Vulnerabilities / Threats

12/20/2011
09:44 AM
50%
50%

12 Groups Carry Out Most APT Attacks

Security consultants and the feds are tracking a dozen groups--all out of China--responsible for advanced threats.

Concerned with the amount of U.S. intellectual property being stolen from corporate networks, a group of security professionals sat down and compared notes on the various groups they tracked. They came up with an approximate tally of attackers targeting the intellectual property of U.S. and multinational companies: An even dozen, and all thought to be Chinese.

High-tech firms, oil companies, and defense contractors have all fallen prey to the 12 teams out to steal trade secrets and sensitive or classified information. While attempting to identify and count the groups behind the attacks may seem like an academic exercise, it's not, says Jon Ramsey, executive director of Dell Secureworks' counter threat unit.

"In the general scheme of things, knowing who your enemy is, is enlightening," he says.

One group, for example, is called the Comment Crew by Dell Secureworks because of its signature tactic of embedding command-and-control information in the comments of Web pages. "Understanding that, if you wanted to deal with the major attack from this one group, you can strip all comments out of the HTML pages as they come into your Web proxy," Ramsey says. "That is a pretty effective technique to deal with this one group."

Moreover, knowing whether an attacker is part of the advanced persistent threat (APT)--the term coined by the defense industry for attackers that don't go away--can determine whether a company calls in help. When a company suspects that a persistent attacker has set up shop inside their network, kicking them back out again is not easy, Richard Bejtlich, chief security officer for security consulting firm Mandiant, said in a recent interview.

Various attributes can be used to classify attackers into groups, including their tools and techniques, the characteristics of their infrastructure, and their targets. Mandiant, for example, keeps dossiers on the 12 groups it tracks, and when called in by a client, compares and gathers network intelligence with what it knows about the usual suspects. The company can analyze an incident under investigation and match it to various groups' modes of operation, including their tools, the passwords, the encryption used, their command-and-control infrastructure, and their targets.

Read the rest of this article on Dark Reading.

Read our report on how to guard your systems from a SQL attack. Download the report now. (Free registration required.)

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
To Be Ready for the Security Future, Pay Attention to the Security Past
Liz Maida, Co-founder, CEO & CTO, Uplevel Security,  9/18/2017
1.9 Billion Data Records Exposed in First Half of 2017
Kelly Jackson Higgins, Executive Editor at Dark Reading,  9/20/2017
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: Jan, check this out! I found an unhackable PC.
Current Issue
Security Vulnerabilities: The Next Wave
Just when you thought it was safe, researchers have unveiled a new round of IT security flaws. Is your enterprise ready?
Flash Poll
[Strategic Security Report] How Enterprises Are Attacking the IT Security Problem
[Strategic Security Report] How Enterprises Are Attacking the IT Security Problem
Enterprises are spending more of their IT budgets on cybersecurity technology. How do your organization's security plans and strategies compare to what others are doing? Here's an in-depth look.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2017-0290
Published: 2017-05-09
NScript in mpengine in Microsoft Malware Protection Engine with Engine Version before 1.1.13704.0, as used in Windows Defender and other products, allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code or cause a denial of service (type confusion and application crash) via crafted JavaScript code within ...

CVE-2016-10369
Published: 2017-05-08
unixsocket.c in lxterminal through 0.3.0 insecurely uses /tmp for a socket file, allowing a local user to cause a denial of service (preventing terminal launch), or possibly have other impact (bypassing terminal access control).

CVE-2016-8202
Published: 2017-05-08
A privilege escalation vulnerability in Brocade Fibre Channel SAN products running Brocade Fabric OS (FOS) releases earlier than v7.4.1d and v8.0.1b could allow an authenticated attacker to elevate the privileges of user accounts accessing the system via command line interface. With affected version...

CVE-2016-8209
Published: 2017-05-08
Improper checks for unusual or exceptional conditions in Brocade NetIron 05.8.00 and later releases up to and including 06.1.00, when the Management Module is continuously scanned on port 22, may allow attackers to cause a denial of service (crash and reload) of the management module.

CVE-2017-0890
Published: 2017-05-08
Nextcloud Server before 11.0.3 is vulnerable to an inadequate escaping leading to a XSS vulnerability in the search module. To be exploitable a user has to write or paste malicious content into the search dialogue.