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.

Comments
Heres How To Protect Against A Ransomware Attack
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
j03king
100%
0%
j03king,
User Rank: Apprentice
5/16/2016 | 9:44:20 PM
New Strain are Smarter than just targeted common file extensions! Your backup needs to be secured!
Apart from all the other Ransomware Protection best practice 101 guides.....

 

First of all just because you are encrypting your backups doesn't mean a ransomware cannot re-encrypt it. We've had a few cases where all clients had their encrypted backups targeted and damaged by ransomware! Your best defence to safe guard your backups:

1. Permissions - Remove all default file & folder permissions on the repository folder. Specifically add a single backup user permission. eg. create a user "repobackup" with read & write. Deny group administrators to this folder and other groups & users.

Configure your backup software to specifically use the repobackup user to do it's business.

Any access to this folder except for the user repobackup will be denied. So all attempts of the ransomware to find it on the network (including accessing hidden shared drives, c$, d$,etc etc) will be denied access to it once it hits your repofolder.

(even ransomware as they wont have permission to it.)

2. Sftp/scp -  some backup software have modules that will allow for remote replication via SFTP/SCP. You should make use of them.

 

Secondly, you shouldn't rely on simply tricking "ransomware" with renaming your files. We've had two cases of modified ransomware (well they should call it "ransom DAMAGEWARE") that had absolutely no intention of giving victims their data and allowed for * file extension.

 

 

OPTION if it is available to you.

 

Explore the software from "Cylance" for your unconventional Security Suite. So far clients that chose to implement it (following previous attacks), have been miraculously somewhat protected. Even with the new strains such as when Locky started to appear, it has seemed to have innoculated it.
theb0x
50%
50%
theb0x,
User Rank: Ninja
2/9/2016 | 12:53:45 PM
Ransomware
Because ransomware is capable of attacking both local and remote backups, the best line of defense is a proper retention policy of encrypted backups. I suggest a minimum of 2 weeks.

Since the backups are already encrypted, they are simply not vulnerable. No matter what method of attack is used. The ransomware will not have access to these files to apply it's own encryption algorithm.

Also, as far as I know the method of attack utilized is soley by file extension. Ransomware is not yet capable of anylizing mime type file headers. That being said, renaming the extension of a known file type such as a word document (ie .docx) to something completely obscure (ie .zyx612), followed by changing the new file type association to open with MS Word will result in the file indexing of the ransomware to bypass encryption of the unrecognized extension.


97% of Americans Can't Ace a Basic Security Test
Steve Zurier, Contributing Writer,  5/20/2019
TeamViewer Admits Breach from 2016
Dark Reading Staff 5/20/2019
How a Manufacturing Firm Recovered from a Devastating Ransomware Attack
Kelly Jackson Higgins, Executive Editor at Dark Reading,  5/20/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Current Issue
Building and Managing an IT Security Operations Program
As cyber threats grow, many organizations are building security operations centers (SOCs) to improve their defenses. In this Tech Digest you will learn tips on how to get the most out of a SOC in your organization - and what to do if you can't afford to build one.
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-5798
PUBLISHED: 2019-05-23
Lack of correct bounds checking in Skia in Google Chrome prior to 73.0.3683.75 allowed a remote attacker to perform an out of bounds memory read via a crafted HTML page.
CVE-2019-5799
PUBLISHED: 2019-05-23
Incorrect inheritance of a new document's policy in Content Security Policy in Google Chrome prior to 73.0.3683.75 allowed a remote attacker to bypass content security policy via a crafted HTML page.
CVE-2019-5800
PUBLISHED: 2019-05-23
Insufficient policy enforcement in Blink in Google Chrome prior to 73.0.3683.75 allowed a remote attacker to bypass content security policy via a crafted HTML page.
CVE-2019-5801
PUBLISHED: 2019-05-23
Incorrect eliding of URLs in Omnibox in Google Chrome on iOS prior to 73.0.3683.75 allowed a remote attacker to perform domain spoofing via a crafted HTML page.
CVE-2019-5802
PUBLISHED: 2019-05-23
Incorrect handling of download origins in Navigation in Google Chrome prior to 73.0.3683.75 allowed a remote attacker to perform domain spoofing via a crafted HTML page.