Category Archives: DDoS Vendors

Who’s hacking into UK unis? Spies, research-nickers… or rival gamers living in res hall?

Report fingers students and staff for academic cyber-attacks Who’s hacking into university systems? Here’s a clue from the UK higher education tech crew at Jisc: the attacks drop dramatically during summer break. A new study from Jisc (formerly the Joint Information Systems Committee) has suggested that rather than state-backed baddies or common criminals looking to siphon off academic research and personal information, staff or students are often the culprits in attacks against UK higher education institutions. The non-profit body, which provides among other things internet connectivity to universities, analysed 850 attacks in the 2017-18 academic year and found a consistent pattern that occurred during term time and the UK working day. Holidays brought with them a sharp reduction in attacks, from a peak 60-plus incidents a week during periods of the autumn term to a low of just one a week at times in the summer. It acknowledged that part of the virtual halt in summer may be down to cops and Feds cracking down on black hat distributed denial-of-service tools in the months prior, however. Jisc is perhaps better known among Reg readers for providing the Janet network to UK education and research institutions. Its data covered cyber-attacks against almost 190 universities and colleges and focused on denial-of-service and other large-scale infosec hits rather than phishing frauds and malware. Staff and students with a grudge or out to cause mischief are more credible suspects in much of this rather than external hackers or spies. More sophisticated hackers might be inclined to use DDoS as some sort of smokescreen. In a blog post, Jisc security operations centre head John Chapman admitted some of the evidence suggesting staff and students might be behind DDoS attacks is circumstantial. However, he pointed out evidence from law enforcement and detected cyber assaults supported this theory. For example, a four-day DDoS attack the unit was mitigating against was traced back to a university hall of residence – and turned out to be the result of a feud between two rival gamers. Whoever might be behind them, the number of incidents is growing. Attacks are up 42 per cent to reach this year’s 850; the previous academic year (2016-17) witnessed less than 600 attacks against fewer than 140 institutions. Matt Lock, director of solutions engineers at Varonis, said: “This report is another reminder that some of the biggest threats facing organisations today do not involve some hoodie-wearing, elusive computer genius.” Education is targeted more often than even the finance and retail sectors, according to McAfee research (PDF). Nigel Hawthorn, data privacy expert at McAfee, commented in March: “The kind of data held by universities (student records/intellectual property) is a valuable commodity for cyber criminals, so it is crucial that the security and education sectors work together to protect it. Source: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/09/17/cyber_attack_uk_universities/

See original article:
Who’s hacking into UK unis? Spies, research-nickers… or rival gamers living in res hall?

DDoS attacks: Students blamed for many university cyber attacks

DDoS attacks against university campuses are more likely in term time. Nation-states and criminal gangs often get the blame for cyber attacks against universities, but a new analysis of campaigns against the education sector suggests that students — or even staff — could be perpetrators of many of these attacks. Attributing cyber attacks is often a difficult task but Jisc, a not-for-profit digital support service for higher education, examined hundreds of DDoS attacks against universities and has come to the conclusion that “clear patterns” show these incidents take place during term-time and during the working day — and dramatically drop when students are on holiday. “This pattern could indicate that attackers are students or staff, or others familiar with the academic cycle. Or perhaps the bad guys simply take holidays at the same time as the education sector,” said John Chapman, head of security operations at Jisc. While the research paper notes that in many cases the reasons behind these DDoS campaigns can only be speculated about, just for fun, for the kudos and to settle grudges are cited as potential reasons. In one case, a DDoS attack against a university network which took place across four nights in a row was found to be specifically targeting halls of residence. In this instance, the attacker was launching an attack in order to disadvantage a rival in online games. The research notes that attacks against universities usually drop off during the summer — when students and staff are away — but that the dip for 2018 started earlier than it did in 2017. “The heat wave weather this year could have been a factor, but it’s more likely due to international law enforcement activity — Operation Power Off took down a ‘stresser’ website at the end of April,” said Chapman. The joint operation by law enforcement agencies around the world took down ‘Webstresser’, a DDoS for hire service which illegally sold kits for overwhelming networks and was, at the time, the world’s largest player in this space. This seemingly led to a downturn in DDoS attacks against universities. But universities ignore more advanced threats “at their peril” said Chapman. “It’s likely that some of these more sophisticated attacks are designed to steal intellectual property, targeting sensitive and valuable information held at universities and research centres.” Despite this, a recent survey by Jisc found that educational establishments weren’t taking cyber attacks seriously, as they weren’t considered a priority issue by many. “When it comes to cyber security, complacency is dangerous. We do everything we can to help keep our members’ safe, but there’s no such thing as a 100% secure network,” said Chapman. Source: https://www.zdnet.com/article/ddos-attacks-students-blamed-for-many-university-cyber-attacks/

