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.

Perimeter

10/3/2018
09:55 PM
Connect Directly
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Inside the North Korean Hacking Operation Behind SWIFT Bank Attacks

FireEye details how this money-stealing operation it now calls APT 38 has emerged in the past four years and how it operates.

FIREEYE CYBER DEFENSE SUMMIT – Washington, DC – Researchers at FireEye here today shared details about how a North Korean hacking team they have christened APT 38 has attempted to pilfer $1.1 billion from financial institutions worldwide.

FireEye previously had attributed the game-changer cyberattacks on the SWIFT international interbank messaging system in various banks to a North Korean hacking group it calls TEMP.Hermit, which mostly had conducted cyber espionage attacks against energy and the defense sectors in South Korea and the US.

APT 38's main objectives, however, are financially motivated on behalf of the North Korean government: Since 2015, the hacking team has stolen hundreds of millions of dollars from at least five banks (including Bangladesh Bank and Banco de Chile) and has hacked into 16 organizations in 11 countries in Latin America and Europe, plus the US, for example, according to FireEye.

"This is the first time we've seen a cybercrime group essentially funding a regime," said Nalani Fraser, manager of threat intelligence at FireEye, of the North Korean group.

North Korean nation-state hacking teams typically get lumped together under the name Lazarus Group, the group behind the epic breach, doxing, and data-wiping attacks on Sony Pictures Entertainment in 2014 and WannaCry in 2017. It was after the Sony breach that North Korea's hacking machine began to split into different groups, according to FireEye's analysis, and APT 38 began to emerge as an entity. APT 38's rise coincided with financial pressures due to international economic sanctions against North Korea.

But CrowdStrike says it has been tracking this same group since 2016 – under the moniker Stardust Chollima. Adam Meyers, vice president of intelligence at CrowdStrike, says his firm attributed the hacks against the SWIFT system to the North Korean group.

"Stardust Chollima has been associated with numerous financially motivated attacks meant to generate revenue for the North Korean regime. Attacks have included targeting of the international financial system, regional banks in developing economies, and cryptocurrency exchanges and businesses," Meyers says. "These attacks are expected to continue due to the economic impact on the DPRK due to international sanctions."

No Smash-and-Grab
There's still plenty of overlap among all three of the main North Korean hacking groups, but FireEye researchers say APT 38 stands apart with its specialized custom tools and focus on financial organization operations. APT 38 employs at least 39 toolsets and is known for its deep study of its targets, often remaining inside a target's network for long periods of time before making a move on its data. It's no smash-and-grab operation, said Jacqueline O'Leary, senior threat intelligence analyst at FireEye.

On average, APT 38 spends 155 days in a compromised network. In one case, it sat quietly on a victim's network for two years before making its move for money. "They can balance multiple motivations, they're financially motivated, and they operate like a traditional espionage operation," O'Leary said. "Sometimes they wait two years before attempting transactions" from a bank, for example.

APT 38 spends that time gathering credentials, mapping the network, and scanning systems for information and vulnerabilities.

"Once we saw them leverage a legitimate file program that was already inherent on a compromised host, and they actually used it to transfer and delete the malware," O'Leary said. "And another time we saw them incorporate a hard-coded proxy IP into their malware that was actually specific to the victim's environment."

When APT 38 began to pivot to the SWIFT servers in bank targets, for example, it used a mix of homegrown and legitimate tools: In one case, they used sysmon to gather users and processes that have access to the SWIFT servers, Fraser said. "We've also seen them use both passive and active backdoors ... to tunnel and get access to internal systems," she said.

To transfer stolen funds, APT 38 uses its so-called DYEPACK malware for the fraudulent transactions, which mostly were performed in less conspicuous increments and sent to nations with lax money-laundering laws.

"Then they proceed to burn down the house," Fraser said, including deleting log histories and launching distractions such as ransomware attacks. In one case, it was a phony ransomware attack that wasn't even set up to collect ransom, she said. "That distracted the investigators and then they proceeded to wipe disks," Fraser said.

At one bank, some 10,000 workstations and servers were taken offline by APT 38's destructive cleanup operation to cover its tracks. "Employees walked in to blue screens ... it was just chaos," Fraser said.

APT 38 also has shown some savvy: "In certain cases, we've observed that they initiate an AV scan on a compromised host to see if their own malware would be detected," O'Leary said.

And in keeping with its stealthy approach, APT 38's malware often is difficult to detect. Take its SWIFT-attack malware, which runs in memory so it's not easily detected. "SWIFT malware is never on disk," said Chris DiGiamo, technical director of FireEye's Mandiant team.

FireEye today also published a blog and report on APT 38. 

 

Black Hat Europe returns to London Dec 3-6 2018  with hands-on technical Trainings, cutting-edge Briefings, Arsenal open-source tool demonstrations, top-tier security solutions and service providers in the Business Hall. Click for information on the conference and to register.

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
 

Recommended Reading:

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
News
Former CISA Director Chris Krebs Discusses Risk Management & Threat Intel
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  2/23/2021
Edge-DRsplash-10-edge-articles
Security + Fraud Protection: Your One-Two Punch Against Cyberattacks
Joshua Goldfarb, Director of Product Management at F5,  2/23/2021
News
Cybercrime Groups More Prolific, Focus on Healthcare in 2020
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  2/22/2021
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win an Amazon Gift Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: This comment is waiting for review by our moderators.
Current Issue
2021 Top Enterprise IT Trends
We've identified the key trends that are poised to impact the IT landscape in 2021. Find out why they're important and how they will affect you today!
Flash Poll
Building the SOC of the Future
Building the SOC of the Future
Digital transformation, cloud-focused attacks, and a worldwide pandemic. The past year has changed the way business works and the way security teams operate. There is no going back.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2021-27132
PUBLISHED: 2021-02-27
SerComm AG Combo VD625 AGSOT_2.1.0 devices allow CRLF injection (for HTTP header injection) in the download function via the Content-Disposition header.
CVE-2021-25284
PUBLISHED: 2021-02-27
An issue was discovered in through SaltStack Salt before 3002.5. salt.modules.cmdmod can log credentials to the info or error log level.
CVE-2021-3144
PUBLISHED: 2021-02-27
In SaltStack Salt before 3002.5, eauth tokens can be used once after expiration. (They might be used to run command against the salt master or minions.)
CVE-2021-3148
PUBLISHED: 2021-02-27
An issue was discovered in SaltStack Salt before 3002.5. Sending crafted web requests to the Salt API can result in salt.utils.thin.gen_thin() command injection because of different handling of single versus double quotes. This is related to salt/utils/thin.py.
CVE-2021-3151
PUBLISHED: 2021-02-27
i-doit before 1.16.0 is affected by Stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) issues that could allow remote authenticated attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via C__MONITORING__CONFIG__TITLE, SM2__C__MONITORING__CONFIG__TITLE, C__MONITORING__CONFIG__PATH, SM2__C__MONITORING__CONFIG__PATH, C__M...