January 2022, KrebsOnSecurity published Who is the Network Access Broker ‘Wazawaka,’ which followed clues from Wazawaka’s many pseudonyms and contact details on the Russian-language cybercrime forums back to a 31-year-old Mikhail Matveev from Abaza, RU.
An FBI wanted poster for Matveev.
In June 2023, Russian national Ruslan Magomedovich Astamirov was charged in New Jersey for his participation in the LockBit conspiracy, including the deployment of LockBit against victims in Florida, Japan, France, and Kenya. Astamirov is currently in custody in the United States awaiting trial.
LockBit was known to have recruited affiliates that worked with multiple ransomware groups simultaneously, and it’s unclear what impact this takedown may have on competing ransomware affiliate operations. The security firm ProDaft said on Twitter/X that the infiltration of LockBit by investigators provided “in-depth visibility into each affiliate’s structures, including ties with other notorious groups such as FIN7, Wizard Spider, and EvilCorp.”
In a lengthy thread about the LockBit takedown on the Russian-language cybercrime forum XSS, one of the gang’s leaders said the FBI and the U.K.’s National Crime Agency (NCA) had infiltrated its servers using a known vulnerability in PHP, a scripting language that is widely used in Web development.
Several denizens of XSS wondered aloud why the PHP flaw was not flagged by LockBit’s vaunted “Bug Bounty” program, which promised a financial reward to affiliates who could find and quietly report any security vulnerabilities threatening to undermine LockBit’s online infrastructure.
This prompted several XSS members to start posting memes taunting the group about the security failure.
“Does it mean that the FBI provided a pentesting service to the affiliate program?,” one denizen quipped. “Or did they decide to take part in the bug bounty program? :):)”
Federal investigators also appear to be trolling LockBit members with their seizure notices. LockBit’s data leak site previously featured a countdown timer for each victim organization listed, indicating the time remaining for the victim to pay a ransom demand before their stolen files would be published online. Now, the top entry on the shaming site is a countdown timer until the public doxing of “LockBitSupp,” the unofficial spokesperson or figurehead for the LockBit gang.
“Who is LockbitSupp?” the teaser reads. “The $10m question.”
In January 2024, LockBitSupp told XSS forum members he was disappointed the FBI hadn’t offered a reward for his doxing and/or arrest, and that in response he was placing a bounty on his own head — offering $10 million to anyone who could discover his real name.
“My god, who needs me?,” LockBitSupp wrote on Jan. 22, 2024. “There is not even a reward out for me on the FBI website. By the way, I want to use this chance to increase the reward amount for a person who can tell me my full name from USD 1 million to USD 10 million. The person who will find out my name, tell it to me and explain how they were able to find it out will get USD 10 million. Please take note that when looking for criminals, the FBI uses unclear wording offering a reward of UP TO USD 10 million; this means that the FBI can pay you USD 100, because technically, it’s an amount UP TO 10 million. On the other hand, I am willing to pay USD 10 million, no more and no less.”
Mark Stockley, cybersecurity evangelist at the security firm Malwarebytes, said the NCA is obviously trolling the LockBit group and LockBitSupp.
“I don’t think this is an accident—this is how ransomware groups talk to each other,” Stockley said. “This is law enforcement taking the time to enjoy its moment, and humiliate LockBit in its own vernacular, presumably so it loses face.”
In a press conference today, the FBI said Operation Cronos included investigative assistance from the Gendarmerie-C3N in France; the State Criminal Police Office L-K-A and Federal Criminal Police Office in Germany; Fedpol and Zurich Cantonal Police in Switzerland; the National Police Agency in Japan; the Australian Federal Police; the Swedish Police Authority; the National Bureau of Investigation in Finland; the Royal Canadian Mounted Police; and the National Police in the Netherlands.
The Justice Department said victims targeted by LockBit should contact the FBI at https://lockbitvictims.ic3.gov/ to determine whether affected systems can be successfully decrypted. In addition, the Japanese Police, supported by Europol, have released a recovery tool designed to recover files encrypted by the LockBit 3.0 Black Ransomware.
Little AV/EDR Evasion Lab for training & learning purposes. (️ under construction..)
____ _ _____ ____ ____ ___ __ _____ _
| __ ) ___ ___| |_ | ____| _ \| _ \ / _ \ / _| |_ _| |__ ___
| _ \ / _ \/ __| __| | _| | | | | |_) | | | | | |_ | | | '_ \ / _ \
| |_) | __/\__ \ |_ | |___| |_| | _ < | |_| | _| | | | | | | __/
|____/_\___||___/\__| |_____|____/|_| \_\ \___/|_| |_| |_| |_|\___|
| \/ | __ _ _ __| | _____| |_
| |\/| |/ _` | '__| |/ / _ \ __|
| | | | (_| | | | < __/ |_ Yazidou - github.com/Xacone
|_| |_|\__,_|_| |_|\_\___|\__|
BestEDROfTheMarket is a naive user-mode EDR (Endpoint Detection and Response) project, designed to serve as a testing ground for understanding and bypassing EDR's user-mode detection methods that are frequently used by these security solutions.
These techniques are mainly based on a dynamic analysis of the target process state (memory, API calls, etc.),
Feel free to check this short article I wrote that describe the interception and analysis methods implemented by the EDR.
In progress:
Usage: BestEdrOfTheMarket.exe [args]
/help Shows this help message and quit
/v Verbosity
/iat IAT hooking
/stack Threads call stack monitoring
/nt Inline Nt-level hooking
/k32 Inline Kernel32/Kernelbase hooking
/ssn SSN crushing
BestEdrOfTheMarket.exe /stack /v /k32
BestEdrOfTheMarket.exe /stack /nt
BestEdrOfTheMarket.exe /iat
Last week, KrebsOnSecurity broke the news that one of the largest cybercrime services for laundering stolen merchandise was hacked recently, exposing its internal operations, finances and organizational structure. In today’s Part II, we’ll examine clues about the real-life identity of “Fearlless,” the nickname chosen by the proprietor of the SWAT USA Drops service.
Based in Russia, SWAT USA recruits people in the United States to reship packages containing pricey electronics that are purchased with stolen credit cards. As detailed in this Nov. 2 story, SWAT currently employs more than 1,200 U.S. residents, all of whom will be cut loose without a promised payday at the end of their first month reshipping stolen goods.
The current co-owner of SWAT, a cybercriminal who uses the nickname “Fearlless,” operates primarily on the cybercrime forum Verified. This Russian-language forum has tens of thousands of members, and it has suffered several hacks that exposed more than a decade’s worth of user data and direct messages.
January 2021 posts on Verified show that Fearlless and his partner Universalo purchased the SWAT reshipping business from a Verified member named SWAT, who’d been operating the service for years. SWAT agreed to transfer the business in exchange for 30 percent of the net profit over the ensuing six months.
Cyber intelligence firm Intel 471 says Fearlless first registered on Verified in February 2013. The email address Fearlless used on Verified leads nowhere, but a review of Fearlless’ direct messages on Verified indicates this user originally registered on Verified a year earlier as a reshipping vendor, under the alias “Apathyp.”
There are two clues supporting the conclusion that Apathyp and Fearlless are the same person. First, the Verified administrators warned Apathyp he had violated the forum’s rules barring the use of multiple accounts by the same person, and that Verified’s automated systems had detected that Apathyp and Fearlless were logging in from the same device. Second, in his earliest private messages on Verified, Fearlless told others to contact him on an instant messenger address that Apathyp had claimed as his.
Intel 471 says Apathyp registered on Verified using the email address triploo@mail.ru. A search on that email address at the breach intelligence service Constella Intelligence found that a password commonly associated with it was “niceone.” But the triploo@mail.ru account isn’t connected to much else that’s interesting except a now-deleted account at Vkontakte, the Russian answer to Facebook.
However, in Sept. 2020, Apathyp sent a private message on Verified to the owner of a stolen credit card shop, saying his credentials no longer worked. Apathyp told the proprietor that his chosen password on the service was “12Apathy.”
A search on that password at Constella reveals it was used by just four different email addresses, two of which are particularly interesting: gezze@yandex.ru and gezze@mail.ru. Constella discovered that both of these addresses were previously associated with the same password as triploo@mail.ru — “niceone,” or some variation thereof.
Constella found that years ago gezze@mail.ru was used to create a Vkontakte account under the name Ivan Sherban (former password: “12niceone“) from Magnitogorsk, an industrial city in the southern region of Russia. That same email address is now tied to a Vkontakte account for an Ivan Sherban who lists his home as Saint Petersburg, Russia. Sherban’s profile photo shows a heavily tattooed, muscular and recently married individual with his beautiful new bride getting ready to drive off in a convertible sports car.
A pivotal clue for validating the research into Apathyp/Fearlless came from the identity intelligence firm myNetWatchman, which found that gezze@mail.ru at one time used the passwords “геззи1991” (gezze1991) and “gezze18081991.”
Care to place a wager on when Vkontakte says is Mr. Sherban’s birthday? Ten points if you answered August 18 (18081991).
Mr. Sherban did not respond to multiple requests for comment.
The login page for the criminal reshipping service SWAT USA Drop.
One of the largest cybercrime services for laundering stolen merchandise was hacked recently, exposing its internal operations, finances and organizational structure. Here’s a closer look at the Russia-based SWAT USA Drop Service, which currently employs more than 1,200 people across the United States who are knowingly or unwittingly involved in reshipping expensive consumer goods purchased with stolen credit cards.
Among the most common ways that thieves extract cash from stolen credit card accounts is through purchasing pricey consumer goods online and reselling them on the black market. Most online retailers grew wise to these scams years ago and stopped shipping to regions of the world most frequently associated with credit card fraud, including Eastern Europe, North Africa, and Russia.
