Like a Mission Impossible script...
Cheaper than nukes. Harder to determine the source?
Meet
“Flame”, The Massive Spy Malware Infiltrating Iranian Computers
A massive, highly sophisticated piece
of malware has been newly found infecting systems in Iran and
elsewhere and is believed to be part of a
well-coordinated, ongoing, state-run cyberespionage operation.
The malware, discovered by Russia-based
anti-virus firm Kaspersky Lab, is an espionage toolkit that has been
infecting targeted systems in Iran, Lebanon, Syria, Sudan, the
Israeli Occupied Territories and other countries in the Middle East
and North Africa for at least two years.
Dubbed “Flame” by Kaspersky, the
malicious code dwarfs Stuxnet in size – the groundbreaking
infrastructure-sabotaging malware that is believed to have
wreaked havoc on Iran’s nuclear program in 2009 and 2010.
… The researchers say that Flame
may be part of a parallel project created by contractors who were
hired by the same nation-state team that was behind Stuxnet and its
sister malware, DuQu.
… Early analysis
of Flame by the Lab indicates that it’s designed primarily to
spy on the users of infected computers and steal data from them,
including documents, recorded conversations and keystrokes. It
also opens a backdoor to infected systems to allow the attackers to
tweak the toolkit and add new functionality.
… Flame appears to have been
operating in the wild as early as March 2010, though it remained
undetected by antivirus companies.
… He noted that there are clues
that the malware may actually date back to as early as 2007, around
the same time-period when Stuxnet and DuQu are believed to have been
created.
… Among Flame’s many modules is
one that turns on the internal microphone of an
infected machine to secretly record conversations that occur either
over Skype or in
the computer’s near vicinity; a module that turns
Bluetooth-enabled computers into a Bluetooth beacon, which scans for
other Bluetooth-enabled devices in the vicinity to siphon names and
phone numbers from their contacts folder; and a module that grabs and
stores frequent screenshots of activity on the machine, such as
instant-messaging and email communications, and sends them via a
covert SSL channel to the attackers’ command-and-control servers.
The malware also has a sniffer
component that can scan all of the traffic on an infected machine’s
local network and collect usernames and password hashes that are
transmitted across the network. The attackers appear to use this
component to hijack administrative accounts and gain high-level
privileges to other machines and parts of the network.
… “It was obvious DuQu was from
the same source as Stuxnet. But no matter how much we looked for
similarities [in Flame], there are zero similarities,” Gostev said.
“Everything is completely different, with the exception of two
specific things.”
One of these is an interesting export
function in both Stuxnet and Flame, which may turn out to link the
two pieces of malware upon further analysis, Gostev said. The export
function allows the malware to be executed on the system.
Also, like Stuxnet, Flame has the
ability to spread by infecting USB sticks using the autorun and .lnk
vulnerabilities that Stuxnet used. It also uses the same print
spooler vulnerability that Stuxnet used to spread to computers on a
local network. This suggests that the authors of Flame may have had
access to the same menu of exploits that the creators of Stuxnet
used.
Unlike Stuxnet, however, Flame does not
replicate automatically by itself. The spreading mechanisms are
turned off by default and must be switched on by the attackers before
the malware will spread.
… The researchers say they don’t
know yet how an initial infection of Flame occurs on a machine before
it starts spreading. The malware has the ability to infect a fully
patched Windows 7 computer, which suggests that there may be a
zero-day exploit in the code that the researchers have not yet found.
… At least one component of Flame
appears to have popped up on machines
in Europe on Dec. 5, 2007 and in Dubai on Apr. 28, 2008.
… The malware has no kill date,
though the operators have the ability to send a kill module to it if
needed. The kill module, named browse32, searches for every trace of
the malware on the system, including stored files full of screenshots
and data stolen by the malware, and eliminates them, picking up any
breadcrumbs that might be left behind.
“When the kill module is activated,
there’s nothing left whatsoever,” Gostev said.
Brief, but interesting.
May 27, 2012
Open
Forum Academy Report - The Cloud Computing Workshop
OFA Report - The Cloud Computing
Workshop - "The
cloud will happen; the question is whether it will happen to us, with
us, or by us": "This report is prepared by the
rapporteur, Dr. E. Altsitsiadis, for Open
Forum Academy (OFA) in support of the Cloud Computing Workshop.
