Data Theft: Wolverine (Update)

Tom Rothman  the chairman of Fox, the company that owns Wolverine which was recently stolen and put on line  has stated that:

We, like everybody, thought our system was secure…Just like I’m sure there are lots of banks that get robbed that thought their vault was safe. We thought the post-production pipeline was secure at every juncture. But, obviously, it’s self-evident that  it wasn’t. I have a high level of confidence we’ll find out where the lapse in security was and we’ll bring the perpetrators to justice.”

While the FBI have allegedly become involved in this case, this type of investigation does not appear to be a priority, based on their current priority list. Though in 2004, they did announce a partnership with the music and movie industry to target this type of crime.

Currently the FBI have been informend, and have not made any public statement about this high profile case. If the leak occured in Australia, which some commentators are indicting the FBI would have no jurisdication, so would be unable to effectively investigate.

Data Theft: Hacking Credit Card Database

On 12th February the US Secret Service and the FBI released a joined press statement explaining the current method of attacks  being used by criminals hacking into financial databases to obtain credit card information.

The FBI & SS also provided a list of 12 recommendations, in detail, on how to stop these attacks. A copy of this advice is attached here

Attacker Methodology:

In general, the attackers perform the following activities on the networks they compromise:

  1. They identify Web sites that are vulnerable to SQL injection. They appear to target MSSQL only.
  2. They use “xp_cmdshell”, an extended procedure installed by default on MSSQL, to download their hacker tools to the compromised MSSQL server.
  3. They obtain valid Windows credentials by using fgdump or a similar tool.
  4. They install network “sniffers” to identify card data and systems involved in processing credit card transactions.
  5. They install backdoors that “beacon” periodically to their command and control servers, allowing surreptitious access to the compromised networks.
  6. They target databases, Hardware Security Modules (HSMs), and processing applications in an effort to obtain credit card data or brute-force ATM PINs.
  7. They use WinRAR to compress the information they pilfer from the compromised networks.

Based on these methods of attack the US Secret Service and the FBI have come up with the following methods to harden and defend company servers:

  1. Recommendation 1: Disable potentially harmful SQL stored procedure calls.
  2. Recommendation 2: Deny extended URLs.
  3. Recommendation 3: Implement specific approaches to secure dynamic web site content
  4. Recommendation 4: Install and run authorized Microsoft SQL Server
  5. Recommendation 5: Apply the principle of ‘least privilege’ on all SQL machine accounts.
  6. Recommendation 6: Require the use of a password on Microsoft SQL Server administrator, user, and machine accounts.
  7. Recommendation 7: Lock out accounts on the mainframes after several unsuccessful logon attempts.
  8. Recommendation 8: Run the minimum required applications and services on servers necessary to perform their intended function.
  9. Recommendation 9: Deny access to the Internet except through proxies for Store and Enterprise servers and workstations.
  10. Recommendation 10: Implement firewall rules to block or restrict Internet and intranet access for database systems.
  11. Recommendation 11: Implement firewall rules to block known malicious IP addresses.
  12. Recommendation 12: Ensure your HSM systems are not responsive to any commands which generate encrypted pin blocks.

The full content of the advice is listed below:

Joint US Secret Service and FBI Advice on preventative measures relating to hackers attacking databases, in relation to financial crime.

Over the past year, there has been a considerable spike in cyber attacks against the financial services and the online retail industry. There are a number of actions a firm can take in order to prevent or thwart the specific attacks and techniques used by these intruders. The following steps can be taken to reduce the likelihood of a similar compromise while improving an organization’s ability to detect and respond to similar incidents quickly and thoroughly.

Attacker Methodology:

In general, the attackers perform the following activities on the networks they compromise:
1.    They identify Web sites that are vulnerable to SQL injection. They appear to target MSSQL only.
2.    They use “xp_cmdshell”, an extended procedure installed by default on MSSQL, to download their hacker tools to the compromised MSSQL server.
3.    They obtain valid Windows credentials by using fgdump or a similar tool.
4.    They install network “sniffers” to identify card data and systems involved in processing credit card transactions.
5.    They install backdoors that “beacon” periodically to their command and control servers, allowing surreptitious access to the compromised networks.
6.    They target databases, Hardware Security Modules (HSMs), and processing applications in an effort to obtain credit card data or brute-force ATM PINs.
7.    They use WinRAR to compress the information they pilfer from the compromised networks.
We are providing the following preventive measures. Performing these steps may not prevent the intruders from gaining access, but they will severely impact their effectiveness based on current attack methods.