But such restrictions have created a burgeoning underground market for reshipping scams, which rely on willing or unwitting residents in the United States and Europe to receive stolen goods and relay them to crooks living in the embargoed areas.
Services like SWAT are known as “Drops for stuff” on cybercrime forums. The “drops” are people who have responded to work-at-home package reshipping jobs advertised on craigslist.com and job search sites. Most reshipping scams promise employees a monthly salary and even cash bonuses. In reality, the crooks in charge almost always stop communicating with drops just before the first payday, usually about a month after the drop ships their first package.
The packages arrive with prepaid shipping labels that are paid for with stolen credit card numbers, or with hijacked online accounts at FedEx and the US Postal Service. Drops are responsible for inspecting and verifying the contents of shipments, attaching the correct shipping label to each package, and sending them off via the appropriate shipping company.
SWAT takes a percentage cut (up to 50 percent) where “stuffers” — thieves armed with stolen credit card numbers — pay a portion of each product’s retail value to SWAT as the reshipping fee. The stuffers use stolen cards to purchase high-value products from merchants and have the merchants ship the items to the drops’ address. Once the drops receive and successfully reship the stolen packages, the stuffers then sell the products on the local black market.
The SWAT drop service has been around in various names and under different ownership for almost a decade. But in early October 2023, SWAT’s current co-owner — a Russian-speaking individual who uses the handle “Fearlless” — took to his favorite cybercrime forum to lodge a formal complaint against the owner of a competing reshipping service, alleging his rival had hacked SWAT and was trying to poach his stuffers and reshippers by emailing them directly.
Milwaukee-based security firm Hold Security shared recent screenshots of a working SWAT stuffer’s user panel, and those images show that SWAT currently lists more than 1,200 drops in the United States that are available for stuffers to rent. The contact information for Kareem, a young man from Maryland, was listed as an active drop. Contacted by KrebsOnSecurity, Kareem agreed to speak on condition that his full name not be used in this story.
A SWAT panel for stuffers/customers. This page lists the rules of the service, which do not reimburse stuffers for “acts of god,” i.e. authorities seizing stolen goods or arresting the drop.
Kareem said he’d been hired via an online job board to reship packages on behalf of a company calling itself CTSI, and that he’s been receiving and reshipping iPads and Apple watches for several weeks now. Kareem was less than thrilled to learn he would probably not be getting his salary on the promised payday, which was coming up in a few days.
Kareem said he was instructed to create an account at a website called portal-ctsi[.]com, where each day he was expected to log in and check for new messages about pending shipments. Anyone can sign up at this website as a potential reshipping mule, although doing so requires applicants to share a great deal of personal and financial information, as well as copies of an ID or passport matching the supplied name.
A SWAT panel for stuffers/customers, listing hundreds of drops in the United States by their status. “Going to die” are those who are about to be let go without promised payment, or who have quit on their own.
On a suspicion that the login page for portal-ctsi[.]com might be a custom coding job, KrebsOnSecurity selected “view source” from the homepage to expose the site’s HTML code. Grabbing a snippet of that code (e.g., “smarty/default/jui/js/jquery-ui-1.9.2.min.js”) and searching on it at publicwww.com reveals more than four dozen other websites running the same login panel. And all of those appear to be geared toward either stuffers or drops.
In fact, more than half of the domains that use this same login panel actually include the word “stuffer” in the login URL, according to publicwww. Each of the domains below that end in “/user/login.php” are sites for active and prospective drops, and each corresponds to a unique fake company that is responsible for managing its own stable of drops:
lvlup-store[.]com/stuffer/login.php
personalsp[.]com/user/login.php
destaf[.]com/stuffer/login.php
jaderaplus[.]com/stuffer/login.php
33cow[.]com/stuffer/login.php
panelka[.]net/stuffer/login.php
aaservice[.]net/stuffer/login.php
re-shipping[.]ru/stuffer/login.php
bashar[.]cc/stuffer/login.php
marketingyoursmall[.]biz/stuffer/login.php
hovard[.]xyz/stuffer/login.php
pullback[.]xyz/stuffer/login.php
telollevoexpress[.]com/stuffer/login.php
postme[.]today/stuffer/login.php
wint-job[.]com/stuffer/login.php
squadup[.]club/stuffer/login.php
mmmpack[.]pro/stuffer/login.php
yoursmartpanel[.]com/user/login.php
opt257[.]org/user/login.php
touchpad[.]online/stuffer/login.php
peresyloff[.]top/stuffer/login.php
ruzke[.]vodka/stuffer/login.php
staf-manager[.]net/stuffer/login.php
data-job[.]club/stuffer/login.php
logistics-services[.]org/user/login.php
swatship[.]club/stuffer/login.php
logistikmanager[.]online/user/login.php
endorphine[.]world/stuffer/login.php
burbon[.]club/stuffer/login.php
bigdropproject[.]com/stuffer/login.php
jobspaket[.]net/user/login.php
yourcontrolboard[.]com/stuffer/login.php
packmania[.]online/stuffer/login.php
shopping-bro[.]com/stuffer/login.php
dash-redtag[.]com/user/login.php
mnger[.]net/stuffer/login.php
begg[.]work/stuffer/login.php
dashboard-lime[.]com/user/login.php
control-logistic[.]xyz/user/login.php
povetru[.]biz/stuffer/login.php
dash-nitrologistics[.]com/user/login.php
cbpanel[.]top/stuffer/login.php
hrparidise[.]pro/stuffer/login.php
d-cctv[.]top/user/login.php
versandproject[.]com/user/login.php
packitdash[.]com/user/login.php
avissanti-dash[.]com/user/login.php
e-host[.]life/user/login.php
pacmania[.]club/stuffer/login.php
Why so many websites? In practice, all drops are cut loose within approximately 30 days of their first shipment — just before the promised paycheck is due. Because of this constant churn, each stuff shop operator must be constantly recruiting new drops. Also, with this distributed setup, even if one reshipping operation gets shut down (or exposed online), the rest can keep on pumping out dozens of packages a day.
A 2015 academic study (PDF) on criminal reshipping services found the average financial hit from a reshipping scheme per cardholder was $1,156.93. That study looked into the financial operations of several reshipping schemes, and estimated that approximately 1.6 million credit and debit cards are used to commit at least $1.8 billion in reshipping fraud each year.
It’s not hard to see how reshipping can be a profitable enterprise for card crooks. For example, a stuffer buys a stolen payment card off the black market for $10, and uses that card to purchase more than $1,100 worth of goods. After the reshipping service takes its cut (~$550), and the stuffer pays for his reshipping label (~$100), the stuffer receives the stolen goods and sells them on the black market in Russia for $1,400. He has just turned a $10 investment into more than $700. Rinse, wash, and repeat.
The breach at SWAT exposed not only the nicknames and contact information for all of its stuffers and drops, but also the group’s monthly earnings and payouts. SWAT apparently kept its books in a publicly accessible Google Sheets document, and that document reveals Fearlless and his business partner each routinely made more than $100,000 every month operating their various reshipping businesses.
The exposed SWAT financial records show this crime group has tens of thousands of dollars worth of expenses each month, including payments for the following recurring costs:
-advertising the service on crime forums and via spam;
-people hired to re-route packages, usually by voice over the phone;
-third-party services that sell hacked/stolen USPS/Fedex labels;
-“drops test” services, contractors who will test the honesty of drops by sending them fake jewelry;
-“documents,” e.g. sending drops to physically pick up legal documents for new phony front companies.
The spreadsheet also included the cryptocurrency account numbers that were to be credited each month with SWAT’s earnings. Unsurprisingly, a review of the blockchain activity tied to the bitcoin addresses listed in that document shows that many of them have a deep association with cybercrime, including ransomware activity and transactions at darknet sites that peddle stolen credit cards and residential proxy services.
The information leaked from SWAT also has exposed the real-life identity and financial dealings of its principal owner — Fearlless, a.k.a. “SwatVerified.” We’ll hear more about Fearlless in Part II of this story. Stay tuned.
If you’ve ever owned a domain name, the chances are good that at some point you’ve received a snail mail letter which appears to be a bill for a domain or website-related services. In reality, these misleading missives try to trick people into paying for useless services they never ordered, don’t need, and probably will never receive. Here’s a look at the most recent incarnation of this scam — DomainNetworks — and some clues about who may be behind it.
The DomainNetworks mailer may reference a domain that is or was at one point registered to your name and address. Although the letter includes the words “marketing services” in the upper right corner, the rest of the missive is deceptively designed to look like a bill for services already rendered.
DomainNetworks claims that listing your domain with their promotion services will result in increased traffic to your site. This is a dubious claim for a company that appears to be a complete fabrication, as we’ll see in a moment. But happily, the proprietors of this enterprise were not so difficult to track down.
The website Domainnetworks[.]com says it is a business with a post office box in Hendersonville, N.C., and another address in Santa Fe, N.M. There are a few random, non-technology businesses tied to the phone number listed for the Hendersonville address, and the New Mexico address was used by several no-name web hosting companies.
However, there is little connected to these addresses and phone numbers that get us any closer to finding out who’s running Domainnetworks[.]com. And neither entity appears to be an active, official company in their supposed state of residence, at least according to each state’s Secretary of State database.
The Better Business Bureau listing for DomainNetworks gives it an “F” rating, and includes more than 100 reviews by people angry at receiving one of these scams via snail mail. Helpfully, the BBB says DomainNetworks previously operated under a different name: US Domain Authority LLC.
DomainNetworks has an “F” reputation with the Better Business Bureau.
Copies of snail mail scam letters from US Domain Authority posted online show that this entity used the domain usdomainauthority[.]com, registered in May 2022. The Usdomainauthority mailer also featured a Henderson, NC address, albeit at a different post office box.
