May 2010 - Posts

Malware modularization and AV detection evasion

Share |

Published: 2010-05-26,
Last Updated: 2010-05-26 05:41:55 UTC
by Bojan Zdrnja (Version: 1)

6 comment(s)

Modularization of malware is something we have been seeing for quite some time already. Authors of malware often build various modules that allow them to extend functionality of malware but also to make analysis more difficult. The rationale behind this is pretty simple – if this particular infected machine does not need the module that, for example, attacks a certain bank it will not be downloaded and installed. This makes it more difficult for the AV vendors to collect all samples of various modules as the attackers can target them. One example of such highly modular (and heavily protected) malware is certainly Clampi – you can see a series of articles about this malware family posted on Symantec's web site.

The attackers can also use modularization to rapidly change fingerprints of malware – if only one module is detected by an AV vendor, the attacker only has to modify that particular module. And if you've been following our diaries you already know how the AV vendors are lagging behind the attackers.

One very simple malicious file was submitted to us couple of days ago by our reader Tim. He found the file in the /Windows/SysWOW64 directory on his Windows 7 machine. The file was named netset.exe and it wasn't signed, so it immediately looked suspicious to Tim.
However, online malware scanners all happily declared the file safe – when it was initially submitted to VirusTotal it resulted in 0 detections (yes – 0 out of 40 AV programs on VirusTotal, see the report here).

After we received the file, one of the things I normally first use is Anubis, a service for analyzing malware available at http://anubis.iseclab.org/. However, Anubis also said that this file is safe and that it did not do anything suspicious. At that point in time I knew I had to dig manually into the file and this is what it is doing.
While not terribly malicious (meaning, it's not a trojan that will communicate with a C&C), the file is obviously part of another malware. The sole purpose of this binary was to check if the user is running certain AV programs on his machine and, if yes, return that result as the exit code so presumably that other malicious program knows what to do. But the sneakiness around this was interesting.

First of all, the malware has to be started with a command line parameter – it can be any parameter that starts with the letter "s" or "t". If that character was not found, the malware will delete some files (dtnet.exe, plang.enu, dsten.log) and just exit. The code that checks the argument can be seen in the picture below:

Argument test

If the correct parameter was found, the binary opens the HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE/Software/Microsoft/Windows/CurrentVersion/Uninstall registry key which holds all installed applications on the system. It then goes through all the subkeys and compares them to the following list: avast, avg, avira, nod32, kaspersky, norton, mcafee, trend micro, comodo. It is now pretty obvious what it does. For any of these, an internal counter is incremented. Finally, when the binary exits the counter is used as the return code so, as I said above, I presume that some other piece of malware uses this to check if there is an AV program running on the machine.
This code is shown below too:

AV test

While this file is relatively simple, we can see on this example that the attackers are using those simple tricks to make automated analysis more difficult. Since even emulators such as Anubis, which execute the malware in an isolated environment, will not know which argument it needs, the file will appear to be benign. And judging by the VirusTotal results they have no problems with evading signature based scanning either.

--
Bojan
INFIGO IS

********************************************************************

Title: Microsoft Security Bulletin Minor Revisions

Issued: May 26, 2010

********************************************************************

Summary

=======

The following bulletin has undergone a minor revision increment.

Please see the appropriate bulletin for more details.

* MS10-020 - Critical

Bulletin Information:

=====================

* MS10-020 - Critical

- http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/ms10-020.mspx

- Reason for Revision: V1.1 (May 26, 2010): Added a link to Microsoft Knowledge Base Article 980232 under Known Issues in

the Executive Summary.

- Originally posted: April 13, 2010

- Updated: May 26, 2010

- Bulletin Severity Rating: Critical

- Version: 1.1

********************************************************************

Title: Microsoft Security Bulletin Minor Revisions

Issued: May 19, 2010

********************************************************************

Summary

=======

The following bulletins have undergone a minor revision increment.

Please see the appropriate bulletin for more details.

* MS10-031 - Critical

* MS10-030 - Critical

Bulletin Information:

=====================

* MS10-031 - Critical

- http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/ms10-031.mspx

- Reason for Revision: V1.1 (May 19, 2010): Added an Update FAQ to explain the bulletin-only changes. There were no changes to the security update files or detection logic. Customers who have already successfully updated their systems do not need to take any action.

