Endpoint Phishing Incident Response with PhishMe and Carbon Black

Hunting Phished Endpoints with PhishMe Intelligence™ and Carbon Black® Response

While sipping coffee and reading the morning headlines, the CISO notices a global mass-phishing campaign that took place overnight. Picking up the phone and calling the SOC, the CISO asks; “Are there any computers that may have been infected with ‘X’ that I read about this morning? I need answers before my meeting in an hour”.

Catching Phish with PhishMe Intelligence and ThreatQ

PhishMe IntelligenceTM Integrates with ThreatQuotient’s ThreatQ Platform

Swimming in a sea of threat intelligence indicators and services, security teams have been working towards effective ways to centralize, de-duplicate, and correlate massive amounts of threat data. The challenge, once this is done, is acting on what matters most. This requires intelligence, not just data.

Human Phishing Defense Tackle Box – PhishMe Intelligence™ and IBM QRadar®

PhishMe® and IBM have teamed up to provide security operations with essentials for their phishing defense program. Security teams don’t want standalone security products; they need holistic security solutions and through partner integrations.

That’s why PhishMe and IBM have partnered to help enterprise businesses defend against credential-stealing, malware, ransomware, and Business Email Compromise (BEC) phishing.

Off-the-shelf Zyklon Botnet Malware Utilized to Deliver Cerber Ransomware

Recent, large-scale distributions of the Zyklon botnet malware mark a continuing trend of off-the-shelf malware use. This multipurpose trojan, capable of supporting numerous criminal activities, has been identified in phishing attacks more and more frequently through the month of April. The bulk of these campaign have leveraged resume- and job-applicant-themed messaging as in the phishing narrative. The most recent analyses of this distribution have shown that the threat actors are attempting to leverage the malware’s full feature set by not only using it as an information stealer, but also as a downloader used to obtain and deploy the Cerber ransomware to infected endpoints. This technique demonstrates threat actor resourcefulness as well as the increasing commodification and democratization of malware utilities once reserved for only the most-technically-capable threat actors.

Malware Delivery OLE Packages Carve Out Market Share in 2017 Threat Landscape

In the first quarter of 2017, PhishMe Intelligence has noted an increase in malware distributors utilizing OLE packages in order to deliver malware content to victims. This current trend was first noted in December 2016 with close association to the delivery of the Ursnif botnet malware. This technique abuses Microsoft Office documents by prompting the victim to double-click an embedded icon to access some content. These objects are used to write a script application to disk that facilitates the download and execution of a malware payload. This method adds to another iteration of techniques threat actors use to evade anti-analysis and sandbox environments and to successfully infect the intended recipient.

Dridex Threat Actors Reinvigorate Attacks with Sizable, Concurrent Campaigns

One of the most historically effective techniques for gaining new infections for the powerful Dridex botnet malware has been sizable sets of widely-distributed phishing email. While these large campaigns have been intermittent for several months, the past week’s Dridex distributions have shown a renewed vigor with several larger campaigns being launched both concurrently and repeatedly. Many of these campaigns return to well-used and previously-successful email templates and malware delivery tools that had seen earlier utilization in conjunction with both Dridex deliveries and the delivery of other malware tools.

On March 30, 2017 three distinct sets of phishing emails were identified as delivering the Dridex malware. Each was a rehashing of a previously-used phishing narrative. The emails analyzed for Threat ID 8692 pretended to represent communication from a travel agency based in the United Kingdom confirming the recipient’s vacation travel has been booked. Other emails, delivered concurrently, purposed to deliver a vaguely- described “confirmation” as analyzed in Threat ID 8693. Furthermore, Threat ID 8700 documents a set of messages purporting to deliver a notice that an image attachment was ready for sending in yet another vague phishing narrative. Examples of these messages can be seen in Figure 1.

