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.

Operations

6/8/2018
01:45 PM
Connect Directly
Google+
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

FireEye Finds New Clues in TRITON/TRISIS Attack

Attackers behind the epic industrial-plant hack reverse-engineered the safety-monitoring system's proprietary protocol, researchers found.

Researchers from FireEye have found proof that the hackers who breached and inadvertently shut down a safety monitoring system in a Middle East industrial plant reverse-engineered the protocol software.

"Instead of just being a theory that they reverse-engineered something or used legitimate resources to augment their development on it, now we have evidence that supports that," says Steve Miller, a researcher with FireEye who made the discovery after studying the malware's Python scripts.

The so-called TRITON/TRISIS attack targeted Schneider Electric's emergency shutdown system – Triconex Tricon – with custom malware. Two of the plant's safety-instrumented systems (SIS) controllers entered a failed safe mode that shut down the industrial process and ultimately led to last year's discovery of the malware.

Schneider Electric later discovered a zero-day privilege-escalation vulnerability in its Triconex Tricon safety-controller firmware that it says helped the attackers wrest control of the emergency shutdown system. They also found a remote access Trojan (RAT) in the TRITON/TRISIS malware that they say represents the first-ever RAT to infect SIS equipment.

SISes monitor critical systems to ensure they are operating within acceptable safety thresholds; when they are not, the SIS automatically shuts them down. Schneider's proprietary TriStation UDP network communications protocol is used by the TriStation application to configure the Triconex SIS controllers.

While recently studying the TRITON/TRISIS malware framework's implementation of the legitimate protocol, FireEye researchers noticed that the malware's TriStation version drew some of its capabilities from the legitimate Triconex software. There also were some "sloppy" elements of the attackers' version of TriStation, including some typos, Miller notes.

"They didn't know enough about the specific function of the protocol code," he says.

Just how the attackers got their hands on the TriStation software remains unclear, Miller says. "We found these items on VirusTotal," he says of the code his team studied. FireEye initially had theorized that the attackers had purchased a Triconex controller and software for their own use and reverse-engineering. If they did, though, the software didn't give them the intel to know which firmware version the targeted plant was running.

Dragos researcher Reid Wightman, whose team also has been studying the attack, applauds FireEye’s findings and says they raise some "interesting questions." The attackers, he says, likely had to have the hardware to test and create the TRISIS/TRITON malware and appear to have reverse-engineered the TriStation 1131 software in order to glean intel on the TriStation protocol. But his team doesn't believe the attackers obtained TriStation's Python library from a vendor.

"Due to some oddities in the implementation of the protocol in the TRISIS malware, we have some doubts that the software came from an ICS vendor," Wightman says. "We would expect a commercially developed library for the protocol to be more fully implemented, while the TRISIS implementation is really doing the bare minimum – only pulling out the fields that are absolutely required to do a logic update and pull off the exploit."

The attackers likely wrote the Python code themselves, after reverse-engineering the TriStation 1131 software, which is available for purchase online, Wightman says.

Sharing Intel
Andrew Kling, Schneider Electric's director of cybersecurity and software practices, says TRITON/TRISIS was a sophisticated targeted attack that only a well-resourced attacker could pull off.

"This was a highly complex, detailed, and targeted attack that could only have been executed by someone with incredible resources at their disposal," Kling says. "It remains a call to action for industry and reinforces the need for industrywide collaboration, transparency, and culture change to ensure our most critical infrastructure and volatile operations are secure from attack."

That's why it's key for researchers to share their analyses of this attack, as well as others, according to Kling. He says his company continues to call vendors, users, third-party providers, integrators, standards bodies, industry groups, and government agencies "to develop a new approach to ensure legacy and new technologies are able to withstand increasingly sophisticated attacks."

Sharing intel on the TRITON/TRISIS attack is what FireEye wants, too. "[Our new research] is just one dataset and aperture into this," Miller says. FireEye wants to work with other researchers and compare findings, he adds.

Miller also says he was surprised to see how relatively simple it was to develop software mimicking TriStation. "I'm not an ICS expert," he says, but he and his team were able to discern how TriStation works using Triton relatively quickly. "We picked this up a month-and-a-half ago. If it was easy for us using public knowledge, one might wonder what a professional, state-sponsored attacker can do."  

Even so, the attackers behind TRITON/TRISIS somehow stumbled, causing their malware to inadvertently shut down the emergency shutdown systems and ultimately expose the malware. What appeared to be an attempt to wreak some sort of cyber-physical damage failed, according to experts who studied the attack. 

"They had problems. It's plausible that was because they were still testing [the malware]," Miller says.

Related Content:

  

Top industry experts will offer a range of information and insight on who the bad guys are – and why they might be targeting your enterprise. Click for more information

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
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Mobile Banking Malware Up 50% in First Half of 2019
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  1/17/2020
Active Directory Needs an Update: Here's Why
Raz Rafaeli, CEO and Co-Founder at Secret Double Octopus,  1/16/2020
New Attack Campaigns Suggest Emotet Threat Is Far From Over
Jai Vijayan, Contributing Writer,  1/16/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Current Issue
The Year in Security: 2019
This Tech Digest provides a wrap up and overview of the year's top cybersecurity news stories. It was a year of new twists on old threats, with fears of another WannaCry-type worm and of a possible botnet army of Wi-Fi routers. But 2019 also underscored the risk of firmware and trusted security tools harboring dangerous holes that cybercriminals and nation-state hackers could readily abuse. Read more.
Flash Poll
How Enterprises are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
How Enterprises are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
Organizations have invested in a sweeping array of security technologies to address challenges associated with the growing number of cybersecurity attacks. However, the complexity involved in managing these technologies is emerging as a major problem. Read this report to find out what your peers biggest security challenges are and the technologies they are using to address them.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-20399
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-23
A timing vulnerability in the Scalar::check_overflow function in Parity libsecp256k1-rs before 0.3.1 potentially allows an attacker to leak information via a side-channel attack.
CVE-2020-7915
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-22
An issue was discovered on Eaton 5P 850 devices. The Ubicacion SAI field allows XSS attacks by an administrator.
CVE-2019-20391
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-22
An invalid memory access flaw is present in libyang before v1.0-r3 in the function resolve_feature_value() when an if-feature statement is used inside a bit. Applications that use libyang to parse untrusted input yang files may crash.
CVE-2019-20392
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-22
An invalid memory access flaw is present in libyang before v1.0-r1 in the function resolve_feature_value() when an if-feature statement is used inside a list key node, and the feature used is not defined. Applications that use libyang to parse untrusted input yang files may crash.
CVE-2019-20393
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-22
A double-free is present in libyang before v1.0-r1 in the function yyparse() when an empty description is used. Applications that use libyang to parse untrusted input yang files may be vulnerable to this flaw, which would cause a crash or potentially code execution.