State of the Hack Webinar – Thursday March 11th

Written by Christopher Glyer

Michael J. Graven and I will be presenting MANDIANT’s State of the Hack webinar titled “Silent But Deadly” this Thursday, March 11th at 2PM EST.

I’ve had the opportunity to lead a number of MANDIANT’s APT investigations recently, and am looking forward to sharing some of my experiences with our audience. One common thread in many of the investigations I have worked is that the APT will use simpler malware, methods, and techniques – until it no longer works and they are forced to break out something a little more advanced from their arsenal.

The attackers will use more sophisticated methods as needed, and can get incredibly advanced and inventive and just “disappear” from the radar of responders if they really have to.  There has been a lot of chatter on the Internet lately about recent attacks and how the malware and the Command and Control channels aren’t very sophisticated.  But why use sophisticated techniques if you don’t have to?

Think about it – if you are a car thief and the car you are going to steal is not locked and has the key in the ignition – why pick the lock and hotwire the car? It doesn’t mean that the thief can’t pick the lock; it just means they don’t need to.  That same thief may be capable of breaking in to a car that has a locked door, a car alarm, the club, and low-jack – and still get away with it if they are advanced enough and really want the car bad enough (think “Gone in 60 seconds“) .  We have seen everything from the very simple – placing malware in a user’s start-up folder (yes, I actually saw this on one of my engagements) – to the pretty advanced – malware that dropped an NDIS driver capable of monitoring and modifying network traffic at the kernel level, implementing its own TCP/IP stack in the kernel, and providing remote access to a machine that would bypass host-based firewalls, IPS…etc.

During the webinar we will talk about the techniques the attackers use and will go into more depth on a few of the case studies in our recently released M-Trends report.

Oh, and you may be asking yourself what the link is between the name of the webinar “Silent But Deadly”, and what we will be discussing.  We have seen evidence of the APT active and undetected in many victim networks for very long periods of time – up to years in some cases.  Hence, the “silent”.  And, while the result of these prolonged intrusions may not be deadly, they can often be costly, which is very bad for business.

We hope to see you on Thursday!

Tags: Advanced Persistent Threat, Case Study, M-Trends, State of the Hack, webinar

Malware Behaving Badly: Preview

Written by Peter Silberman

Hope everyone on the northern east coast is staying warm during snowpaclypse. Since I can’t go anywhere I figured now is the right time to write about an upcoming webinar I am giving with Michael Graven.

The webinar entitled Malware Behaving Badly is on Thursday, February 18, at 2:00 p.m. EST. The webinar title is a cute play on my DOD Cyber Crime (DC3) talk where I first introduced Malware Rating Index (MRI) into Audit Viewer (which is available for download).

If you saw my DC3 talk or viewed the slides and are wondering, “hey is this the same talk?” the answer is…well a little bit. The webinar will build off of a lot of the behaviors and theories I discussed at DC3. We will be addressing new behaviors as well as looking at APT vs Mass Malware behaviors.  I’ve added two new configurable behaviors to MRI and did enough research to scrap a third. I’ll share those as well as give more real world examples of how malware exposes itself in memory.

For example the below listing shows the keylogger, the process and the file handle that process has. The file handle is actual the log file the key logger is writing too.

Keylogger Name	Process	Log File
Klog	System	\Klog.txt
Advanced Keylogger	Explorer	\WINDOWS\Help\dsclientsock.hlp
Spector Pro	Explorer	\WINDOWS\system32\avoxnot\BEC7CA9645B2AF87DEEACD53B38B223FEE1C605C.zup

If you didn’t catch my DC3 talk and didn’t understand the slides this is a good time to get an updated version of the talk. I’m going to focus on malware behavior, what it does when it’s installed that makes it stand out in memory. We will cover APT and Mass Malware, and specifically where we see their behaviors intersect. Some of these behaviors are horribly simple, i.e. flag svchost launched from directories other than \windows\system32. Some are as simple but may not be as obvious, for example flag svchost, or iexplore if they have a process handle to cmd.exe. These are rules that should never be true.

When discussing rules, I use that term loosely. Basically in Audit Viewer you now have the option to configure all this information. If you go to Operations -> Configure Malware Rating Index you can configure all these things and a few more not mentioned in this post but mentioned in the webinar. We will wrap up the webinar like always with a live demo. Live demos are the most fun really, it’s like NASCAR except it’s just reputation not lives on the line.

I hope you can join us, it should be fun.