Usdomainauthority[.]com is no longer online, and the site seems to have blocked its pages from being indexed by the Wayback Machine at archive.org. But searching on a long snippet of text from DomainNetworks[.]com about refund requests shows that this text was found on just one other active website, according to publicwww.com, a service that indexes the HTML code of existing websites and makes it searchable.
A deceptive snail mail solicitation from DomainNetwork’s previous iteration — US Domain Authority. Image: Joerussori.com
That other website is a domain registered in January 2023 called thedomainsvault[.]com, and its registration details are likewise hidden behind privacy services. Thedomainsvault’s “Frequently Asked Questions” page is quite similar to the one on the DomainNetworks website; both begin with the question of why the company is sending a mailer that looks like a bill for domain services.
Thedomainsvault[.]com includes no useful information about the entity or people who operate it; clicking the “Contact-us” link on the site brings up a page with placeholder Lorem Ipsum text, a contact form, and a phone number of 123456789.
However, searching passive DNS records at DomainTools.com for thedomainsvault[.]com shows that at some point whoever owns the domain instructed incoming email to be sent to ubsagency@gmail.com.
The first result that currently pops up when searching for “ubsagency” in Google is ubsagency[.]com, which says it belongs to a Las Vegas-based Search Engine Optimization (SEO) and digital marketing concern generically named both United Business Service and United Business Services. UBSagency’s website is hosted at the same Ann Arbor, Mich. based hosting firm (A2 Hosting Inc) as thedomainsvault[.]com.
UBSagency’s LinkedIn page says the company has offices in Vegas, Half Moon Bay, Calif., and Renton, Wash. But once again, none of the addresses listed for these offices reveal any obvious clues about who runs UBSagency. And once again, none of these entities appear to exist as official businesses in their claimed state of residence.
Searching on ubsagency@gmail.com in Constella Intelligence shows the address was used sometime before February 2019 to create an account under the name “Sammy\Sam_Alon” at the interior decorating site Houzz.com. In January 2019, Houzz acknowledged that a data breach exposed account information on an undisclosed number of customers, including user IDs, one-way encrypted passwords, IP addresses, city and ZIP codes, as well as Facebook information.
Sammy\Sam_Alon registered at Houzz using an Internet address in Huntsville, Ala. (68.35.149.206). Constella says this address was associated with the email tropicglobal@gmail.com, which also is tied to several other “Sammy” accounts at different stores online.
Constella also says a highly unique password re-used by tropicglobal@gmail.com across numerous sites was used in connection with just a few other email accounts, including shenhavgroup@gmail.com, and distributorinvoice@mail.com.
The shenhavgroup@gmail.com address was used to register a Twitter account for a Sam Orit Alon in 2013, whose account says they are affiliated with the Shenhav Group. According to DomainTools, shenhavgroup@gmail.com was responsible for registering roughly two dozen domains, including the now-defunct unitedbusinessservice[.]com.
Constella further finds that the address distributorinvoice@mail.com was used to register an account at whmcs.com, a web hosting platform that suffered a breach of its user database several years back. The name on the WHMCS account was Shmuel Orit Alon, from Kidron, Israel.
UBSagency also has a Facebook page, or maybe “had” is the operative word because someone appears to have defaced it. Loading the Facebook page for UBSagency shows several of the images have been overlaid or replaced with a message from someone who is really disappointed with Sam Alon.
“Sam Alon is a LIAR, THIEF, COWARD AND HAS A VERY SMALL D*CK,” reads one of the messages:
The current Facebook profile page for UBSagency includes a logo that is similar to the DomainNetworks logo.
The logo in the UBSagency profile photo includes a graphic of what appears to be a magnifying glass with a line that zig-zags through bullet points inside and outside the circle, a unique pattern that is remarkably similar to the logo for DomainNetworks:
The logos for DomainNetworks (left) and UBSagency.
Constella also found that the same Huntsville IP address used by Sam Alon at Houzz was associated with yet another Houzz account, this one for someone named “Eliran.”
The UBSagency Facebook page features several messages from an Eliran “Dani” Benz, who is referred to by commenters as an employee or partner with UBSagency. The last check-in on Benz’s profile is from a beach at Rishon Letziyon in Israel earlier this year.
Neither Mr. Alon nor Mr. Benz responded to multiple requests for comment.
It may be difficult to believe that anyone would pay an invoice for a domain name or SEO service they never ordered. However, there is plenty of evidence that these phony bills often get processed by administrative personnel at organizations that end up paying the requested amount because they assume it was owed for some services already provided.
In 2018, KrebsOnSecurity published How Internet Savvy are Your Leaders?, which examined public records to show that dozens of cities, towns, school districts and even political campaigns across the United States got snookered into paying these scam domain invoices from a similar scam company called WebListings Inc.
In 2020, KrebsOnSecurity featured a deep dive into who was likely behind the WebListings scam, which had been sending out these snail mail scam letters for over a decade. That investigation revealed the scam’s connection to a multi-level marketing operation run out of the U.K., and to two brothers living in Scotland.
Article tags
An automatic Blind ROP exploitation python tool
BROP (Blind ROP) was a technique found by Andrew Bittau from Stanford in 2014.
Most servers like nginx, Apache, MySQL, forks then communicates with the client. This means canary and addresses stay the same even if there is ASLR and PIE. So we can use some educated brute force to leak information and subsequently craft a working exploit.
There is 3 customs vulnerable examples provided in this repository. You can run it directly or build the Dockerfile
BROPPER will then dump the binary :
It's then possible to extract all ROP gadgets from the dumped binary using ROPgadget for example :
$ ROPgadget --binary dump
Gadgets information
============================================================
0x0000000000001177 : adc al, 0 ; add byte ptr [rax], al ; jmp 0x1020
0x0000000000001157 : adc al, byte ptr [rax] ; add byte ptr [rax], al ; jmp 0x1020
0x0000000000001137 : adc byte ptr [rax], al ; add byte ptr [rax], al ; jmp 0x1020
...
...
...
0x0000000000001192 : xor ch, byte ptr [rdi] ; add byte ptr [rax], al ; push 0x16 ; jmp 0x1020
0x000000000000182e : xor eax, 0x891 ; mov rdi, rax ; call rcx
0x0000000000001861 : xor eax, 0xffffff22 ; mov rdi, rax ; call rcx
Unique gadgets found: 235To use this script:
python3 -m pip install -r requirements.txt
python3 bropper.py -t 127.0.0.1 -p 1337 --wait "Password :" --expected Bad --expected-stop Welcome -o dump$ python3 bropper.py -h
usage: bropper.py [-h] -t TARGET -p PORT --expected-stop EXPECTED_STOP --expected EXPECTED --wait WAIT -o OUTPUT [--offset OFFSET] [--canary CANARY] [--no-canary] [--rbp RBP] [--rip RIP] [--stop STOP]
[--brop BROP] [--plt PLT] [--strcmp STRCMP] [--elf ELF]
Description message
options:
-h, --help show this help message and exit
-t TARGET, --target TARGET
target url
-p PORT, --port PORT target port
--expected-stop EXPECTED_STOP
Expected response for the stop gadget
--expected EXPECTED Expected normal response
--wait WAIT String to wait before sending payload
-o OUTPUT, --output OUTPUT
File to write dumped remote binary
--offset OFFSET set a offset value
--canary CANARY set a canary valu e
--no-canary Use this argument if there is no stack canary protection
--rbp RBP set rbp address
--rip RIP set rip address
--stop STOP set stop gadget address
--brop BROP set brop gadget address
--plt PLT set plt address
--strcmp STRCMP set strcmp entry value
--elf ELF set elf addressPull requests are welcome. Feel free to open an issue if you want to add other features.
Nikita Kislitsin, formerly the head of network security for one of Russia’s top cybersecurity firms, was arrested last week in Kazakhstan in response to 10-year-old hacking charges from the U.S. Department of Justice. Experts say Kislitsin’s prosecution could soon put the Kazakhstan government in a sticky diplomatic position, as the Kremlin is already signaling that it intends to block his extradition to the United States.
Nikita Kislitsin, at a security conference in Russia.
Kislitsin is accused of hacking into the now-defunct social networking site Formspring in 2012, and conspiring with another Russian man convicted of stealing tens of millions of usernames and passwords from LinkedIn and Dropbox that same year.
In March 2020, the DOJ unsealed two criminal hacking indictments against Kislitsin, who was then head of security at Group-IB, a cybersecurity company that was founded in Russia in 2003 and operated there for more than a decade before relocating to Singapore.
Prosecutors in Northern California indicted Kislitsin in 2014 for his alleged role in stealing account data from Formspring. Kislitsin also was indicted in Nevada in 2013, but the Nevada indictment does not name his alleged victim(s) in that case.
However, documents unsealed in the California case indicate Kislitsin allegedly conspired with Yevgeniy Nikulin, a Russian man convicted in 2020 of stealing 117 million usernames and passwords from Dropbox, Formspring and LinkedIn in 2012. Nikulin is currently serving a seven-year sentence in the U.S. prison system.
As first reported by Cyberscoop in 2020, a trial brief in the California investigation identified Nikulin, Kislitsin and two alleged cybercriminals — Oleg Tolstikh and Oleksandr Vitalyevich Ieremenko — as being present during a 2012 meeting at a Moscow hotel, where participants allegedly discussed starting an internet café business.
A 2010 indictment out of New Jersey accuses Ieremenko and six others with siphoning nonpublic information from the U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission (SEC) and public relations firms, and making $30 million in illegal stock trades based on the proprietary information they stole.
[The U.S. Secret Service has an outstanding $1 million reward for information leading to the arrest of Ieremenko (Александр Витальевич Еременко), who allegedly went by the hacker handles “Zl0m” and “Lamarez.”]