View article:
DDoS attacks: Students blamed for many university cyber attacks

How to train your network: the role of artificial intelligence in network operations

With the help of machine learning and AI, software-defined networks could soon aid businesses with network management. A network that can fix and optimize itself without human intervention could become a reality soon – but not without some training. With the help of machine learning and artificial intelligence, software-defined networks can learn to help with network management by using operational data. Initial application of AI to WAN operations includes security functions such as DDoS attack mitigation as well as near real-time, automated path selection, and eventually AI-defined network topologies and basic operations essentially running on ‘auto-pilot’. Enhancing IT operations with artificial intelligence (AI), including configuration management, patching, and debugging and root cause analysis (RCA) is an area of significant promise – enough so that Gartner has defined the emerging market as “AIOps”. These platforms use big data and machine learning to enhance a broad range of IT operations processes, including availability and performance monitoring, event correlation and analysis, IT service management, and automation (Gartner “Market Guide for AIOps platforms,” August 2017). Gartner estimates that by 2022, 40 percent of all large enterprises will combine big data and machine learning functionality to support and partially replace monitoring, service desk and automation processes and tasks, up from five percent today. Limits of automation and policy for NetOps Given the traditional split between APM (application performance management) and NPM (network performance management), even the best network management tools aren’t always going to help trace the root cause of every application and service interruption. There can be interactions between network and application that give rise to an issue, or a router configuration and issue with a service provider that’s impacting application performance. Network operations personnel might respond to an incident by setting policies in the APM or NPM systems that will alert us when an unwanted event is going to happen again. The issue with policy-based management is that it is backwards looking. That’s because historical data is used to create into policies that should prevent something from happening again. Yet, policy is prescriptive; it doesn’t deal with unanticipated conditions. Furthermore, changes in business goals again more human intervention if there isn’t a matching rule or pre-defined action. On the whole, SD-WAN services represent an improvement over management of MPLS networks. Still, the use of an SD-WAN isn’t without its own challenges. Depending on the number of locations that have to be linked, there can be some complexity in managing virtual network overlays. The use of on-demand cloud services adds another layer of complexity. Without sufficient monitoring tools, problems can escalate and result in downtime. At the same time, adding people means adding cost, and potentially losing some of the cost efficiencies of SD-WAN services. AI is way forward for SD-WAN management What would AIOps bring to SD-WAN management? Starting with a programmable SD-WAN architecture is an important first step towards a vision of autonomous networking. Programmable in this case means API-driven, but the system also needs to leverage data from the application performance and security stack as well as the network infrastructure as inputs into the system so that we can move from simple alerting to intelligence that enables self-healing, managing and optimization with minimal human intervention. Monitoring all elements in the system in real time (or at least near real time) will require storing and analyzing huge amounts of data. On the hardware side, cloud IaaS services have made that possible. Acting on the information will require artificial intelligence in the form of machine learning. Use Cases for AI in SD-WAN There are a variety of ways to apply machine learning algorithms to large datasets from supervised to unsupervised (and points in between) with the result being applications in areas such as: Security, where unexpected network traffic patterns and patterns of requests against an application can be detected to prevent DDoS attacks. Enhancing performance of applications over the internet network with optimized route selection. Looking more closely at security as a use case, how would AI and ML be able to augment security of SD-WANs? While the majority of enterprises are still trying to secure their networks with on-premise firewalls and DDoS mitigation appliances, they are also facing attacks that are bigger and more sophisticated. According to statistics gathered by Verisign last year: DDoS attacks peaked at over 5Gbps approximately 25% of the time During Q3 2017, 29% of attacks combined five or more different attack types. Challenge : A multi-vector attack on an enterprise network has affected service availability in Europe. Response : Application of AIOps to the SD-WAN underlay can automate the response to the attack. Instead of manually re-configuring systems, the network can automatically direct traffic to different traffic scrubbing centers based on real-time telemetry around network and peering point congestion, mitigation capacity, and attack type/source. Because the system can process data from outside sources at speeds far beyond human ability to manage the network, the system can adjust traffic flows back to normal transit routes as soon as the attack subsides, saving money on the cost of attack mitigation. AI and ML in conjunction with a programmable SD-WAN are capable of responding more quickly and in more granular fashion than is possible with standard policy-based “automatic detection” and mitigation techniques. Where does AI in network go next? Although the industry is still in the early days of applying machine learning to networking, there are a number of efforts underway to keep an eye on. One is the Telecom Infra Project (TIP), founded by Facebook and telecom first firms such as Deutsche Telecom and SK Telecom, which now counts several hundred other companies as members. The TIP recently started collaborating on AI with an eye towards predictive maintenance and dynamic allocation of resources. Important groundwork for the project will include defining common dataset formats that are used to train systems. That work could lead to further sharing of data between network providers and web companies, offering the prospect of significant improvements to security and threat detection for enterprises and consumers. Further in the future, we might expect to see an AI designed network topology, combined with SDN control over resources. Networking will have moved from a paradigm of self-contained networks to a network ‘awareness’ overlay which enables coordinated, intelligent actions based on operator intention. Network engineers can put the system on ‘auto-pilot’ during everyday computing, and instead spend time orchestrating resources based on the goals of the business. Source: https://www.itproportal.com/features/how-to-train-your-network-the-role-of-artificial-intelligence-in-network-operations/

