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.

IoT
1/5/2016
07:30 AM
Connect Directly
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
100%
0%

Hacker 2016 To-Do List: Botnet All The Things!

Most predicted security crisis of the year is an impending wave of zombified Internet of Things (IoT) devices taken over to fill out cybercriminal botnets.

To ring in the new year, Dark Reading already ran through the list of the most exciting, funny, and just plain zany security predictions for 2016. But what about the prediction most likely to come to pass? Beyond a lot of the "more of the same"-type of predictions, if we had our pick we'd probably vote for one of the most mentioned prognostications to hit our inboxes in the last few months. Namely that 2016 is going to be the year that attackers make a concerted effort to turn the Internet of Things (IoT) into the Botnet of Things.

Until now, there haven't been any reported widespread infections of consumer devices used within large-scale criminal botnets. Two years ago, Proofpoint claimed it found a botnet sending spam that included a smart refrigerator, but that was later called into question by a number of researchers, including one from Symantec in a detailed explainer piece a few days after the initial claims were made. Meanwhile, last fall saw news from Incapsula researchers that the abuse of CCTVs in botnets is on the rise.

"We first warned about them in March 2014, when we became aware of a steep 240 percent increase in botnet activity on our network, much of it traced back to compromised CCTV cameras," the researchers wrote, filling in details with an anecdote of an attack they found that they managed to track back to CCTV cameras at a retail store only about five minutes from their office.

This research shows that if there is an opening--namely unprotected, powerful-enough, well-connected, and largely ignored devices--attackers will take it. While these CCTVs might not be the consumer gadgets most people think of when they imagine the IoT, they fit within a similar profile and this level of infection offers a portent for the future.

"By naively connecting everything to the Internet, we have made our possessions and personal information extremely vulnerable," says Deepak Patel, vice president of engineering for Imperva. "IoT essentially means ‘hey, there's a small computer in there,' and for malicious actors, that also means ‘prey!’"

As he explains, common IoT security gaffes such as hard-coded default credentials and poor patch management are essentially spreading blood in the water for attackers looking for easy marks from which to build their botnets.

According to Sean Tierney, vice president of threat intelligence for IID, his firm predicts that in the next two years botnet operators are going to start getting creative in their use of wearables and connected home products to bulk up their botnet ranks. They predict that these IoT botnets will be used for everyday DDoS attacks, pay-per-click fraud, and other wide-ranging attacks.

"As these devices are used to attack other networks or for retaliatory attacks, it will eventually lead to the 'Battle of the Botnet' for domination of IoT," Tierney says.

 

Ericka Chickowski specializes in coverage of information technology and business innovation. She has focused on information security for the better part of a decade and regularly writes about the security industry as a contributor to Dark Reading.  View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Why Cyber-Risk Is a C-Suite Issue
Marc Wilczek, Digital Strategist & CIO Advisor,  11/12/2019
DevSecOps: The Answer to the Cloud Security Skills Gap
Lamont Orange, Chief Information Security Officer at Netskope,  11/15/2019
Unreasonable Security Best Practices vs. Good Risk Management
Jack Freund, Director, Risk Science at RiskLens,  11/13/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
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-2019-19040
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-17
KairosDB through 1.2.2 has XSS in view.html because of showErrorMessage in js/graph.js, as demonstrated by view.html?q= with a '"sampling":{"value":"<script>' substring.
CVE-2019-19041
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-17
An issue was discovered in Xorux Lpar2RRD 6.11 and Stor2RRD 2.61, as distributed in Xorux 2.41. They do not correctly verify the integrity of an upgrade package before processing it. As a result, official upgrade packages can be modified to inject an arbitrary Bash script that will be executed by th...
CVE-2019-19012
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-17
An integer overflow in the search_in_range function in regexec.c in Oniguruma 6.x before 6.9.4_rc2 leads to an out-of-bounds read, in which the offset of this read is under the control of an attacker. (This only affects the 32-bit compiled version). Remote attackers can cause a denial-of-service or ...
CVE-2019-19022
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-17
iTerm2 through 3.3.6 has potentially insufficient documentation about the presence of search history in com.googlecode.iterm2.plist, which might allow remote attackers to obtain sensitive information, as demonstrated by searching for the NoSyncSearchHistory string in .plist files within public Git r...
CVE-2019-19035
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-17
jhead 3.03 is affected by: heap-based buffer over-read. The impact is: Denial of service. The component is: ReadJpegSections and process_SOFn in jpgfile.c. The attack vector is: Open a specially crafted JPEG file.