Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

ABTV //

Malware

// // //
3/13/2018
09:35 AM
Scott Ferguson
Scott Ferguson
News Analysis-Security Now

Kaspersky: Olympic Destroyer Creator Left 'False Flag' Clues

The person or group behind the Olympic Destroyer attack that disrupted the opening ceremony of the 2018 Winter Games is hiding their tracks pretty well, according to a new analysis by Kaspersky Labs.

Whoever was behind the Olympic Destroyer attack that disrupted the opening ceremony of the 2018 Winter Olympics developed a sophisticated way of covering their tracks and left several "false flag" clues along the way, according to a new analysis.

Olympic Destroyer played havoc with the PyeongChang opening ceremony in February, disrupting WiFi in the South Korean stadium, interrupting television signals and Internet access in the press area, and causing other problems with the IT infrastructure. (See 2018 Winter Olympics Websites Hit by Cyberattack – Reports.)

Almost immediately, security experts began to point fingers.

(Source: iStock)\r\n
(Source: iStock)\r\n

The most obvious target was North Korea, specifically the so-called Lazarus Group, which is reportedly affiliated with the country's military and is suspected of carrying out multiple operations in recent years, including the WannaCry ransomware attack. (See Cybercrime Is North Korea's Biggest Threat.)

Then, for a time, Russia and China were suspects after additional research and analysis of the attack was released and reviewed.

Now, however, new research from Kaspersky Labs is casting doubt on all these theories.

When its researchers looked at the Destroyer attack, Kaspersky found that the culprits left misleading clues and false information as to their identity. In many cases, these appeared to be false flag operations with the intent to sow even greater levels of confusion.

"However, as our experts dug deeper, they found more and more discrepancies," according to a March 9 blog post from the company. "After a thorough re-evaluation of all discovered 'exhibits' and a detailed study of the code, they realized that what appeared to be conclusive evidence was actually a skillful imitation -- a so called false flag."

In its research, Kaspersky did find some evidence pointing to a Russian group dubbed Sofacy, which is also known APT28 and Fancy Bear, but noted quickly that "we cannot rule out the possibility that this evidence is also false."

What Kaspersky did find is that the Olympic Destroyer was a network worm.


The fundamentals of network security are being redefined -- don't get left in the dark by a DDoS attack! Join us in Austin from May 14-16 at the fifth-annual Big Communications Event. There's still time to register and communications service providers get in free!

The malware was able to infect three different places: The pyeongchang2018.com website, network servers of a ski resort and the servers of Atros, a French IT service provider, which powered the Olympic site.

From these three jumping off points, the Destroyer malware propagated in the network and spread through Windows network shares. As it moved, the worm stole passwords, wrote them into itself and used that to further infect other machines in an effort to keep spreading.

"The ultimate objective of the Olympic Destroyer was to purge files from network drives that the worm could reach and shut down the systems it infected," according to the post.

While this type of malware behavior makes it somewhat easier to trace back, the false flag clues that the group left behind muddied the waters and made for a bad initial analysis, which is one reason no one can be sure who is behind Destroyer right now.

Related posts:

— Scott Ferguson, Editor, Enterprise Cloud News. Follow him on Twitter @sferguson_LR.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Edge-DRsplash-10-edge-articles
I Smell a RAT! New Cybersecurity Threats for the Crypto Industry
David Trepp, Partner, IT Assurance with accounting and advisory firm BPM LLP,  7/9/2021
News
Attacks on Kaseya Servers Led to Ransomware in Less Than 2 Hours
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  7/7/2021
Commentary
It's in the Game (but It Shouldn't Be)
Tal Memran, Cybersecurity Expert, CYE,  7/9/2021
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
The 10 Most Impactful Types of Vulnerabilities for Enterprises Today
Managing system vulnerabilities is one of the old est - and most frustrating - security challenges that enterprise defenders face. Every software application and hardware device ships with intrinsic flaws - flaws that, if critical enough, attackers can exploit from anywhere in the world. It's crucial that defenders take stock of what areas of the tech stack have the most emerging, and critical, vulnerabilities they must manage. It's not just zero day vulnerabilities. Consider that CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog lists vulnerabilitlies in widely used applications that are "actively exploited," and most of them are flaws that were discovered several years ago and have been fixed. There are also emerging vulnerabilities in 5G networks, cloud infrastructure, Edge applications, and firmwares to consider.
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2023-1142
PUBLISHED: 2023-03-27
In Delta Electronics InfraSuite Device Master versions prior to 1.0.5, an attacker could use URL decoding to retrieve system files, credentials, and bypass authentication resulting in privilege escalation.
CVE-2023-1143
PUBLISHED: 2023-03-27
In Delta Electronics InfraSuite Device Master versions prior to 1.0.5, an attacker could use Lua scripts, which could allow an attacker to remotely execute arbitrary code.
CVE-2023-1144
PUBLISHED: 2023-03-27
Delta Electronics InfraSuite Device Master versions prior to 1.0.5 contains an improper access control vulnerability in which an attacker can use the Device-Gateway service and bypass authorization, which could result in privilege escalation.
CVE-2023-1145
PUBLISHED: 2023-03-27
Delta Electronics InfraSuite Device Master versions prior to 1.0.5 are affected by a deserialization vulnerability targeting the Device-DataCollect service, which could allow deserialization of requests prior to authentication, resulting in remote code execution.
CVE-2023-1655
PUBLISHED: 2023-03-27
Heap-based Buffer Overflow in GitHub repository gpac/gpac prior to 2.4.0.