View article:
How to train your network: the role of artificial intelligence in network operations

A Scoville Heat Scale For Measuring Cybersecurity

The Scoville Scale is a measurement chart used to rate the heat of peppers or other spicy foods. It can also can have a useful application for measuring cybersecurity threats. Cyber-threats are also red hot as the human attack surface is projected to reach over 6 billion people by 2022. In addition, cyber-crime damage costs are estimated to reach $6 trillion annually by 2021. The cybersecurity firm RiskIQ states that every minute approximately 1,861 people fall victim to cyber-attacks, while some $1.14 million is stolen. In recognition of these alarming stats, perhaps it would be useful to categorize cyber-threats in a similar scale to the hot peppers we consume. I have provided my own Scoville Scale-like heat characterizations of the cyber threats we are facing below. Data Breaches: According to Juniper Research, over The Next 5 Years, 146 Billion Records Will Be Breached. The 2017 Annual Data Breach Year-end Review (Identity Theft Resource Center) found that 1,946,181,599 of records containing personal and other sensitive data that have been in compromised between Jan. 1, 2017, and March 20, 2018. The true tally of victims is likely much greater as many breaches go unreported. According to the Pew Research Center, a majority of Americans (65%) have already personally experienced a major data breach. On the Scoville scale, data breaches, by the nature of their growing exponential threat can be easily categorized at a “Ghost Pepper ” level. Malware: According to Forrester Research’s 2017 global security survey, there are 430 million types of malware online—up 40 percent from just three years ago. The Malware Tech Blog cited that 100,000 groups in at least 150 countries and more than 400,000 machines were infected by the Wannacry virus in 2017, at a total cost of around $4 billion. Malware is ubiquitous and we deal with it. It is a steady “Jalepeno Pepper” on the scale. Ransomware: Cybersecurity Ventures predicts that ransomware damage costs will rise to $11.5 billion in 2019 with an attack occurring every 14 seconds. According to McAfee Lab’s Threat Report covering Q4 2017, eight new malware samples were recorded every second during the final three months of 2017. Cisco finds that Ransomware attacks are growing more than 350 percent annually. Experts estimate that there are more than 125 separate families of ransomware and hackers have become very adept at hiding malicious code. Ransomware is scary and there is reason to panic, seems like a ”Fatali Pepper.” Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS): In 2016, DDoS attacks were launched against a Domain Name System (DNS) called Dyn. The attack directed thousands of IoT connected devices to overload and take out internet platforms and services. The attack used a simple exploit of a default password to target home surveillance cameras, and routers. DDoS is like a “Trinidad Pepper” as it can do quick massive damage and stop commerce cold. DDoS is particularly a frightening scenario for the retail, financial. and healthcare communities. Phishing: Phishing is a tool to infect malware, ransomware, and DDoS. The 2017 Ponemon State of Endpoint Security Risk Report found that 56% of organizations in a survey of 1,300 IT decision makers identified targeted phishing attacks as their biggest current cybersecurity threat. According to an analysis by Health Information Privacy/Security Alert, 46,000 new phishing sites are created every day. According to Webroot, An average of 1.385 million new, unique phishing sites are created each month. The bottom line it is easy anyone to be fooled by a targeted phish. No one is invulnerable to a crafty spear-phish, especially the C-Suite. On the Scoville Scale, Phishing is prolific, persistent, and often causes harm. I rate it at the “Habanero Pepper” level. Protecting The Internet of Things : The task of securing IoT is increasingly more difficult as mobility, connectivity and the cyber surface attack space grows. Most analysts conclude that there will be more than 20 billion connected Internet devices by 2020. According to a study conducted in April of 2017 by The Altman Vilandrie & Company, neary half of U.S. firms using The Internet of Things experienced cybersecurity