Friday, 14 May 2010

Thieves Flood Victim’s Phone With Calls to Loot Bank Accounts

Bank thieves have rolled out a new weapon in their arsenal of tactics — telephony denial-of-service attacks that flood a victim’s phone with diversionary calls while the thieves drain the victim’s account of money.

A Florida dentist lost $400,000 from his retirement account last year in this manner, and the FBI said the attacks are growing.

A spokeswoman for the Communication Fraud Control Association — a telecom industry organization — told Threat Level that although fraudulent transfers have been halted in a number of cases, the losses are increasing.

“I know it’s in the millions,” said Roberta Aranoff, executive director of the CFCA. “It has exceeded a million dollars easily.”

Last November, Robert Thousand Jr., a semi-retired dentist in Florida, received a flood of calls to several phones. When he answered them, he heard a 30-second recording for a sex hotline, according to the St. Augustine Record.

In December, he discovered that $399,000 had been drained from his Ameritrade retirement account shortly after he’d received the calls. About $18,000 was transferred from his account on Nov. 23, with a $82,000-transfer following two days later. Five days after that, another $99,000 was drained, followed by two transfers of $100,000 each on Dec. 2 and 4. The thieves withdrew the money in New York.

Thousand’s son, who shares his name, received similar harassing calls, though his financial accounts were not touched. Thousand did not respond to a request from Threat Level for comment.

The FBI says the calls were a diversionary tactic, meant to tie up Thousand’s line so that Ameritrade couldn’t reach him to authenticate the money transfer requests. FBI spokesman Bryan Travers said AT&T, Thousand’s phone carrier, contacted the agency’s New Jersey office to help investigate the matter. The agency has since seen at least 16 similar cases since November, most of them occurring in the last few weeks.

In some cases, the victims simply heard dead air when they answered their phone or heard a brief advertisement or other recorded message. Some victims had to change their phone numbers to halt the harassing calls.

The perpetrator who targeted Thousand created a number of VoIP accounts, which were used with automated dialing tools to flood the dentist’s home, business and cellphone with calls.

Generally in these cases, Travers said, the thief obtains the victim’s account information through some other means — perhaps through a phishing attack or other method — and then contacts the financial institution to change the victim’s contact information. In this way, the institution will call the thief instead of the victim to verify a money transfer request.

Many banks, however, now contact customers at their previous phone number when contact information on their account has changed.

But with these attacks, the institution’s calls are prevented from reaching the victim, whose phone is tied up with a flood of diversionary calls.

AT&T spokesman Marty Richter told Threat Level that the perpetrators then generally contact the financial institution posing as the victim to complain that a requested money transfer hasn’t gone through. When the institution discloses that it tried unsuccessfully to contact the victim to authenticate the transfer, the perpetrator says he’s been having phone troubles and verifies that the transfer should proceed.

Richter says that other telecommunication companies have been alerted to the problem and are warning customers when they call to complain about harassing calls that the issue may be related to their financial accounts. The victims are warned to place fraud alerts on their financial and credit bureau accounts and block any electronic fraudulent money transfers that may be in the works.

“This may appear to some people that they’re just having a connect issue with their phone carrier,” he said, “and we want to alert them that this may not be the case.”

Travers said that in most cases so far, the victims have acted quickly enough to prevent money from being drained from their accounts, but he says there may be many other cases that haven’t yet been reported to the FBI. He urged consumers who may have been victims to contact the FBI.

Read More http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/05/telephony-dos/#ixzz0nt0tgdrn
By Kim Zetter

Thursday, 13 May 2010

German court orders wireless passwords for all

BERLIN (AP) -- Germany's top criminal court ruled Wednesday that Internet users need to secure their private wireless connections by password to prevent unauthorized people from using their Web access to illegally download data.

Internet users can be fined up to euro100 ($126) if a third party takes advantage of their unprotected WLAN connection to illegally download music or other files, the Karlsruhe-based court said in its verdict.

"Private users are obligated to check whether their wireless connection is adequately secured to the danger of unauthorized third parties abusing it to commit copyright violation," the court said.

But the court stopped short of holding the users responsible for the illegal content the third party downloads themselves.

The court also limited its decision, ruling that users could not be expected to constantly update their wireless connection's security - they are only required to protect their Internet access by setting up a password when they first install it.

The national consumer protection agency said the verdict was balanced.

Spokeswoman Carola Elbrecht told the German news agency DAPD it made sense that users should install protection for their wireless connection and that at the same time it was fair of the court not to expect constant technical updates by private users.

The ruling came after a musician, who the court did not identify, sued an Internet user whose wireless connection was used to illegally download a song which was subsequently offered on an online file sharing network.

But the user could prove that he was on vacation while the song was downloaded via his wireless connection. Still, the court ruled he was responsible to a degree for failing to protect his connection from abuse by third parties.

About 26 million homes in Germany have wireless Internet access, according to Bitkom, the German Association for Information Technology, Telecommunications and New Media.

© 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Friday, 30 April 2010

PDF Exploits Explode, Continue Climb in 2010

Exploits of Adobe's PDF format jumped dramatically last year, and continue to climb during 2010, a McAfee security researcher said Wednesday.