The summaries of the speaker presentations and panel discussions in
this report are based on the rapporteur’s notes. The workshop
brought together high-level experts to discuss three broad aspects of
cloud computing; the economic impact, the legal
aspects and the way to move forward. The economic
opportunity is irrefutable - If you live in a multi-device world, you
simply need the cloud. The cloud will have a significant impact on
our entire economy; from the micro level and the numerous benefits it
brings to supply and demand alike, to the positive macro-effects in
new job creation and GDP contribution. There are serious obstacles
though in claiming these benefits, from practical operational
limitations to misconceptions, distrust and a legal framework that is
largely fragmented and complicated. The speakers broadened our
understanding of these weak points, downplaying some issues that are
overly considered important, while pointing out others that are
crucial, yet evade our attention. The workshop illustrated that
there are a lot of misconceptions but also a lot of common ground and
it is becoming apparent that the way forward passes through better
communication and collaboration, whether at the level of EU-US
governments, Industry-Policymakers or Providers-Users."
Cloudy, with a chance of surveillance?
May 27, 2012
Governmental
Access to Data in the Cloud - A comparative analysis of ten
international jurisdictions
A
Global Reality: Governmental Access to Data in the Cloud - A
comparative analysis of ten international jurisdictions Governmental
access to data stored in the Cloud – including cross-border access
– exists in every jurisdiction, by Winston Maxwell, Paris,
France Christopher Wolf, Washington, DC; May 23, 2012. A Hogan
Lovells White Paper.
- "This White Paper examines the extent to which access to data in the Cloud by governments in various jurisdictions is possible, regardless of where a Cloud provider is located. “Governmental access,” as that term is used here, includes access by all types of law enforcement authorities and other governmental agencies, recognizing that the rules may be different for law enforcement and national security access. Governments need some degree of access to data for criminal (including cybercrime) investigations and for purposes of national security. But privacy and confidentiality also are important issues. This paper does not enter into the ongoing debate about the potential for excessive government access to data and insufficient procedural protections. Rather, this White Paper undertakes to compare the nature and extent of governmental access to data in the Cloud in many jurisdictions around the world."
Interesting that the London School of
Economics finds that organizations can save money using “free”
software. That's not as simple an answer as you may think.
May 27, 2012
Total
cost of ownership of open source software: a report for the UK
Cabinet Office
"The Cabinet Office and London
School of Economics (LSE) have published research into the Total
Cost of Ownership of Open Source Software, by Maha Shaikh and
Tony Cornford, Version 8.5 Final, November 2011, Unclassified. The
report has beejointly financed by the Cabinet Office and OpenForum
Academy, together with some of its supporters, including Alfresco,
Deloitte, IBM and Red Hat."
For my Business Continuity students...
Five
years after Estonia's cyber attacks: lessons learned for NATO?
By
Peggy Garvin
Source: NATO Defense College
From the report:
In April 2007 a
series of cyber attacks targeted Estonian information systems and
telecommunication networks ... Lasting twenty-two days, the attacks
were directed at a range of servers (web, email, DNS) and routers.
The 2007 attacks
did not damage much of the Estonian IT infrastructure ... However,
the attacks were a true wake-up call for NATO, offering a practical
demonstration that cyber attacks could now cripple an entire nation
dependent on IT networks.
Link
to download full report (PDF; 944 KB)
Incentive for my CS majors to also grab
an MBA?
"The IT industry is hurting for
women. Currently only 11% of IT companies are owned by women. The
Women-Owned Small Business (WOSB) Federal Contract program requires
5% of all IT jobs to go to female-owned integration companies, but
there must be at least 2 female bidders. There are
so
few female bidders that women-owned IT firms are ineligible for the
contracts. From the article: 'Wendy Frank, founder of Accell
Security Inc. in Birdsboro, Pa., wishes she had more competitors.
It's not often you hear any integrator say that, but in Frank's case,
she has good reason. The current Women-Owned Small Business (WOSB)
Federal Contract program authorizes five percent of Federal prime and
subcontracts to be set aside for WOSBs. While that might sound fair
on the surface, in order to invoke the money set aside for this
program, the contracting officer at an agency has to have a
reasonable expectation that two or more WOSBs will submit offers for
the job. “We could not participate in the government’s
Women-Owned Small Business program unless there was another female
competitor,” says Frank. “Procurement officers required that at
least two women-owned small businesses compete for the contracts,
even in the IT field, where women-owned businesses are
underrepresented.”'"
Trend spotting? It also shows that
“correlation” is not the same as “connected”
To make use of this tool, it is best
that we define correlation first. A correlation is a mutual
relationship or interdependence of two or more things. In this case,
Google answers the question – which keywords have the most
comparable pattern of search activity?
Sort of an illustrated explanation of
“Why the Privacy Foundation exists”
No comments:
Post a Comment