Kislitsin was hired by Group-IB in January 2013, nearly six months after the Formspring hack. Group-IB has since moved its headquarters to Singapore, and in April 2023 the company announced it had fully exited the Russian market.
In a statement provided to KrebsOnSecurity, Group-IB said Mr. Kislitsin is no longer an employee, and that he now works for a Russian organization called FACCT, which stands for “Fight Against Cybercrime Technologies.”
“Dmitry Volkov, co-founder and CEO, sold his stake in Group-IB’s Russia-based business to the company’s local management,” the statement reads. “The stand-alone business in Russia has been operating under the new brand FACCT ever since and will continue to operate as a separate company with no connection to Group-IB.”
FACCT says on its website that it is a “Russian developer of technologies for combating cybercrime,” and that it works with clients to fight targeted attacks, data leaks, fraud, phishing and brand abuse. In a statement published online, FACCT said Kislitsin is responsible for developing its network security business, and that he remains under temporary detention in Kazakhstan “to study the basis for extradition arrest at the request of the United States.”
“According to the information we have, the claims against Kislitsin are not related to his work at FACCT, but are related to a case more than 10 years ago when Nikita worked as a journalist and independent researcher,” FACCT wrote.
From 2006 to 2012, Kislitsin was editor-in-chief of “Hacker,” a popular Russian-language monthly magazine that includes articles on information and network security, programming, and frequently features interviews with and articles penned by notable or wanted Russian hackers.
“We are convinced that there are no legal grounds for detention on the territory of Kazakhstan,” the FACCT statement continued. “The company has hired lawyers who have been providing Nikita with all the necessary assistance since last week, and we have also sent an appeal to the Consulate General of the Russian Federation in Kazakhstan to assist in protecting our employee.”
FACCT indicated that the Kremlin has already intervened in the case, and the Russian government claims Kislitsin is wanted on criminal charges in Russia and must instead be repatriated to his homeland.
“The FACCT emphasizes that the announcement of Nikita Kislitsin on the wanted list in the territory of the Russian Federation became known only today, June 28, 6 days after the arrest in Kazakhstan,” FACCT wrote. “The company is monitoring developments.”
The Kremlin followed a similar playbook in the case of Aleksei Burkov, a cybercriminal who long operated two of Russia’s most exclusive underground hacking forums. Burkov was arrested in 2015 by Israeli authorities, and the Russian government fought Burkov’s extradition to the U.S. for four years — even arresting and jailing an Israeli woman on phony drug charges to force a prisoner swap.
That effort ultimately failed: Burkov was sent to America, pleaded guilty, and was sentenced to nine years in prison.
Alexei Burkov, seated second from right, attends a hearing in Jerusalem in 2015. Image: Andrei Shirokov / Tass via Getty Images.
Arkady Bukh is a U.S. attorney who has represented dozens of accused hackers from Russia and Eastern Europe who were extradited to the United States over the years. Bukh said Moscow is likely to turn the Kislitsin case into a diplomatic time bomb for Kazakhstan, which shares an enormous border and a great deal of cultural ties with Russia. A 2009 census found that Russians make up about 24 percent of the population of Kazakhstan.
“That would put Kazakhstan at a crossroads to choose between unity with Russia or going with the West,” Bukh said. “If that happens, Kazakhstan may have to make some very unpleasant decisions.”
Group-IB’s exodus from Russia comes as its former founder and CEO Ilya Sachkov remains languishing in a Russian prison, awaiting a farcical trial and an inevitable conviction on charges of treason. In September 2021, the Kremlin issued treason charges against Sachkov, although it has so far refused to disclose any details about the allegations.
Sachkov’s pending treason trial has been the subject of much speculation among denizens of Russian cybercrime forums, and the consensus seems to be that Sachkov and Group-IB were seen as a little too helpful to the DOJ in its various investigations involving top Russian hackers.
Indeed, since its inception in 2003, Group-IB’s researchers have helped to identify, disrupt and even catch a number of high-profile Russian hackers, most of whom got busted after years of criminal hacking because they made the unforgivable mistake of stealing from their own citizens.
When the indictments against Kislitsin were unsealed in 2020, Group-IB issued a lengthy statement attesting to his character and saying they would help him with his legal defense. As part of that statement, Group-IB noted that “representatives of the Group-IB company and, in particular, Kislitsin, in 2013, on their own initiative, met with employees of the US Department of Justice to inform them about the research work related to the underground, which was carried out by Kislitsin in 2012.”
A DLL Loader With Advanced Evasive Features
"Atom" function via the command line.CRC32 string hashing algorithm.AtomLdr's unhooking method looks like the following
the program Unhooking from the \KnwonDlls\ directory is not a new method to bypass user-land hooks. However, this loader tries to avoid allocating RWX memory when doing so. This was obligatory to do in KnownDllUnhook for example, where RWX permissions were needed to replace the text section of the hooked modules, and at the same time allow execution of functions within these text sections.
This was changed in this loader, where it suspends the running threads, in an attempt to block any function from being called from within the targetted text sections, thus eliminating the need of having them marked as RWX sections before unhooking, making RW permissions a possible choice.
This approach, however, created another problem; when unhooking, NtProtectVirtualMemory syscall and others were using the syscall instruction inside of ntdll.dll module, as an indirect-syscall approach. Still, as mentioned above, the unhooked modules will be marked as RW sections, making it impossible to perform indirect syscalls, because the syscall instruction that we were jumping to, can't be executed now, so we had to jump to another executable place, this is where win32u.dll was used.
win32u.dll contains some syscalls that are GUI-related functions, making it suitable to jump to instead of ntdll.dll. win32u.dll is loaded (statically), but not included in the unhooking routine, which is done to insure that win32u.dll can still execute the syscall instruction we are jumping to.
The suspended threads after that are resumed.
It is worth mentioning that this approach may not be that efficient, and can be unstable, that is due to the thread suspension trick used. However, it has been tested with multiple processes with positive results, in the meantime, if you encountered any problems, feel free to open an issue.
PayloadConfig.pc file, that contains the encrypted payload, and its encrypted key and iv.PayloadConfig.pc file will then replace this in the AtomLdr project.AtomLdr project as x64 Release.AtomLdr.dll using rundll32.exe, running Havoc payload, and capturing a screenshotAtomLdr.dll's Import Address TablePayloadBuilder.exe, to encrypt demon[111].bin - a Havoc payload fileAtomLdr.dll using rundll32.exe
EntropyReducer algorithm is determined by BUFF_SIZE and NULL_BYTES values. The following is how would EntropyReducer organize your payload if BUFF_SIZE was set to 4, and NULL_BYTES to 2.
BUFF_SIZE, if not, it pads it to be as so.BUFF_SIZE chunk from the payload, and makes a linked list node for it, using the InitializePayloadList function, initializing the payload as a linked list.NULL_BYTES, that will be used to lower the entropyObfuscate function here.Obfuscation Algorithm was serializing the linked list, the first thing that must be done here is to deserialize the obfuscated payload, generating a linked list from it, this step is done here in the Deobfuscate function.BUFF_SIZE and NULL_BYTES. However, it can be determined using the following equationFinalSize = ((OriginalSize + BUFF_SIZE - OriginalSize % BUFF_SIZE ) / BUFF_SIZE) * (BUFF_SIZE + NULL_BYTES + sizeof(INT))
".ER" file generated as an example of deserializing and deobfuscating it.All you have to do is add EntropyReducer.c and EntropyReducer.h files to your project, and call the Deobfuscate function. You can check PoC/main.c for reference.
In this example, BUFF_SIZE was set to 3, and NULL_BYTES to 1.
FC 48 83)5.883, view by pestudio.7.110.7.210
4.093
This tool is a simple PoC of how to hide memory artifacts using a ROP chain in combination with hardware breakpoints. The ROP chain will change the main module memory page's protections to N/A while sleeping (i.e. when the function Sleep is called). For more detailed information about this memory scanning evasion technique check out the original project Gargoyle. x64 only.
The idea is to set up a hardware breakpoint in kernel32!Sleep and a new top-level filter to handle the exception. When Sleep is called, the exception filter function set before is triggered, allowing us to call the ROP chain without the need of using classic function hooks. This way, we avoid leaving weird and unusual private memory regions in the process related to well known dlls.
The ROP chain simply calls VirtualProtect() to set the current memory page to N/A, then calls SleepEx and finally restores the RX memory protection.
The overview of the process is as follows:
This process repeats indefinitely.
As it can be seen in the image, the main module's memory protection is changed to N/A while sleeping, which avoids memory scans looking for pages with execution permission.
Since we are using LITCRYPT plugin to obfuscate string literals, it is required to set up the environment variable LITCRYPT_ENCRYPT_KEY before compiling the code:
C:\Users\User\Desktop\RustChain> set LITCRYPT_ENCRYPT_KEY="yoursupersecretkey"
After that, simply compile the code and run the tool:
C:\Users\User\Desktop\RustChain> cargo build
C:\Users\User\Desktop\RustChain\target\debug> rustchain.exe
This tool is just a PoC and some extra features should be implemented in order to be fully functional. The main purpose of the project was to learn how to implement a ROP chain and integrate it within Rust. Because of that, this tool will only work if you use it as it is, and failures are expected if you try to use it in other ways (for example, compiling it to a dll and trying to reflectively load and execute it).
Countless smartphones seized in arrests and searches by police forces across the United States are being auctioned online without first having the data on them erased, a practice that can lead to crime victims being re-victimized, a new study found. In response, the largest online marketplace for items seized in U.S. law enforcement investigations says it now ensures that all phones sold through its platform will be data-wiped prior to auction.
