Links for 2008-10-10

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments

Links for 2008-10-02

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments

Links for 2008-09-22

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments

How tightly linked are the top spam botnets?

I was away on holidays last week, and when I got back, I found my feed reader full of some good discussion as to whether today’s bigger spam botnets — Srizbi, Rustock, Mega-D, Cutwail/Pushdo — are sharing components, such as “landing” sites, exploits, customers, and even command and control networks. It started with this post on the FireEye Malware Intelligence Lab’s blog noting:

‘Some malware researchers have described Srizbi and Rustock as rival botnets, our data indicates that this apparent rivalry is a sibling rivalry at best. Srizbi and Rustock seem to be supported (controlled) by the same parent (bot herder).’

and in this followup:

‘We can clearly see that Srizbi, Pushdo and Rustock are using same ISP, and in many cases, IPs on the same subnet to host their Command and Control servers. It seems extremely unlikely to our research team that three previously “rival” Botnets would share nearly consecutive IP space, and be hosted in the same physical facility. Of all the data centers and IPs in the world, the fact that they are all on the same subnet is very intriguing. This fact makes the FireEye research team conclude that either the Botnets are operated by the same organization, or that the datacenter (McColo) is a shell corporation that leases out it’s IP space and bandwidth for nefarious actions.’ [...]

‘IPs at a typical datacenter are leased out in a /30 or more commonly, a /29 block. However, here we can see that in a given succession of IPs, the three Botnets have C&C servers dispersed throughout. This gives us an impression that same Bot herder leased out a larger range and then distributed it amongst its different Botnets.’

Marshal say: ‘at the very least, the major botnets have common customers.’

Dark Reading cover it like so:

Rustock, which recently edged Srizbi for the top slot as the biggest spammer mostly due to a wave of fake Olympics and CNN news spam, and Srizbi, known for fake video and DVD spam, have been using the same Trojan, Trojan.Exchanger, to download their bot malware updates, researchers say. “This is the first time” we had seen this connection between the two botnets, says Fengmin Gong, chief security content officer for anti-botnet software firm FireEye. “That’s why when we saw it, it was surprising. They definitely have a relationship,” he says. “There’s not the rivalry we used to think about.” [...]

Joe Stewart, director of security research for SecureWorks, says the Srizbi-Rustock connection is most likely due to a spammer using both zombie networks — not that the operators of the two botnets are actually collaborating. “What is confusing people is that you’re seeing Rustock bots sending out emails that essentially infect people with Srizbi, so they think it must be Srizbi that’s sending it, but it’s not,” he says. “Srizbi is not just one big model. It’s rented out to lots of different spammers.”

A major spammer may be trying to diversify by using the two botnets, he says. “It could be because they want to separate their malware-seeding operation from their spamming operation,” Stewart says. “Maybe their bots are getting blacklisted faster when they’re sending out URLs with fake video files because they’re easy to spot, so their spam doesn’t get through. So they send malware from this botnet, and spam from this one, to keep out of the blacklists longer.”

I agree that Joe’s scenario is very likely; the spammers aren’t always the same people who operate the botnets, and it only makes sense that some of them would spread their business among multiple nets, to minimize the risk that all of their output would be blocked if one ‘net runs into trouble (or indeed, good filtering ;). But seeing C&C servers sharing LANs also strikes me as unusual. One to watch.

Anyway, it’s good to see that the malware research blogs are now actively tracking and posting updates when the botnets change topics and format; this info is very valuable for us in anti-spam, as it allows us to map from the received spam mails back to the sending botnet, and determine which rules are good at detecting each botnet. Thanks, guys.

(image credit: cobalt123, used under CC license)

Tags: , , ,

Comments

Links for 2008-08-07

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments (1)

Amazon EC2’s spam and malware problems

Over the past few weeks, I’ve increasingly heard of spam and abuse problems originating in Amazon EC2.

This has culminated in a blog post yesterday by Brian Krebs at the Washington Post:

It took me by surprise this weekend to discover that that mounds of porn spam and junk e-mail laced with computer viruses are actively being blasted from digital real estate leased to [Amazon].

He goes on to discuss how EC2 space is now actively blocked by Outblaze, and has been listed by Spamhaus in their PBL list. A spokesperson for Amazon said:

“We have a clear acceptable use policy and whenever we have received a complaint of spam or malware coming through Amazon EC2, we have moved swiftly to strictly enforce the use policy by network isolating (or even terminating) any offending instances,” Kinton said. She added that Amazon has since taken action against the EC2 systems hosting the [malware].

However as Seth Breidbart noted in the comments, ‘note that Amazon will terminate the instance. That means that the spammer just creates another instance, which gets a new IP address, and continues spamming.’ True enough – as described, instance termination simply isn’t good enough.

