CryptoWall 3.0 Strikes To Close for Comfort

Instead of testing Windows Server 2016 TPv4 a bit more during “slow” hours we got distracted from that a bit CryptoWall 3.0 strikes to close for Comfort. Last week we, my team and I, had to distinct displeasure of having to tackle a “ransomware” infection inside a business network. Talk about petting a burning dog.

We were lucky on a few fronts. The anti malware tools got the infection in the act and shut it down. We went from zero and 100 miles per hour and had the infected or suspect client systems ripped of the network and confiscated.  We issue a brand new imaged PC in such incidents. No risks are taken there.

Then there was a pause … anything to be seen on the anti malware tools? Any issues being reported?  Tick tock … tick tock … while we were looking at the logs to see what we were dealing with. Wait Out …

Contact! The first reports came in about issues with opening files on the shares and soon the service desk found the dreaded images on subfolders on those shares.

image

Pucker time as we moved to prevent further damage and started an scan & search for more encrypted files and evidence of damage. I’m not going to go into detail about what, why, when and how. As in all fights you have to fight as you are. No good wishing for better defenses, tools, skills or training. At that moment you do what you think you need to do to contain the situation, clean up, restore data and hope for the best.

What can I say? We got lucky. We did our best. I’d rather not have to do that again. We have multiple types of backup & restore capabilities and that was good. But you do not want to call all data lost beyond a point and start restoring dozen of terabytes of corporate data to a last know good without any insight on the blast radius and fall out of that incident.

The good thing was our boss was on board to do what needed and could be done and let us work. We tried to protect our data while we started the cleanup and restores where needed. It could have been a lot uglier, costlier and potentially deadly. This time our data protection measures saved the day. And at least 2 copies of those were save from infection. Early detection and response was key. The rest was luck.

Crypto wall moves fast. It attempts to find active command and control infrastructure immediately. As soon as it gets it public key from the command and control server that it starts using to encrypt files. The private key securely hidden behind “a pay wall” somewhere in a part of the internet you don’t want to know about. All that happens in seconds. Stopping that is hard. Being fast limits damage. Data recovery options are key. Everyday people are being trapped by phishing e-mails with malicious attachments, drive by downloads on infected website or even advertisement networks.

Read more on CryptoWall 3.0 here https://www.sentinelone.com/blog/anatomy-of-cryptowall-3-0-a-look-inside-ransomwares-tactics/  Details on how to protect and detect depend on your anti malware solution. It’s very sobering, to say the least.

It makes me hate corporate apps that require outdated browsers even more. Especially since we’ve been able to avoid that till now. But knowing all to well forces are at work to introduce those down grade browsers with “new” software. Insanity at its best.

Out-of-Band Update MS15-078: Vulnerability in Microsoft font driver could allow remote code execution: July 16, 2015 – KB3079904

This morning at work, with a cup of coffee, I was glancing over the e-mail and was greeted by “ADVANCE NOTIFICATION – Microsoft Out of Band Security Bulletin Release July 20, 2015”

image

So Microsoft will release an emergency Out-of-Band (OOB) security update today that is valid for all windows versions and deals with a remote code execution vulnerability. It’s marked as critical but there is very little other information for the moment.

Just now it became available via MS15-078: Vulnerability in Microsoft font driver could allow remote code execution: July 16, 2015.

This security update resolves a vulnerability in Windows that could allow remote code execution if a user opens a specially crafted document or goes to an untrusted webpage that contains embedded OpenType fonts. To learn more about the vulnerability, see Microsoft Security Bulletin MS15-078.

This security update is rated Critical for all supported releases of Microsoft Windows. For more information, see the Affected Software section.

Windows Server 2012 R2 Datacenter
Windows Server 2012 R2 Standard
Windows Server 2012 R2 Essentials
Windows Server 2012 R2 Foundation
Windows 8.1 Enterprise
Windows 8.1 Pro
Windows 8.1
Windows RT 8.1
Windows Server 2012 Datacenter
Windows Server 2012 Standard
Windows Server 2012 Essentials
Windows Server 2012 Foundation
Windows 8 Enterprise
Windows 8 Pro
Windows 8
Windows RT
Windows Server 2008 R2 Service Pack 1
Windows 7 Service Pack 1
Windows Server 2008 Service Pack 2
Windows Vista Service Pack 2

The funny thing is that is shows up as important and not as critical in Windows Update.

image

Get you’re due diligence done before rolling it out but don’t delay it for to long! It’s a critical one!

MS15-068: Vulnerability in Windows Hyper-V could allow remote code execution: July 14, 2015

Hi people, Hyper-V has been blessed with a very good security track record. The few security issues that did arise over the years have always been resolved quickly. Today it’s

time to act fast once again and make sure you have your security & patch process act together.

Note the following:

  • Microsoft has not identified any mitigating factors for this vulnerability.
  • Microsoft has not identified any workarounds for this vulnerability.

This security update resolves vulnerabilities in Windows that could allow remote code execution in a host context if a specially crafted application is run by an authenticated and privileged user on a guest virtual machine that is hosted by Hyper-V. An attacker must have valid logon credentials for a guest virtual machine to exploit this vulnerability.

To learn more about the vulnerability, see Microsoft Security Bulletin MS15-068

This one is critical. So do not delay long after your smoke testing of this patch.You have some time to act but don’t wait too long:

Microsoft received information about this vulnerability through coordinated vulnerability disclosure. When this security bulletin was originally issued Microsoft had not received any information to indicate that this vulnerability had been publicly used to attack customers.