Researchers at the University of Maryland last year purchased 228 smartphones sold “as-is” from PropertyRoom.com, which bills itself as the largest auction house for police departments in the United States. Of phones they won at auction (at an average of $18 per phone), the researchers found 49 had no PIN or passcode; they were able to guess an additional 11 of the PINs by using the top-40 most popular PIN or swipe patterns.
Phones may end up in police custody for any number of reasons — such as its owner was involved in identity theft — and in these cases the phone itself was used as a tool to commit the crime.
“We initially expected that police would never auction these phones, as they would enable the buyer to recommit the same crimes as the previous owner,” the researchers explained in a paper released this month. “Unfortunately, that expectation has proven false in practice.”
The researchers said while they could have employed more aggressive technological measures to work out more of the PINs for the remaining phones they bought, they concluded based on the sample that a great many of the devices they won at auction had probably not been data-wiped and were protected only by a PIN.
Beyond what you would expect from unwiped second hand phones — every text message, picture, email, browser history, location history, etc. — the 61 phones they were able to access also contained significant amounts of data pertaining to crime — including victims’ data — the researchers found.
Some readers may be wondering at this point, “Why should we care about what happens to a criminal’s phone?” First off, it’s not entirely clear how these phones ended up for sale on PropertyRoom.
“Some folks are like, ‘Yeah, whatever, these are criminal phones,’ but are they?” said Dave Levin, an assistant professor of computer science at University of Maryland.
“We started looking at state laws around what they’re supposed to do with lost or stolen property, and we found that most of it ends up going the same route as civil asset forfeiture,” Levin continued. “Meaning, if they can’t find out who owns something, it eventually becomes the property of the state and gets shipped out to these resellers.”
Also, the researchers found that many of the phones clearly had personal information on them regarding previous or intended targets of crime: A dozen of the phones had photographs of government-issued IDs. Three of those were on phones that apparently belonged to sex workers; their phones contained communications with clients.
An overview of the phone functionality and data accessibility for phones purchased by the researchers.
One phone had full credit files for eight different people on it. On another device they found a screenshot including 11 stolen credit cards that were apparently purchased from an online carding shop. On yet another, the former owner had apparently been active in a Telegram group chat that sold tutorials on how to run identity theft scams.
The most interesting phone from the batches they bought at auction was one with a sticky note attached that included the device’s PIN and the notation “Gry Keyed,” no doubt a reference to the Graykey software that is often used by law enforcement agencies to brute-force a mobile device PIN.
“That one had the PIN on the back,” Levin said. “The message chain on that phone had 24 Experian and TransUnion credit histories”.
The University of Maryland team said they took care in their research not to further the victimization of people whose information was on the devices they purchased from PropertyRoom.com. That involved ensuring that none of the devices could connect to the Internet when powered on, and scanning all images on the devices against known hashes for child sexual abuse material.
It is common to find phones and other electronics for sale on auction platforms like eBay that have not been wiped of sensitive data, but in those cases eBay doesn’t possess the items being sold. In contrast, platforms like PropertyRoom obtain devices and resell them at auction directly.
PropertyRoom did not respond to multiple requests for comment. But the researchers said sometime in the past few months PropertyRoom began posting a notice stating that all mobile devices would be wiped of their data before being sold at auction.
“We informed them of our research in October 2022, and they responded that they would review our findings internally,” Levin said. “They stopped selling them for a while, but then it slowly came back, and then we made sure we won every auction. And all of the ones we got from that were indeed wiped, except there were four devices that had external SD [storage] cards in them that weren’t wiped.”
A copy of the University of Maryland study is here (PDF).
A new breach involving data from nine million AT&T customers is a fresh reminder that your mobile provider likely collects and shares a great deal of information about where you go and what you do with your mobile device — unless and until you affirmatively opt out of this data collection. Here’s a primer on why you might want to do that, and how.
Image: Shutterstock
Telecommunications giant AT&T disclosed this month that a breach at a marketing vendor exposed certain account information for nine million customers. AT&T said the data exposed did not include sensitive information, such as credit card or Social Security numbers, or account passwords, but was limited to “Customer Proprietary Network Information” (CPNI), such as the number of lines on an account.
Certain questions may be coming to mind right now, like “What the heck is CPNI?” And, ‘If it’s so ‘customer proprietary,’ why is AT&T sharing it with marketers?” Also maybe, “What can I do about it?” Read on for answers to all three questions.
AT&T’s disclosure said the information exposed included customer first name, wireless account number, wireless phone number and email address. In addition, a small percentage of customer records also exposed the rate plan name, past due amounts, monthly payment amounts and minutes used.
CPNI refers to customer-specific “metadata” about the account and account usage, and may include:
-Called phone numbers
-Time of calls
-Length of calls
-Cost and billing of calls
-Service features
-Premium services, such as directory call assistance
According to a succinct CPNI explainer at TechTarget, CPNI is private and protected information that cannot be used for advertising or marketing directly.
“An individual’s CPNI can be shared with other telecommunications providers for network operating reasons,” wrote TechTarget’s Gavin Wright. “So, when the individual first signs up for phone service, this information is automatically shared by the phone provider to partner companies.”
Is your mobile Internet usage covered by CPNI laws? That’s less clear, as the CPNI rules were established before mobile phones and wireless Internet access were common. TechTarget’s CPNI primer explains:
“Under current U.S. law, cellphone use is only protected as CPNI when it is being used as a telephone. During this time, the company is acting as a telecommunications provider requiring CPNI rules. Internet use, websites visited, search history or apps used are not protected CPNI because the company is acting as an information services provider not subject to these laws.”
Hence, the carriers can share and sell this data because they’re not explicitly prohibited from doing so. All three major carriers say they take steps to anonymize the customer data they share, but researchers have shown it is not terribly difficult to de-anonymize supposedly anonymous web-browsing data.
“Your phone, and consequently your mobile provider, know a lot about you,” wrote Jack Morse for Mashable. “The places you go, apps you use, and the websites you visit potentially reveal all kinds of private information — e.g. religious beliefs, health conditions, travel plans, income level, and specific tastes in pornography. This should bother you.”
Happily, all of the U.S. carriers are required to offer customers ways to opt out of having data about how they use their devices shared with marketers. Here’s a look at some of the carrier-specific practices and opt-out options.
AT&T’s policy says it shares device or “ad ID”, combined with demographics including age range, gender, and ZIP code information with third parties which explicitly include advertisers, programmers, and networks, social media networks, analytics firms, ad networks and other similar companies that are involved in creating and delivering advertisements.
AT&T said the data exposed on 9 million customers was several years old, and mostly related to device upgrade eligibility. This may sound like the data went to just one of its partners who experienced a breach, but in all likelihood it also went to hundreds of AT&T’s partners.
AT&T’s CPNI opt-out page says it shares CPNI data with several of its affiliates, including WarnerMedia, DirecTV and Cricket Wireless. Until recently, AT&T also shared CPNI data with Xandr, whose privacy policy in turn explains that it shares data with hundreds of other advertising firms. Microsoft bought Xandr from AT&T last year.
According to the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), T-Mobile seems to be the only company out of the big three to extend to all customers the rights conferred by the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA).
EPIC says T-Mobile customer data sold to third parties uses another unique identifier called mobile advertising IDs or “MAIDs.” T-Mobile claims that MAIDs don’t directly identify consumers, but under the CCPA MAIDs are considered “personal information” that can be connected to IP addresses, mobile apps installed or used with the device, any video or content viewing information, and device activity and attributes.
T-Mobile customers can opt out by logging into their account and navigating to the profile page, then to “Privacy and Notifications.” From there, toggle off the options for “Use my data for analytics and reporting” and “Use my data to make ads more relevant to me.”
Verizon’s privacy policy says it does not sell information that personally identities customers (e.g., name, telephone number or email address), but it does allow third-party advertising companies to collect information about activity on Verizon websites and in Verizon apps, through MAIDs, pixels, web beacons and social network plugins.
According to Wired.com’s tutorial, Verizon users can opt out by logging into their Verizon account through a web browser or the My Verizon mobile app. From there, select the Account tab, then click Account Settings and Privacy Settings on the web. For the mobile app, click the gear icon in the upper right corner and then Manage Privacy Settings.
On the privacy preferences page, web users can choose “Don’t use” under the Custom Experience section. On the My Verizon app, toggle any green sliders to the left.
EPIC notes that all three major carriers say resetting the consumer’s device ID and/or clearing cookies in the browser will similarly reset any opt-out preferences (i.e., the customer will need to opt out again), and that blocking cookies by default may also block the opt-out cookie from being set.
T-Mobile says its opt out is device-specific and/or browser-specific. “In most cases, your opt-out choice will apply only to the specific device or browser on which it was made. You may need to separately opt out from your other devices and browsers.”
Both AT&T and Verizon offer opt-in programs that gather and share far more information, including device location, the phone numbers you call, and which sites you visit using your mobile and/or home Internet connection. AT&T calls this their Enhanced Relevant Advertising Program; Verizon’s is called Custom Experience Plus.
In 2021, multiple media outlets reported that some Verizon customers were being automatically enrolled in Custom Experience Plus — even after those customers had already opted out of the same program under its previous name — “Verizon Selects.”
If none of the above opt out options work for you, at a minimum you should be able to opt out of CPNI sharing by calling your carrier, or by visiting one of their stores.
Why should you opt out of sharing CPNI data? For starters, some of the nation’s largest wireless carriers don’t have a great track record in terms of protecting the sensitive information that you give them solely for the purposes of becoming a customer — let alone the information they collect about your use of their services after that point.
In January 2023, T-Mobile disclosed that someone stole data on 37 million customer accounts, including customer name, billing address, email, phone number, date of birth, T-Mobile account number and plan details. In August 2021, T-Mobile acknowledged that hackers made off with the names, dates of birth, Social Security numbers and driver’s license/ID information on more than 40 million current, former or prospective customers who applied for credit with the company.
