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.

Application Security //

Ransomware

3/29/2018
08:05 AM
Scott Ferguson
Scott Ferguson
News Analysis-Security Now
50%
50%

WannaCry Ransomware Hits Boeing, but Company Claims It's Contained

On Thursday, reports surfaced that a Boeing plant sustained a cyber attack that appeared related to the WannaCry ransomware virus, but the company claimed it did not affect production.

A Boeing aircraft plant appears to have sustained a cyber attack related to the WannaCry ransomware virus, although the company downplayed the attack and later claimed that it did not affect production or spread beyond the one facility.

The attack appears to have affected the company's aircraft facility in North Charleston, S.C., according to the Seattle Times, which first reported the incident late Wednesday.

Boeing released a short statement downplaying the attack but also reassuring its customers that production would carry on. The statement did not mention WannaCry specifically.

"Our cybersecurity operations center detected a limited intrusion of malware that affected a small number of systems. Remediations were applied and this is not a production or delivery issue," according to Boeing's March 28 statement.

If the attack against Boeing is related to WannaCry, it's the first time that the ransomware has hit a major target since first coming to light in 2017. Before it was contained, WannaCry affected about 400,000 computers in 150 companies and caused about $4 billion worth of damage, according to Kasperksy Labs.

When it first emerged early last year, WannaCry appeared to be a game-changer. It acted like a traditional malware worm, but it managed to spread throughout corporate networks without relying on a user to open malicious attachments or emails. It also took advantage of enterprises not patching older versions of Microsoft Windows. (See WannaCry Was Just the Beginning.)

Although it has never been proven, many security researchers believe that North Korea was behind the original attack. (See New Insight on WannaCry's Roots.)

If the cyber attack against Boeing is Wannacry, it's the third time within two weeks that an enterprise or government agency has reported an issue with ransomware. Atlanta is still dealing with the fallout over a massive attack that happened last week, and on Thursday, a ransomware attack targeted Baltimore's 911 system.


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!

What also makes these types of cyber attacks strange is that the number of ransomware attacks since last year has been decreasing, as attackers appear to have moved on to different schemes, most notably cryptocurrency mining. (See As Ransomware Declines, Atlanta Is Odd Man Out.)

After the WannaCry attack came to light in 2017, Microsoft issued a series of patches and sent out alerts to customers to update older systems.

However, according to the Seattle Times, the Boeing facility may have been running an older version of Windows embedded within certain systems that are used to monitor or test production equipment. It's rare that companies deploy patches to these older PCs, which can run for years and years without an update.

It does appear that the production equipment itself, as well as more updated machines running new versions of Windows, were not affected, which could help explain why the WannaCry ransomware did not spread.

In an email to Security Now, Fleming Shi, senior vice president of technology at Barracuda Networks, wrote that he believes that there are two ways the attack against Boeing could have happened:

  • The affected systems were segmented in their network, and an infected host had no Internet access, but was networked internally. Under such situations, the kill switch would not trigger, which allowed WannaCry to spread as if there is no kill switch.
  • Or, Boeing was hit by a new variant of the WannaCry ransomware, which was immune to the previous kill switch. This allowed the new variant was able to spread.

"I would imagine that Boing has an ATP solution that can sandbox a suspicious file, but all it takes is one vulnerable system to allow the infection to spread if the system does not exist," Shi wrote.

Editor's note: This article was updated with comments from Barracuda Networks' Fleming Shi.

Related posts:

— Scott Ferguson, is the managing editor of Light Reading and the editor of Security Now. Follow him on Twitter @sferguson_LR.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Current Issue
Special Report: Computing's New Normal, a Dark Reading Perspective
This special report examines how IT security organizations have adapted to the "new normal" of computing and what the long-term effects will be. Read it and get a unique set of perspectives on issues ranging from new threats & vulnerabilities as a result of remote working to how enterprise security strategy will be affected long term.
Flash Poll
The Threat from the Internetand What Your Organization Can Do About It
The Threat from the Internetand What Your Organization Can Do About It
This report describes some of the latest attacks and threats emanating from the Internet, as well as advice and tips on how your organization can mitigate those threats before they affect your business. Download it today!
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-20001
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-04
An issue was discovered in RICOH Streamline NX Client Tool and RICOH Streamline NX PC Client that allows attackers to escalate local privileges.
CVE-2020-15467
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-04
The administrative interface of Cohesive Networks vns3:vpn appliances before version 4.11.1 is vulnerable to authenticated remote code execution leading to server compromise.
CVE-2020-5615
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-04
Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in [Calendar01] free edition ver1.0.0 and [Calendar02] free edition ver1.0.0 allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of administrators via unspecified vectors.
CVE-2020-5616
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-04
[Calendar01], [Calendar02], [PKOBO-News01], [PKOBO-vote01], [Telop01], [Gallery01], [CalendarForm01], and [Link01] [Calendar01] free edition ver1.0.0, [Calendar02] free edition ver1.0.0, [PKOBO-News01] free edition ver1.0.3 and earlier, [PKOBO-vote01] free edition ver1.0.1 and earlier, [Telop01] fre...
CVE-2020-5617
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-04
Privilege escalation vulnerability in SKYSEA Client View Ver.12.200.12n to 15.210.05f allows an attacker to obtain unauthorized privileges and modify/obtain sensitive information or perform unintended operations via unspecified vectors.