Figure 1 – Examples of Dridex phishing emails from March 30, 2017

The message narrative used in these campaigns should be familiar to information security professionals following Dridex as they represent similar themes to earlier Dridex campaigns. The impersonation of small- and medium-sized firms based in the United Kingdom was previously a common theme among Dridex delivery emails. This preference in content may serve to indicate a preference for a population with which those emails are meant to have disproportionate appeal. However, it appears that these emails were still delivered globally. The other repeated narrative seen once again today is a vague informational message about the status of an image attachment that has been readied for sending. Similar narratives have been used a half-dozen times in the delivery of Dridex since July 2015.

While the Dridex botnet malware’s users are launching phishing campaigns with renewed vigor, their stories and tools have stayed the same. This provides a distinct advantage to threat intelligence users who have access to repositories of information on the tactics, techniques, and procedures related to earlier attacks. It also provides an advantage to organizations whose email users are prepared and empowered to identify and report suspicious emails. Empowered recipients of messages like these are able to recognize the lure and instead of becoming victims, can make a difference for their organization by reporting the email.

Emails based on the threats shown in this blog post are also available as templates in PhishMe Simulator.

For further information on the Threat ID’s mentioned in this post, PhishMe Intelligence customers can log into https://www.threathq.com.

For more information on PhishMe’s human vetted, phishing-specific threat intelligence request a demo today.

What is Actionable Intelligence?

Do you know what is actionable intelligence? Do you know the difference between threat intelligence and actionable intelligence? If not, read on.

The term actionable intelligence has joined the ranks of threat intelligence, big data and more words that are used in well-meaning ways, but are ultimately meaningless.

Don’t get us wrong, like many other vendors, we use these phrases to describe what we do. However, because there are so many companies out there using these terms with their own meanings attached to them, we feel the need to write this blog post and hopefully do right by the technology and service offerings that are transforming the way that we approach today’s cyber threats.

In fact, there was a recent LinkedIn discussion on this very topic. A LinkedIn user posted this question:

What exactly is “actionable intelligence”? I see a lot of start-ups being created by MBA persons who have no background or credentials in IT security. The product they offer for big fees is known as “actionable intelligence”. They are trying to duplicate for businesses what the NSA, CIA, FBI, and DHS are doing for, and within, the federal government. My question is: how can these companies have the manpower and the resources to provide services like the NSA, CIA, FBI, DHS. We all have heard of the failures in intel coming from the best intel services in the world, i.e. NSA, CIA, etc. Those big boys have failures. What should we expect from these start-ups and your companies that are jumping on the bandwagon.? And these companies do not know of the ordinary IT security practices like defense in depth, hardening systems. They are providing intelligence about the “bad guys”. How do they go about getting this intelligence? It is so secretive how does a CISO know if it is worth anything?

As the following definition from businessdictionary.com provides, actionable intelligence is not relegated to security; maybe that’s why ‘MBA person with no security credentials’ feel they can use it or may actually know something about it from usage in a different field:

“Any intelligence can be used to boost a company’s strategic position against industry peers. The acquired intelligence must be transferred into real actions which can be used to either launch a preemptive strike or prepare a counter strategy. Examples include the competitors’ price range, marketing budget, target demographic, advertising campaign and strengths over a company’s own product. Overly aggressive attempts to gather intelligence from competitors may be illegal and constitute corporate espionage.”

Now onto some of the other questions posited: Let’s get into the context of security. Here is one definition that’s pretty good:

“Actionable Security Intelligence is the real-time collection, normalization, and analysis of the data generated by users, applications and infrastructure that impacts the IT security and risk posture of an enterprise. The goal of Security Intelligence is to provide actionable and comprehensive insight that reduces risk and operational effort for any size organization.”

Not perfect, but not bad.

As for the vendors’ size, not everyone in the market of ‘threat intelligence’ is small – by the way, the industry analyst group The 451 estimates there will be $1.2B in spending this year and IDC thinks spending will be $1.8B. Symantec, Cisco, Intel/McAfee, IBM and many other large traditional security vendors have acquired threat intelligence offerings.

