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

1/30/2019
03:00 PM
Connect Directly
Google+
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Iran Ups its Traditional Cyber Espionage Tradecraft

Newly named APT39 hacking team exemplifies Iran's growing sophistication in nation-state hacking operations.

Iran's nation-state hacking machine mostly is known for its destructive cyberattacks: first with Web defacements, then crippling distributed-denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks, and most recently, data-wiping. But Iran increasingly is increasingly honing its operations in pure intelligence-gathering cyber espionage.

Cyber spying is nothing new, but over the past few years it has evolved into more of a step one for sophisticated nation-state hackers to know their targets, burrow in them, and ultimately wage more damaging attacks, such as ransomware, financial crime, data leaks/doxing, intellectual property theft - and in the case of some Iranian hacking teams such as the one behind Shamoon, data-wiping.

FireEye's research group this week officially christened one Iranian hacking team it has been tracking for more than four years, as APT39 - the same group of hackers that Symantec already calls Chafer and CrowdStrike calls Helix Kitten. The hacking group operates as an old-fashioned cyber espionage operation, but with advanced stealthy tactics and tools to meet its intel-gathering objectives.

Benjamin Read,  senior manager of cyber espionage analysis at FireEye, says his team spotted APT39 in December of last year waging attacks against the telecommunications, travel, and technology services sectors, in campaigns aimed at gathering information and records on individuals. The attackers likely were rooting around for details on phone calls of specific individuals, as well as their travel plans and patterns in support of a broad Iranian government espionage operation, he says.

APT39, unlike its counterparts in Iran that wage influence-peddling, disruption, or destructive cyberattacks, focuses specifically on the theft of personal information for use in monitoring, tracking, and surveillance operations by the nation. "They're generally stealing data ... in bulk and then processing it" for usefulness and use, he says, adding that FireEye does not have insight into the types of individuals APT39 is after.

"They're gaining information on the very target itself," Jon DiMaggio, senior threat intelligence analyst at Symantec, says of APT39/Chafer. "It appears they do have some cooperation with other groups" in the Middle East region, he says. "That region's groups really play together often, which is one of the big differences in attacks" there, he notes.

Symantec by policy doesn't identify nation-state hacking teams by country, but rather, by general region.

US Intel Community Calls Out Iran

Meanwhile, US intelligence officials see Iran as one of the biggest cyber threats to the US in the next year. Daniel Coats, US director of national intelligence, in a report yesterday said Iran is among the main hacking adversaries to target the US in 2019, along with Russia, China, and North Korea. "The use of cyber attacks as a foreign policy tool outside of military conflict has been mostly limited to sporadic lower-level attacks. Russia, Iran, and North Korea, however, are testing more aggressive cyber attacks that pose growing threats to the United States and US partners," according his statement in the Worldwide Threat Assessment of the US Intelligence Community, which was given to Congress yesterday.

Iran will "continue working to penetrate US and Allied networks for espionage and to position itself for potential future cyber attacks, although its intelligence services primarily focus on Middle Eastern adversaries — especially Saudi Arabia and Israel. Tehran probably views cyberattacks as a versatile tool to respond to perceived provocations, despite Iran's recent restraint from conducting cyber attacks on the United States or Western allies," the report said.

And like many nation-state groups, APT39/Chafer uses legitimate hacking tools such as Mimikatz and Microsoft apps like Windows Credential Editor, which makes the group difficult to detect. The key to catching them using legit tools is monitoring and looking of unusual behavioral trends and usage, DiMaggio notes. "Anyone can download and use Mimikatz," he says. "A lot comes down to behaviors, targets, the patterns and sequence of operations, how they get onto the network ... Attribution is getting harder, not easier" with these types of tools in use, he says.

If a tool is used at an odd time of day, or if a file gets dropped onto the network that hasn't been seen before,  that could indicate an attacker is behind the tool, he says.

Other Iranian APTs

FireEye also closely follows other Iranian nation-stage hacking groups - APT33, APT34, and APT35. APT33 typically targets the defense industrial base, and has waged data-wiping attacks on victims; APT34 (aka OilRig), which may be related to APT39, conducts traditional cyber espionage, but mainly against foreign affairs ministries, Read notes. APT35 also targets the defense industrial base sector, but isn't known for the typical spear phishing attack in its initial step, for example.

What sets APT39 apart from its Iranian counterparts is its more "personal" touch of getting information on individuals. The group mostly uses the Seaweed and CacheMoney Trojan backdoors, as well as a variant of the Powbat backdoor, FireEye found. The attackers also employ relatively strong operational security to avoid detection; they were spotted running an altered version of Mimikatz that bypasses anti-malware tools, as well as conducting credential harvesting outside the victim's network.

"They are a bit stealthier and more careful than other Iranian groups," FireEye's Read says.

However, so far, he says, Iran hasn't retaliated cyber-wise against the US for withdrawing from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) nuclear agreement, however.

Related Content:

 

 

Kelly Jackson Higgins is the Executive Editor of Dark Reading. She is an award-winning veteran technology and business journalist with more than two decades of experience in reporting and editing for various publications, including Network Computing, Secure Enterprise ... View Full Bio
 

Recommended Reading:

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
li'l ciso
50%
50%
li'l ciso,
User Rank: Strategist
1/30/2019 | 4:39:40 PM
slight edit issue
"increasingly is increasingly" para 1
COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 8/14/2020
Lock-Pickers Face an Uncertain Future Online
Seth Rosenblatt, Contributing Writer,  8/10/2020
Hacking It as a CISO: Advice for Security Leadership
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  8/10/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
7 New Cybersecurity Vulnerabilities That Could Put Your Enterprise at Risk
In this Dark Reading Tech Digest, we look at the ways security researchers and ethical hackers find critical vulnerabilities and offer insights into how you can fix them before attackers can exploit them.
Flash Poll
The Changing Face of Threat Intelligence
The Changing Face of Threat Intelligence
This special report takes a look at how enterprises are using threat intelligence, as well as emerging best practices for integrating threat intel into security operations and incident response. Download it today!
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-17475
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
Lack of authentication in the network relays used in MEGVII Koala 2.9.1-c3s allows attackers to grant physical access to anyone by sending packet data to UDP port 5000.
CVE-2020-0255
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2020-10751. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2020-10751. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2020-10751 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidenta...
CVE-2020-14353
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2017-18270. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2017-18270. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2017-18270 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidenta...
CVE-2020-17464
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was withdrawn by its CNA. Further investigation showed that it was not a security issue. Notes: none.
CVE-2020-17473
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
Lack of mutual authentication in ZKTeco FaceDepot 7B 1.0.213 and ZKBiosecurity Server 1.0.0_20190723 allows an attacker to obtain a long-lasting token by impersonating the server.