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

9/15/2016
01:20 PM
Connect Directly
Google+
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

PLCs Possessed: Researchers Create 'Undetectable' Rootkit

New attack to be revealed at Black Hat Europe conference silently overtakes industrial network processes.

Move over, Stuxnet: researchers have discovered a way to silently manipulate the programmable logic controller (PLC) systems that control water, power, and other industrial processes without getting caught.

Researcher Ali Abbasi, a Ph.D. candidate in the distributed and embedded system security group at University of Twente, Netherlands, and Majid Hashemi, a system programmer and independent security researcher at the time of their research, have created an attack on PLCs that unlike Stuxnet, they say, cannot be detected. Abbasi and Hashemi will demonstrate the new PLC rootkit in November at Black Hat Europe in London.

Stuxnet, which was the first known cyberattack on an industrial network to sabotage a physical process, damaged the centrifuges in Iran's Natanz uranium enrichment plant by manipulating the speed the devices spun. The attack, believed to be the handiwork of US and Israeli cyber intelligence units, ultimately was detected by researchers at a European anti-malware firm after Stuxnet somehow spread beyond its Natanz target to other Windows machines.

Abbasi says the PLC rootkit sits directly on the PLC, whereas Stuxnet targeted Windows-based SCADA servers in the plant. It's much less likely to be discovered because it sits at the lower-level of the system. The rootkit works on any brand of PLC, he says.

"It's a race to the bottom" now, Abbasi says. "Everybody has access to higher-level [SCADA operations]. Attackers in the future will go to lower level assaults" such as this to evade detection, he says.

There are few detection functions that can be used in a PLC running a real-time operating system, he says. And if they were running on a PLC, he adds, they still would not spot the rootkit attack.

PLC hacking research isn't new. Researchers at Black Hat USA in August, for example, demonstrated PLC-Blaster, a PLC worm that spreads among PLCs. 

Abbasi says his and Hashemi's rootkit is a new way to exploit a PLC. Previous hacks have targeted the PLC logic code, for example, which tells the PLC what to do in the physical operation. "Our attack instead targets the relation between PLC runtime and logic with the I/O peripherals of it. In our attack, the PLC logic and PLC runtime remain intact," he explains. That prevents any integrity-verification for the PLC from seeing the malicious activity in the PLC.

They place their malicious code in the device's dynamic memory. The PLC believes it's communicating with the I/O, but the rootkit is actually manipulating the I/O and PLC process, such as the opening or closing of a gate. PLCs communicate via input pins and output pins, low-level communications links. An input pin tells the PLC the temperature of an industrial boiler, or another state of the industrial system. The output pin handles the physical control of the process, such as the order from a PLC to the industrial equipment to open the gate.

Abbasi says the rootkit manipulates the I/O process. If, for example, a gate must be opened if a boiler temperature reaches 80 degrees Celsius to relieve pressure, the temperature sensor would be connected to the input pin and the rootkit attack could manipulate the temperature values and cause the boiler to overheat and explode, he says. The rootkit basically changes the state of the output pin to that of the input pin, he adds, noting that "in PLCs, the I/O operations are one of the most important tasks." 

The attack is so low-overhead that power-consumption usage monitors wouldn't notice it. "The overhead imposed of our attack outside of kernel is below one percent, which means even those approaches which monitor the power usage of PLC for attack detection will be useless," Abbasi says.

The researchers also plan to show a version of the PLC attack that uses shellcode in their Ghost In The PLC: Designing An Undetectable Programmable Logic Controller Rootkit session at Black Hat.

The underlying weakness exploited by the rootkit attack lies in the PLC hardware, according to the reseaarchers. Abbasi and Hashemi are studying ways to better protect PLCs from such attacks. They are exploring several avenues, from preventing system-level privilege to the PLC to rooting out design flaws in the real-time embedded systems to building a mitigation defense for their attack. 

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

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Oldest First  |  Newest First  |  Threaded View
janerose
100%
0%
janerose,
User Rank: Apprentice
9/20/2016 | 9:24:04 AM
Helpful post
Helpful post for the readers thanks for sharing great information.
SOC 2s & Third-Party Assessments: How to Prevent Them from Being Used in a Data Breach Lawsuit
Beth Burgin Waller, Chair, Cybersecurity & Data Privacy Practice , Woods Rogers PLC,  12/5/2019
Navigating Security in the Cloud
Diya Jolly, Chief Product Officer, Okta,  12/4/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: This comment is waiting for review by our moderators.
Current Issue
Navigating the Deluge of Security Data
In this Tech Digest, Dark Reading shares the experiences of some top security practitioners as they navigate volumes of security data. We examine some examples of how enterprises can cull this data to find the clues they need.
Flash Poll
Rethinking Enterprise Data Defense
Rethinking Enterprise Data Defense
Frustrated with recurring intrusions and breaches, cybersecurity professionals are questioning some of the industrys conventional wisdom. Heres a look at what theyre thinking about.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-19698
PUBLISHED: 2019-12-10
marc-q libwav through 2017-04-20 has a NULL pointer dereference in wav_content_read() at libwav.c.
CVE-2019-4428
PUBLISHED: 2019-12-09
IBM Watson Assistant for IBM Cloud Pak for Data 1.0.0 through 1.3.0 is vulnerable to cross-site scripting. This vulnerability allows users to embed arbitrary JavaScript code in the Web UI thus altering the intended functionality potentially leading to credentials disclosure within a trusted session....
CVE-2019-4611
PUBLISHED: 2019-12-09
IBM Planning Analytics 2.0 is vulnerable to cross-site scripting. This vulnerability allows users to embed arbitrary JavaScript code in the Web UI thus altering the intended functionality potentially leading to credentials disclosure within a trusted session. IBM X-Force ID: 168519.
CVE-2019-4612
PUBLISHED: 2019-12-09
IBM Planning Analytics 2.0 is vulnerable to malicious file upload in the My Account Portal. Attackers can make use of this weakness and upload malicious executable files into the system and it can be sent to victim for performing further attacks. IBM X-Force ID: 168523.
CVE-2019-4621
PUBLISHED: 2019-12-09
IBM DataPower Gateway 7.6.0.0-7 throug 6.0.14 and 2018.4.1.0 through 2018.4.1.5 have a default administrator account that is enabled if the IPMI LAN channel is enabled. A remote attacker could use this account to gain unauthorised access to the BMC. IBM X-Force ID: 168883.