Threat report conclusion: Patch now!

h2_2012_infographic#1544C6EOur Threat report for H2 2012 is now available. Read it if you want to know what’s going on and what the threat landscape is looking like. It is interesting reading, highly recommended! If you are in a hurry and want to save the reading for later, there’s still one point that affects most users and deserves immediate attention. Vulnerabilities and patching.

One of the major trends is no doubt the increasing importance of exploits and vulnerabilities. And you have probably already heard the nagging about how important it is to patch your system. That IS good advice and our threat report shows how it is getting even more important. But I don’t want to just repeat the nagging. I want to take the opportunity to dig a bit deeper into this issue and explain what it is all about.

There are basically two ways to get malware into your computer; to trick you to install it and to utilize a vulnerability. All software in your computer is written by humans, and as we know, “mistake” is our human race’s middle name. Mistakes in computer programs are called bugs and a vulnerability is a special type of bug. Many bugs just affect the functionality of the program. Something may not work or work in an unexpected way. Applications are supposed to handle errors in a graceful way. But they may encounter erroneous data that the programmer didn’t anticipate. The application wreaks havoc and starts behaving in an unplanned way, and this may breach security. If this can happen, then there’s a vulnerability in the system.

An exploit is data that is carefully crafted by a hacker. Its purpose is to create an error that is no accident . What happens after the error is not chaotic after all; it is orchestrated by the hacker. He has at this point gained unauthorized control and the next task is to make sure that some malware is installed permanently on the system. The attacker has successfully exploited a vulnerability.

This may happen by just visiting a web page. The web page is a document that is rendered by your browser. If your browser has a vulnerability and you visit the wrong page you may be victim of a so called drive-by download. You surf the page comfortably unaware of the fact that a program silently is installed on your computer. And that’s not a friendly program!

But I have bought an antivirus program for good money. Doesn’t that protect me? Yes, that’s good. But we still recommend that you pay attention to patches as well. Your security product will detect and block malware that is about to execute. It will monitor your file transfers over the net and block harmful content. It will even check what sites you surf and warn when entering hostile territory. And if all that fails, executing programs are watched for suspicious behavior. But all this is a cat and mouse game. The bad guys come up with new clever tricks to circumvent all these layers and the security researchers upgrade the product to cope with them. If you are unlucky you can hit malware that your product can’t cope with yet. Remember that no product will ever give you 100% protection no matter what the sleek marketoids are claiming! But you are still fine if you have patched the vulnerability that the bad guys try to exploit. The malware has to go through that bottleneck so why not plug the hole? It can’t be done by your security vendor; it must be done by the vendor of the affected software. Your security suite can just build layers of security around the hole, but not correct errors in other products.

OK, I’m convinced. I want to start patching my system now. But how? One problem is that you probably have software from several vendors on your system. They all have to produce patches for their own product and there is no single outlet that would provide patches for all vendors. That’s one of the reasons why we have made F-Secure Safe Check . This free tool checks the security of your system from several different angles; your patching status is one of them. And you will get instructions about how to patch if that is needed. Why not run it right away!


PS. Some definitions: (Source: Wikipedia)

“In computer security, a vulnerability is a weakness which allows an attacker to reduce a system’s information assurance.”

“An exploit (from the verb to exploit, in the meaning of using something to one’s own advantage) is a piece of software, a chunk of data, or sequence of commands that takes advantage of a bug, glitch or vulnerability in order to cause unintended or unanticipated behaviour to occur on computer software, hardware, or something electronic (usually computerised).”

A patch is a piece of software designed to fix problems with, or update a computer program or its supporting data. This includes fixing security vulnerabilities and other bugs, and improving the usability or performance.”

