Intelligent CIO Africa Issue 06 | Page 16

TRENDING TRENDING Petya-like malware: the who, how and why it unbootable. If this was not possible, AES-128 keys were used to encrypt each individual file, with the AES keys subsequently being encrypted using an RSA-2048 public key. To obtain the private RSA key necessary to recover the AES keys, victims were instructed to transfer $300 USD in Bitcoin to a specified Bitcoin ID and send their wallet ID and victim ID number in an email to a specified address. Why? NotPetya and WannaCry are a sign of things to come, explains Rick Holland, Vice President, Strategy, Digital Shadows While the malware’s functionality has reportedly made it highly effective at propagating to machines within a local network, it has been reported as having no function for spreading outside of these local networks. It was therefore assessed as likely to be much more effective for conducting targeted attacks than WannaCry. In the case of NotPetya, it is highly likely that the ransom payment method was never intended to result in revenue for attackers or the recovery of victim data. Although the email service provider with which the account was registered has publicly announced that this account has been disabled, it has subsequently been reported that victim ID numbers were pseudo randomly generated rather than being derived from the RSA key used for AES key encryption. This indicates that it would not be possible for the threat actors to provide victims with the correct decryption key, even if a victim had paid the ransom and succeeded in making contact. Furthermore, Matt Suiche has reported that, unlike Petya, which encrypts an infected machine’s MBR in a reversible manner, this malware reportedly irreversibly overwrote 24 sector blocks of the MBR section of an infected machine’s disk, rendering it permanently inoperable. With monetary gain as a motivation out the picture, the most likely motivation left for NotPeyta’s behaviour is destructive malicious intent. Who? L ate on 27 June, the New York Times reported that a number of Ukrainian banks and Ukrenergo, the Ukrainian state power distributor, had been affected by unidentified malware which caused significant operational disruption. Multiple security vendors and independent researchers subsequently identified the malware as a wormable ransomware variant with functional and technical similarities to Petya. Based on these similarities and continuing confusion, the malware has been dubbed Nyetya, Petna, ExPetr and NotPetya, among others. It has been 16 INTELLIGENTCIO How NotPeyta works MeDoc’s software update process. Once the malware was installed, intra- network propagation functions enabled it to rapidly spread between networked machines over the following vectors: A social media account used by the National Police of Ukraine Cyberpolice Department suggested that the reported infections originated from a compromised software update delivered to users through MeDoc, a Ukrainian accounting software provider. While MeDoc has denied this, Microsoft has confirmed that a small number of infections were the result of malware being delivered to machines by the • EternalBlue and EternalRomance exploits: these are exploits for SMB remote code execution vulnerabilities (CVE-2017-0144 and CVE-2017-0145) leaked by the Shadow Brokers in April. These exploits were reportedly used to propagate between networked machines running SMB. Patches for these vulnerabilities were released by Microsoft in March (MS17-010) and in May. linked with a large number of infections, a significant proportion of which affected machines in Ukraine. www.intelligentcio.com • PsExec: The ransomware used a tool similar to Mimikatz to harvest user credentials. These credentials were then passed to an older version of the PSExec Windows tool which was dropped by the malware. This tool then attempted to use PowerShell remote functionality to copy itself onto a target machine and begin execution. • Windows Management Instrumentation (WMI): The malware also enumerated Windows network shares with WMI and attempted to launch a copy of itself on any discovered network shares. Once installed, the malware functioned similarly to Petya, checking for the availability of administrator privileges by using the Windows API AdjustTokenPrivileges function. If this was successful, the malware would overwrite the infected machine’s Master Boot record (MBR), rendering www.intelligentcio.com Clues lie in the geopolitical context and the initial target geography of the malware. Kaspersky Labs have claimed a 60/30% split (total number of infections unknown) between Ukraine and Russia. Additionally, the initial attack occurred during the Ukrainian holiday celebrating independence from Russia. Although these facts are interesting – and they do suggest that the malware was actively aimed at the Ukrainian economy – they are circumstantial and do not conclusively link the incident to any particular nation state. Attribution is and will continue to be a challenge. The technology behind this attack is well within the range of many hacktivists and cybercriminals, and so these details have less diagnostic value when considering the ‘who’. Although speculative, there are other factors to consider: the supply chain compromise, efforts at obfuscation (hiding the wiper as ransomware), the geography that the malware was deployed in and the timing of the deployment INTELLIGENTCIO 17