Attacks/Breaches

4/18/2007
08:55 AM
Connect Directly
Google+
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Botnets Battle Over Turf

Some botnets even patch their infected machines to prevent other botnets from hijacking them

More botnet-on-botnet turf wars have erupted -- and intensified -- over the past few months. (See Black Hat: Botnets Go One-on-One and Botnets Don Invisibility Cloaks.)

Aside from the distributed denial-of-service (DDOS) attacks they launch against one another to disrupt their operations (like the recent DDOS battles between the Storm and Stration botnets), they also are constantly trying to hijack bots from one another. "Stealing is easier than building [out] one," says Danny McPherson, chief research officer for Arbor Networks, who tracks botnet activity.

But the savvier botnets go the extra mile to protect their captor capital: Some actually "secure" the bot machines they have infected so no other botnets can steal them or utilize them, too. They install patches on their bots, for instance, to close the security holes and shut down open ports that are vulnerable to attack. "They are installing defenses to make sure no one else doubly infects the machine," says Paul Mockapetris, chairman and chief scientist of Nominum. "There are instances where a machine is infected, and part of that is defense against another infection."

Patching their bots and shutting out other botnets is no harder than initially recruiting a machine as a bot, security experts say. "It would be trivial for a bot to compromise a machine and apply Microsoft's recommended workarounds to prevent re-infection," says David Maynor, CTO of Errata Security.

The bottom line is the bottom line, of course: The more bots you have, the better chance you have of making money off your spam runs, identity theft efforts, etc. And bots are often used to advertise botnet services, too, touting features such as IP addresses that change every 10 minutes.

"They market their own botnet services through the bots. It's an entire economy," Arbor's McPherson says.

McPherson says bots are more of a commodity now. Part of the problem, he says, is that antivirus and IDS tools only detect about 75 percent of malware, which makes it fairly simple to zombify a consumer's machine.

Meanwhile, as botnets are also ditching their old-school Internet Relay Chat (IRC) channels for HTTP and peer-to-peer communications to be less conspicuous to investigators, it raises the bar for their infighting as well.

"Now they have more sophisticated P2P systems -- and hijacking [one another] may be more difficult," notes Adam O'Donnell, senior research scientist for Cloudmark. Still, "botnet hijacking is a common occurrence."

O'Donnell says when new attack vectors are publicized for popular operating systems, it's easy to build up a botnet using them if the botnet operator gets there first. "If those systems become botted quickly by other parties, then it may become easier for a party just to hijack someone else's network."

It's one incestuous ecosystem. Says Errata Security's Maynor: "Think of bot masters like stock brokers: They are always going to go back and cannibalize their base first."

— Kelly Jackson Higgins, Senior Editor, Dark Reading

  • Arbor Networks Inc.
  • Cloudmark Inc.
  • Errata Security
  • Nominum Inc.

    Kelly Jackson Higgins is Executive Editor at DarkReading.com. She is an award-winning veteran technology and business journalist with more than two decades of experience in reporting and editing for various publications, including Network Computing, Secure Enterprise ... View Full Bio

    Comment  | 
    Print  | 
    More Insights
  • Comments
    Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
    Crowdsourced vs. Traditional Pen Testing
    Alex Haynes, Chief Information Security Officer, CDL,  3/19/2019
    BEC Scammer Pleads Guilty
    Dark Reading Staff 3/20/2019
    Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
    White Papers
    Video
    Cartoon Contest
    Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
    Latest Comment: Well, at least it isn't Mobby Dick!
    Current Issue
    5 Emerging Cyber Threats to Watch for in 2019
    Online attackers are constantly developing new, innovative ways to break into the enterprise. This Dark Reading Tech Digest gives an in-depth look at five emerging attack trends and exploits your security team should look out for, along with helpful recommendations on how you can prevent your organization from falling victim.
    Flash Poll
    The State of Cyber Security Incident Response
    The State of Cyber Security Incident Response
    Organizations are responding to new threats with new processes for detecting and mitigating them. Here's a look at how the discipline of incident response is evolving.
    Twitter Feed
    Dark Reading - Bug Report
    Bug Report
    Enterprise Vulnerabilities
    From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
    CVE-2019-4035
    PUBLISHED: 2019-03-22
    IBM Content Navigator 3.0CD could allow attackers to direct web traffic to a malicious site. If attackers make a fake IBM Content Navigator site, they can send a link to ICN users to send request to their Edit client directly. Then Edit client will download documents from the fake ICN website. IBM X...
    CVE-2019-4052
    PUBLISHED: 2019-03-22
    IBM API Connect 2018.1 and 2018.4.1.2 apis can be leveraged by unauthenticated users to discover login ids of registered users. IBM X-Force ID: 156544.
    CVE-2019-9648
    PUBLISHED: 2019-03-22
    An issue was discovered in the SFTP Server component in Core FTP 2.0 Build 674. A directory traversal vulnerability exists using the SIZE command along with a \..\..\ substring, allowing an attacker to enumerate file existence based on the returned information.
    CVE-2019-9923
    PUBLISHED: 2019-03-22
    pax_decode_header in sparse.c in GNU Tar before 1.32 had a NULL pointer dereference when parsing certain archives that have malformed extended headers.
    CVE-2019-9924
    PUBLISHED: 2019-03-22
    rbash in Bash before 4.4-beta2 did not prevent the shell user from modifying BASH_CMDS, thus allowing the user to execute any command with the permissions of the shell.