breaches. Last year, Symantec noted that IoT attacks were up 600 percent. Analysts predict 25 percent of cyber-attacks in 2020 will target IoT environments. Protect IoT can be the “ Carolina Reaper” as everything connected is vulnerable and the consequences can be devastating. Lack of Skilled Cybersecurity Workers : Both the public and private sectors are facing major challenges from a dearth of cybersecurity talent. As companies evolve toward digital business, people with cybersecurity skills are becoming more difficult to find and more expensive for companies to hire and keep . A report out from Cybersecurity Ventures estimates there will be 3.5 million unfilled cybersecurity jobs by 2021. A 2017 research project by the industry analyst firm Enterprise Strategy Group (ESG ) and the Information Systems Security Association (ISSA) found that 70 percent of cybersecurity professionals claimed their organization was impacted by the cybersecurity skills shortage. On the Scoville Scale, I rate the skills shortage as a “Scotch Bonett,” dangerous but perhaps automation, machine learning and artificial intelligence can ease the pain. Insider Threats: Insider threats can impact a company’s operational capabilities, cause significant financial damages, and harm a reputation. The IBM Cyber Security Index found that 60% of all cyber- attacks were carried out by insiders. And according to a recent Accenture HfS Research report 69% of enterprise security executives reported experiencing an attempted theft or corruption of data by insiders over one year. Malicious insider intrusions can involve theft of IP, social engineering; spear-phishing attacks, malware, ransomware, and in some cases sabotage. Often overlooked, insider threats correlate to a “Red Savina Habanero.” Identity Theft : Nearly 60 million Americans have been affected by identity theft, according to a 2018 online survey by The Harris Poll. The reason for the increased rate of identity fraud is clear. As we become more and more connected, the more visible and vulnerable we become to those who want to hack our accounts and steal our identities. We are often enticed via social media or email phishing. Digital fraud and stealing of our identities is all too common and associated closely to data breaches, a “Chocolate Habanero.” Crypto-mining and Theft : Crypto poses relatively new threats to the cybersecurity ecosystem. Hackers need computing power to find and “mine” for coins and can hijack your computer processor while you are online. Hackers place algorithm scripts on popular websites that people innocently visit. You might not even know you are being hijacked. Trend Micro disclosed that Crypto-mining malware detections jumped 956% in the first half of 2018 versus the whole of last year. Also, paying ransomware in crypto currencies seems to be a growing trend. The recent WannaCry and the Petya ransomware attackers demanded payment in bitcoin. On The Scoville Scale, it’s still early for crypto and the threats may evolve but right now a “Tabasco Pepper.” Potential Remedies: Cybersecurity at its core essence is guided by risk management: people, process, policies, and technologies. Nothing is completely invulnerable, but there are some potential remedies that can help us navigate the increasingly malicious cyber threat landscape. Some of these include: Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning Automation and Adaptive Networks Biometrics and Authentication Technologies Blockchain Cloud Computing Cryptography/Encryption Cyber-hygiene Cyber Insurance Incident Response Plans Information Threat Sharing Managed Security Services Predictive Analytics Quantum-computing and Super-Computing And … Cold Milk The bottom line is that as we try to keep pace with rising cybersecurity threat levels, we are all going to get burned in one way or another. But we can be prepared and resilient to help mitigate the fire. Keeping track of threats on any sale can be useful toward those goals. Chuck Brooks is the Principal Market Growth Strategist for General Dynamics Mission Systems for Cybersecurity and Emerging Technologies. He is also Adjunct Faculty in Georgetown University’s Graduate Applied Intelligence program. Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/cognitiveworld/2018/09/05/a-scoville-heat-scale-for-measuring-cybersecurity/#15abda233275