As for the startups and whether or not they can compete, the question isn’t one about manpower as you refer to with major security agencies; instead it’s about their technology and its ability to provide value. If they can provide that value with one person their ‘actionable intelligence’ will be purchased. And yes, just like traditional defense in depth systems, threat intelligence is not a panacea for the woes of security. However, the reality of failures of current defense in depth, hardening and other current security techniques has to be acknowledged. Many organizations realize that ‘defending’ and ‘responding’ is no longer as effective as it used to be, and that being intelligence led is required. Why? The hackers, the bad guys, are winning more and more.

As for traditional security (defense in depth, hardening, Etc.), I don’t think anyone would ever suggest that you not use these and other network defenses. And these threat intelligence vendors don’t either. The traditional security systems and methods play a vital role in securing your network, even if they have their individual shortcomings. Their efficacy can be raised, however, when given the right kind of intelligence that has an immediate impact on network security. Threat intelligence can make these devices smarter and the security professionals who are too few and overworked, ‘smarter’ about how to stop and prevent attacks.

As for how they get their intelligence, its different by vendor and it’s a great question to ask them if you evaluate their offerings.  And try before you buy—just like anything else—and that way you will know if it has value—and so will your CISO!

Got Any Good Phishing TIPs?

PhishMe Intelligence Integrates with Industry Leading Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIPs)

Swimming in a sea of threat intelligence indicators and services, security teams have been working towards effective ways to centralize, de-duplicate, and correlate massive amounts of threat data. The challenge is once this is done, acting on the what matters most. This requires intelligence, not just data.

This is why PhishMe has completed technical integrations with TIP partners Anomali™ and ThreatConnect®. These integrations offer security teams the ability to ingest and correlate phishing-specific indicators with easy-to-act-on impact ratings and contextual reports to make confident security and business decisions.

PhishMe Intelligence customers gain from our human-verified phishing intelligence. What does this mean? It means that our customers receive phishing indicators from daily criminal phishing campaigns such as compromised IP addresses, domains, URLs, hashes, and botnet and command and control infrastructure. These indicators and credible intelligence reports are meticulously maintained and verified by PhishMe security researchers. Customers receive expert phishing intelligence that connects indicators with threat actors’ infrastructure so that security teams can confidently act quickly and accurately in their investigations.

PhishMe precisely delivers timely indicators and intelligence about ransomware, business email compromise, credential-stealing phish, and other malware. It is the timeliness and accuracy that is so crucial because the longer it takes security teams to determine the impact and severity of the threat, the more time the attacker has to plot their next move and achieve their mission.

When PhishMe designates an indicator with a major impact rating, teams can heed this warning and confidently take action. PhishMe doesn’t just tell security teams what is malicious, we explain why something is malicious. This is the context that allows analysts to act on the data analyzed and enriched by trustworthy PhishMe researchers.

PhishMe also helps answer the never-ending question; “is this a threat to my business”? The Active Threat Reports are contextually-rich reports that illustrate threat actor tactics and the neighboring criminal infrastructure that supports their operation. The reports take “so what” about an indicator, and provide an inside-out view of the threat actor and tactics.

Security analysts spend less time deducing and more time executing.

Security teams invest in TIPs as a way of bringing multiple sources of data into a centralized location that can be correlated and then distributed to other systems as part of the workflow. Open source, paid subscription, and industry-specific intelligence exchanges, all provide a useful purpose in managing threats to the business. The difficulty is managing vast amounts of data and ensuring a low signal-to-noise ratio. As such, TIPs emerged to support the endless need for data analysis and decisive action.

PhishMe Intelligence product management and solution engineers collaborated with TIP providers to complete technical integrations suited for security teams accountable for defending the business.

Conclusion

TIPs emerged to help security analysts who are inundated with so much information and the need to centrally manage it. They’ve become a concentrated repository for security teams to ingest, de-duplicate, analyze, and act on the indicators received. PhishMe’s technical partnerships with Anomali and ThreatConnect, will help ensure that the quality of intelligence available is second to none when it comes to indicators of phishing. Phishing is the primary vector of compromise and oftentimes leads to data loss. Consuming human-vetted phishing intelligence into a TIP ensures security teams can be confident in the action they take to protect their business.