My recommendations:

  • as John Levine noted, it’s likely that Amazon need to treat EC2-originated traffic similarly to how an ISP treats their DSL pools – filtering outbound traffic for nastiness, in particular rate-limiting port 25/tcp connections on a per-customer basis, so that an instance run by (or infiltrated by) a spammer cannot produce massive quantities of spam before it is detected and cut off.

    However, I’m not talking about blocking port 25/tcp outbound entirely. That’s not appropriate — an EC2 instance is analogous to a leased colo box in a server farm, and not being able to send mail from our instances would really suck for EC2 users (like myself and my employers).

  • It would help if there were a way to look up customer IDs from the IP address of the EC2 nodes they’re using — either via WHOIS or through rDNS. Even an opaque customer ID string would allow anti-abuse teams to correlate a single customer’s activity as they cycle through EC2 instances. This would allow those teams to deal with the reputation of Amazon’s customers, instead of Amazon’s own rep, analogous to how “traditional” hosters use SWIP to publicize their reassignments of IPs between their customers.

There’s some more discussion buried in a load of knee-jerking on the NANOG thread. Here’s a few good snippets:

Jon Lewis: ‘I got the impression the only thing Amazon considers abuse is use of their servers and not paying the bill. If you’re a paying customer, you can do whatever you like.’ (ouch.)

Ken Simpson: ‘IMHO, Amazon will eventually be forced to bifurcate their EC2 IP space into a section that is for “newbies” and a section for established customers. The newbie space will be widely black-listed, but will also have a lower rate of abuse complaint enforcement. The only scalable way to deal with a system like EC2 is to provide clear demarcations of where the crap is likely to originate from.’

Bill Herrin: ‘From an address-reputation perspective EC2 is no different than, say, China. Connections from China start life much closer to my filtering threshold that connections from Europe because a far lower percentage of the connections from China are legitimate. EC2 will get the same treatment.’

There’s also an earlier thread here.

Anyway, this issue is on fire — Amazon need to get the finger out and deal with it quickly and effectively, before EC2 does start to run into widespread blocks. I’m already planning migration of our mail-sending components off of EC2; we’re already seeing blocks of mail sent from it, and it’s looking likely that these will increase. :(

(It’s worth noting that a block of EC2’s netblocks today will produce a load of false positives, mainly on transactional mail, if you’re contemplating it. So I wouldn’t recommend it. But a lot of sites are willing to accept a few FPs, it seems.)

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Comments (19)

Spambots stealing GMail and Hotmail passwords?

I just received this mail from a friend:

Dear friend

Welcome to stwoxy.com ! We are one of the largest electronic distributors and wholesalers in Beijing China. We offer qualified digital products: Motorcycles?TVs, Notebooks, phones. PSP, projectors, GPS, DVD, DV, DC, MP3/4 and so on, which are of world famous brands, such as Sony, IBM, PHILIPS, NOKIA, DELL and so on. All our items are brand new from the manufactures and they come with 1-3 years’ after service. These days we are expanding our overseas market, and every item is sold in extremely low price. Such chances should never be missed, ladies and gentlemen, do come to stwoxy.com! you will surely have a big surprise! We are looking forward to hearing from you!

It was sent from a HTTP connection into GMail, and was delivered from there using valid DKIM, Domain Keys and SPF signatures. In addition, it was sent to all the addresses in his address book. In other words, this was no run-of-the-mill impersonation spam — for this one, the spammer obtained my friend’s username and password somehow, logged into GMail, scraped the address book, and then sent spam via GMail that way.

My friend says he didn’t access GMail using a desktop mail client, but did have his Google password saved in his web browser (a pretty typical configuration). My theory is that some virus/malware has infected his desktop machine, captured the saved-passwords file from the web browser configuration, and used that to log into GMail. Alternatively, it could also be a guessable username and password which was picked up via dictionary attack, I guess…

This is the first case I’ve heard of where spammers are actively stealing user account authentication tokens, in order to take over the accounts for spamming. (We’d long predicted it, of course, since it’s a natural response to “pay for mail” schemes… but since there’s no widely-used pay-for-mail system available yet, it’s premature!)

It seems this is not just a GMail thing, btw. Here’s a report of the same thing happening to some French guy via HotMail last month (or in english). I don’t speak Dutch, but this forum post looks like it might be the same situation.

If you’re curious, here’s a copy of the spam, delivered to a Yahoo! group; it appears these spammers aren’t too sophisticated in terms of the text they’re sending, since they haven’t morphed that text, HTML, or even the domain in the link yet. It’s just the malware that’s sophisticated, at this stage.