View the original here:
A Scoville Heat Scale For Measuring Cybersecurity

Brit teen arrested for involvement in DDoS attack on ProtonMail

George Duke-Cohan was recruited by criminal group Apophis Squad A 19-YEAR-OLD MEMBER of hacking group Apophis Squad has been arrested by British cops. George Duke-Cohan from Watford, who uses the aliases ‘7R1D3N7?, ‘DoubleParalla’ and ‘optcz1?, was identified after the criminal group launched a series of DDoS attacks on Swiss-based encrypted email and VPN provider ProtonMail in June. Writing on the ProtonMail blog, CEO Andy Yen said that a team of security researchers had assisted the firm in investigating those responsible for the attacks. “Our security team began to investigate Apophis Squad almost immediately after the first attacks were launched. In this endeavour, we were assisted by a number of cybersecurity professionals who are also ProtonMail users,” he said. “It turns out that despite claims by Apophis Squad that federal authorities would never be able to find them, they themselves did not practice very good operational security. In fact, some of their own servers were breached and exposed online.” Yen did not go into details about how Duke-Cohan was ‘conclusively’ identified, save to say that “intelligence provided by a trusted source” played a part. The group attacked ProtonMail in June, apparently on a whim, but the attacks intensified after CTO Bart Butler responded to a tweet from the group, saying “we’re back you clowns”. Apophis Squad also attacked Tutanota, another encrypted email provider. Users of ProtonMail email and VPN services saw them briefly disrupted, but “due to the efforts of Radware, F5 Networks, and our infrastructure team, we were able keep service disruptions to a minimum,” Yen said. As a member of Apophis Squad, Duke-Cohan was also involved in making hoax bomb threats to schools and colleges and airlines which saw 400 educational facilities in the UK and USA evacuated and a United Airlines flight grounded in San Francisco in March. He pleaded guilty in Luton Magistrates Court to three counts of making bomb threats and is due to appear before Luton Crown Court on September 21 to face further charges. He also faces possible extradition to the US. Marc Horsfall, senior investigating officer at the National Crime Agency said: “George Duke-Cohan made a series of bomb threats that caused serious worry and inconvenience to thousands of people, not least an international airline. He carried out these threats hidden behind a computer screen for his own enjoyment, with no consideration for the effect he was having on others.” Duke-Cohan’s parents have said he was “groomed” by “serious people” online through playing the game Minecraft. Apophis Squad is thought to be based in Russia. ProtonMail’s Yen said other attackers have also been identified and the authorities notified. “We will investigate to the fullest extent possible anyone who attacks ProtonMail or uses our platform for crime. We will also cooperate with law enforcement agencies within the framework of Swiss law,” he said. Source: https://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/3062293/brit-teen-arrested-for-involvement-in-ddos-attack-on-protonmail

