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.

Endpoint

2/14/2011
06:54 PM
Connect Directly
Google+
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

New 'Boy In The Browser' Attacks On The Rise

Researchers at Imperva identify proxy Trojan attack targeting banks, retailers, and Google that's a less-sophisticated knock-off of 'man-in-the-browser'

SAN FRANCISCO, CA -- RSA Conference 2011 -- A new but familiar type of attack on the rise is a spin-off of the proxy Trojan, keylogger, and man-in-the-browser (MITB) attack. The "boy-in-the-browser" (BITB) attack -- so named as a less sophisticated form of MITB -- may be immature, but it's efficient, easy, and targeting users visiting their banks, retailers, and even Google.

"It reroutes a [victim's] traffic without them being aware ... It's so effective because it's quick to modify itself so antivirus can't detect it. It's great for a quick-hit attack," says Noa Bar-Yosef, senior security strategist with Imperva, which issued a security alert today on this attack technique that its researchers have spotted in the wild.

BITB is basically a "dumbed-down" MITB in which the attacker infects a user with its Trojan, either via a drive-by download or by luring the user to click on an infected link on a site. The Trojan reconfigures the victim's "hosts" file and reroutes the victim's traffic for a specific website -- say, a bank or an online retailer -- and to the attacker's own server posing as that site. Then the BITB attacker can intercept or modify the transaction. "It's difficult to detect," Bar-Yosef says, because the victim sees the same URL he or she was requesting.

Bar-Yosef says the BITB is a low-cost and relatively easy attack to wage. Nine Latin American banks have been targeted with this attack, and another attack went after Google for ad fraud. In the Google attack, the attackers basically reconfigured the search engine address of different Google regional URLs, such as www.google.co.uk, which was rerouted to the attacker's URL that appeared similar to the Google page. When the victim searches on the "Google" site, the request is sent to the attacker's server, thus letting the attacker collect ad clicks or steal the victim's persistent cookies, for instance.

That particular BITM attack was uncharacteristically simple to detect because the page wasn't a perfect match to the legitimate Google site, Bar-Yosef says, but in most cases, there are no obvious clues with these attacks.

Imperva's advisory on the attacks is here.

Have a comment on this story? Please click "Add Your Comment" below. If you'd like to contact Dark Reading's editors directly, send us a message.

Kelly Jackson Higgins is Executive Editor at DarkReading.com. 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
Aviation Faces Increasing Cybersecurity Scrutiny
Kelly Jackson Higgins, Executive Editor at Dark Reading,  8/22/2019
Microsoft Tops Phishers' Favorite Brands as Facebook Spikes
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  8/22/2019
Capital One Breach: What Security Teams Can Do Now
Dr. Richard Gold, Head of Security Engineering at Digital Shadows,  8/23/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
7 Threats & Disruptive Forces Changing the Face of Cybersecurity
This Dark Reading Tech Digest gives an in-depth look at the biggest emerging threats and disruptive forces that are changing the face of cybersecurity today.
Flash Poll
The State of IT Operations and Cybersecurity Operations
The State of IT Operations and Cybersecurity Operations
Your enterprise's cyber risk may depend upon the relationship between the IT team and the security team. Heres some insight on what's working and what isn't in the data center.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-15540
PUBLISHED: 2019-08-25
filters/filter-cso/filter-stream.c in the CSO filter in libMirage 3.2.2 in CDemu does not validate the part size, triggering a heap-based buffer overflow that can lead to root access by a local Linux user.
CVE-2019-15538
PUBLISHED: 2019-08-25
An issue was discovered in xfs_setattr_nonsize in fs/xfs/xfs_iops.c in the Linux kernel through 5.2.9. XFS partially wedges when a chgrp fails on account of being out of disk quota. xfs_setattr_nonsize is failing to unlock the ILOCK after the xfs_qm_vop_chown_reserve call fails. This is primarily a ...
CVE-2016-6154
PUBLISHED: 2019-08-23
The authentication applet in Watchguard Fireware 11.11 Operating System has reflected XSS (this can also cause an open redirect).
CVE-2019-5594
PUBLISHED: 2019-08-23
An Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ("Cross-site Scripting") in Fortinet FortiNAC 8.3.0 to 8.3.6 and 8.5.0 admin webUI may allow an unauthenticated attacker to perform a reflected XSS attack via the search field in the webUI.
CVE-2019-6695
PUBLISHED: 2019-08-23
Lack of root file system integrity checking in Fortinet FortiManager VM application images of all versions below 6.2.1 may allow an attacker to implant third-party programs by recreating the image through specific methods.