- Originally posted: May 11, 2010

- Updated: May 19, 2010

- Bulletin Severity Rating: Critical

- Version: 1.1

* MS10-030 - Critical

- http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/ms10-030.mspx

- Reason for Revision: V1.2 (May 19, 2010): Removed erroneous references to Windows Mail when installed on Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2. Also corrected the bulletin replacement information for Windows XP, Windows Server 2003,

and Windows Vista update packages.

- Originally posted: May 11, 2010

- Updated: May 19, 2010

- Bulletin Severity Rating: Critical

- Version: 1.2

Published: 2010-05-11,
Last Updated: 2010-05-11 18:05:49 UTC
by Scott Fendley (Version: 1)
0 comment(s)

Overview of the May 2010 Microsoft Patches and their status.

# Affected Contra Indications Known Exploits Microsoft rating ISC rating(*)
clients servers
MS10-030 Vulnerabilities in Outlook Express and Windows Mail (Replaces MS09-037, MS08-048 )
Outlook Express and Windows Mail Integer Overflow
CVE-2010-0816

no known exploits. Severity:Critical
Exploitability: 2
Critical Important
MS10-031 Vulnerabilities in Microsoft Visual Basic for Applications (Replaces MS08-013, MS06-047 )
VBE6.DLL Stack Memory Corruption
CVE-2010-0815
 

no known exploits. Severity:Critical
Exploitability: 2
Critical Important
We will update issues on this page for about a week or so as they evolve.
We appreciate updates
US based customers can call Microsoft for free patch related support on 1-866-PCSAFETY
(*): ISC rating
  • We use 4 levels:
    • PATCH NOW: Typically used where we see immediate danger of exploitation. Typical environments will want to deploy these patches ASAP. Workarounds are typically not accepted by users or are not possible. This rating is often used when typical deployments make it vulnerable and exploits are being used or easy to obtain or make.
    • Critical: Anything that needs little to become "interesting" for the dark side. Best approach is to test and deploy ASAP. Workarounds can give more time to test.
    • Important: Things where more testing and other measures can help.
    • Less Urgent: Typically we expect the impact if left unpatched to be not that big a deal in the short term. Do not forget them however.
  • The difference between the client and server rating is based on how you use the affected machine. We take into account the typical client and server deployment in the usage of the machine and the common measures people typically have in place already. Measures we presume are simple best practices for servers such as not using outlook, MSIE, word etc. to do traditional office or leisure work.
  • The rating is not a risk analysis as such. It is a rating of importance of the vulnerability and the perceived or even predicted threat for affected systems. The rating does not account for the number of affected systems there are. It is for an affected system in a typical worst-case role.
  • Only the organization itself is in a position to do a full risk analysis involving the presence (or lack of) affected systems, the actually implemented measures, the impact on their operation and the value of the assets involved.
  • All patches released by a vendor are important enough to have a close look if you use the affected systems. There is little incentive for vendors to publicize patches that do not have some form of risk to them

------
Scott Fendley
ISC Handler on Duty

Another round of WordPress Attacks

Share |

Published: 2010-05-10,
Last Updated: 2010-05-10 19:18:13 UTC
by Toby Kohlenberg (Version: 1)

0 comment(s)

H-Security has published an article (http://www.h-online.com/security/news/item/Large-scale-attack-on-WordPress-996628.html) discussing a new series of attacks against WordPress-based sites.

Multiple ISPs have been hit including GoDaddy, Bluehost, Dreamhost, Network Solutions and Media Temple. There is one report that even sites built with the most current version of WordPress have been compromised.

We will update as we have more information, at this point I recommend reading the H-Security article for the summary of the scripts being added and contacting your hosting provider if you have concerns about your site.

Keywords: wordpress

********************************************************************

Title: Microsoft Security Bulletin Major Revision

Issued: May 3, 2010

********************************************************************

Summary

=======

The following bulletin has undergone a major revision increment.

* MS10-016 - Important

Bulletin Information:

=====================

* MS10-016 - Important

- http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/ms10-016.mspx

- Reason for Revision: V2.0 (May 3, 2010): Corrected installation switches for Movie Maker 2.6 on Windows Vista and Windows 7.  Also, announced availability of Microsoft Producer. Microsoft recommends that users of Microsoft Producer 2003 upgrade to the new version, Microsoft Producer.

- Originally posted: March 9, 2010

- Updated: May 3, 2010

- Bulletin Severity Rating: Important

- Version: 2.0