Fortifying Defenses with Human-Verified Phishing Intelligence

Mining Phish in the IOCs

PhishMe® and Palo Alto Networks® are providing security teams with the ability to ingest human-verified phishing intelligence in a standard format that can be automatically enforced as new protections for the Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Security Platform through the MineMeld application. Through this integration, PhishMe and Palo Alto Networks are providing a powerful approach to identifying and preventing potentially damaging phishing attacks.

The challenge of operationalizing threat intelligence

Ransomware, business email compromise (BEC), malware infections, and credential-based theft all primarily stem from a single vector of compromise – phishing. Operationalizing threat intelligence, especially when it comes to phishing, continues to weigh on the minds of businesses regardless of size. Security teams require the ability to ingest, verify and enforce new protections for potential phishing attacks, all within their existing infrastructure.

Where are the Phish?

PhishMe extends beyond a traditional data feed. Customers receive phishing intelligence. What’s the difference? Intelligence, vs. traditional data.

Information without context is data. Intelligence is information with context, and context is what security teams require in order to have confidence in their decisions.

Intelligence customers receive indicators specific to phishing and their criminal command and control (C2) and botnet infrastructure associated with malware families like Locky, Dyre, and Cerber. This is then backed up by threat intelligence reports with verbose context that provides security teams with insight into attacker TTPs.

PhishMe identifies what is nefarious, but more importantly, why, and what it means.

Integration Tackle Box for PhishMe and Palo Alto Networks

Security teams who wish to easily complement their Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Security Platform’s security policies with PhishMe Intelligence will need an instance of MineMeld (version 0.9.26 and above) and PhishMe Intelligence API credentials (contact PhishMe for trial access https://phishme.com/product-services/live-demo). MineMeld will ingest intelligence from PhishMe, and can automatically feed new prevention controls to Palo Alto Networks devices, without adding heavy operational burden.

Configuring MineMeld with PhishMe

The following is a step-by-step guide to configure MineMeld in order to ingest PhishMe Intelligence phishing URLs, aggregate them, and construct into an output capable of preventing malicious URLs in security policies within PAN-OS devices. Before we dive into the configuration of MineMeld, it is important to review the three key concepts behind the application:

  • Miners: responsible for retrieving indicators from configured sources of intelligence and data feeds. Miners will bring in new indicators on a configurable, periodic basis, and also age-out any indicators that are no longer needed.
  • Processor: The processor node will aggregate the data obtained by the Miner and conforms the data to IPv4, Ipv6, URLs, or domains. Once aggregated, the data is sent to the output nodes.
  • Output: The output nodes gather data from the processor node and convert the data into a format that is capable of being consumed by PAN-OS (and other non-PAN-OS external services)

PhishMe Intelligence Miner Node

(Image of Miner Node with API credential example and phishme.intelligence prototype)

Processor Node

(Image of Processor Node using the stdlib.aggregatorURL prototype and the PM_Intel input from the configured Miner)

Output Node

(Image of Output Node using the stdlib.feedHCRedWithValue prototype and the agg_URL_all input from the configured Processor)

Configuration Graph Summary

The configuration graph is a summary exhibiting the flow of PhishMe Intelligence. The miner collects intelligence, aggregates, and the output node structures the data to be usefully applied to prevent phishing.

(Example of PhishMe Intelligence aggregated and with output URL data for PAN-OS)

Log Detail with URL Indicator and High Confidence rating of 100

The image below represents an example of URL intelligence received in the MineMeld log. This snippet specifies a malware payload from an OfficeMacro and TrickBot (similar to Dyre) family. If they choose to, analysts can then use the URL to the Threat Report with executive and technical details that explain more about the malware.

The above summarization of the MineMeld setup portrays how easy it is to take very relevant and useful information and structure it so that it can be operationalized with other security investments. Far too often teams have underutilized technical resources or processes that place a strain on the workforce. MineMeld reduces the human burden and provides security teams with the ability to create actionable prevention-based controls.

Phishing Intelligence Operationalized = PhishOps!