Last summer, a cybercriminal began selling the names, email addresses, phone numbers, SSNs and dates of birth on 23 million Americans. An exhaustive analysis of the data strongly suggested it all belonged to customers of one AT&T company or another. AT&T stopped short of saying the data wasn’t theirs, but said the records did not appear to have come from its systems and may be tied to a previous data incident at another company.
However frequently the carriers may alert consumers about CPNI breaches, it’s probably nowhere near often enough. Currently, the carriers are required to report a consumer CPNI breach only in cases “when a person, without authorization or exceeding authorization, has intentionally gained access to, used or disclosed CPNI.”
But that definition of breach was crafted eons ago, back when the primary way CPNI was exposed was through “pretexting,” such when the phone company’s employees are tricked into giving away protected customer data.
In January, regulators at the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) proposed amending the definition of “breach” to include things like inadvertent disclosure — such as when companies expose CPNI data on a poorly-secured server in the cloud. The FCC is accepting public comments on the matter until March 24, 2023.
While it’s true that the leak of CPNI data does not involve sensitive information like Social Security or credit card numbers, one thing AT&T’s breach notice doesn’t mention is that CPNI data — such as balances and payments made — can be abused by fraudsters to make scam emails and text messages more believable when they’re trying to impersonate AT&T and phish AT&T customers.
The other problem with letting companies share or sell your CPNI data is that the wireless carriers can change their privacy policies at any time, and you are assumed to be okay with those changes as long as you keep using their services.
For example, location data from your wireless device is most definitely CPNI, and yet until very recently all of the major carriers sold their customers’ real-time location data to third party data brokers without customer consent.
What was their punishment? In 2020, the FCC proposed fines totaling $208 million against all of the major carriers for selling their customers’ real-time location data. If that sounds like a lot of money, consider that all of the major wireless providers reported tens of billions of dollars in revenue last year (e.g., Verizon’s consumer revenue alone was more than $100 billion last year).
If the United States had federal privacy laws that were at all consumer-friendly and relevant to today’s digital economy, this kind of data collection and sharing would always be opt-in by default. In such a world, the enormously profitable wireless industry would likely be forced to offer clear financial incentives to customers who choose to share this information.
But until that day arrives, understand that the carriers can change their data collection and sharing policies when it suits them. And regardless of whether you actually read any notices about changes to their privacy policies, you will have agreed to those changes as long as you continue using their service.
Article tags
Millions of Americans receiving food assistance benefits just earned a new right that they can’t yet enforce: The right to be reimbursed if funds on their Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) cards are stolen by card skimming devices secretly installed at cash machines and grocery store checkout lanes.
On December 29, 2022, President Biden signed into law the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023, which — for the first time ever — includes provisions for the replacement of stolen EBT benefits. This is a big deal because in 2022, organized crime groups began massively targeting EBT accounts — often emptying affected accounts at ATMs immediately after the states disperse funds each month.
EBT cards can be used along with a personal identification number (PIN) to pay for goods at participating stores, and to withdraw cash from an ATM. However, EBT cards differ from debit cards issued to most Americans in two important ways. First, most states do not equip EBT cards with smart chip technology, which can make the cards more difficult and expensive for skimming thieves to clone.
More critically, EBT participants traditionally have had little hope of recovering food assistance funds when their cards were copied by card-skimming devices and used for fraud. That’s because while the EBT programs are operated by individually by the states, those programs are funded by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), which until late last year was barred from reimbursing states for stolen EBT funds.
The protections passed in the 2023 Appropriations Act allow states to use federal funds to replace stolen EBT benefits, and they permit states to seek reimbursement for any skimmed EBT funds they may have replaced from their own coffers (dating back to Oct. 1, 2022).
But first, all 50 states must each submit a plan for how they are going to protect and replace food benefits stolen via card skimming. Guidance for the states in drafting those plans was issued by the USDA on Jan. 31 (PDF), and states that don’t get them done before Feb. 27, 2023 risk losing the ability to be reimbursed for EBT fraud losses.
Deborah Harris is a staff attorney at The Massachusetts Law Reform Institute (MLRI), a nonprofit legal assistance organization that has closely tracked the EBT skimming epidemic. In November 2022, the MLRI filed a class-action lawsuit against Massachusetts on behalf of thousands of low-income families who were collectively robbed of more than $1 million in food assistance benefits by card skimming devices secretly installed at cash machines and grocery store checkout lanes across the state.
Harris said she’s pleased that the USDA guidelines were issued so promptly, and that the guidance for states was not overly prescriptive. For example, some security experts have suggested that adding contactless capability to EBT cards could help participants avoid skimming devices altogether. But Harris said contactless cards do not require a PIN, which is the only thing that stops EBT cards from being drained at the ATM when a participant’s card is lost or stolen.
Then again, nothing in the guidance even mentions chip-based cards, or any other advice for improving the physical security of EBT cards. Rather, it suggests states should seek to develop the capability to perform basic fraud detection and alerting on suspicious transactions, such as when an EBT card that is normally used only in one geographic area suddenly is used to withdraw cash at an ATM halfway across the country.
“Besides having the states move fast to approve their plans, we’d also like to see a focused effort to move states from magstripe-only cards to chip, and also assisting states to develop the algorithms that will enable them to identify likely incidents of stolen benefits,” Harris said.
Harris said Massachusetts has begun using algorithms to look for these suspicious transaction patterns throughout its EBT network, and now has the ability to alert households and verify transactions. But she said most states do not have this capability.
“We have heard that other states aren’t currently able to do that,” Harris said. “But encouraging states to more affirmatively identify instances of likely theft and assisting with the claims and verification process is critical. Most households can’t do that on their own, and in Massachusetts it’s very hard for a person to get a copy of their transaction history. Some states can do that through third-party apps, but something so basic should not be on the burden of EBT households.”
Some states aren’t waiting for direction from the federal government to beef up EBT card security. Like Maryland, which identified more than 1,400 households hit by EBT skimming attacks last year — a tenfold increase over 2021.
Advocates for EBT beneficiaries in Maryland are backing Senate Bill 401 (PDF), which would require the use of chip technology and ongoing monitoring for suspicious activity (a hearing on SB401 is scheduled in the Maryland Senate Finance Commission for Thursday, Feb. 23, at 1 p.m.).
Michelle Salomon Madaio is a director at the Homeless Persons Representation Project, a legal assistance organization based in Silver Spring, Md. Madaio said the bill would require the state Department of Human Services to replace skimmed benefits, not only after the bill goes into effect but also retroactively from January 2020 to the present.
Madaio said the bill also would require the state to monitor for patterns of suspicious activity on EBT cards, and to develop a mechanism to contact potentially affected households.
“For most of the skimming victims we’ve worked with, the fraudulent transactions would be pretty easy to spot because they mostly happened in the middle of the night or out of state, or both,” Madaio said. “To make matters worse, a lot of families whose benefits were scammed then incurred late fees on many other things as a result.”
It is not difficult to see why organized crime groups have pounced on EBT cards as easy money. In most traditional payment card transactions, there are usually several parties that have a financial interest in minimizing fraud and fraud losses, including the bank that issued the card, the card network (Visa, MasterCard, Discover, etc.), and the merchant.
But that infrastructure simply does not exist within state EBT programs, and it certainly isn’t a thing at the inter-state level. What that means is that the vast majority of EBT cards have zero fraud controls, which is exactly what continues to make them so appealing to thieves.
For now, the only fraud controls available to most EBT cardholders include being especially paranoid about where they use their cards, and frequently changing their PINs.
According to USDA guidance issued prior to the passage of the appropriations act, EBT cardholders should consider changing their card PIN at least once a month.
“By changing PINs frequently, at least monthly, and doing so before benefit issuance dates, households can minimize their risk of stolen benefits from a previously skimmed EBT card,” the USDA advised.
sandfly-entropyscan is a utility to quickly scan files or running processes and report on their entropy (measure of randomness) and if they are a Linux/Unix ELF type executable. Some malware for Linux is packed or encrypted and shows very high entropy. This tool can quickly find high entropy executable files and processes which often are malicious.
Entropy is a measure of randomness. For binary data 0.0 is not-random and 8.0 is perfectly random. Good crypto looks like random white noise and will be near 8.0. Good compression removes redundant data making it appear more random than if it was uncompressed and usually will be 7.7 or above.
A lot of malware executables are packed to avoid detection and make reverse engineering harder. Most standard Linux binaries are not packed because they aren't trying to hide what they are. Searching for high entropy files is a good way to find programs that could be malicious just by having these two attributes of high entropy and executable.
Usage of sandfly-entropyscan:
-csv output results in CSV format (filename, path, entropy, elf_file [true|false], MD5, SHA1, SHA256, SHA512)
-delim change the default delimiter for CSV files of "," to one of your choosing ("|", etc.)
