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.

Infrastructure Security //

DNS

1/11/2019
09:35 AM
Larry Loeb
Larry Loeb
Larry Loeb
50%
50%

Iran Suspected of 'Stealthy & Sophisticated' DNS Hijacking Campaign

New research from FireEye suggests that a group working within Iran is behind a large-scale DNS hijacking scheme that involves web traffic all across the globe.

Iran seems to have been conducting the Mother of All DNS Hijackings over the last year, according to new research from FireEye.

In its report, researchers describe a year-long DNS hijacking campaign that was equally stealthy and sophisticated. The hijacking has affected dozens of domains belonging to government, telecommunications and Internet infrastructure entities across the Middle East and North Africa, as well as Europe and North America.

While there is no direct attribution to Iran available, FireEye has identified access from Iranian IPs to machines used to intercept, record and forward network traffic. They note that geolocation of an IP address is a "weak" indicator, but that these IP addresses have been previously observed during the response to an intrusion attributed to Iranian cyberespionage actors.

The report notes that researchers have "moderate" confidence that the hijacking has been conducted by persons based in Iran and that -- more importantly for attribution purposes -- the activity aligns with Iranian government interests.

The first method exploited by the attackers is altering DNS A records. This misdirects mail traffic to the listening post set up by the attacker on a load balancer. Credentials are extracted and stored on the rogue load balancer.

A second method used is to modify the DNS NS records after hacking into the victim's domain registrar account. The name server record will give the correct IP for a web request that is made, but it will forward any mail requests to the attackers' listening post. The username, password and domain credentials are harvested and stored, then the mail request is sent to the correct IP.

Let's Encrypt certificates are used to avoid setting off alarms when the information is redirected.

A DNS redirector and previously altered A and NS records form a third method that is also used by the attackers. Requests from outside the affected domain go to the correct mail server, but requests from inside the domain go to the listening post.

One of the FireEye report writers sounded the alarm on Twitter, noting that the attacks and scope were "huge."

The researchers recommend that two-factor authentication for DNS and TLD management accounts should be enabled. They also note that that IT and security admins should be alert for any changes made to DNS A or NS records.

Google is also taking some steps that may aid in combatting DNS hijacking, but it is only currently implemented for Android 9 Pie systems.

The search giant's DNS resolver is, according to the company, "the world's largest public Domain Name Service (DNS) recursive resolver." Googlers are adding the DNS-over-TLS protocol, which specifies a standard way to provide security and privacy for DNS traffic between users and their resolvers. It uses TLS, which is the same technology that is in use to protect HTTPS web connections.

Google is also implementing the RFC 7766 recommendations, which can minimize the overhead of using TLS. These include support for TLS 1.3 -- for faster connections and improved security -- TCP fast open, and the pipelining of multiple queries and out-of-order responses over a single connection. (See OpenSSL 1.1.1 Released With TLS 1.3 Support.)

DNS hijacking has proven to be a stubborn security problem. Increased awareness by security teams of the depth of the problem, along with improved support by Google and others, will go a long way in resolving it.

Related posts:

— 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
COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 9/25/2020
Hacking Yourself: Marie Moe and Pacemaker Security
Gary McGraw Ph.D., Co-founder Berryville Institute of Machine Learning,  9/21/2020
Startup Aims to Map and Track All the IT and Security Things
Kelly Jackson Higgins, Executive Editor at Dark Reading,  9/22/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
Special Report: Computing's New Normal
This special report examines how IT security organizations have adapted to the "new normal" of computing and what the long-term effects will be. Read it and get a unique set of perspectives on issues ranging from new threats & vulnerabilities as a result of remote working to how enterprise security strategy will be affected long term.
Flash Poll
How IT Security Organizations are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
How IT Security Organizations are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
The COVID-19 pandemic turned the world -- and enterprise computing -- on end. Here's a look at how cybersecurity teams are retrenching their defense strategies, rebuilding their teams, and selecting new technologies to stop the oncoming rise of online attacks.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-15208
PUBLISHED: 2020-09-25
In tensorflow-lite before versions 1.15.4, 2.0.3, 2.1.2, 2.2.1 and 2.3.1, when determining the common dimension size of two tensors, TFLite uses a `DCHECK` which is no-op outside of debug compilation modes. Since the function always returns the dimension of the first tensor, malicious attackers can ...
CVE-2020-15209
PUBLISHED: 2020-09-25
In tensorflow-lite before versions 1.15.4, 2.0.3, 2.1.2, 2.2.1 and 2.3.1, a crafted TFLite model can force a node to have as input a tensor backed by a `nullptr` buffer. This can be achieved by changing a buffer index in the flatbuffer serialization to convert a read-only tensor to a read-write one....
CVE-2020-15210
PUBLISHED: 2020-09-25
In tensorflow-lite before versions 1.15.4, 2.0.3, 2.1.2, 2.2.1 and 2.3.1, if a TFLite saved model uses the same tensor as both input and output of an operator, then, depending on the operator, we can observe a segmentation fault or just memory corruption. We have patched the issue in d58c96946b and ...
CVE-2020-15211
PUBLISHED: 2020-09-25
In TensorFlow Lite before versions 1.15.4, 2.0.3, 2.1.2, 2.2.1 and 2.3.1, saved models in the flatbuffer format use a double indexing scheme: a model has a set of subgraphs, each subgraph has a set of operators and each operator has a set of input/output tensors. The flatbuffer format uses indices f...
CVE-2020-15212
PUBLISHED: 2020-09-25
In TensorFlow Lite before versions 2.2.1 and 2.3.1, models using segment sum can trigger writes outside of bounds of heap allocated buffers by inserting negative elements in the segment ids tensor. Users having access to `segment_ids_data` can alter `output_index` and then write to outside of `outpu...