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

Google Disputes Socially Engineered Malware Study

After IE9 beat Chrome on security in a report, Google says social engineering accounts for only 2% of malware found on the Web.

How Firesheep Can Hijack Web Sessions
(click image for larger view)
Slideshow: How Firesheep Can Hijack Web Sessions
In the wake of a report by an independent security testing lab that awarded top marks to Microsoft Internet Explorer 9 for its ability to stop socially engineered malware, Google fired back, alleging that such malware only accounts for 2% of malicious code found online.

That statistic comes via a new report from Google, "Trends in Circumventing Web-Malware Detection," that was compiled using four years' worth of data, gathered as part of its Safe Browsing initiative. According to Google, its Safe Browsing API, which provides a block list of suspected or known-bad URLs linked to malware and phishing attacks, results in about 3 million malware warnings daily to more than 400 million people. Firefox, Safari, and Chrome all make use of the data feed.

Google's publicizing of the report followed the release, earlier this week, of a study from independent security testing organization NSS Labs, which tested five browsers for their ability to stop socially engineered malware found in the wild. It awarded top marks to IE9, which it said successfully and quickly blocked almost 100% of all such threats, followed by Chrome (13.2%), Safari and Firefox (7.6%), and Opera (6.1%).

The Google researchers acknowledged that socially engineered malware is dangerous, and that its volume continues to increase. "Social engineering is a malware distribution mechanism that relies on tricking a user into installing malware. Typically, the malware is disguised as an antivirus product or browser plug-in," said two of the Google report's co-authors, Lucas Ballard and Niels Provos, part of the Google Security Team, in a blog post.

Even so, they said, "it's important to keep this growth in perspective--sites that rely on social engineering comprise only 2% of all sites that distribute malware."

In fact, according to their research, drive-by downloads are a much more common attack vector. In such exploits, "malicious pages install malware after exploiting a vulnerability in the browser or a plug-in," they said. Furthermore, attackers often exploit the latest vulnerabilities to help their attacks avoid detection. That said, "a prominent exception is the MDAC vulnerability which is present in most exploit kits," according to the researchers. (MDAC is a set of exploits that target ActiveX controls.)

NSS Labs appears to have predicted Google's criticism. "NSS Labs commends Google for adding some protection against socially engineered malware to Chrome," according to its report. "Further, we view the addition of this protection as evidence that even as Google's PR engine downplayed the findings of prior NSS Labs test reports, the Chrome engineering team was working hard to address this known deficiency."

While blocking socially engineered malware is important, the Google researchers emphasized that stopping Internet-borne malware in general is extremely difficult, owing to the many different ways in which computers can become infected. "The attack surface of the modern Web browser is quite large," said the Google researchers. "Web-based malware can target vulnerabilities in the browser itself, or against the myriad of plug-ins that extend the browser to handle, for example, Flash, Java applets, or PDF files. A vulnerability in any of these components may be leveraged to compromise the browser and the underlying operating system." Furthermore, malicious files can be introduced not just via compromised websites, but also through email and instant messages.

The Google research further highlights that no one defense mechanism alone will stop all malware attacks. In particular, the paper studied the four most prevalent defenses: "virtual machine client honeypots, browser emulator client honeypots, classification based on domain reputation, and antivirus engines."

According to the researchers, "our results show that none of these systems are effective in isolation." In addition, what works today may fail tomorrow, as there's an "arms race" between browser makers and attackers, who are "highly motivated and quickly adapt to technologies that try to protect users from their sites," they said.

At a full-day virtual event, InformationWeek and Dark Reading editors will talk with security experts about the causes and mistakes that lead to security breaches, both from the technology perspective and from the people perspective. It happens Aug. 25. Register now.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Data Leak Week: Billions of Sensitive Files Exposed Online
Kelly Jackson Higgins, Executive Editor at Dark Reading,  12/10/2019
Intel Issues Fix for 'Plundervolt' SGX Flaw
Kelly Jackson Higgins, Executive Editor at Dark Reading,  12/11/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Current Issue
The Year in Security: 2019
This Tech Digest provides a wrap up and overview of the year's top cybersecurity news stories. It was a year of new twists on old threats, with fears of another WannaCry-type worm and of a possible botnet army of Wi-Fi routers. But 2019 also underscored the risk of firmware and trusted security tools harboring dangerous holes that cybercriminals and nation-state hackers could readily abuse. Read more.
Flash Poll
Rethinking Enterprise Data Defense
Rethinking Enterprise Data Defense
Frustrated with recurring intrusions and breaches, cybersecurity professionals are questioning some of the industrys conventional wisdom. Heres a look at what theyre thinking about.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
PUBLISHED: 2019-12-14
There is an improper authentication vulnerability in Huawei smartphones (Y9, Honor 8X, Honor 9 Lite, Honor 9i, Y6 Pro). The applock does not perform a sufficient authentication in a rare condition. Successful exploit could allow the attacker to use the application locked by applock in an instant.
PUBLISHED: 2019-12-14
Some Huawei smart phones have a null pointer dereference vulnerability. An attacker crafts specific packets and sends to the affected product to exploit this vulnerability. Successful exploitation may cause the affected phone to be abnormal.
PUBLISHED: 2019-12-13
There is an information disclosure vulnerability in certain Huawei smartphones (Mate 10;Mate 10 Pro;Honor V10;Changxiang 7S;P-smart;Changxiang 8 Plus;Y9 2018;Honor 9 Lite;Honor 9i;Mate 9). The software does not properly handle certain information of applications locked by applock in a rare condition...
PUBLISHED: 2019-12-13
Huawei CloudUSM-EUA V600R006C10;V600R019C00 have an information leak vulnerability. Due to improper configuration, the attacker may cause information leak by successful exploitation.
PUBLISHED: 2019-12-13
Certain Huawei products (AP2000;IPS Module;NGFW Module;NIP6300;NIP6600;NIP6800;S5700;SVN5600;SVN5800;SVN5800-C;SeMG9811;Secospace AntiDDoS8000;Secospace USG6300;Secospace USG6500;Secospace USG6600;USG6000V;eSpace U1981) have an out-of-bounds read vulnerability. An attacker who logs in to the board m...