-dir string directory name to analyze
-file string full path to a single file to analyze
-proc check running processes (defaults to ELF only check)
-elf only check ELF executables
-entropy float show any file/process with entropy greater than or equal to this value (0.0 min - 8.0 max, defaults 0 to show all files)
-version show version and exit
Search for any file that is executable under /tmp:
sandfly-entropyscan -dir /tmp -elf
Search for high entropy (7.7 and higher) executables (often packed or encrypted) under /var/www:
sandfly-entropyscan -dir /var/www -elf -entropy 7.7
Generates entropy and cryptographic hashes of all running processes in CSV format:
sandfly-entropyscan -proc -csv
Search for any process with an entropy higher than 7.7 indicating it is likely packed or encrypted:
sandfly-entropyscan -proc -entropy 7.7
Generate entropy and cryptographic hash values of all files under /bin and output to CSV format (for instance to save and compare hashes):
sandfly-entropyscan -dir /bin -csv
Scan a directory for all files (ELF or not) with entropy greater than 7.7: (potentially large list of files that are compressed, png, jpg, object files, etc.)
sandfly-entropyscan -dir /path/to/dir -entropy 7.7
Quickly check a file and generate entropy, cryptographic hashes and show if it is executable:
sandfly-entropyscan -file /dev/shm/suspicious_file
Do spot checks on systems you think have a malware issue. Or you can automate the scan so you will get an output if we find something show up that is high entropy in a place you didn't expect. Or simply flag any executable ELF type file that is somewhere strange (e.g. hanging out in /tmp or under a user's HTML directory). For instance:
Did a high entropy binary show up under the system /var/www directory? Could be someone put a malware dropper on your website:
sandfly-entropyscan -dir /var/www -elf -entropy 7.7
Setup a cron task to scan your /tmp, /var/tmp, and /dev/shm directories for any kind of executable file whether it's high entropy or not. Executable files under tmp directories can frequently be a malware dropper.
sandfly-entropyscan -dir /tmp -elf
sandfly-entropyscan -dir /var/tmp -elf
sandfly-entropyscan -dir /dev/shm -elf
Setup another cron or automated security sweep to spot check your systems for highly compressed or encrypted binaries that are running:
sandfly-entropyscan -proc -entropy 7.7
git clone https://github.com/sandflysecurity/sandfly-entropyscan.git
go build
./sandfly-entropyscan
There are a some basic build scripts that build for various platforms. You can use these to build or modify to suit. For Incident Responders, it might be useful to keep pre-compiled binaries ready to go on your investigation box.
build.sh - Build for current OS you're running on when you execute it.
We use a simple method for seeing if a file may be an executable ELF type. We can spot ELF format files for multiple platforms. Even if malware has Intel/AMD, MIPS and Arm dropper binaries we will still be able to spot all of them.
It's possible to flag a legitimate binary that has a high entropy because of how it was compiled, or because it was packed for legitimate reasons. Other files like .zip, .gz, .png, .jpg and such also have very high entropy because they are compressed formats. Compression removes redundancy in a file which makes it appear to be more random and has higher entropy.
On Linux, you may find some kinds of libraries (.so files) get flagged if you scan library directories.
However, it is our experience that executable binaries that also have high entropy are often malicious. This is especially true if you find them in areas where executables normally shouldn't be (such as again tmp or html directories).
The entropy calculation requires reading in all the bytes of the file and tallying them up to get a final number. It can use a lot of CPU and disk I/O, especially on very large file systems or very large files. The program has an internal limit where it won't calculate entropy on any file over 2GB, nor will it try to calculate entropy on any file that is not a regular file type (e.g. won't try to calculate entropy on devices like /dev/zero).
Then we calculate MD5, SHA1, SHA256 and SHA512 hashes. Each of these requires going over the file as well. It's reasonable speed on modern systems, but if you are crawling a very large file system it can take some time to complete.
If you tell the program to only look at ELF files, then the entropy/hash calculations won't happen unless it is an ELF type and this will save a lot of time (e.g. it will ignore massive database files that aren't executable).
If you want to automate this program, it's best to not have it crawl the entire root file system unless you want that specifically. A targeted approach will be faster and more useful for spot checks. Also, use the ELF flag as that will drastically reduce search times by only processing executable file types.
For incident responders, running sandfly-entropyscan against the entire top-level "/" directory may be a good idea just to quickly get a list of likely packed candidates to investigate. This will spike CPU and disk I/O. However, you probably don't care at that point since the box has been mining cryptocurrency for 598 hours anyway by the time the admins noticed.
Again, use the ELF flag to get to the likely problem candidate executables and ignore the noise.
There is a script called scripts/testfiles.sh that will make two files. One will be full of random data and one will not be random at all. When you run the script it will make the files and run sandfly-entropyscan in executable detection mode. You should see two files. One with very high entropy (at or near 8.0) and one full of non-random data that should be at 0.00 for low entropy. Example:
./testfiles.sh
Creating high entropy random executable-like file in current directory.
Creating low entropy executable-like file in current directory.
high.entropy.test, entropy: 8.00, elf: true
low.entropy.test, entropy: 0.00, elf: true
You can also load up the upx utility and compress an executable and see what values it returns.
Sandfly Security produces an agentless endpoint detection and incident response platform (EDR) for Linux. Automated entropy checks are just one of thousands of things we search for to find intruders without loading any software on your Linux endpoints.
Get a free license and learn more below:
https://www.sandflysecurity.com @SandflySecurity
Peter is an IT manager for a technology manufacturer that got hit with a Russian ransomware strain called “Zeppelin” in May 2020. He’d been on the job less than six months, and because of the way his predecessor architected things, the company’s data backups also were encrypted by Zeppelin. After two weeks of stalling their extortionists, Peter’s bosses were ready to capitulate and pay the ransom demand. Then came the unlikely call from an FBI agent. “Don’t pay,” the agent said. “We’ve found someone who can crack the encryption.”
Peter, who spoke candidly about the attack on condition of anonymity, said the FBI told him to contact a cybersecurity consulting firm in New Jersey called Unit 221B, and specifically its founder — Lance James. Zeppelin sprang onto the crimeware scene in December 2019, but it wasn’t long before James discovered multiple vulnerabilities in the malware’s encryption routines that allowed him to brute-force the decryption keys in a matter of hours, using nearly 100 cloud computer servers.
In an interview with KrebsOnSecurity, James said Unit 221B was wary of advertising its ability to crack Zeppelin ransomware keys because it didn’t want to tip its hand to Zeppelin’s creators, who were likely to modify their file encryption approach if they detected it was somehow being bypassed.
This is not an idle concern. There are multiple examples of ransomware groups doing just that after security researchers crowed about finding vulnerabilities in their ransomware code.
“The minute you announce you’ve got a decryptor for some ransomware, they change up the code,” James said.
But he said the Zeppelin group appears to have stopped spreading their ransomware code gradually over the past year, possibly because Unit 221B’s referrals from the FBI let them quietly help nearly two dozen victim organizations recover without paying their extortionists.
In a blog post published today to coincide with a Black Hat talk on their discoveries, James and co-author Joel Lathrop said they were motivated to crack Zeppelin after the ransomware gang started attacking nonprofit and charity organizations.
“What motivated us the most during the leadup to our action was the targeting of homeless shelters, nonprofits and charity organizations,” the two wrote. “These senseless acts of targeting those who are unable to respond are the motivation for this research, analysis, tools, and blog post. A general Unit 221B rule of thumb around our offices is: Don’t [REDACTED] with the homeless or sick! It will simply trigger our ADHD and we will get into that hyper-focus mode that is good if you’re a good guy, but not so great if you are an ***hole.”
The researchers said their break came when they understood that while Zeppelin used three different types of encryption keys to encrypt files, they could undo the whole scheme by factoring or computing just one of them: An ephemeral RSA-512 public key that is randomly generated on each machine it infects.
“If we can recover the RSA-512 Public Key from the registry, we can crack it and get the 256-bit AES Key that encrypts the files!” they wrote. “The challenge was that they delete the [public key] once the files are fully encrypted. Memory analysis gave us about a 5-minute window after files were encrypted to retrieve this public key.”
Unit 221B ultimately built a “Live CD” version of Linux that victims could run on infected systems to extract that RSA-512 key. From there, they would load the keys into a cluster of 800 CPUs donated by hosting giant Digital Ocean that would then start cracking them. The company also used that same donated infrastructure to help victims decrypt their data using the recovered keys.
A typical Zeppelin ransomware note.
Jon is another grateful Zeppelin ransomware victim who was aided by Unit 221B’s decryption efforts. Like Peter, Jon asked that his last name and that of his employer be omitted from the story, but he’s in charge of IT for a mid-sized managed service provider that got hit with Zeppelin in July 2020.
The attackers that savaged Jon’s company managed to phish credentials and a multi-factor authentication token for some tools the company used to support customers, and in short order they’d seized control over the servers and backups for a healthcare provider customer.
Jon said his company was reluctant to pay a ransom in part because it wasn’t clear from the hackers’ demands whether the ransom amount they demanded would provide a key to unlock all systems, and that it would do so safely.
“They want you to unlock your data with their software, but you can’t trust that,” Jon said. “You want to use your own software or someone else who’s trusted to do it.”
In August 2022, the FBI and the Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) issued a joint warning on Zeppelin, saying the FBI had “observed instances where Zeppelin actors executed their malware multiple times within a victim’s network, resulting in the creation of different IDs or file extensions, for each instance of an attack; this results in the victim needing several unique decryption keys.”
The advisory says Zeppelin has attacked “a range of businesses and critical infrastructure organizations, including defense contractors, educational institutions, manufacturers, technology companies, and especially organizations in the healthcare and medical industries. Zeppelin actors have been known to request ransom payments in Bitcoin, with initial amounts ranging from several thousand dollars to over a million dollars.”
The FBI and CISA say the Zeppelin actors gain access to victim networks by exploiting weak Remote Desktop Protocol (RDP) credentials, exploiting SonicWall firewall vulnerabilities, and phishing campaigns. Prior to deploying Zeppelin ransomware, actors spend one to two weeks mapping or enumerating the victim network to identify data enclaves, including cloud storage and network backups, the alert notes.
Jon said he felt so lucky after connecting with James and hearing about their decryption work, that he toyed with the idea of buying a lottery ticket that day.
“This just doesn’t usually happen,” Jon said. “It’s 100 percent like winning the lottery.”
By the time Jon’s company got around to decrypting their data, they were forced by regulators to prove that no patient data had been exfiltrated from their systems. All told, it took his employer two months to fully recover from the attack.
