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

1/8/2016
08:00 AM
Connect Directly
Twitter
LinkedIn
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

'Spymel’ Is Latest Example Of Attackers Using Signed Malware

What was once reserved for targeted attacks is being increasingly used to distribute common crimeware payloads says Zscaler.

In another instance of the growing tendency by threat actors to use digital certificates in crimeware payloads, security vendor Zscaler Wednesday issued an alert on a new data stealing Trojan that uses a legitimately issued certificate to try and evade security tools.

The highly obfuscated spyware dubbed Spymel is digitally signed with a certificate that was originally issued by certificate authority DigiCert to an entity named SBO Invest.  DigiCert has since revoked the certificate but a newer version of Spymel has surfaced using another certificate issued to SBO Invest, Zscaler said.

In order to infect a Windows system, the attackers first send a malicious JavaScript file as an email attachment to victims. Spymel is downloaded and installed from a remote location on the systems of those who click open the attachment, the security vendor noted.

Once installed on a system, Spymel monitors Task Manager, Process Explorer and other applications. It logs keystrokes and is capable of preventing the victim from running software capable of terminating the malware. The malware communicates with a command and control server and sends information about all user activity and active processes running on the victim’s computer, Zscaler said.

What makes Spymel noteworthy is its use of a digital certificate to try and evade security software. Software vendors and websites use digital certificates to authenticate their products and to enable secure communications between a web browser and a server.

In recent years, malware authors have taken to stealing digital certs or to set up new certificate with fake information, which they then use to digitally sign their malware tools to make them appear legitimate.

“The digital certificate will give a false sense of authenticity to the end user especially when the certificate belongs to a legitimate software vendor,” says Deepen Desai, director of security research at Zscaler. “This approach also helps malware authors in evading detection as it is common for security vendors to bypass advanced heuristic checks for payloads that are signed using legitimate trusted certificates,” he said.

The use of such certificates is becoming increasingly common especially in creating botnets as well as spyware and adware payloads, he said.  Signed malware payloads have been around for years, he said but initially at least most of it was used for carrying out targeted attacks. It’s only relatively recently that threat actors have begun using digital certs to distribute other payloads as well, Desai said.

Most likely driving the trend is the improved infection rates that malware authors can achieve with signed malware and the higher possibility that signed malware has of evading malware detection tools he said.

“Additionally, it is very easy and inexpensive for the bad actors to setup a new certificate with fake information due to weaknesses in the vetting process of certain Certificate issuing authorities.”

This marks the second time in just the past few days that a security vendor has warned about threat actors using digital certs to distribute malware. Just last week, Proofpoint warned about rogue iOS application marketplaces springing up carrying malicious IOS applications signed with stolen enterprise certificates. According to Proofpoint, threat actors have figured out a way to “sideload” malicious applications even on non-jailbroken iOS devices by using digital signatures to fool iOS devices into installing the software.

 [For more on this topic, read 2015: The Year Of 'Attacks on Trust' by Kevin Bocek]

Jai Vijayan is a seasoned technology reporter with over 20 years of experience in IT trade journalism. He was most recently a Senior Editor at Computerworld, where he covered information security and data privacy issues for the publication. Over the course of his 20-year ... View Full Bio
 

Recommended Reading:

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
macker490
100%
0%
macker490,
User Rank: Ninja
1/9/2016 | 7:26:49 AM
another new normal
with x.509 certificates printed up like losing lotto tickets it's no wonder the scamsters have figured out how to get a few for their own use

that shouldn't be a problem except that the current masss distribution process for x.509 certificates does not provide the end user any means of selecting and validating certificates.

how many x.509 certs do you really need to validate?

credit union and an online shopping site ?     tax provider ?

what's missing: a means for user to validate certificates

we need a key encryption key ( KEK ) device that can validate certificates .    single purpose device.

you can't use your cell phone for this because on your cell you are installing apps from heaven knows where and giving them any permissions they ask for

KEK must be a single purpose device controlled only by the OEM

 
Commentary
What the FedEx Logo Taught Me About Cybersecurity
Matt Shea, Head of Federal @ MixMode,  6/4/2021
Edge-DRsplash-10-edge-articles
A View From Inside a Deception
Sara Peters, Senior Editor at Dark Reading,  6/2/2021
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
The State of Cybersecurity Incident Response
In this report learn how enterprises are building their incident response teams and processes, how they research potential compromises, how they respond to new breaches, and what tools and processes they use to remediate problems and improve their cyber defenses for the future.
Flash Poll
How Enterprises are Developing Secure Applications
How Enterprises are Developing Secure Applications
Recent breaches of third-party apps are driving many organizations to think harder about the security of their off-the-shelf software as they continue to move left in secure software development practices.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2021-23394
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-13
The package studio-42/elfinder before 2.1.58 are vulnerable to Remote Code Execution (RCE) via execution of PHP code in a .phar file. NOTE: This only applies if the server parses .phar files as PHP.
CVE-2021-34682
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-12
Receita Federal IRPF 2021 1.7 allows a man-in-the-middle attack against the update feature.
CVE-2021-31811
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-12
In Apache PDFBox, a carefully crafted PDF file can trigger an OutOfMemory-Exception while loading the file. This issue affects Apache PDFBox version 2.0.23 and prior 2.0.x versions.
CVE-2021-31812
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-12
In Apache PDFBox, a carefully crafted PDF file can trigger an infinite loop while loading the file. This issue affects Apache PDFBox version 2.0.23 and prior 2.0.x versions.
CVE-2021-32552
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-12
It was discovered that read_file() in apport/hookutils.py would follow symbolic links or open FIFOs. When this function is used by the openjdk-16 package apport hooks, it could expose private data to other local users.