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.

Threat Intelligence

5/15/2019
05:45 PM
50%
50%

Attackers Are Messing with Encryption Traffic to Evade Detection

Unknown groups have started tampering with Web traffic encryption, causing the number of fingerprints for connections using Transport Layer Security to jump from 19,000 to 1.4 billion in less than a year.

Online attackers are trying to obscure their encrypted traffic in an attempt to evade detection, using a technique known as "cipher stunting," accoding to Internet infrastructure and security firm Akamai.

Cipher stuffing modifies the fingerprint of communications encrypted with secure sockets layer (SSL) and transport layer security (TLS). Akamai, which fingerprints encrypted traffic as one way to identify attacks on its customers, found that the number of variations of the initial handshake request — known as the Client Hello packet — has recently exploded, from the usual thousands of variants in August 2018 to more than a billion in February. When used legitimately, each unique variant represents a different combination of encryption software, browser, operating system, and configuration of the encryption package. The change is on a "scale never seen before by Akamai," the company said in an analysis.

While variations could be due to legitimate software behavior or some sort of software defect, the most likely explanation is that attackers are attempting to evade detection or appear as a large number of different systems, says Moshe Zioni, director of threat research at Akamai.

"We were able to deduce with high certainty that it is a Java-based tool that made most of these permutations," he says. "The existence of such a thing means this was an intentional attempt to hide on the part of the threat actor … in the greater scheme, this is a good evasion technique."

The surge in variations of the Client Hello packets is the latest iteration of the cat-and-mouse game between attackers and defenders. Because SSL and TLS are so popular — 82% of malicious traffic uses encrypted communications, according to Akamai — many companies use fingerprinting as one of the techniques to classify traffic. Because the content of the communications is encrypted, defenders can only make use of the initial handshake between the client and server, which is in plaintext.

"This is a great illustration of one of the limitations of fingerprinting," says Shuman Ghosemajumder, chief technology officer of Shape Security, a website security firm. "If you are trying to fingerprint a device in any of many different ways, the first thing that an attacker will do is randomize that characteristic."

The goal for attackers is to make a single machine, or network of machines, look like hundreds of thousands or millions of users' devices, he says.

Fingerprinting encrypted communications using characteristics of the initial handshake between client and server is at least a decade old. In 2009, Qualys researcher Ivan Ristic described ways of fingerprinting clients and browsers from their SSL characteristics. In a talk at DerbyCon 2015, Lee Brotherston, at the time a senior security adviser at Leviathan Security Group, described how defenders could use TLS fingerprinting to better detect threats.

"The thing I like about TLS fingerprinting is that people don't tend to update how their crypto is set up that regularly. Even the big browsers with their regular releases have the same crypto between versions, and when I looked at malware, it never really changed their crypto signatures," Brotherston said at the time.

Akamai routinely looks at the initial Client Hello packets sent by a client as part of the process of establishing a secure connection between a browser client and a server. The packets allow anyone with access to the network to fingerprint, and later identify, a particular client. The fields included in the Client Hello packet are the TLS version, the session ID, cipher-suite options, and extensions and compression methods.

"Observing the way clients behave during the establishment of a TLS connection is beneficial for fingerprinting purposes so we can differentiate between attackers and legitimate users," Akamai stated in its analysis. "When we conduct fingerprinting, we aim to select components of the negotiation sent by all clients." 

Attackers are trying to pollute the waters. In August 2018, Akamai collected 18,652 distinct fingerprints on its global network, representing a fraction of a percent of all possible fingerprints. Starting in early September 2018, however, attackers started to randomize the characteristics of the cipher packets. By February of this year, the variation had hit 1.4 billion, the company stated.

Much of the randomization occurred on traffic attempting to use login credentials stolen from other sites to takeover accounts of Akamai clients.

With the explosion of random fingerprints, defenders will have problems classifying specific malware, but will still be able to detect TLS encryption requests that are behaving badly, Akamai's Zioni says.

"There is a relatively small and finite set of SSL/TLS stack implementations available today," he said. "We see strong correlation between randomization and malicious activity."

Related Content

 

 

 

Join Dark Reading LIVE for two cybersecurity summits at Interop 2019. Learn from the industry's most knowledgeable IT security experts. Check out the Interop agenda here.

Veteran technology journalist of more than 20 years. Former research engineer. Written for more than two dozen publications, including CNET News.com, Dark Reading, MIT's Technology Review, Popular Science, and Wired News. Five awards for journalism, including Best Deadline ... View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Where Businesses Waste Endpoint Security Budgets
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  7/15/2019
How Attackers Infiltrate the Supply Chain & What to Do About It
Shay Nahari, Head of Red-Team Services at CyberArk,  7/16/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: This comment is waiting for review by our moderators.
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
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-2019-7843
PUBLISHED: 2019-07-18
Adobe Campaign Classic version 18.10.5-8984 and earlier versions have an Insufficient input validation vulnerability. Successful exploitation could lead to Information Disclosure in the context of the current user.
CVE-2019-7846
PUBLISHED: 2019-07-18
Adobe Campaign Classic version 18.10.5-8984 and earlier versions have an Improper error handling vulnerability. Successful exploitation could lead to Information Disclosure in the context of the current user.
CVE-2019-7847
PUBLISHED: 2019-07-18
Adobe Campaign Classic version 18.10.5-8984 and earlier versions have an Improper Restriction of XML External Entity Reference ('XXE') vulnerability. Successful exploitation could lead to Arbitrary read access to the file system in the context of the current user.
CVE-2019-7848
PUBLISHED: 2019-07-18
Adobe Campaign Classic version 18.10.5-8984 and earlier versions have an Inadequate access control vulnerability. Successful exploitation could lead to Information Disclosure in the context of the current user.
CVE-2019-7850
PUBLISHED: 2019-07-18
Adobe Campaign Classic version 18.10.5-8984 and earlier versions have a Command injection vulnerability. Successful exploitation could lead to Arbitrary Code Execution in the context of the current user.