Attacks/Breaches
7/5/2011
12:59 PM
Connect Directly
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

LulzSec's Top 3 Hacking Tools Deconstructed

Analysis suggests LulzSec was most effective using a relatively unknown vulnerability to launch large-scale, botnet-driven attacks against everyone from Sony to the Senate.

10 Massive Security Breaches
(click image for larger view)
Slideshow: 10 Massive Security Breaches
In its 50-day hacking spree, how did the hacking group known as LulzSec manage to break into so many websites?

All told, the group appears to have relied heavily on three attack techniques: using remote file include (RFI), SQL injections, and cross-site scripting. That's according to an analysis conducted by data security vendor Imperva, which studied the leaked LulzSec IRC chat logs recently published by the Guardian.

Interestingly, according to the Open Web Application Security Project's list of the top 10 biggest application security risks, injection attacks and cross-site scripting, respectively, placed first and second. These vulnerabilities, furthermore, have been extensively analyzed and detailed by security experts.

But RFI--a "not widely discussed" type of attack, according to Imperva--is a different story. According to the leaked chat logs, LulzSec member Kayla said that he or she "used to load about 8,000 RFI with usp flooder crushed most server."

"Remember that [it's] Kayla who brought a bot army to Lulsec's toolbox," said Rob Rachwald, director of security strategy at Imperva, in a blog post. "In other words, Lulzsec used an often overlooked vulnerability to help ambush their targets."

What's an RFI attack? "An RFI attack inserts some nasty code into a Web application server," he said. "What does the code do? Usually, RFI is used to take over the Web application and steal data. In the case of Lulzsec, they used it to conduct DDoS attacks."

Based on the chat logs, Kayla had 8,000 infected servers at his or her disposal. "That's pretty sizable," said Rachwald. Furthermore, just one infected server, given its relatively large throughput, can equal about 3,000 bot-infected PCs, meaning that Kayla's botnet could have equaled the power of one with about 24 million PCs. Notably, this was the botnet used to launch the DDoS attack against the CIA's public website.

Regardless of the techniques used by LulzSec, the companies and organizations it hacked--ranging from Sony to the U.S. Senate--faced a similar end result. Namely, LulzSec gained access to their servers, then published sensitive information. But had those organizations taken better security precautions, LulzSec may have moved on to easier pickings.

Last month, a message on the official LulzSec Twitter feed announced that after a 50-day hacking spree, its members were moving on. But understanding how its attacks succeeded is useful information for avoiding similar attacks in the future.

Notably, the #AntiSec effort to publish sensitive business and government secrets, launched by the Anonymous hacking collective and LulzSec (which sprang from Anonymous), has carried on. In fact, #AntiSec recently claimed responsibility for publishing information it obtained in separate attacks against Viacom, Vivendi SA's Universal Music Group, as well as the Arizona Department of Public Safety.

Security monitoring, incident response, and forensics are essential, even in the cloud. But the cloud by definition implies relinquishing at least some control, which can make these practices problematic. In this report, we identify the challenges of detecting and responding to security issues in the cloud and discuss the most effective ways to address them. Download our report now. (Free registration required.)

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Threaded  |  Newest First  |  Oldest First
RWISELY520
50%
50%
RWISELY520,
User Rank: Apprentice
3/17/2012 | 2:37:47 PM
re: LulzSec's Top 3 Hacking Tools Deconstructed
So true. More hacking tools: www.ubers.org
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
Partner Perspectives
What's This?
In a digital world inundated with advanced security threats, Intel Security seeks to transform how we live and work to keep our information secure. Through hardware and software development, Intel Security delivers robust solutions that integrate security into every layer of every digital device. In combining the security expertise of McAfee with the innovation, performance, and trust of Intel, this vision becomes a reality.

As we rely on technology to enhance our everyday and business life, we must too consider the security of the intellectual property and confidential data that is housed on these devices. As we increase the number of devices we use, we increase the number of gateways and opportunity for security threats. Intel Security takes the “security connected” approach to ensure that every device is secure, and that all security solutions are seamlessly integrated.
Featured Writers
White Papers
Cartoon
Current Issue
Dark Reading's October Tech Digest
Fast data analysis can stymie attacks and strengthen enterprise security. Does your team have the data smarts?
Flash Poll
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2013-0334
Published: 2014-10-31
Bundler before 1.7, when multiple top-level source lines are used, allows remote attackers to install arbitrary gems by creating a gem with the same name as another gem in a different source.

CVE-2014-2334
Published: 2014-10-31
Multiple cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities in the Web User Interface in Fortinet FortiAnalyzer before 5.0.7 allow remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via unspecified vectors, a different vulnerability than CVE-2014-2336.

CVE-2014-2335
Published: 2014-10-31
Multiple cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities in the Web User Interface in Fortinet FortiManager before 5.0.7 allow remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via unspecified vectors, a different vulnerability than CVE-2014-2336.

CVE-2014-2336
Published: 2014-10-31
Multiple cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities in the Web User Interface in Fortinet FortiManager before 5.0.7 and FortiAnalyzer before 5.0.7 allow remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via unspecified vectors, a different vulnerability than CVE-2014-2334 and CVE-2014-2335.

CVE-2014-3366
Published: 2014-10-31
SQL injection vulnerability in the administrative web interface in Cisco Unified Communications Manager allows remote authenticated users to execute arbitrary SQL commands via a crafted response, aka Bug ID CSCup88089.

Best of the Web
Dark Reading Radio
Archived Dark Reading Radio
Follow Dark Reading editors into the field as they talk with noted experts from the security world.