More here:
Brit teen arrested for involvement in DDoS attack on ProtonMail

The evolution of DDoS attacks – and defences

Aatish Pattni, regional director, UK & Ireland, Link11, explores in Information Age how DDoS attacks have grown in size and sophistication over the last two decades. What is the biggest cyber-threat to your company? In April 2018, the UK’s National Crime Agency answered that question by naming DDoS attacks as the joint leading threat facing businesses, alongside ransomware. The NCA noted the sharp increase in DDoS attacks on a range of organisations during 2017 and into 2018, and advised organisations to take immediate steps to protect themselves against the potential attacks. It’s no surprise that DDoS is seen as such a significant business risk. Every industry sector is now reliant on web connectivity and online services. No organisation can afford to have its systems offline or inaccessible for more than a few minutes: business partners and consumers expect seamless, 24/7 access to services, and being forced offline costs a company dearly. A Ponemon Institute study found that each DDoS incident costs $981,000 on average, including factors such as lost sales and productivity, the effect on customers and suppliers, the cost of restoring IT systems, and brand damage. So how have DDoS attacks evolved from their early iterations as stunts used by attention-seeking teens, to one of the biggest threats to business? What techniques are attackers now using, and how can organisations defend themselves? Early days of DDoS The first major DDoS attack to gain international attention was early in 2000, launched by a 15-year-old from Canada who called himself Mafiaboy. His campaign effectively broke the internet, restricting access to the web’s most popular sites for a full week, including Yahoo!, Fifa.com, Amazon.com, eBay, CNN, Dell, and more. DDoS continued to be primarily a tool for pranks and small-scale digital vandalism until 2007, when a range of Estonian banking, news, and national government websites were attacked. The attack sparked nationwide riots and is widely regarded as one of the world’s first nation-state acts of cyberwar. The technique is also successful as a diversion tactic, to draw the attention of IT and security teams while a second attack is launched: another security incident accompanies up to 75% of DDoS attacks. Denial of service has also been used as a method of protest by activist groups including Anonymous and others, to conduct targeted take-downs of websites and online services. Anonymous has even made its attacks tools freely available for anyone to use. Recent years have also seen the rise of DDoS-on-demand services such as Webstresser.org. Before being shut down by international police, Webstresser offered attack services for as little as £11, with no user expertise required – yet the attacks were powerful enough to disrupt operations at seven of the UK’s biggest banks. Amplified and multi-vector attacks In October 2016, a new method for distributing DoS attacks emerged – using a network of Internet of Things (IoT) devices to amplify attacks. The first of these, the Mirai botnet infected thousands of insecure IoT devices to power the largest DDoS attack witnessed at the time, with volumes over a Terabyte. By attacking Internet infrastructure company Dyn, Mirai brought down Reddit, Etsy, Spotify, CNN and the New York Times. This was just a signpost showing how big attacks could become. In late February 2018, developer platform Github was hit with a 1.35 Tbps attack, and days later a new record was set with an attack volume exceeding 1.7 Tbps. These massive attacks were powered by artificial intelligence (AI) and self-learning algorithms which amplified their scale, giving them the ability to disrupt the operations of any organisation, of any size. Attacks are not only getting bigger but are increasingly multi-vector. In Q4 2017, Link11 researchers noted that attackers are increasingly combining multiple DDoS attack techniques. Over 45% of attacks used 2 or more different techniques, and for the first time, researchers saw attacks which feature up to 12 vectors. These sophisticated attacks are difficult to defend against, and even low-volume attacks can cause problems, as happened in early 2018 when online services from several Dutch banks, financial and government services were brought to a standstill. Staying ahead of next-generation AI-based attacks As DDoS attacks now have such massive scale and complexity, traditional DDoS defences can no longer withstand them. Firewalls, special hardware appliances and intrusion detection systems are the main pillars of protection against DDoS, but these all have major limitations. Current attack volume levels can easily overload even high-capacity firewalls or appliances, consuming so many resources that that reliable operation is no longer possible. Extortion by DDoS The next iteration of attackers set out to use DDoS as an extortion tool, threatening organisations with an overwhelming attack unless they meet the attacker’s demand for cryptocurrency. Notable extortionists included the original Armada Collective, which targeted banks, web hosting providers, data centre operators as well as e-commerce and online marketing agencies in Greece and Central Europe. Between January and March 2018, Link11’s Security Operation Centre recorded 14,736 DDoS attacks, an average of 160 attacks per day, with multiple attacks exceeding 100 Gbps. Malicious traffic at these high volumes can simply flood a company’s internet bandwidth, rendering on-premise network security solutions useless. What’s needed is to deploy a cloud-native solution that can use AI to filter, analyse, and block web traffic if necessary before it even reaches a company’s IT systems. This can be done by routing the company’s Internet traffic via an external, cloud-based protection service. With this approach, incoming traffic is subject to granular analysis, with the various traffic types being digitally ‘fingerprinted’. Each fingerprint consists of hundreds of properties, including browser data, user behaviour, and its origin. The solution builds up an index of both normal and abnormal, or malicious traffic fingerprints. When known attack patterns are detected in a traffic flow, the attack ‘client’ is blocked immediately and automatically in the cloud, before it even reaches customers’ networks – so that only clean; legitimate traffic reaches the organisation. However, regular traffic is still allowed, enabling a business to continue unaffected, without users being aware of the filtering process. The solution’s self-learning AI algorithms also help to identify and block attacks for which there is no current fingerprint within a matter of seconds, to minimise the impact on the organisation’s website or web services. This means each new attack helps the system improve its detection capabilities, for the benefit of all users. Furthermore, this automated approach to blocking attacks frees up IT and security teams, enabling them to focus on more strategic work without being distracted by DDoS attempts. In conclusion, DDoS attacks will continue to evolve and grow, simply because with DDoS-for-hire services and increasingly sophisticated methods, they are relatively easy and cheap to do – and they continue to be effective in targeting organisations. But by understanding how attacks are evolving and implementing the protective measures described here, organisations will be better placed to deny DDoS attackers. Source: https://www.information-age.com/evolution-of-ddos-123473947/