Tags: , , , , , ,

Comments (32)

Scary Storm figure

This study of the Storm worm (via) contains this rather terrifying factoid:

Figure 12 illustrates a time-volume graph of TCP packets, SMTP packets, spam messages, and smtp servers. Our analysis of this graph reveals the following findings. First, we find that except for the first 5 minutes almost all the TCP communication is dominated by spam. Second, we measured that hosts generate on average of 100 successful spam messages per five minutes, which translates to 1200 spam messages per hour or 28,800 messages per day. If we mutiply this by the estimated size for the Storm network (which we suspect varies between 1 million and 5 million, we derive that the total number of spam messages that could be generated by Storm is somewhere between 28 billion and 140 billon per day.

While such numbers might be mind-boggling they are inline with observed spam volumes in the Internet, e.g., overall volume of spam messages in the Internet per day in 2006 was estimated to be around 140 billion [2]; Spamhaus claims to have been blocking over 50 billion spam messages per day in October 2006 [10], and AOL was blocking 1.5 billion spam messages per day in its network in June 2006 [5]. These numbers suggest that Storm could be responsible for anywhere between 17% and 50% of all spam that is generated on the Internet.

28 to 140 billion messages per day. That is a lot of spam.

Minor nitpick with the paper — it notes that

Storm retrieves emails found in [certain] files and gathers information about possible hosts, users, and mailing lists that are referenced in these files. In particular, it looks for strings like “yahoo.com”, “gmail.com”, “rating@”, “f-secur”, “news”, “update”, “anyone@”, “bugs@”, “contract@”, “feste”, “gold-certs@”, “help@”, “info@”, “nobody@”, “noone@”, “kasp”, “admin”, “icrosoft”, “support”, “ntivi”, “unix”, “bsd”, “linux”, “listserv”, “certific”, “sopho”, “@foo”, “@iana”, “free-av”, “@messagelab”, “winzip”, “google”, “winrar”, “samples” , “abuse”, “panda”, “cafee”, “spam”, “pgp”, “@avp.” , “noreply” , “local”, “root@”, and “postmaster@”.

I would postulate that those strings are a stoplist — that in fact the worm avoids sending spam to addresses containing those strings. The presence of “abuse” and “postmaster” in particular would suggest that.

Tags: , , , , ,

Comments (4)

More ways malware damages internet infrastructure: DNS servers

Malware: spotted on NANOG — Six PCs caused BigPond problems:

Disconnecting six compromised personal computers on Tuesday evening eased the difficulties caused by bogus requests which clogged BigPond’s domain name servers (DNS), slowing customer e-mail and Web site access, Telstra said.

A Telstra spokesperson said the carrier had narrowed the list of malware that could have infected the computers to three, adding the problem could have been caused by a combination of those viruses or Trojans. He declined to name the suspects.

He said the PCs generated 95 percent of the bogus requests which caused the problems that evening.

The ‘problems’ in question are described here :

One forum participant (on Aussie forum Whirlpool), who claimed to be a BigPond customer, said on Monday: ‘I’m in Canberra and it’s been almost unusable all afternoon. I’m snowed under at the moment and it is really driving me crazy. Three out of four links fail to load first time and sometimes take eight or nine tries before it does.’

Another said: ‘I am having problems loading Web pages, I get the 404 error. I have to retry five to 10 times to get some places.’

Petri Helenius, in a post to NANOG, notes:

Consumer ISP’s who don’t proactively take care of security/abuse usually end up with harvesting-bots which consume significant amount of DNS resources, typically doing anything from a few dozen to a thousand queries a second. A few hundred of these will seriously hamper an usually provisioned recursive server.

Interesting. It’s been a long time since I’ve relied on an ISP’s recursive DNS servers; in my recent experience (Comcast, Cox.net) they’ve always been overloaded, and take aaaages to give me answers. Maybe this is why.

It makes sense; most Windows machines will indeed use the ISP’s NSes, because that’s what DHCP tells you to do; and setting up a BIND or djbdns instance locally to query the roots directly is still a UNIX-only trick, as far as I know.

The upshot?

  • 1. Yet another good reason why ISPs should proactively disconnect infected customers, as they deny service to other users of the ISP.
  • 2. A good demonstration of yet another way the techie community’s experience of web surfing and internet use differs from that of the unwashed masses in the hinternet — that ’shanty-town of pop-ups and porn adware’, as Danny O’Brien puts it.
  • 3. Sometime soon, if it hasn’t happened already, someone’s going to bundle up an ‘Internet Accelerator’ lump of shareware that sets up a local recursive NS on Windows which queries the roots, and it’ll become the latest popular Windows download. Then the load on the root servers will really start rising.

(PS: top tip — ever wanted a publically-queriable recursive nameserver, or a good IP address for pinging, that’s easy to remember? 4.2.2.1 is what you’re after.)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments