Incident 1: Stuxnet .LNK Vulnerability 1.1 Background Patched Windows machines remained vulnerable to Stuxnet .LNK exploit since 2010. In early January 2015, Michael Heerklotz approached the Zero Day Initiative with details of a vulnerability in the Microsoft Windows operating system and it was assigned CVE-2015-0096. Stuxnet .LNK Vulnerability was discovered by a German computer science student Michael Heerklot, who through interest in the discovery and impact of Stuxnet exploit, decided to investigate Stuxnet attack, particularly the hack of the Natanz uranium enrichment facility where the .LNK vulnerability in windows shell was exploited in 2010 [1]. He examined the .LNK vulnerability, which was presumably patched by Microsoft, to …show more content…
The issue is that in Windows, icons are executed from modules (either executables or dynamic link-libraries). In fact, .CPL files are actually DLLs. Because an attacker could define which executable module would be loaded, an attacker could use the .LNK file to execute arbitrary code inside of the Windows shell and do anything the current user could” [2]. The first patch released August in 2010, Microsoft put in an explicit whitelist check with MS10-046. Once installed, it intended to ensure that only approved .CPL files should have been used to load non-standard icons for links. This patch failed and for more than four years, all windows files have been vulnerable to exactly the same attack that stuxnet attackers used in initial exploit. In light of its recent rediscovery, it is unknown if other groups discovered and exploited the vulnerability in the wild [2]. The section below explores the section of code that was patched in the initial patch in 2010 and how the vulnerability remained vulnerable. The definition of the function shown below is taken from a function called CControlPanelFolder::GetUiObjectOf() in Shell32.dll. Shown in the diagram below is the first block that was changed after zero day vulnerability was discovered. In the event below a whitelist check was put in place. The definition calls for a custom icon, with the iconID of 0, which is checked against a
0-day Vulnerabilities Exploitation – an attack that takes advantage of a vulnerability for which no patch is yet available.
Which tool and application were used to exploit the identified vulnerability on the targeted Microsoft® Windows 2003 XP server?
Ralph Langner’s article on the Stuxnet worm discusses the hardware, distribution and targets of the attack. He also goes into detail regarding the outlook of future attacks and what we can do to prevent them.
I have learned skills to diagnose and repair software vulnerabilities within Windows and Linux operating systems through the CyberPatriot program. I also participated in additional studies within the Cisco Networking Academy and received a perfect score on the Cisco Networking Quiz during the CyberPatriot competition.
Ping sweeps and port scans are two techniques that a malicious computer user such as a hacker can utilize to compromise an Enterprise networks security and gain access to their proprietary data. For example, private email messages can be forwarded to a rogue destination email address: Done by installing a virus program into a user’s email client through a discovered active computers open TCP/IP IMAP port (port number 143) that is not being currently used by that user (Clarke, 2008). The virus then could take advantage of security vulnerabilities in that users email client program and forward emails from that users inbox over to another destination email address without them knowing about
Another occurrence of cyberwarfare and its power lies within the Stuxnet worm, unleashed primarily to attack Iranian industrial programmable logic controllers (PLCs) in the nation’s Nuclear facilities. The Stuxnet worm is typically introduced to its target environment via an infected USB flash drive, and upon being loaded onto a computer running the Microsoft Windows operating system the worm would then seek out Siemens Step7 software. This software will then allow for Stuxnet to control Iranian PLCs, collecting information on industrial systems and causing the fast-spinning centrifuges to tear themselves apart. Stuxnet’s complexity is evident in its three prong approach to infection: It unloads a worm that executes all routines related to the main attack, it executes a link file that automatically activates other copies of the worm on the same network, and it activates its rootkit, which allows it to hide its processes and activity on the local computer as well as the entire computer network. Kaspersky Lab, an international software security group operating in almost 200 countries and territories worldwide, concluded that the attack “is a one-of-a-kind, sophisticated malware attack backed by a well-funded, highly skilled attack team” and that the “attack could only be conducted with nation-state support and backing”. In May 2011, the PBS program Need To Know cited a statement by Gary Samore, White House Coordinator for Arms Control and Weapons of Mass Destruction, in which
System/application attacks fall within three categories: denial or destruction, alteration, and disclosure. This paper will cover some common system/application domain vulnerabilities: unauthorized physical and logical access to resources, weaknesses in server operating system and application software, and data loss.
The two vulnerabilities that will be discussed in this report are Flame and ZeroAccess Botnet. Flame is a malicious program that was discovered in May 2012 by Kaspersky Lab experts. It is a program that can have several dangerous effects to an infected system. It also has the potential of stealing valuable information. It is known to be the largest cyber weapon discovered to date.
Teneable Nessus has been rated by its users to be the best in preventative defense in addition to being low cost solution with free online training. Though the application suite requires profile configurations to start, it provides the necessary functions to support the requirements of software and system configuration vulnerability assessments and easily scales to accommodate future growth. Plugins are updated regularly and new plugins are added to account for new Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVEs) as they arise. Security Center Continuous View simplifies the administrator’s role by integrating with other tools like Mobile Device Management (MDM) and a head to toe vulnerability detection and mitigation solution for any platform [3].
As such, he introduces a technique of identifying a spectrum of potential vulnerabilities and suggests procedures to deal with them. Systems Specification and High Order Language Implementation are categorized as items of high risk to attacks. Security Policy and Machine Language Implementation are classified as items of moderate risk of being vulnerable to attacks. Circuits Electronics and Device Physics are of low and very low risks respectively. He also discusses potential threats such as deceiving operating systems to grant access to file or data to unauthorized users through direct (overt) and indirect (convert) channels. Walker also says that lack of precise definition of trusted operating systems and the higher cost of building them are the significant drawbacks faced by the vendors. Vendors are concerned that if they build trusted operating systems, they might not be accepted by their customers. The only solution suggested by the author was to have someone or a company builds it, shares the technology used, and convinces the general public on the significance of it. Once it becomes accepted, then there will be a widespread use of trusted computer operating systems.
Monitor all network traffic and alert personnel to suspected compromises using network intrusion-detection systems, host-based intrusion detection systems, and intrusion-prevention systems.
One attribute of APT refers to the continuous attacks from threat actors to penetrate SPE infrastructure. Although the attack on Sony Corporation in 2011 to its network might not have been related to this incident in 2014, it has been proven “the hackers behind the SPE attack exploited a previously undisclosed or unknown [Zero-Day] vulnerability in its computer systems that gave them unlimited access to the entirety of SPE’s network.” (Bechor,
A zero day event is defined by Wikipedia as an undisclosed computer application vulnerability that could be exploited to adversely affect the computer programs, data, additional computers, control machinery in this case, or to a network. It is known as a zero-day because once the flaw becomes known, the application’s
Using Windows operating system the Stuxnet worm attacks computer systems by using four separate zero-day attacks via Windows. Stuxnet uses vulnerability in the way Windows handles shortcut files to spread to new systems. The worm was designed from the bottom up to attack Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems, or those used to manage complex industrial networks, such as systems at power plants and chemical manufacturing facilities (Broad, W., Markoff, J., & Sanger, D., 2011).
In today’s world, we see many systems getting infected with malware and threats that are just feeding off the user’s actions. However, we must focus on preparing ourselves for these malicious threat agents that are hidden and very hard to see in the open. Moreover, we should be ready for the next gigantic attack on our systems which brings me to this article where the creator of it explains that he has developed an open source tool named rapid_env. This analysis tool stands for rapid environment that allows for the template based provisioning of a Windows environment. This tool sees files, registry keys, processes and mutex which can change the way modern threats behave in our systems. Also, in the article you can see the analysis tool in