If you would like to learn more in-depth about how physical memory analysis works, use Memoryze and Audit Viewer, understand MRI, or write your own malware rules, join Jamie and I at the CanSecWest training. CanSecWest specializes in technical, hands-on classes with an extremely low student-teacher ratio.

Tags: APT, Audit Viewer, CanSecWest, Fresh Prints Malware Behaving Badly, Malware Behaving Badly, Malware Rating Index, Memoryze, MRI, webinar

Audit Viewer: Malware Rating Index Undocumented Features and Caveats

Written by Peter Silberman

Hopefully everyone has had a few weeks to recover from the M-Trends kickoff party in St. Louis and everyone has also had a chance to read the M-Trends report! I hope everyone enjoyed the talk I gave at DOD Cyber Crime Conference. I certainly had fun giving it, sorry to those that got hit with the squishy balls. I wanted to take a second to address some caveats and undocumented features of MRI that couldn’t be discussed in the talk.

A caveat within MRI I that I want to talk about is Process Path Verification. This rule set is very powerful but there are two ways to define to paths. Neither is documented because currently there is no documentation on MRI.. The first method of specifying a process path is to specify an absolute path such as this:
calc.exe:\windows\system32

MRI interprets this as the only valid path for calc.exe is \windows\system32\calc.exe. However, if I wrote the rule like:
calc.exe:\windows\system32\

MRI would interpret this as calc.exe can be run from any sub directory as long it’s a sub directory within \windows\system32\*

The reason this is important is it gives you flexibility in writing definitions. If I don’t want to specify the exact location of iexplore.exe I can say it needs to be launched from \program files\. This may prove to be too loose, and I may change this behavior going forward. For now you have the flexibility to specify absolute paths or sub paths.

The next “undocumented” tidbit that I want to discuss is within two behaviors. These behaviors actually have the ability to use regex when trying to match up their values. I did not build the regex option into the UI so it has to be manually added to the AuditViewerConfig.xml. The two XML lists that can take regex expressions are IgnoreFilesList, and ProcessSuspiciousHandleList. The regex elements are, IgnoreFileRegex, and HandleRegex. An example IgnoreFileRegex looks like:
<IgnoreFileRegex>mshist.*\\index.dat</IgnoreFileRegex>

This rule specifies that any file matching this regular expression should be ignored when doing process scoring. You can get creative just be careful.

An example HandleRegex looks like:
<HandleRegex>*:.*-7$:mutant:known conficker mutant</HandleRegex>

It breaks down like this:
Process: Regular Expressions : handle type: description

It breaks down like this:
Process: Regular Expressions : handle type: description

This allows you to get more out of your suspicious handles definitions.

Finally, I’d like to take a second to reiterate something I stated at DC3. The “Verify Digital Signatures” option in Memoryze and Audit Viewer wizard can ONLY be run when doing live memory. It is not possible to enable it when doing dead memory analysis. Which means the address scoring is not possible on dead memory, behavioral analysis still works on dead memory. If you are going to acquire memory, please run live analysis jobs as well as acquisition. This way you get the most information possible off the machine. The second thing I wanted to reiterate is that verify digital signatures is great, it really helps potentially speed up an analyst’s job. However, we are only verifying the digital signatures exist and are valid on disk. We are not verifying the module in memory hasn’t been modified. If a userland rootkit exists (again shame on the authors) then we won’t report that. It’s important to remember this. Verifying modules in memory short of doing rootkit detection is not a trivial task. The windows loader is a beast, a behemoth it does a lot to make verification in memory to disk is very hard (not impossible). Thanks again for all the interest in M-Trends, Audit Viewer and Memoryze. As always feedback is always appreciated.

Tags: Audit Viewer, DC3, DOD Cyber Crime Conference, M-Trends, Malware Rating Index, Memoryze, MRI, MTrends

Combat the APT by Sharing Indicators of Compromise

Written by Matt Frazier

At MANDIANT, we value human intelligence – ground-truth, intelligent decision-making and adapting to your enemy’s tactics. Since expert humans can’t be everywhere, we’ve built a means to exchange enough ground-truth and decision-making so security experts can spend more energy applying expertise, less time parsing and pruning stale datasets and leverage their expertise across organizations and between compromises.

Historically, compromise data has been exchanged in CSV or PDFs laden with tables of “known bad” malware information – name, size, MD5 hash values and paragraphs of imprecise descriptions supplemented by ad-hoc exchanges between targets.

MANDIANT, inspired by field pressures, operation after operation, imagined a way to exchange not only indicators of specific compromises but structures which formalize the human-intelligence of decision-making, rules, exceptions, and ongoing adaptability. Our Indicators of Compromise (IOCs) were shaped operationally detecting real-world threats. We help our clients detect the APT right now, and they’re exchanging information about it using IOCs.