Let’s review an example of how to operationalize these indicators of phishing (IoPs) and apply them to a Palo Alto Networks security policy to deny egress traffic to these phishing URLs.

Create New Object in PAN-OS

From the Objects tab, select External Dynamic Lists from the navigational pane. Analysts just need to provide the relevant information to pull in the list of URLs from MineMeld.

(Example of External Dynamic List linking to URL list from MineMeld)

Apply to PAN-OS Security Policy

With the External Dynamic List defined, security policies can now be created based on acceptable criteria. In the case below, inside sources browsing externally and matching the PhishMe Intelligence URLs will be denied.

(Example policy to deny inside to outside web-browsing against PhishMe Intelligence URLs)

FINito! Wrapping up

A similar process can be repeated like the above, with IP lists and domains, and applied according to phishing threats facing the business. The way MineMeld handles the data received makes applying it to Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Security Platform very effective. Security teams will need to determine where they want to apply the policies once MineMeld has compiled the data.

The phishing threat is alive and very well and the ability for security teams to maximize their investments and operationalize with low administrative overhead should be enticing to tackle the threat.

 

More about MineMeld:

MineMeld, by Palo Alto Networks, is an extensible threat intelligence processing framework and the ‘multi-tool’ of threat indicator feeds. Based on an extremely flexible engine, MineMeld can be used to collect, aggregate and filter indicators from a variety of sources and make them available for consumption to peers or to the Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Security Platforms.

To learn more about the Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Security Platform, visit: https://www.paloaltonetworks.com/products/designing-for-prevention/security-platform

To learn more about the PhishMe Intelligence, visit:  https://phishme.com/product-services/phishing-intelligence/.  

 

A Warning on Christmas Delivery Scams

The time of year has once again arrived when post offices are busier than the freeway on a Friday evening. We buy gifts, online and in stores, and we send and expect packages to and from the far corners of the country, continent, and even the world.

Yet behind this frenzy of merriment skulk a series of dangers. Although Christmas is still more than a month away, scammers of this kind have already been active in various areas across the US. For a number of years, security experts have grown to expect a hike in the number of internet scams being spotted around the festive period, from fake deal websites to counterfeit greeting ecards. One example is becoming highly-popular among threat actors and is better positioned to trick even the most security-aware individual: failed delivery phishing scams.

UPS estimates that in the U.S., more than 630 million packages were delivered by shoppers during the holiday period last year, and FedEx predicts  317 million shipments between Black Friday and Christmas Eve. With all this holiday mail, not to mention everyone out and about to prepare for their celebrations, it is not surprising to find a “delivery failed” notice in your inbox. If the message concerns something needed by Christmas, the annoyance at having to re-organize a delivery can make us act rashly and even foolishly.

It is widely-known that the keys to successful social engineering are fear and greed.  When presented with compelling stimuli under these categories, criminals can count on a significant number of their potential victims briefly suspending their information security awareness training and clicking the link.  As Christmas approaches, certain malware families such as ASProx may have high-volume spikes, taking advantage of shoppers lowering their guard.  In December 2014, spammers used ASProx to deliver fear in the form of a Failed Delivery email from big, respected brands like CostCo, BestBuy, and Walmart.  Recall that PhishMe’s Gary Warner identified more than 600 hacked websites that were used as intermediaries to prevent detection by causing the spammed links to point to websites that had been “known to be good” until the morning of the attack.

So who should be on the lookout for these scams, and what can be done to protect Christmas shoppers?

Basically everyone, from individual consumers to massive businesses, should be on high alert. Though we should not let scammers turn shoppers into paranoid victims, being able to spot the details that reveal a scam can be the only thing standing between a scammer and your personal or company bank account details. While Christmas scams are thought of as dangerous, if the computer used to access these websites is a company or government computer, these scams can have a wide-ranging and long-term impact. And with nearly , this is a subject to take extremely seriously.

So be vigilant, and have a very merry (and scam-free) holiday season.

 

Did you know that 97% of phishing emails delivered in 2016 contained ransomware? Learn more by downloading our latest Q3 Malware Review.