Recommendation 1: Disable potentially harmful SQL stored procedure calls.
The xp_cmdshell, OPENROWSET, and OPENDATASOURCE stored procedures should be disabled on all databases unless they are explicitly serving a business need within the network.
The xp_cmdshell procedure allows someone to execute commands on a local system from the database, with the permissions of the service account used for the database.
The OPENROWSET and OPENDATASOURCE procedures allow one to cause the database to transfer data from the local database to a remote database and vice versa.
The following two steps should be taken to remove the potentially harmful stored procedure calls.
o    Disable access to the xp_cmdshell functions within Microsoft SQL Server.
o    Microsoft SQL Server 2000
EXEC sp_dropextendedproc ‘
xp_cmdshell’ Microsoft SQL Server 2005
EXEC sp_configure ‘xp_cmdshell’, 02.
o    Remove the “xplog70.dll” file from the server.
If it is necessary to use the potentially harmful stored procedure calls, limit the exposure by applying IP filters on the SQL servers. Assign explicit ALLOW rules to the interfaces for the application the SQL server is supporting. Disallow communication between SQL Server hosts unless an application necessitates otherwise.

Recommendation 2: Deny extended URLs.
Excessively long URLs can be sent to Microsoft IIS servers, causing the server to fail to log the complete request. Unless specific applications require long URLs, set a limit of 2048 characters. Microsoft IIS will process requests over 4096 bytes long, but will not place the contents of the request in the log files. This has become an effective means to evade detection while performing attacks.
1.    Modify “%windir%system32inetsrvurlscanurlscan.ini”
a.    Ensure “MaxQueryString=2048″ is present
b.    Ensure “LogLongUrls=1″ is present
Recommendation 3: Implement specific approaches to secure dynamic web site content.
Certain measures can be taken to mitigate the risk of these types of attacks by developing a secure code base. The steps below are a few of the best practices for secure coding that will help prevent the attack associated with this incident. Additional information can be found at http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms998271.aspx.
1.Replace escape sequences
private string SafeSqlLiteral(string inputSQL)
{
inputSQL.Replace(”‘”, “””);
}
2.Use parameters with stored procedures
using (SqlConnection connection = new SqlConnection(connectionString))
{
DataSet userDataset = new DataSet();
SqlDataAdapter myDataAdapter = new SqlDataAdapter(
“SELECT au_lname, au_fname FROM Authors WHERE au_id = @au_id”,
connection);
myCommand.SelectCommand.Parameters.Add(”@au_id”, SqlDbType.VarChar, 11);
myCommand.SelectCommand.Parameters["@au_id"].Value = SSN.Text;
myDataAdapter.Fill(userDataset);
}
3. Constrain input in ASP.NET web pages
if (!Regex.IsMatch(userIDTxt.Text, @”^[a-zA-Z'./s]{1,40}$”))
throw new FormatException(”Invalid name format”);

Recommendation 4: Install and run authorized Microsoft SQL Server

Unless a specific application requires system or administrative level permissions, all instances of Microsoft SQL Server and IIS should run under accounts with restricted user permissions.

Recommendation 5: Apply the principle of ‘least privilege’ on all SQL machine accounts.

The attackers generally create tables into which they store malware or data collected from the enterprise. Unless specific applications dictate otherwise, restrict the capabilities of the accounts used to modify databases on the servers. In particular, remove the ability to create new tables, denying the attackers a means of transporting malware and stolen data.

Recommendation 6: Require the use of a password on Microsoft SQL Server administrator, user, and machine accounts.

Several SQL servers examined had an empty password on the “sa” SQL account. All accounts with access to resources should be protected with passwords or certificates.

Recommendation 7: Lock out accounts on the mainframes after several unsuccessful logon attempts.

Locking accounts and requiring IT support to restore service aids in protection against brute force attacks. This can serve as an early detection of potential security problems.

Recommendation 8: Run the minimum required applications and services on servers necessary to perform their intended function.

Several servers, to include Active Directory master servers, have unnecessary software installed (e.g. Microsoft Office). In addition, ensure that no unnecessary services are running. This includes SQL Server and SQL Server Express on support and other workstations. Should these services be necessary, restrict access through IP filters on Microsoft Windows or through third-party firewall software.

Recommendation 9: Deny access to the Internet except through proxies for Store and Enterprise servers and workstations.
Attacks on victim networks make extensive use of HTTP, HTTPS, and DNS network ports. Denying direct access to the Internet will frustrate and mislead an attacker.

Recommendation 10: Implement firewall rules to block or restrict Internet and intranet access for database systems.

Disallow all traffic outbound from servers harboring sensitive data. Communication to the SQL servers and data warehousing servers should be tightly controlled. Restrict traffic between data centers and stores to essential ports and services only.

Recommendation 11: Implement firewall rules to block known malicious IP addresses.

