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.

Attacks/Breaches

2/11/2021
12:45 PM
Jai Vijayan
Jai Vijayan
Slideshows
Connect Directly
Twitter
LinkedIn
RSS
E-Mail

7 Things We Know So Far About the SolarWinds Attacks

Two months after the news first broke, many questions remain about the sophisticated cyber-espionage campaign.
2 of 8

Initial Access Vector at SolarWinds Remains Unclear
The SolarWinds compromise involved attackers gaining access to the company's software development environment and inserting malicious code into builds for versions 2019.4 HF 5, 2020.2 unpatched, and 2020.2 HF 1 of the company's Orion network management platform. (The list of all affected products is here). The tainted builds were digitally signed and automatically pushed out to about 18,000 customers over a period of several months last year. Only a relatively small number of those organizations are believed to have been actually targeted for subsequent attacks.
The manner in which threat actors gained initial access to SolarWinds' build system environment remains unclear. A SolarWinds update on Feb. 3 described the company as still 'exploring several potential theories' about how the threat actors broke in. According to SolarWinds, current evidence suggests that the most likely attack vector was through a credential compromise and/or access through a then zero-day vulnerability in a third-party app.
SolarWinds has also confirmed that an email account belonging to one of its employees was compromised and used to 'programmatically access' accounts belonging to other targeted individuals. The attackers used the credentials to eventually gain access to SolarWinds' Orion development environment. The company says its data shows the attackers were in its network conducting reconnaissance for an unknown period of time before they began conducting trial runs of injecting malware into SolarWinds' build system in October 2019.
Image Source: PopTika via Shutterstock

Initial Access Vector at SolarWinds Remains Unclear

The SolarWinds compromise involved attackers gaining access to the company's software development environment and inserting malicious code into builds for versions 2019.4 HF 5, 2020.2 unpatched, and 2020.2 HF 1 of the company's Orion network management platform. (The list of all affected products is here). The tainted builds were digitally signed and automatically pushed out to about 18,000 customers over a period of several months last year. Only a relatively small number of those organizations are believed to have been actually targeted for subsequent attacks.

The manner in which threat actors gained initial access to SolarWinds' build system environment remains unclear. A SolarWinds update on Feb. 3 described the company as still "exploring several potential theories" about how the threat actors broke in. According to SolarWinds, current evidence suggests that the most likely attack vector was through a credential compromise and/or access through a then zero-day vulnerability in a third-party app.

SolarWinds has also confirmed that an email account belonging to one of its employees was compromised and used to "programmatically access" accounts belonging to other targeted individuals. The attackers used the credentials to eventually gain access to SolarWinds' Orion development environment. The company says its data shows the attackers were in its network conducting reconnaissance for an unknown period of time before they began conducting trial runs of injecting malware into SolarWinds' build system in October 2019.

Image Source: PopTika via Shutterstock

2 of 8
Comment  | 
Print  | 
Comments
Oldest First  |  Newest First  |  Threaded View
Commentary
Ransomware Is Not the Problem
Adam Shostack, Consultant, Entrepreneur, Technologist, Game Designer,  6/9/2021
Edge-DRsplash-11-edge-ask-the-experts
How Can I Test the Security of My Home-Office Employees' Routers?
John Bock, Senior Research Scientist,  6/7/2021
News
New Ransomware Group Claiming Connection to REvil Gang Surfaces
Jai Vijayan, Contributing Writer,  6/10/2021
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win an Amazon Gift Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: Zero Trust doesn't have to break your budget!
Current Issue
The State of Cybersecurity Incident Response
In this report learn how enterprises are building their incident response teams and processes, how they research potential compromises, how they respond to new breaches, and what tools and processes they use to remediate problems and improve their cyber defenses for the future.
Flash Poll
How Enterprises are Developing Secure Applications
How Enterprises are Developing Secure Applications
Recent breaches of third-party apps are driving many organizations to think harder about the security of their off-the-shelf software as they continue to move left in secure software development practices.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2021-32695
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-17
Nextcloud Android app is the Android client for Nextcloud. In versions prior to 3.16.1, a malicious app on the same device could have gotten access to the shared preferences of the Nextcloud Android application. This required user-interaction as a victim had to initiate the sharing flow and choose t...
CVE-2020-36388
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-17
In CiviCRM before 5.21.3 and 5.22.x through 5.24.x before 5.24.3, users may be able to upload and execute a crafted PHAR archive.
CVE-2020-36389
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-17
In CiviCRM before 5.28.1 and CiviCRM ESR before 5.27.5 ESR, the CKEditor configuration form allows CSRF.
CVE-2021-32575
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-17
HashiCorp Nomad and Nomad Enterprise up to version 1.0.4 bridge networking mode allows ARP spoofing from other bridged tasks on the same node. Fixed in 0.12.12, 1.0.5, and 1.1.0 RC1.
CVE-2021-33557
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-17
An XSS issue was discovered in manage_custom_field_edit_page.php in MantisBT before 2.25.2. Unescaped output of the return parameter allows an attacker to inject code into a hidden input field.