IoT
1/5/2016
07:30 AM
Connect Directly
Twitter
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
100%
0%

Hacker 2016 To-Do List: Botnet All The Things!

Most predicted security crisis of the year is an impending wave of zombified Internet of Things (IoT) devices taken over to fill out cybercriminal botnets.

To ring in the new year, Dark Reading already ran through the list of the most exciting, funny, and just plain zany security predictions for 2016. But what about the prediction most likely to come to pass? Beyond a lot of the "more of the same"-type of predictions, if we had our pick we'd probably vote for one of the most mentioned prognostications to hit our inboxes in the last few months. Namely that 2016 is going to be the year that attackers make a concerted effort to turn the Internet of Things (IoT) into the Botnet of Things.

Until now, there haven't been any reported widespread infections of consumer devices used within large-scale criminal botnets. Two years ago, Proofpoint claimed it found a botnet sending spam that included a smart refrigerator, but that was later called into question by a number of researchers, including one from Symantec in a detailed explainer piece a few days after the initial claims were made. Meanwhile, last fall saw news from Incapsula researchers that the abuse of CCTVs in botnets is on the rise.

"We first warned about them in March 2014, when we became aware of a steep 240 percent increase in botnet activity on our network, much of it traced back to compromised CCTV cameras," the researchers wrote, filling in details with an anecdote of an attack they found that they managed to track back to CCTV cameras at a retail store only about five minutes from their office.

This research shows that if there is an opening--namely unprotected, powerful-enough, well-connected, and largely ignored devices--attackers will take it. While these CCTVs might not be the consumer gadgets most people think of when they imagine the IoT, they fit within a similar profile and this level of infection offers a portent for the future.

"By naively connecting everything to the Internet, we have made our possessions and personal information extremely vulnerable," says Deepak Patel, vice president of engineering for Imperva. "IoT essentially means ‘hey, there's a small computer in there,' and for malicious actors, that also means ‘prey!’"

As he explains, common IoT security gaffes such as hard-coded default credentials and poor patch management are essentially spreading blood in the water for attackers looking for easy marks from which to build their botnets.

According to Sean Tierney, vice president of threat intelligence for IID, his firm predicts that in the next two years botnet operators are going to start getting creative in their use of wearables and connected home products to bulk up their botnet ranks. They predict that these IoT botnets will be used for everyday DDoS attacks, pay-per-click fraud, and other wide-ranging attacks.

"As these devices are used to attack other networks or for retaliatory attacks, it will eventually lead to the 'Battle of the Botnet' for domination of IoT," Tierney says.

 

Ericka Chickowski specializes in coverage of information technology and business innovation. She has focused on information security for the better part of a decade and regularly writes about the security industry as a contributor to Dark Reading.  View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
White House Cybersecurity Strategy at a Crossroads
Kelly Jackson Higgins, Executive Editor at Dark Reading,  7/17/2018
Lessons from My Strange Journey into InfoSec
Lysa Myers, Security Researcher, ESET,  7/12/2018
What's Cooking With Caleb Sima
Kelly Jackson Higgins, Executive Editor at Dark Reading,  7/12/2018
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Current Issue
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2018-14339
PUBLISHED: 2018-07-19
In Wireshark 2.6.0 to 2.6.1, 2.4.0 to 2.4.7, and 2.2.0 to 2.2.15, the MMSE dissector could go into an infinite loop. This was addressed in epan/proto.c by adding offset and length validation.
CVE-2018-14340
PUBLISHED: 2018-07-19
In Wireshark 2.6.0 to 2.6.1, 2.4.0 to 2.4.7, and 2.2.0 to 2.2.15, dissectors that support zlib decompression could crash. This was addressed in epan/tvbuff_zlib.c by rejecting negative lengths to avoid a buffer over-read.
CVE-2018-14341
PUBLISHED: 2018-07-19
In Wireshark 2.6.0 to 2.6.1, 2.4.0 to 2.4.7, and 2.2.0 to 2.2.15, the DICOM dissector could go into a large or infinite loop. This was addressed in epan/dissectors/packet-dcm.c by preventing an offset overflow.
CVE-2018-14342
PUBLISHED: 2018-07-19
In Wireshark 2.6.0 to 2.6.1, 2.4.0 to 2.4.7, and 2.2.0 to 2.2.15, the BGP protocol dissector could go into a large loop. This was addressed in epan/dissectors/packet-bgp.c by validating Path Attribute lengths.
CVE-2018-14343
PUBLISHED: 2018-07-19
In Wireshark 2.6.0 to 2.6.1, 2.4.0 to 2.4.7, and 2.2.0 to 2.2.15, the ASN.1 BER dissector could crash. This was addressed in epan/dissectors/packet-ber.c by ensuring that length values do not exceed the maximum signed integer.