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

9/9/2019
09:00 AM
By Nadav Maman, Co-Founder & Chief Technical Officer at Deep Instinct
By Nadav Maman, Co-Founder & Chief Technical Officer at Deep Instinct
Sponsored Article
50%
50%

Hackers & Artificial Intelligence: A Dynamic Duo

To best defend against an AI attack, security teams will need to adopt the mindset and techniques of a malicious actor.

The amplified efficiency of artificial intelligence (AI) means that once a system is trained and deployed, malicious AI can attack a far greater number of devices and networks more quickly and cheaply than a malevolent human actor. Given sufficient computing power, an AI system could launch many attacks, be more selective in its targets and more devastating in its impact. The potential mass destruction makes a nuclear explosion sound rather limited.

Currently the use of AI for attackers is mainly pursued at an academic level and we’re yet to see AI attacks in the wild. However, there’s a lot of talk in the industry about attackers using AI in their malicious efforts, and defenders using machine learning as a defense technology.

There are three types of attacks in which an attacker can use AI:

AI-based cyberattacks: The malware operates AI algorithms as an integral part of its business logic. This is where AI algorithms are used to detect anomalies and indicate irregular user and system activity patterns. The AI algorithm is trained to identify unusual patterns indicative of malicious activity that can be used to execute malware, increase or decrease evasion and stealth configurations and communication times. An example of this is DeepLocker, demonstrated by IBM security which encrypted ransomware to autonomously decide which computer to attack based on a face recognition algorithm.

AI facilitated cyberattacks: The malicious code and malware running on the victim’s machine does not include AI algorithms, but the AI is used elsewhere in the attacker’s environment. An example of this is Info-stealer malware which uploads a lot of personal information to the C&C server, which then runs an NLP algorithm to cluster and classify sensitive information as interesting (e.g. credit card numbers). Another example of this is spear fishing where an email is sent with a façade the looks legitimate by collecting and using information specifically relevant to the target. 

Adversarial attacks: The use of malicious AI algorithms to subvert the functionality of benign AI algorithms. This is done by using the algorithms and techniques that are built into a traditional machine learning algorithm and “breaking” it by reverse engineering the algorithm. Skylight Cyber recently demonstrated an example of this when they were able to trick Cylance’s AI based antivirus product into detecting a malicious file as benign.

The constructive AI versus malicious AI trend will continue to increase and spread across the opaque border that separates academic proof of concepts from actual full-scale attacks in the wild. This will happen incrementally as computing power (GPUs) and deep learning algorithms become more and more available to the wider public.

To best defend against an AI attack, you need to adopt the mindset and techniques of a malicious actor. Machine learning and deep learning experts need to be familiar with these techniques in order to build robust systems that will defend against them. 

For more examples of how each of the AI types of attack have been discovered, click here to read the full article.

About the Author

Nadav Maman, Co-Founder & Chief Technical Officer, Deep Instinct

Nadav Maman brings 15 years of experience in customer-driven business and technical leadership to his role as co-founder and chief technical officer at Deep Instinct. He has a proven track record in managing technical complex cyber projects, including design, executions and sales. He also has vast hands-on experience with data security, network design, and implementation of complex heterogeneous environments.

 

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
US Turning Up the Heat on North Korea's Cyber Threat Operations
Jai Vijayan, Contributing Writer,  9/16/2019
Fed Kaspersky Ban Made Permanent by New Rules
Dark Reading Staff 9/11/2019
NetCAT Vulnerability Is Out of the Bag
Dark Reading Staff 9/12/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Current Issue
7 Threats & Disruptive Forces Changing the Face of Cybersecurity
This Dark Reading Tech Digest gives an in-depth look at the biggest emerging threats and disruptive forces that are changing the face of cybersecurity today.
Flash Poll
The State of IT Operations and Cybersecurity Operations
The State of IT Operations and Cybersecurity Operations
Your enterprise's cyber risk may depend upon the relationship between the IT team and the security team. Heres some insight on what's working and what isn't in the data center.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-16395
PUBLISHED: 2019-09-17
GnuCOBOL 2.2 has a stack-based buffer overflow in the cb_name() function in cobc/tree.c via crafted COBOL source code.
CVE-2019-16396
PUBLISHED: 2019-09-17
GnuCOBOL 2.2 has a use-after-free in the end_scope_of_program_name() function in cobc/parser.y via crafted COBOL source code.
CVE-2019-16199
PUBLISHED: 2019-09-17
eQ-3 Homematic CCU2 before 2.47.18 and CCU3 before 3.47.18 allow Remote Code Execution by unauthenticated attackers with access to the web interface via an HTTP POST request to certain URLs related to the ReGa core process.
CVE-2019-16391
PUBLISHED: 2019-09-17
SPIP before 3.1.11 and 3.2 before 3.2.5 allows authenticated visitors to modify any published content and execute other modifications in the database. This is related to ecrire/inc/meta.php and ecrire/inc/securiser_action.php.
CVE-2019-16392
PUBLISHED: 2019-09-17
SPIP before 3.1.11 and 3.2 before 3.2.5 allows prive/formulaires/login.php XSS via error messages.