Firewall rule sets designed to block all ingress (incoming) and egress (outgoing) traffic to the known malicious IP addresses have been put in place. Note that traffic violating the rules should be logged and observed in near-real time.

Recommendation 12: Ensure your HSM systems are not responsive to any commands which generate encrypted pin blocks.
More specifically, HSMs should not accept commands that allow plain text PINs as an argument and respond with encrypted PIN blocks.

HSMs are normally used to verify Personal Identification Numbers (PINs), generate PINs used with bank accounts and credit cards, generate encrypted Card Verification Values (CVVs), generate keys for Electronic Funds Transfer Point of Sale systems (EFTPOS), and generating and verifying Message Authorization Codes (MACs). These systems, if accessed by an unauthorized intruder, can provide the attacker the ability to discover the appropriate PIN number for a corresponding credit or debit card. Therefore, in an effort to prevent this, HSMs should be configured to disallow “in the clear” PINs as an argument for performing its tasks.

Data Theft: FBI Reports Increase (2008)

The 2008 the FBI reported an increase theft of data and obtaining information from computers – hacking/computer spying.

The FBI also stated that this now threatens US security.

Article

Computer spying and theft of personal information have risen notably in the past year, costing tens of millions of dollars and threatening U.S. security, the FBI’s cyber division head said on Wednesday.

FBI Assistant Director Shawn Henry told reporters that organized-crime groups are drawn by the ease of reaching millions of potential victims.

He said as many as two dozen countries have taken an “aggressive interest” in penetrating the networks of U.S. companies and government agencies.

He declined to specify countries, but U.S. intelligence agencies have voiced concern over Russia and China’s abilities to electronically spy on the United States and disrupt U.S. computer networks.

As one possible example of Russia’s electronic spying prowess, Georgia accused Moscow in August of conducting “cyber warfare” to shut down Georgian government websites at the same time as it carried out a military offensive.

U.S. federal agents are stepping up efforts to fight computer crime, and working with foreign counterparts where the rising wave of computer attacks has awakened international interest, Henry said.

“Over the past year the malicious activity has become much more prevalent,” Henry said. “The threat continues to increase.”

An attack method growing in popularity is “botnets,” in which malicious software spreads via viruses to computers of unwitting individuals and companies forms networks that can then be used for data theft or shutting down a system,

Source

Mistaken Identity: Brandon Mayfield

In  March 2004 US Citizen Brandon Mayfield was identified as  the primary suspect responsible for the Madrid Bombing by the FB, based on Fingerprint evidence. In April the Spanish National Police stated, in a written report that the finger print of Brandon was not a match. The following month, 6th May 2004, the FBI arrested Brandon Mayfield, 13 days later the Spanish police arrest the correct person, but the FBI did not fully release Brandon for five  more days.

The detention was based on a single, imperfect finger print. The FBI had not see the original print, despite being given the opportunity by the Spanish police. Brandon was released on 21st May 2004, two days after the Spanish police had identified the correct suspect, Ouhane Daoud and 1 month after they stated Brandon’s fingerprint did not match

On the 13th March 2004 when the FBI first searched their database “AFIS” – Automatic Fingerprint Identification Search”, the result was negative, and they asked for a new, better quality image, which they received on the following day, on 14th March.

On 15th March 2004, 20 “matches” were found during the search – 20 were found as the search was programmed to limit show only 20 – i.e it could/would have many more, if it had not been limited to 20 people.

Brandon Mayfield was ranked number 4 on the search. Details of the 20 people identified in the search were extracted and background checks made. Brandon Mayfield has the following Bio:

American citizen born in Oregon and reared in Kansas. He lives with his wife and three children in Aloha, Oregon, a suburb of Portland. Mayfield was 38 years old, a former Army officer with an honorable discharge, and a practicing Oregon lawyer. However his faith is listed as Muslim.

The persons ranked number 1 to 3 were not arrested.

On April 13, 2004, the Spanish National Police provided a written report to the FBI concluding that Mayfield’s fingerprints did no match the scene of crime.

The FBI continued to investigate Brandon Mayfield, including bugging his house, etc, then on 6th May 2004 Bradon was eventually arrested, he was put in solitary confinement, his family was told the evidence was “100%” and leaks to the press about the guilt of Brandon were made.

On 19th May 2004 the Spanish Police correctly identified who the fingerprint belonged to, an Algerian called -Ouhane Daoud. However the FBI continued to detain Brandon until the 21st – when the story made the news. Even then Brandon was still placed under home arrest until 24th May, when the FBI finally released him.

This case, along with the case of David Asbury, shows how large amounts of data, and fingerprints in particular, can and are misused.

Links:

The Register

FBI Statement

US Court Report

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 25 other followers