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.

Vulnerabilities / Threats

3/4/2008
07:33 AM
Connect Directly
Google+
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

New Method IDs Phishing, Malicious Domains

Researchers at a secretive security summit hosted by Yahoo revealed new ways they are finding phishers and other bad sites

At a closed-door security summit hosted on Yahoo’s Sunnyvale campus last week, a researcher demonstrated a new technique to more easily identify phishing and other malicious Websites.

Dan Hubbard, vice president of security research for Websense, showed a tool Websense researchers have built that detects domains that were automatically registered by machines rather than humans -- a method increasingly being used by the bad guys, he says. “[Automation] is being used more and more,” Hubbard says.

Not much of the contents of the so-called ISOI conference typically seeps beyond the confines of this annual closed-door event: It’s set up to accommodate the privacy and sensitivity of the content and information shared, as well as the attendees themselves. But some participants, including Hubbard, were willing to discuss some elements of the ISOI 4 summit.

In case you were wondering how long it takes for stolen data to actually get exploited, some researchers at the ISOI4 reported that there’s about a five-hour window once a phishing site goes up to tear it down before the bad guys start using the stolen data, which is typically credit card numbers.

Meanwhile, Websense’s new Lexi-Rep tool , which it uses internally in its Web security research, gives researchers -- and eventually, maybe domain registrars -- a way to sniff out any suspicious domains that get automatically set up. “Increasingly, we’re seeing more bots, keyloggers, and Trojans automatically connecting to domains,” Hubbard says. “And people are now automatically registering these domains without a human involved.”

The tool’s algorithm determines whether a domain name was registered by man or machine, by assessing whether the domain and URL are “human consumable,” or “whether someone would type that into a URL or search for that” site. It scores the likelihood of maliciousness of the domain and host name based on patterns in the name.

So while users may not notice that a phony “eBay.com” URL has a wild mix of random letters and numbers appended to it since the entire URL may not show up in their browser, this algorithm is aimed at nabbing any likely suspects. The pair of letters such as “JX” or “JW” in a domain, for example, are less likely to be paired together in English lexicon than, say, “TH.” “’TH’ would score very high because those two letters are likely to appear together, but ‘JW’ and ‘JX’ are not, so they would get a negative score,” Hubbard says. The algorithm weighs the scores and categorizes the sites, and sends some out for further analysis if needed.

The “bad” domain names then get blacklisted. Hubbard says the tool has an a 99.9 percent rate of accuracy, and that automatically generated domains to date represent over 1 percent of the nearly 1 million domains registered each day, but that share is rising.

Hubbard says Websense is happy to share the tool with domain registrars if they are interested in it -- it’s avoiding going the open source route because it doesn’t want the technology falling into the hands of the bad guys, who then could figure out how to circumvent it.

“I can see how this approach can help alert on some flavors of the domains phishers may register,” says Nitesh Dhanjani, a researcher who, along with fellow researcher Billy Rios, recently infiltrated the phisher community to get an inside look at how it operates. “However, phishers often set up their sites on compromised hosts and use the existing domain name structures, and they also use approaches that are hard to reduce into specific patterns. So although this sort of an automated approach will have positive impact, it shouldn't be the only technique businesses rely on to find out the URLs where phishing sites targeting them have been set up.” (See Researchers Expose 'Stupid Phisher Tricks'.)

Hubbard noted that data such as history of the IP, network, ASN, registration details, site content, search results, and email volumes, can also be factored in with a domain's scoring.

Meanwhile, Gadi Evron, one of the organizers of the ISOI 4 summit, says law enforcement, researchers, and the industry are getting better organized in fighting cybercrime, but they still have a ways to go. “We’re not really affecting the business of the criminals,” Evron says -- the key is to move past a reactive approach to threats.

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

  • Websense Inc. (Nasdaq: WBSN)

    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
    Small Business Security: 5 Tips on How and Where to Start
    Mike Puglia, Chief Strategy Officer at Kaseya,  2/13/2020
    Architectural Analysis IDs 78 Specific Risks in Machine-Learning Systems
    Jai Vijayan, Contributing Writer,  2/13/2020
    Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
    White Papers
    Video
    Cartoon
    Current Issue
    6 Emerging Cyber Threats That Enterprises Face in 2020
    This Tech Digest gives an in-depth look at six emerging cyber threats that enterprises could face in 2020. Download your copy today!
    Flash Poll
    How Enterprises Are Developing and Maintaining Secure Applications
    How Enterprises Are Developing and Maintaining Secure Applications
    The concept of application security is well known, but application security testing and remediation processes remain unbalanced. Most organizations are confident in their approach to AppSec, although others seem to have no approach at all. Read this report to find out more.
    Twitter Feed
    Dark Reading - Bug Report
    Bug Report
    Enterprise Vulnerabilities
    From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
    CVE-2020-9308
    PUBLISHED: 2020-02-20
    archive_read_support_format_rar5.c in libarchive before 3.4.2 attempts to unpack a RAR5 file with an invalid or corrupted header (such as a header size of zero), leading to a SIGSEGV or possibly unspecified other impact.
    CVE-2019-20479
    PUBLISHED: 2020-02-20
    A flaw was found in mod_auth_openidc before version 2.4.1. An open redirect issue exists in URLs with a slash and backslash at the beginning.
    CVE-2011-2498
    PUBLISHED: 2020-02-20
    The Linux kernel from v2.3.36 before v2.6.39 allows local unprivileged users to cause a denial of service (memory consumption) by triggering creation of PTE pages.
    CVE-2012-2629
    PUBLISHED: 2020-02-20
    Multiple cross-site request forgery (CSRF) and cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities in Axous 1.1.1 and earlier allow remote attackers to hijack the authentication of administrators for requests that (1) add an administrator account via an addnew action to admin/administrators_add.php; or (2) c...
    CVE-2014-3484
    PUBLISHED: 2020-02-20
    Multiple stack-based buffer overflows in the __dn_expand function in network/dn_expand.c in musl libc 1.1x before 1.1.2 and 0.9.13 through 1.0.3 allow remote attackers to (1) have unspecified impact via an invalid name length in a DNS response or (2) cause a denial of service (crash) via an invalid ...