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

3/8/2016
02:45 PM
50%
50%

The New BEC Phishing Attack: Stealing Data Instead Of Cash

Duped by phishers posing as company executives, Seagate and Snapchat expose employee tax, payroll data.

Perhaps inspired by business email compromise (BEC) phishing campaigns' astonishing success at parting companies from their money, phishermen are using the same tactics to part companies from their data.

In BEC phishing campaigns, attackers posing as business executives send messages to individuals in business departments who handle large payments and convince them to wire transfer huge sums of money to an attacker-controlled account. Now, as tax season (and tax fraud season) is underway, they're asking for employee data, instead of money.

Last week, Snapchat announced that a scammer impersonating their CEO tricked their payroll department into emailing an attacker the payroll information of current and former Snapchat employees. Saturday, it was reported that Alaskan telecom GCI was tricked into handing over employee W-2 forms by a phisher posing as the company's CFO. Sunday, it was reported that a Seagate employee was also fooled into sending thousands of employee W-2's by an email sent to HR and finance personnel by a phisher posing as the company CEO. 

All companies reported the incidents to federal authorities and offered affected individuals credit monitoring. 

 

Dark Reading's Quick Hits delivers a brief synopsis and summary of the significance of breaking news events. For more information from the original source of the news item, please follow the link provided in this article. View Full Bio
 

Recommended Reading:

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
RyanSepe
50%
50%
RyanSepe,
User Rank: Ninja
3/11/2016 | 2:57:25 PM
Source and Behavior
Its always important in instances like this to identify the source of the message. Make sure the source information and that individual are 1:1 in the address book. Also, behavioral analysis is key. If this request is outside the norm then it would be prudent to elevate up the chain before actually adhering to the request.
COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 10/23/2020
Modern Day Insider Threat: Network Bugs That Are Stealing Your Data
David Pearson, Principal Threat Researcher,  10/21/2020
Are You One COVID-19 Test Away From a Cybersecurity Disaster?
Alan Brill, Senior Managing Director, Cyber Risk Practice, Kroll,  10/21/2020
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-2020-27743
PUBLISHED: 2020-10-26
libtac in pam_tacplus through 1.5.1 lacks a check for a failure of RAND_bytes()/RAND_pseudo_bytes(). This could lead to use of a non-random/predictable session_id.
CVE-2020-1915
PUBLISHED: 2020-10-26
An out-of-bounds read in the JavaScript Interpreter in Facebook Hermes prior to commit 8cb935cd3b2321c46aa6b7ed8454d95c75a7fca0 allows attackers to cause a denial of service attack or possible further memory corruption via crafted JavaScript. Note that this is only exploitable if the application usi...
CVE-2020-26878
PUBLISHED: 2020-10-26
Ruckus through 1.5.1.0.21 is affected by remote command injection. An authenticated user can submit a query to the API (/service/v1/createUser endpoint), injecting arbitrary commands that will be executed as root user via web.py.
CVE-2020-26879
PUBLISHED: 2020-10-26
Ruckus vRioT through 1.5.1.0.21 has an API backdoor that is hardcoded into validate_token.py. An unauthenticated attacker can interact with the service API by using a backdoor value as the Authorization header.
CVE-2020-15272
PUBLISHED: 2020-10-26
In the git-tag-annotation-action (open source GitHub Action) before version 1.0.1, an attacker can execute arbitrary (*) shell commands if they can control the value of [the `tag` input] or manage to alter the value of [the `GITHUB_REF` environment variable]. The problem has been patched in version ...