Conventional compromise datasets consist of table after table of immediately-stale data capturing few, if any, relationships. An Indicator of Compromise (IOC), however, is a Boolean decision tree that discriminates an indicator from a false-positive, theory from ground truth. What’s more, when you discover an exception or extension to a well-known-IOC you can describe it concisely and proactively, authenticate its source and re-evaluate your existing data to detect new instances of old compromises. This way, as a threat group adapts to your detections, you retain an IOC’s identity and maintain the value of intelligence shared with other targets over time.

Importantly, IOC is industry-standard XML so you already have tools and a community of experts who can comprehend, transform, and leverage new data immediately. Unlike many XML standards however, it’s simple – developed operationally with an eye toward staying adaptable, transformable, and scalable. IOC describes relationships which indicate compromise – this makes the format resilient to new data formats, data sources and decision engines.

At DoD CyberCrime 2010 MANDIANT will formally release this format and tools to leverage it in your investigations today. We’ll have full coverage of the release on M-unition – stay tuned.

Tags: APT, humint, MIR, sizzle, xml

DOD Cyber Crime: New Audit Viewer/Memoryze

Written by Peter Silberman

MANDIANT is going to be at DOD Cyber Crime this year. Jamie and I have both been heads down for many weeks now working on some pretty cool stuff. We are starting to come up for air and what that means for you is updates to Memoryze and Audit Viewer. We will be releasing new versions of each that coincide with DC3.  I, along with many of my co-workers, will be presenting and attending. My talk abstract is very ambiguous so I thought I’d take a brief second to discuss both the talk and the changes to Audit Viewer and Memoryze.

The talk is going to be interactive. And dammit I don’t care if you don’t want to interact with me. I’m both very convincing, persistent and well…charming! You will feel compelled to join in on this talk. I promise. I know this because I’m bringing bribes… And yes, I’m bringing what you are thinking.

This talk will contain a brief intro to memory analysis, a FAQ etc. We are not going to waste much time on the nitty gritty since most people are not interested in how we chop off the last 12 bits to get a physical offset from a virtual address. I know, you just fell asleep a little.  During this talk I will make a case for why memory analysis is important. I will pull from pervious APT investigations where disk analysis failed and had to be used in conjunction with memory analysis. Finally, we will discuss MANDIANT’s Malware Rating Index (MRI). We will finish with real APT incident demos where I’ll walk through the investigation of an infected system with APT.

Now, a little more about MRI. MRI is a huge update to Audit Viewer.  Instead of going after a fish (malware) with a hook (signatures), I’m going after fish (malware) with a drag net (MRI). The goal of this feature is twofold. First it is going to  help pinpoint specific processes that should be investigated further while attempting to eliminate some of the non-suspicious processes and get them out of the analyst’s way. It’s also designed to try and make APT detection easier. A lot of work went into looking at our samples and how they behave etc, and coming up with definable behaviors that trap those little creatures. MRI is made up of two components. The first component is a definable behavior rule set that is completely customizable. It is made up of three different types of rules:

• Process Path Verification – allows users to define what processes should be launched from what directories. This triggers on malware that copies and names itself after svchost or other system processes to subdirectories within system folders. For example a default rule is that svchost can only be executed from \windows\system32. Any time we see it running from somewhere else we flag the process.
• Process User Verification – allows users to define what processes should be running under what users.  This triggers on malware spawning svchost for purposes of unmapping image bases or hiding dlls within spawned svchost. So, for example, if malware copies itself to system32\dllcache and then names itself svchost.exe, you can define a rule saying svchost.exe should be running as local service, network service, or system. When Audit Viewer see svchost running as administrator it gets flagged.
• Process Handle Inspection – this allows you to define specific rules pertaining to malware or generic behavior. For example a default rule is to flag svchost or iexplore anytime it has a process handle to cmd.exe. There is just no good reason for this to _EVER_ happen. You can also define rules based on specific malware, for example if a3c mutant is present then flag the process as being infected with sality.

All of these features are configurable from the UI by going to operations -> Configure MANDIANT MRI.