WP Engine launches Global Edge Security for WordPress with Cloudflare

WP Engine announced the launch of Global Edge Security, an enterprise-class security solution built from Cloudflare’s Internet performance and security solutions. Global Edge Security integrates WP Engine’s platform, which powers more than 80,000 global customers, with Cloudflare’s managed web application firewall (WAF), distributed denial of service (DDoS) mitigation, SSL/TLS encryption, and CDN across a global edge network spanning more than 70 countries to deliver digital experiences on WordPress. WP Engine’s Global Edge Security is a … More ? The post WP Engine launches Global Edge Security for WordPress with Cloudflare appeared first on Help Net Security .

View original post here:
WP Engine launches Global Edge Security for WordPress with Cloudflare

Mikrotik routers pwned en masse, send network data to mysterious box

Researchers uncover botnet malware pouncing on security holes More than 7,500 Mikrotik routers have been compromised with malware that logs and transmits network traffic data to an unknown control server.…

Department of Labour denies server compromise in recent cyberattack

The government department says the attack did not expose any sensitive or confidential information. The South African Department of Labour has confirmed a recent cyberattack which disrupted the government agency’s website. In a statement, the Department of Labour said that a distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attack was launched against the organization’s front-facing servers over the weekend. According to the department’s acting chief information officer Xola Monakali, the “attempt was through the external Domain Name Server (DNS) server which is sitting at the State Information Technology Agency,” and “no internal servers, systems, or client information were compromised, as they are separated with the relevant protection in place.” The government agency has asked external cybersecurity experts to assist in the investigation. DDoS attacks are often launched through botnets, which contain countless enslaved devices — ranging from standard PCs to IoT devices — which are commanded to flood a domain with traffic requests. When the volume reaches peak levels, this can prevent legitimate traffic from being able to access the same resource, leading to service disruption. Some of the worst we have seen in recent times include the Mirai botnet, made up of millions of compromised IoT devices, which was powerful enough to disrupt online services across an entire country. With the rapid adoption of IoT and connected devices, including mobile products, routers, smart lighting and more, botnets have become more powerful. Unfortunately, many of our IoT products lag behind in security and the use of lax or default credentials, open ports, and unpatched firmware has led to botnets which automatically scan for vulnerable devices online and add them to the slave pool with no-one the wiser. In July, a threat actor was able to create a botnet 18,000 device-strong in only 24 hours. The botnet scanned the Internet for connected devices left unpatched against Huawei router vulnerability CVE-2017-17215. It is not known who is behind the DDoS attack against the government agency. However, News24 reports that hacker “Paladin” may be responsible. The individual reportedly tipped off reporters that the attack was taking place as a test for a “full-scale attack” due to take place in the future against another government website. Paladin is also believed to be responsible for DDoS attacks launched against SA Express, the country’s Presidency domain, and the Department of Environmental Affairs. Source: https://www.zdnet.com/article/department-of-labour-denies-server-compromise-in-recent-cyberattack/

