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

 
News
Former CISA Director Chris Krebs Discusses Risk Management & Threat Intel
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  2/23/2021
Edge-DRsplash-10-edge-articles
Security + Fraud Protection: Your One-Two Punch Against Cyberattacks
Joshua Goldfarb, Director of Product Management at F5,  2/23/2021
News
Cybercrime Groups More Prolific, Focus on Healthcare in 2020
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  2/22/2021
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win an Amazon Gift Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: This comment is waiting for review by our moderators.
Current Issue
2021 Top Enterprise IT Trends
We've identified the key trends that are poised to impact the IT landscape in 2021. Find out why they're important and how they will affect you today!
Flash Poll
Building the SOC of the Future
Building the SOC of the Future
Digital transformation, cloud-focused attacks, and a worldwide pandemic. The past year has changed the way business works and the way security teams operate. There is no going back.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2021-27132
PUBLISHED: 2021-02-27
SerComm AG Combo VD625 AGSOT_2.1.0 devices allow CRLF injection (for HTTP header injection) in the download function via the Content-Disposition header.
CVE-2021-25284
PUBLISHED: 2021-02-27
An issue was discovered in through SaltStack Salt before 3002.5. salt.modules.cmdmod can log credentials to the info or error log level.
CVE-2021-3144
PUBLISHED: 2021-02-27
In SaltStack Salt before 3002.5, eauth tokens can be used once after expiration. (They might be used to run command against the salt master or minions.)
CVE-2021-3148
PUBLISHED: 2021-02-27
An issue was discovered in SaltStack Salt before 3002.5. Sending crafted web requests to the Salt API can result in salt.utils.thin.gen_thin() command injection because of different handling of single versus double quotes. This is related to salt/utils/thin.py.
CVE-2021-3151
PUBLISHED: 2021-02-27
i-doit before 1.16.0 is affected by Stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) issues that could allow remote authenticated attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via C__MONITORING__CONFIG__TITLE, SM2__C__MONITORING__CONFIG__TITLE, C__MONITORING__CONFIG__PATH, SM2__C__MONITORING__CONFIG__PATH, C__M...