More posts from this topic

The Dukes

“The Dukes” – Ask the Experts

Last week, F-Secure Labs published a new study that provides a detailed analysis of a hacking group called “the Dukes”. The Dukes are what’s known as an advanced persistent threat (APT) – a type of hacking campaign in which a group of attackers is able to covertly infiltrate an organization’s IT network and steal data, often over a long period of time while remaining undetected. The report provides a comprehensive analysis of the Dukes’ history, and provides evidence that security researchers and analysts say proves the various attacks discussed in the report are attributable to the Duke group. Furthermore, the new information contained in the report strengthens previous claims that the group is operating with support from the Russian government. Mikko Hypponen has said that attacker attribution is important, but it’s also complex and notoriously difficult, so the findings of the report have considerable security implications. I contacted several people familiar with the report to get some additional insights into the Dukes, the research, and what this information means to policy makers responsible for issues pertaining to national cybersecurity. Artturi Lehtiö (AL) is the F-Secure Researcher who headed the investigation and authored the report. He has published previous research on attacks that are now understood to have been executed by the Dukes. Patrik Maldre (PM) is a Junior Research Fellow at the International Center for Defense and Security, and has previously written about the Dukes, and the significance of this threat for global security. Mika Aaltola (MA) is the Program Director for the Global Security research program at the Finnish Institute for International Affairs. He published an article of his own examining how groups like the Dukes fit into the geopolitical ambitions of nations that employ them.   Q: What is the one thing that people must absolutely know about the Dukes? PM: They are using their capabilities in pursuit of Russian strategic interests, including economic and political domination in Central and Eastern Europe, as well as the Caucasus region, and a return to higher status at the international level. AL: They are a long-standing key part of Russian espionage activity in the cyber domain. MA: The geopolitical intention behind the vast majority of targets. Q: We now know the Dukes are responsible for a number of high profile attacks, and seemingly target information about politics and defense. But what kind of information might they obtain with their attacks, and why would it be valuable? AL: They might obtain information like meeting notes, memos, plans, and internal reports, not to mention email conversations. In essence, the Dukes aim to be a fly on the wall behind the closed doors of cabinets, meeting rooms, and negotiating tables. PM: The targets of the Dukes include government ministries, militaries, political think tanks, and parliaments. The information that can be gained from these organizations includes, among other things, sensitive communication among high-level officials, details of future political postures, data about strategic arms procurement plans, compromising accounts of ongoing intelligence operations, positions regarding current diplomatic negotiations, future positioning of strategic military contingents, plans for future economic investments, and internal debates about policies such as sanctions. MA: The targets are high value assets. Two things are important: data concerning the plans and decisions taken by the targeted organizations. Second, who is who in the organizations, what are the key decision-making networks, what possible weaknesses can be used and exploited, and how the organization can be used to gain access to other organizations. Q: The Dukes are typically classified as an APT. What makes the Dukes different from other APTs? MA: APT is a good term to use with the Dukes. However, there are some specific characteristics. The multi-year campaigning with relatively simple tools sets Dukes apart from e.g. Stuxnet. Also, the Dukes are used in psychological warfare. The perpetrators can even benefit from they actions becoming public as long as some deniability remains. AL: The sophistication of the Dukes does not come as much from the sophistication of their own methods as it comes from their understanding of their targets’ methods, what their targets’ weaknesses are, and how those can be exploited. PM: They are among the most capable, aggressive, and determined actors that have been publicly identified to be serving Russian strategic interests. The Dukes provide a very wide array of different capabilities that can be chosen based on the targets, objectives, and constraints of a particular operation. They appear to be acting in a brazen manner that indicates complete confidence in their immunity from law enforcement or domestic oversight by democratic bodies. Q: There are 9 distinctive Duke toolsets. Why would a single group need 9 different malware toolsets instead of just 1? AL: The Dukes attempt to use their wide arsenal of tools to stay one-step ahead of the defenders by frequently switching the toolset used. MA: They are constantly developing the tools and using them for different targets. Its an evolutionary process meant to trick different “immunity” systems. Much like drug cocktails can trick the HIV virus. PM: The different Duke toolsets provide flexibility and can be used to complement each other. For example, if various members of the Dukes are used to compromise a particular target and the infection is discovered, the incident responders may be led to believe that quarantines and remediation have been successful even though another member of the Dukes is still able to extract valuable information. Q: Many people reading this aren’t involved in geopolitics. What do you think non-policy makers can take away from this whitepaper? AL: This research aims to provide a unique window into the world of the Dukes, allowing people not traditionally involved with governmental espionage or hacking to gauge for themselves how their lives may be affected by activity like the Dukes. PM: It is important for people to understand the threats that are associated with these technological developments. The understanding of cybersecurity should grow to the point where it is on par with the wider public’s understanding of other aspects of international security, such as military strategy or nuclear non-proliferation. This knowledge is relevant for the exercise of fundamental liberties that are enjoyed in democratic societies, including freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of association, as well as of basic rights such as voting in elections. MA: The geopolitical intent is clearly present in this activity. However, the developments in this realm affects other types of cyber-attacks. Same methods spread. There is cross-fertilization, as in the case of Stuxnet that was soon adapted for other purposes by other groups.   F-Secure’s Business Security Insider blog recently posted a quick breakdown on how the Dukes typically execute their attacks, and what people can do to prevent becoming a victim of the Dukes or similar threats. Check it out for some additional information about the Dukes.

September 22, 2015
graveyard, RIP Flash, Is Flash dead

RIP Flash? Has Chrome signed Flash’s death warrant?

The first day of September may go down in internet security history -- and not just because it's the day when F-Secure Labs announced that its blog, which was the first antivirus industry blog ever, has moved to a new home. It's also the day that Google's Chrome began blocking flash ads from immediately loading, with the goal of moving advertisers to develop their creative in HTML5. Google is joining Amazon, whose complete rejection of Flash ads also begins on September 1. "This is a very good move on Amazon’s part and hopefully other companies will follow suit sooner than later," F-Secure Security Advisor Sean Sullivan wrote in August when Amazon made its announcement. "Flash-based ads are now an all-too-common security risk. Everybody will be better off without them." Last month, Adobe issued its 12th update in 2015 for the software addressing security and stability concerns. An estimated 90 percent of rich media ads are delivered through Flash. Having the world's largest online retailer reject your ad format is a significant nudge away from the plugin. But it would be difficult to overstate the impact of Chrome actively encouraging developers to drop Flash. About 1 out of every 2 people, 51.74 percent, who access the internet through a desktop browser do it via Chrome, according to StatCounter. This makes it the world's most popular web interface by far.   Facebook's Chief Security Officer has also recently called for the end of Flash and YouTube moved away from the format by default in January. “Newer technologies are available and becoming more popular anyway, so it would really be worth the effort to just speed up the adoption of newer, more secure technologies, and stop using Flash completely," F-Secure Senior Researcher Timo Hirvonen told our Business Insider blog. So what's keeping Flash alive? Massive adoption and advertisers. “Everyone in every agency’s creative department grew up using Adobe’s creative suite, so agencies still have deep benches of people who specialize in this,”Media Kitchen managing partner Josh Engroff told Digiday. “Moving away from it means new training and calibration.” And Flash does have some advantages over the format that seems fated to replace it. "HTML5 ads may be more beautiful, and are perceived to be more secure, but the files can be a lot larger than Flash," Business Insider's Laura O'Reilly wrote. In markets, stability can breed instability and it seems that our familiarity and reliance on Flash has resulted in unnecessary insecurity for our data. Has Flash hit its moment when its dominance rapidly evaporates? We can have hope. "I sincerely hope this is the end of Flash," Timo told us. Cheers, Sandra [Image by Sean MacEntee | Flickr]    

September 1, 2015