Microsoft , meanwhile, recently said that more than 46% of the browser -based exploits during the second half of 2009 were aimed at vulnerabilities in Adobe's free Reader PDF viewer.

According to Toralv Dirro, a security strategist with McAfee Labs, the percentage of exploitative malware targeting PDF vulnerabilities has skyrocketed. In 2007 and 2008, only 2% of all malware that included a vulnerability exploit leveraged an Adobe Reader or Acrobat bug. The number jumped to 17% in 2009, and to 28% during the first quarter of 2010.

"In the last three years, attackers have found PDF vulnerabilities more and more useful, for a couple of reasons," Dirro said. "First of all, it's increasingly difficult for them to find new vulnerabilities with the operating system and within browsers that they can exploit across the different versions of Windows. And second, Reader is one of the most widely deployed applications that allows files to be accessed or opened within the browser."

Other factors for the jump in PDF exploits, argued Dirro, range from user belief that PDFs are safe to open, or at least safer to open than Microsoft Office documents, to the age of Adobe's code. "Quite a lot of PDF code was written years ago, and attackers are finding new security problems that no one thought of then," Dirro said. "That makes it difficult for Adobe to clean it up."

A recent discovery illustrated Dirro's point. Earlier this month, Belgium researcher Didier Stevens demonstrated how malicious PDFs could use a by-designed feature of the PDF specification to run attack code hidden in the file, and how to modify a warning message that Adobe Reader displays to further trick users into opening the document. Although some of what Stevens revealed has been publicly known for at least eight months, the technique has only been picked up by hackers in the last several weeks.

A major malware campaign using Stevens' tactics began Tuesday, with malicious PDFs attached to messages masquerading as instructions from companies' network administrators.

Microsoft also recently reported that PDF exploits remains a potent part of hackers' arsenals. In its newest Security Intelligence Report , Microsoft said that nearly half of all browser-based exploits in the second half of 2009 targeted Adobe's Reader. Three Reader vulnerabilities -- which were patched in May 2008, November 2008 and March 2009 -- accounted for more than 46% of all browser attacks.

McAfee rival Symantec has also tracked an explosion in PDF-based attacks. According to Symantec's latest Internet Security Threat Report , published last week, malicious PDFs were responsible for 49% of all Web-based attacks in all of 2009, compared to just 11% in 2008.

Like McAfee, Symantec also recorded a surge in reported Adobe Reader vulnerabilities. Of all browser plug-in bugs logged last year, 15% were in Reader's add-on for Internet Explorer, Firefox, Chrome and other Windows browsers. That was almost a four-fold increase from the 4% in 2008. And two of 2009's top five exploited vulnerabilities were in Adobe Reader.

Adobe declined to comment specifically about McAfee's and Microsoft's statistics on Reader vulnerabilities. Instead, a spokeswoman forwarded a statement the company has used before. "Given the relative ubiquity and cross-platform reach of many of our products, in particular our clients, Adobe has attracted -- and will likely continue to attract -- increasing attention from attackers," she said in an e-mail. "The majority of attacks we are seeing are exploiting software installations that are not up-to-date on the latest security updates."

The company's latest security move attempts to address the update issue; on April 13, Adobe switched on a service that silently updates customers' copies of Reader and Acrobat.

Adobe may be working on other ways to beef up Reader and Acrobat. According to one security researcher, Adobe will add sandboxing defenses to its PDF software this year. Sandboxing, perhaps best known as a technique used by Google 's Chrome browser, isolates processes from each other and the rest of the machine, preventing or hindering malicious code from escaping an application to wreak havoc or infect the computer with malware.

Adobe has acknowledged it will add sandboxing to Flash -- another of its products that is frequently targeted by exploits -- and has it at the top of its to-do list, according to Paul Betlem, senior director of Flash Player engineering.

Reader may, or may not, get sandboxing as well. When asked about the reports that Reader 10 would include sandboxing defenses, a company spokeswoman said Adobe had no announced plans but was "investigating how to get different features to work in a sandbox."

McAfee's Dirro said adding sandboxing to Adobe Reader would be a smart move. "It's one of the most useful ways to address a lot of different vulnerabilities," he said. "Sandboxing had proven to be fairly efficient at stopping attacks."

by Gregg Keizer
http://www.pcworld.com

Wednesday, 7 April 2010

Analysis of Attack on Google: Aurora Botnet Command Structure

Analysis of Attack on Google: Aurora Botnet Command Structure

Kneber_Spearphishing_Crimeware

kneber_spearphishing_crimeware-1

SHADOWS IN THE CLOUD: Investigating Cyber Espionage 2.0

SHADOWS IN THE CLOUD:  Investigating Cyber Espionage 2.0                                                            

Conducting Cybersecurity Research Legally and Ethically

Abstract

The primary legal obstacles to conducting cybersecurity are not outright prohibitions but rather the difficulty of determining which of a large set of complex statutes might regulate a given research project. Privacy, computer abuse, tort, and contract law are all potentially applicable. Moreover, even when the law permits a research activity, researchers may wonder whether it is ethically permissible. This paper seeks to clarify these issues by explaining the areas of law that are most generally applicable to cybersecurity researchers and offering guidelines for evaluating ethical issues that arise in this area of research.

http://www.usenix.org/event/leet08/tech/full_papers/burstein/burstein_html/