Go and secure your environment wisely and effectively now.

SSL Certs And Achieving “A” Level Security With Older Windows Versions

So a mate of mine pings me. Says they have an problem with their web mail SSL security  (Exchange 2010) running virtualized on Hyper-V.  The security guy states they need to move to a more secure platform that supports “modern SSL standards” and proposes to migrate from Exchange 2010 to Exchange 2013 in an emergency upgrade. Preferably to VMware as “MickeySoft” is insecure. Oh boy! Another profit of disaster who says the ship is lost unless …

You immediately know that the “security guy” is an incompetent fraud who only reads the IT press tabloids, runs some  freely available vulnerability toys (some are quite good) to determine what to check off on his list and shout out some “the sky is falling” rubbish to justify his daily rate and guarantee his paycheck. I’ve said it before, your mother told you not to trust strangers just like that, so why do so many companies do this with “consultants”? Choose your advisers wisely and remember Machiavelli’s notes on the use of mercenaries Winking smile!

  • VMware is not more secure than Hyper-V. That’s so wrong and so loaded with prejudice it immediately invalidates the persons credibility & reputation. If you need proof, do your research but as a recent example the “HeartBleed” issue left VMware scrambling, not Hyper-V. And for what it’s worth. IT security is like crime, statistically we’ll all be victims a couple of times in our life time.
  • Exchange 2010 running on Windows 2008R2 fully patched is just fine. So what was all the drama about? The issue was that the Qualys SSL Labs tool gave their Outlook Web Access a F grade. Why? Well they still allowed SSL 2.0, they didn’t run TLS 1.2 and they don’t have Forward Secrecy support.

My advice to my buddy? First he needs to get better security advice. Secondly, to get an “A” for secure SSL configuration all you need to is some easy tweaking. You don’t want to support any clients that can’t handle the better SSL configurations anyway. No one should be allowed to use these anyway. But what do I use? SSL 3.0? TLS 1.0/1.1/1.2? What to use & do? Here’s some documentation on how to enable/disable protocols: How to restrict the use of certain cryptographic algorithms and protocols in Schannel.dll. This will tell you how to do it? But which SSL versions can you dump today without suffering to many support calls. Server side, drop SSL 2.0 & SSL 3.0, keep TLS 1.0/1.1/1.2. On the client side you’ll need to do the same. That will keep most things working. Not ideal but the trick is to allow / enable the better protocols server side so all clients that can use it, can use it, while you block the really bad ones that just don’t have any use any more. We’ll play a bit with this.

Test 1: Disable SSL 2.0 and Enable SSL 3.0

image

As you can see this gave them an B grade. We need to enforce the current best TLS 1.2 protocol to get that and we might want to get rid of SSL 3.0 as XP &n IE 6.0 have had there time and that’s over.

Test 2: Enable TLS 1.2

There you go. I hope this helps you out if you need to make sure you environment supports only more modern, stronger protocols.

image

There it is. A- Smile Compliance achieved! Now it would best to disable SSL 2.0/3.0, TLS 1.0/1.1 on the server and forget about any browsers, operating systems and software that can’t handle it. But that’s not that easily done you’ll need Outlook 2013 for RPC over HTTP if you want to enforce TLS 1.2. But as far as the auditors go they are all so happy now and effectively you’re now supporting the more modern clients. Now my buddy can get to an A or A+ rating when they make sure to get Forward secrecy support in the future. I really advise the latter as HeartBleed made it obvious the wide use of this is long overdue.

Some Testing Fun

Grab a laptop, WireShark and a number of twitter clients, cloud storage products and take a peak a what version of SSL/TLS those apps use. Some tests you can do:

MetroTwit uses SSLv3, OneDrive uses TLSv1, Yammer seems to be at TLSv1 as well. Try disabling TSL 1.0 on a client and see how it breaks Outlook  2010 RPC over HTTPS and even OneDrive by the way.

image

What you can get away with depends on the roles of the servers and the level security the clients for that role can handle.

Won’t this break functionality?

As you’ve seen above it can but for what matters on the e-mail server, probably not. If it does you’re in need of some major work on your client infrastructure. But in most cases you’ll be fine, especially with web browsers. But I have a underpaid employee who needs food stamp support so she cannot afford to upgrade her PC from Windows XP! Dude, pay a decent living wage, please. That aside, yes you can turn on better protocol support and block the oldest, most insecure ones on your servers. You call the shots on the use of your businesses infrastructure and you are under no obligation to allow your employees to access your services with obsolete clients. You want to be in the green zone, in the right column with TLS 1.2 if possible, but that’s going to be a challenge for a lot of services.

image

Do as I say, don’t do as I do

The funny thing is that I ran the same test against the web (mainly e-mail) servers of 4 governments levels that are enforcing/promoting the (mandatory) use of security officers in an attempt to get to a more secure web for the benefit of all man kind. Not only does this fail because of such fine examples of security officers but 2/3 don’t seem to take their own medicine. The intentions are good I’m sure but the road to hell is paved with those and while compliancy is not the same a being secure, even this is hard to get to it seems.

Federal Government Department

image

Undisclosed State Government

image

Undisclosed Local Government

image

Medium Sized City (they did well compared to the above braches with more resources)

image

Don’t panic

That’s what it says on the cover of “The Official Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy Companion”. Get some good advise and if you want or read more about how the rating is done (as of 2014) then please read this SSL Labs: Stricter Security Requirements for 2014 which also provide a link to their SSL Server Rating Guide.