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.

Cloud Security

// // //
10/17/2019
10:40 AM
Larry Loeb
Larry Loeb
Larry Loeb

Unit 42 Finds the First Cryptojacking Docker Container

Palo Alto Network's Unit 42 has found the first cryptocurrency miner malware that spreads like a worm through the use of Docker containers.

Palo Alto Network's Unit 42 has found the first cryptocurrency miner malware that spreads like a worm through the use of Docker (community edition) containers. They say that it has spread to more than 2,000 unsecured Docker hosts. They call it "Graboid" which refers to the 1990s movie Tremorswhich has giant sandworms that act in bursts.

One of the major advantages to this method of malware operation is that traditional endpoint protection software does not inspect data and activities inside containers. That gives the worm a stealth aspect it would not otherwise have going for it.

When a Docker image is first installed to run on what will become the compromised host, the daemons are unsecured. The actual malware (pocosow/centos:7.6.1810) is downloaded from an attacker's command and control (C2) server and aims to mine for Monero. The miner queries every 100 seconds for new vulnerable hosts from the C2 and picks its next three targets at random from a list the C2 provides that contains a list of 2000+ IP addresses. These IPs are hosts with unsecured docker API endpoints. 57.4% of the IPs originated from China, followed by 13% from the US.

The pocosow/centos:7.6.1810 container image contains a docker client tool that is used to communicate with other Docker hosts. The actions it will perform on the three new targets are not linear and straightforward. It installs the worm on the first target, stops a miner on the second target if it exists, and starts the miner on the third target. The strategy for this unusual behavior is not clear.\r\nUnit 42 found that each miner is active 63% of the time and that each mining period lasts for 250 seconds. They also found that pocosow/centos container image has been downloaded more than 10,000 times and another xmrig binary (gakeaws/nginx) has been downloaded more than 6,500 times. There is also another mining image with the name of gakeaws/mysql. Graboid performs both worm-spreading and cryptojacking from inside the Docker containers.

This particular malware doesn't involve sophisticated tactics, techniques or procedures. But another version of it could. Since the intruder looks to the C2 server for the actual malware, it would be fairly simple for an attacker to upgrade the specific malicious program.

Unit 42 recommends some actions to prevent against compromise. They say to "Never expose a docker daemon to the internet without a proper authentication mechanism. Note that by default the Docker Engine (CE) is NOT exposed to the internet."

Also, "Use Unix socket to communicate with Docker daemon locally or use SSH to connect to a remote docker daemon."

Of course, not pulling Docker images from unknown registries or unknown user namespaces will help.

Brandon Levene, Chronicle's head of applied intelligence, has this to say about this discovery. "It makes sense for attackers to target Docker because it's one of the most popular platform-as-a-service frameworks to date, and misconfigurations around PaaS are prime for abuse. By poisoning container images, the attackers effectively take advantage of the inherent trust that users place in Docker images -- surely no one would go through the trouble of building a container for malicious use, right? Granting a cryptominer worming capabilities also aligns with the general strategy of cryptojacking, which compromises as many hosts as possible and runs miners for a long time. When there are more compromised hosts, there are more contributions to mining pools, and therefore greater financial rewards."

— Larry Loeb has written for many of the last century's major "dead tree" computer magazines, having been, among other things, a consulting editor for BYTE magazine and senior editor for the launch of WebWeek.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Edge-DRsplash-10-edge-articles
I Smell a RAT! New Cybersecurity Threats for the Crypto Industry
David Trepp, Partner, IT Assurance with accounting and advisory firm BPM LLP,  7/9/2021
News
Attacks on Kaseya Servers Led to Ransomware in Less Than 2 Hours
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  7/7/2021
Commentary
It's in the Game (but It Shouldn't Be)
Tal Memran, Cybersecurity Expert, CYE,  7/9/2021
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
How Machine Learning, AI & Deep Learning Improve Cybersecurity
Machine intelligence is influencing all aspects of cybersecurity. Organizations are implementing AI-based security to analyze event data using ML models that identify attack patterns and increase automation. Before security teams can take advantage of AI and ML tools, they need to know what is possible. This report covers: -How to assess the vendor's AI/ML claims -Defining success criteria for AI/ML implementations -Challenges when implementing AI
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2022-42247
PUBLISHED: 2022-10-03
pfSense v2.5.2 was discovered to contain a cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the browser.php component. This vulnerability allows attackers to execute arbitrary web scripts or HTML via a crafted payload injected into a file name.
CVE-2022-41443
PUBLISHED: 2022-10-03
phpipam v1.5.0 was discovered to contain a header injection vulnerability via the component /admin/subnets/ripe-query.php.
CVE-2022-33882
PUBLISHED: 2022-10-03
Under certain conditions, an attacker could create an unintended sphere of control through a vulnerability present in file delete operation in Autodesk desktop app (ADA). An attacker could leverage this vulnerability to escalate privileges and execute arbitrary code.
CVE-2022-42306
PUBLISHED: 2022-10-03
An issue was discovered in Veritas NetBackup through 8.2 and related Veritas products. An attacker with local access can send a crafted packet to pbx_exchange during registration and cause a NULL pointer exception, effectively crashing the pbx_exchange process.
CVE-2022-42307
PUBLISHED: 2022-10-03
An issue was discovered in Veritas NetBackup through 10.0.0.1 and related Veritas products. The NetBackup Primary server is vulnerable to an XML External Entity (XXE) Injection attack through the DiscoveryService service.