The second component of MRI is a process address space scoring mechanism. We will be releasing an update to Memoryze at DC3. The new release will contain bug fixes as well as a new feature called “Verify Digital Signatures.” When this parameter is turned on memoryze will perform a “digital signature check” on all loaded modules. This can only be enabled on live memory analysis. The digital signature check verifies the module on disk is digitally signed. We do a bunch of math and use our Least Frequency of Occurrence to trust modules that aren’t signed but occur in more than X% of processes. Where X is defined by the user. We won’t flag or catch modified binaries in memory. So if a rootkit is doing userland hooking (it should be ashamed) we won’t know about it because we are checking disk to determine if it is digitally signed. There are a lot of reasons why we can’t verify in memory digital signatures.  It might make an interesting blog to detail all the reasons. With that said, this new feature gives us a good working idea of how much of the loaded modules in the process address space are signed and therefore trusted. It’s had fantastic results thus far. I’ve been using it on old incidents to see if we could have sped up results using these new methods. The answer seems to be yes in a lot of cases.

After DC3 I’ll have more blogs detailing how you can use and write better rules for MRI. But for now there will be a default distribution that you can use and modify. Again, like always, Audit Viewer is open source and free. Which means you can see the logic and rules behind MRI. Memoryze is and will stay free.

If you are going to be at DC3 and want to grab a beer I will be there from Sun (night)-Weds. Unfortunately I’m going to be missing all the great talks on Thurs so I can leave to compete in the Tough Guy Challenge. You are more than welcome to join at this race in Northern England. As I understand it there are still some open slots! See everyone at DC3!

Tags: APT, Audit Viewer, DC3, DOD Cyber Crime, malware, Malware Rating Index, MANDIANT, Memoryze, MRI

M-Trends: Advanced Persistent Threat Malware

Written by Wendi Rafferty

There are a lot of reports in the news about the types of malware being utilized by the Advanced Persistent Threat (APT) attackers.  Our upcoming release of M-Trends will go into great detail about the types of malware, its capabilities, and how the attackers leverage a variety of malware throughout a breadth of victim organizations to accomplish very specific goals.   Over the next week, the MANDIANT blog will feature excerpts from our upcoming M-Trends report that illustrate just how difficult it is to identify APT techniques.

The most significant commonality of APT malware is that it hides in plain sight. It avoids detection by using common network ports, process injection and Windows service persistence.  Every piece of APT malware cataloged by MANDIANT initiated only outbound network connections.  No sample listened for inbound connections.  So, unless an enterprise network is specifically monitoring outbound network traffic for APT-related anomalies, it will not identify the APT malware outbound beaconing attempts.

A few of the most poignant stats about APT malware are listed below:

APT Malware:

• Average File Size: 121.85 KB

Most Common APT Filenames:

• svchost.exe (most common)
• iexplore.exe
• iprinp.dll
• wiinzf32.dll

APT Malware avoids anomaly detection through:

• Outbound HTTP connections
• Process injection
• Service persistence

APT Malware Communication:

• 100% of APT backdoors made only outbound connections
  • 83% used TCP port 80 or 443
  • 17% used another port

Because APT malware is so difficult to detect, simple malware signatures such as MD5 hashes, filenames, and traditional anti-virus methods usually yield a low rate of true positives.  M-Trends will provide detailed information about how exactly organizations can posture themselves for success when fighting attackers with such specialized and sophisticated capabilities.

If you’d like to register for a copy of “M-Trends,” drop us a note at info(at)mandiant(dot)com otherwise, keep your eyes peeled to our blog  and http://www.mandiant.com for the official release of “M-Trends.”

Special Thanks to Peter Silberman, the MANDIANT malware analysis team, and product engineers for their work in developing this information.

Tags: Advanced Persistent Threat, APT, M-Trends, malware analysis

Recent Posts

• State of the Hack Webinar – Thursday March 11th
• Malware Behaving Badly: Preview
• Audit Viewer: Malware Rating Index Undocumented Features and Caveats
• Combat the APT by Sharing Indicators of Compromise
• DOD Cyber Crime: New Audit Viewer/Memoryze

Follow us on Twitter

• Mandiant: 1 hour left to register for MANDIANT's State of the Hack: Silent But Deadly webinar Today @ 2pm EST http://bit.ly/cKw0ba
• Mandiant: 3 hrs left to register for MANDIANT's State of the Hack: Silent But Deadly webinar Today @ 2pm EST http://bit.ly/cKw0ba
• Mandiant: 4 hrs left to register for MANDIANT's State of the Hack: Silent But Deadly webinar Today @ 2pm EST http://bit.ly/cKw0ba

MANDIANT News

• CENTCOM Conference
• 11th Annual SAS US Government Executive Conference
• NY State Security Committee
• Digging Deeper Into The Advanced Persistent Threat: Ask the Experts