View the original here:
Department of Labour denies server compromise in recent cyberattack

Rise in multifunctional botnets

There is a growing demand around the world for multifunctional malware that is not designed for specific purposes but is flexible enough to perform almost any task. This was revealed by Kaspersky Lab researchers in a report on botnet activity in the first half of 2018. The research analysed more than 150 malware families and their modifications circulating through 600 000 botnets around the world. Botnets are large ‘nets’ of compromised machines that are used by cybercriminals to carry out nefarious activities, including DDoS attacks, spreading malware or sending spam. Kaspersky monitors botnet activity on an ongoing basis to prevent forthcoming attacks or to stop a new type of banking Trojan before it spreads. It does this by employing technology that emulates a compromised device , trapping the commands received from threat actors that are using the botnets to distribute malware. Researchers gain valuable malware samples and statistics in the process. Drop in single-purpose malware The first half of 2018 also saw the number of single-purpose pieces of malware distributed through botnets dropping significantly in comparison to the second half of 2017. In H2 2017, 22.46% of all unique malware strands were banking Trojans. This number dropped to 13.25% in the first half of this year. Moreover, the number of spamming bots, another type of single-purpose malware distributed through botnets, decreased dramatically, from 18.93% in the second half of 2017 to 12.23% in the first half 2018. DDoS bots, yet another typical single-purpose malware, also dropped, from 2.66% to 1.99%, in the same period. The only type of single-purpose malicious programs to demonstrate notable growth within botnet networks were miners. Even though their percentage of registered files is not comparable to highly popular multifunctional malware, their share increased two-fold and this fits in the general trend of a malicious mining boom, as noted in previous reports. There’s a RAT in my PC Alongside these findings, the company noted distinctive growth in malware that is more versatile, in particular Remote Access Tools (RATs) that give cyber crooks almost unlimited opportunities for exploiting infected machines. Since H1 2017, the share of RAT files found among the malware distributed by botnets almost doubled, rising from 6.55% to 12.22%, with the Njrat, DarkComet and Nanocore varieties topping the list of the most widespread RATs. “Due to their relatively simple structure, the three backdoors can be modified even by an amateur threat actor. This allows the malware to be adapted for distribution in a specific region,” the researchers said. Trojans, which can also be employed for a range of purposes, did not grow as much as RATs, but unlike a lot of single-purpose malware, still increased 32.89% in H2 2017 to 34.25% in H1 2018. In a similar manner to RATs, Trojans can be modified and controlled by multiple command and control servers, for a range of nefarious activities, including cyberespionage or the theft of personal information. Bot economy Alexander Eremin, a security expert at Kaspersky Lab, says the reason multipurpose malware is taking the lead when it comes to botnets is clear. “Botnet ownership costs a significant amount of money and, in order to make a profit, criminals must be able to use each and every opportunity to get money out of malware. A botnet built out of multipurpose malware can change its functions relatively quickly and shift from sending spam to DDoS or to the distribution of banking Trojans.” In addition to switching between different ‘active’ malicious activities, it also opens an opportunity for a passive income, as the owner can simply rent out their botnet to other criminals, he added. Source: https://www.itweb.co.za/content/LPwQ57lyaoPMNgkj

Link:
Rise in multifunctional botnets