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

1/10/2019
02:50 PM
Connect Directly
Twitter
LinkedIn
Google+
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Ryuk Ransomware Attribution May Be Premature

The eagerness to tie recent Ryuk ransomware attacks to a specific group could be rushed, researchers say.

Security researchers are keen to link a recent outbreak of Ryuk ransomware to a specific attacker. Some have suggested North Korea, a decision some experts say could be rushed.

Last week a cyberattack caused print and delivery problems for newspapers owned by Tribune Publishing, including the Chicago Tribune and Baltimore Sun, as well as the Los Angeles Times. The issue affected the timeliness and, in some cases, the completeness of printed papers. At the time, people with knowledge of the incident said it appeared to be Ryuk ransomware.

Some parties, including Check Point Research, connected this particular Ryuk campaign and some of its inner workings to the Hermes ransomware – a form of malware commonly linked to the North Korean APT Lazarus Group. Unlike most ransomware, they say, Ryuk is only used for tailored attacks and its encryption scheme is purposefully built for small-scale operations.

But was North Korea behind the Tribune campaign? Not necessarily, McAfee Labs experts say.

To determine who may have launched the Ryuk campaign, some experts have looked at past research comparing Ryuk's code with older Hermes ransomware. In October 2017, McAfee Labs investigated an attack on a Taiwanese bank in which actors used a ransomware outbreak to distract IT staff at the same time they were stealing money. The malware used was Hermes 2.1.

Back at the time of the bank attack, McAfee didn't do much digging into the ransomware itself, says John Fokker, head of cyber investigations for McAfee Advanced Threat Research. When it was investigating North Korean attribution for the recent Ryuk campaign, they found an Aug. 2017 posting in an underground forum where a Russian-speaking actor was selling Hermes 2.1.

"It looks like a regular cybercrime kit you can buy and perhaps tweak to your liking," he explains. "If we backtrack to the investigation, there's a probability Lazarus bought this kit to use as a distraction."

While most nation-state groups tend to build and use attacks they developed, as Lazarus typically does, it wouldn't be out of the question for a group to purchase malware that would serve as a diversion. "It makes sense if you want to go for distractions, or want to create a false flag, you might go out and buy something," Fokker adds, saying it's a likely hypothesis.

Given Hermes 2.1 went on sale long before the bank heist in Oct. 2017, several people could have purchased and altered it, he continues. "We've shown that it's for sale, anyone with skill and money could buy this," says Fokker. "It opens to a wide variety of potential actors."

McAfee Labs says Ryuk and Hermes 2.1 are generally equal. "There is a very high overlap," he continues. "They're almost identical." If changing the name, and implementing a ransom note, are both part of the "fine tuning" process involved with editing Hermes 2.1 into a slightly different threat, then Ryuk is likely an edited version of it, researchers explain.

So Whodunnit?

McAfee Labs suggests the most likely hypothesis in the Ryuk case is that of a cybercriminal operation developed from a toolkit offered by a Russian-speaking actor. Evidence shows sample similarities over the past several months, which indicate a toolkit is being used. Researchers don't currently know who is responsible, but Fokker points to some defining traits.

The author and seller of Hermes 2.1 advertises a kit, not a service, meaning whoever bought it would need to set up a distribution method and infrastructure to make it work, McAfee Labs researchers explain in a blog post. Fokker also predicts the attacker has a skill in targeting.

"They're doing reconnaissance on the victim to find out if the victim is interesting and if they have money to pay up," he says. "It's less opportunistic, and more targeted. That shows to me a certain level of skill – not necessarily technical skill, but a skill that you can find your victim and select them." If it's not North Korea, it could also be a well-organized criminal group.

Fokker also points to general problems with attribution. It's understandable experts want to attribute an attack, he says, but oftentimes the process for doing so is flawed – especially when it comes to linking incidents with state-sponsored actors.

"There is a strong movement toward the 'who'," he says. "Everyone wants to figure out who is responsible … but you often don't have all the pieces to the puzzle."

McAfee Labs' approach is to analyze competing hypotheses, researchers say. An investigation involves several views, comparing different pieces of evidence to support each hypothesis, and also finding evidence that falsifies hypotheses. This method ensures the strongest hypothesis is not the one with the most verified evidence, but the one with the least falsifying evidence.

Related Content:

Kelly Sheridan is the Staff Editor at Dark Reading, where she focuses on cybersecurity news and analysis. She is a business technology journalist who previously reported for InformationWeek, where she covered Microsoft, and Insurance & Technology, where she covered financial ... View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Oldest First  |  Newest First  |  Threaded View
US Turning Up the Heat on North Korea's Cyber Threat Operations
Jai Vijayan, Contributing Writer,  9/16/2019
MITRE Releases 2019 List of Top 25 Software Weaknesses
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  9/17/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: "He's too shy to invite me out face to face!"
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-2019-16649
PUBLISHED: 2019-09-21
On Supermicro H11, H12, M11, X9, X10, and X11 products, a combination of encryption and authentication problems in the virtual media service allows capture of BMC credentials and data transferred over virtual media devices. Attackers can use captured credentials to connect virtual USB devices to the...
CVE-2019-16650
PUBLISHED: 2019-09-21
On Supermicro X10 and X11 products, a client's access privileges may be transferred to a different client that later has the same socket file descriptor number. In opportunistic circumstances, an attacker can simply connect to the virtual media service, and then connect virtual USB devices to the se...
CVE-2019-15138
PUBLISHED: 2019-09-20
The html-pdf package 2.2.0 for Node.js has an arbitrary file read vulnerability via an HTML file that uses XMLHttpRequest to access a file:/// URL.
CVE-2019-6145
PUBLISHED: 2019-09-20
Forcepoint VPN Client for Windows versions lower than 6.6.1 have an unquoted search path vulnerability. This enables local privilege escalation to SYSTEM user. By default, only local administrators can write executables to the vulnerable directories. Forcepoint thanks Peleg Hadar of SafeBreach Labs ...
CVE-2019-6649
PUBLISHED: 2019-09-20
F5 BIG-IP 15.0.0, 14.1.0-14.1.0.6, 14.0.0-14.0.0.5, 13.0.0-13.1.1.5, 12.1.0-12.1.4.1, 11.6.0-11.6.4, and 11.5.1-11.5.9 and Enterprise Manager 3.1.1 may expose sensitive information and allow the system configuration to be modified when using non-default ConfigSync settings.