“I definitely feel like I was ill-prepared for this attack,” Jon said. “One of the things I’ve learned from this is the importance of forming your core team and having those people who know what their roles and responsibilities are ahead of time. Also, trying to vet new vendors you’ve never met before and build trust relationships with them is very difficult to do when you have customers down hard now and they’re waiting on you to help them get back up.”
A more technical writeup on Unit 221B’s discoveries (cheekily titled “0XDEAD ZEPPELIN”) is available here.
A recent proliferation of phony executive profiles on LinkedIn is creating something of an identity crisis for the business networking site, and for companies that rely on it to hire and screen prospective employees. The fabricated LinkedIn identities — which pair AI-generated profile photos with text lifted from legitimate accounts — are creating major headaches for corporate HR departments and for those managing invite-only LinkedIn groups.
Some of the fake profiles flagged by the co-administrator of a popular sustainability group on LinkedIn.
Last week, KrebsOnSecurity examined a flood of inauthentic LinkedIn profiles all claiming Chief Information Security Officer (CISO) roles at various Fortune 500 companies, including Biogen, Chevron, ExxonMobil, and Hewlett Packard.
Since then, the response from LinkedIn users and readers has made clear that these phony profiles are showing up en masse for virtually all executive roles — but particularly for jobs and industries that are adjacent to recent global events and news trends.
Hamish Taylor runs the Sustainability Professionals group on LinkedIn, which has more than 300,000 members. Together with the group’s co-owner, Taylor said they’ve blocked more than 12,700 suspected fake profiles so far this year, including dozens of recent accounts that Taylor describes as “cynical attempts to exploit Humanitarian Relief and Crisis Relief experts.”
“We receive over 500 fake profile requests to join on a weekly basis,” Taylor said. “It’s hit like hell since about January of this year. Prior to that we did not get the swarms of fakes that we now experience.”
The opening slide for a plea by Taylor’s group to LinkedIn.
Taylor recently posted an entry on LinkedIn titled, “The Fake ID Crisis on LinkedIn,” which lampooned the “60 Least Wanted ‘Crisis Relief Experts’ — fake profiles that claimed to be experts in disaster recovery efforts in the wake of recent hurricanes. The images above and below show just one such swarm of profiles the group flagged as inauthentic. Virtually all of these profiles were removed from LinkedIn after KrebsOnSecurity tweeted about them last week.
Another “swarm” of LinkedIn bot accounts flagged by Taylor’s group.
Mark Miller is the owner of the DevOps group on LinkedIn, and says he deals with fake profiles on a daily basis — often hundreds per day. What Taylor called “swarms” of fake accounts Miller described instead as “waves” of incoming requests from phony accounts.
“When a bot tries to infiltrate the group, it does so in waves,” Miller said. “We’ll see 20-30 requests come in with the same type of information in the profiles.”
After screenshotting the waves of suspected fake profile requests, Miller started sending the images to LinkedIn’s abuse teams, which told him they would review his request but that he may never be notified of any action taken.
Some of the bot profiles identified by Mark Miller that were seeking access to his DevOps LinkedIn group. Miller said these profiles are all listed in the order they appeared.
Miller said that after months of complaining and sharing fake profile information with LinkedIn, the social media network appeared to do something which caused the volume of group membership requests from phony accounts to drop precipitously.
“I wrote our LinkedIn rep and said we were considering closing the group down the bots were so bad,” Miller said. “I said, ‘You guys should be doing something on the backend to block this.”
Jason Lathrop is vice president of technology and operations at ISOutsource, a Seattle-based consulting firm with roughly 100 employees. Like Miller, Lathrop’s experience in fighting bot profiles on LinkedIn suggests the social networking giant will eventually respond to complaints about inauthentic accounts. That is, if affected users complain loudly enough (posting about it publicly on LinkedIn seems to help).
Lathrop said that about two months ago his employer noticed waves of new followers, and identified more than 3,000 followers that all shared various elements, such as profile photos or text descriptions.
“Then I noticed that they all claim to work for us at some random title within the organization,” Lathrop said in an interview with KrebsOnSecurity. “When we complained to LinkedIn, they’d tell us these profiles didn’t violate their community guidelines. But like heck they don’t! These people don’t exist, and they’re claiming they work for us!”
Lathrop said that after his company’s third complaint, a LinkedIn representative responded by asking ISOutsource to send a spreadsheet listing every legitimate employee in the company, and their corresponding profile links.
Not long after that, the phony profiles that were not on the company’s list were deleted from LinkedIn. Lathrop said he’s still not sure how they’re going to handle getting new employees allowed into their company on LinkedIn going forward.
It remains unclear why LinkedIn has been flooded with so many fake profiles lately, or how the phony profile photos are sourced. Random testing of the profile photos shows they resemble but do not match other photos posted online. Several readers pointed out one likely source — the website thispersondoesnotexist.com, which makes using artificial intelligence to create unique headshots a point-and-click exercise.
Cybersecurity firm Mandiant (recently acquired by Google) told Bloomberg that hackers working for the North Korean government have been copying resumes and profiles from leading job listing platforms LinkedIn and Indeed, as part of an elaborate scheme to land jobs at cryptocurrency firms.
Fake profiles also may be tied to so-called “pig butchering” scams, wherein people are lured by flirtatious strangers online into investing in cryptocurrency trading platforms that eventually seize any funds when victims try to cash out.
In addition, identity thieves have been known to masquerade on LinkedIn as job recruiters, collecting personal and financial information from people who fall for employment scams.
But the Sustainability Group administrator Taylor said the bots he’s tracked strangely don’t respond to messages, nor do they appear to try to post content.
“Clearly they are not monitored,” Taylor assessed. “Or they’re just created and then left to fester.”
This experience was shared by the DevOp group admin Miller, who said he’s also tried baiting the phony profiles with messages referencing their fakeness. Miller says he’s worried someone is creating a massive social network of bots for some future attack in which the automated accounts may be used to amplify false information online, or at least muddle the truth.
“It’s almost like someone is setting up a huge bot network so that when there’s a big message that needs to go out they can just mass post with all these fake profiles,” Miller said.
In last week’s story on this topic, I suggested LinkedIn could take one simple step that would make it far easier for people to make informed decisions about whether to trust a given profile: Add a “created on” date for every profile. Twitter does this, and it’s enormously helpful for filtering out a great deal of noise and unwanted communications.
Many of our readers on Twitter said LinkedIn needs to give employers more tools — perhaps some kind of application programming interface (API) — that would allow them to quickly remove profiles that falsely claim to be employed at their organizations.
Another reader suggested LinkedIn also could experiment with offering something akin to Twitter’s verified mark to users who chose to validate that they can respond to email at the domain associated with their stated current employer.
In response to questions from KrebsOnSecurity, LinkedIn said it was considering the domain verification idea.
“This is an ongoing challenge and we’re constantly improving our systems to stop fakes before they come online,” LinkedIn said in a written statement. “We do stop the vast majority of fraudulent activity we detect in our community – around 96% of fake accounts and around 99.1% of spam and scams. We’re also exploring new ways to protect our members such as expanding email domain verification. Our community is all about authentic people having meaningful conversations and to always increase the legitimacy and quality of our community.”
In a story published Wednesday, Bloomberg noted that LinkedIn has largely so far avoided the scandals about bots that have plagued networks like Facebook and Twitter. But that shine is starting to come off, as more users are forced to waste more of their time fighting off inauthentic accounts.
“What’s clear is that LinkedIn’s cachet as being the social network for serious professionals makes it the perfect platform for lulling members into a false sense of security,” Bloomberg’s Tim Cuplan wrote. “Exacerbating the security risk is the vast amount of data that LinkedIn collates and publishes, and which underpins its whole business model but which lacks any robust verification mechanisms.”
ropr is a blazing fast multithreaded ROP Gadget finder
ROP (Return Oriented Programming) Gadgets are small snippets of a few assembly instructions typically ending in a ret instruction which already exist as executable code within each binary or library. These gadgets may be used for binary exploitation and to subvert vulnerable executables.
When the addresses of many ROP Gadgets are written into a buffer we have formed a ROP Chain. If an attacker can move the stack pointer into this ROP Chain then control can be completely transferred to the attacker.
Most executables contain enough gadgets to write a turing-complete ROP Chain. For those that don't, one can always use dynamic libraries contained in the same address-space such as libc once we know their addresses.
The beauty of using ROP Gadgets is that no new executable code needs to be written anywhere - an attacker may achieve their objective using only the code that already exists in the program.
Typically the first requirement to use ROP Gadgets is to have a place to write your ROP Chain - this can be any readable buffer. Simply write the addresses of each gadget you would like to use into this buffer. If the buffer is too small there may not be enough room to write a long ROP Chain into and so an attacker should be careful to craft their ROP Chain to be efficient enough to fit into the space available.
The next requirement is to be able to control the stack - This can take the form of a stack overflow - which allows the ROP Chain to be written directly under the stack pointer, or a "stack pivot" - which is usually a single gadget which moves the stack pointer to the rest of the ROP Chain.
Once the stack pointer is at the start of your ROP Chain, the next ret instruction will trigger the gadgets to be excuted in sequence - each using the next as its return address on its own stack frame.
It is also possible to add function poitners into a ROP Chain - taking care that function arguments be supplied after the next element of the ROP Chain. This is typically combined with a "pop gadget", which pops the arguments off the stack in order to smoothly transition to the next gadget after the function arguments.
Easy install:
cargo install ropr
the application will install to ~/.cargo/bin
From source:
git clone https://github.com/Ben-Lichtman/ropr
cd ropr
cargo build --release
the resulting binary will be located in target/release/ropr
Alternatively:
git clone https://github.com/Ben-Lichtman/ropr
cd ropr
cargo install --path .
the application will install to ~/.cargo/bin
rax with a value from another register I may choose to filter by the regex ^mov eax, ...;:
