[HN Gopher] China state-sponsored cyber actor living off the lan...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       China state-sponsored cyber actor living off the land to evade
       detection [pdf]
        
       Author : mmwelt
       Score  : 88 points
       Date   : 2023-05-28 15:17 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (media.defense.gov)
 (TXT) w3m dump (media.defense.gov)
        
       | badrabbit wrote:
       | Oh wow, so living off the land is the same as "hands-on-keyboard"
       | activity now? They used impacket ffs! This is a very typical
       | post-compromise playbook many actors use. A lot of this might
       | even be considered bad opsec.
       | 
       | This is why it is said that APTs are usually not very
       | sophisticated, they just have a lot of resources.
        
         | pphysch wrote:
         | Yeah, this seems like a classic case of "random mundane thing"
         | + "namedrop China" = "srs bsns" + someone getting promoted
        
       | alexeldeib wrote:
       | Here I thought this was about human spies on US soil avoiding
       | leaving a digital trace of their real identities...
        
         | ssss11 wrote:
         | Maybe it should be called living on the sand (silicon) instead
        
       | yellow_lead wrote:
       | I believe even an expert security researcher would have a hard
       | time using windows as a personal machine without getting hacked.
       | There are so many attack vectors and the security
       | updates+guidance from Microsoft is completely lacking.
        
         | mmastrac wrote:
         | Most serious security researchers use an airgapped laptop with
         | a wireless card pulled or otherwise disabled. There's far fewer
         | ways to compromise a laptop where the only comms are on a USB
         | stick physically transported between two computers, though it's
         | not necessarily impossible.
        
       | cookieperson wrote:
       | Not a single mention of Linux. Hope the windows community comes
       | together and finds ways to harden these exploits
        
         | supriyo-biswas wrote:
         | Run a SSH honeypot. You can capture plenty of Linux malware.
        
           | cookieperson wrote:
           | Oh for sure. Just saying in this specific bulletin there's no
           | mention of Linux or macos targets.
        
           | some_random wrote:
           | Yeah lots of really, really low quality malware
        
         | belltaco wrote:
         | There are mentions of Linux right at the beginning:
         | 
         | >The actor has leveraged compromised small office/home office
         | (SOHO) network devices as intermediate infrastructure to
         | obscure their activity by having much of the command and
         | control (C2) traffic emanate from local ISPs in the geographic
         | area of the victim.
         | 
         | None of those devices are running Windows.
        
         | waihtis wrote:
         | the cynic in me thinks the bad linux activity is there, but the
         | targets do not have any kind of linux monitoring in place to
         | spot activity
        
           | SoftTalker wrote:
           | If you're just running a random linux server that isn't an
           | otherwise "interesting" target the only times I've seen those
           | get compromised is by some ludicrously dumb configuration
           | mistakes, such as running databases with a default admin
           | password and no firewall, etc.
        
           | cookieperson wrote:
           | It's a less interesting target for a lot of widespread
           | attacks. Consider the surface area of Linux machines vs
           | Windows? Most big corporations run on windows, even if devs
           | rock Linux, that's not usually what these types of attacks
           | are after.
           | 
           | That said you are right. Most Linux users ride on insecure
           | machines. I remember talking to someone who had no idea they
           | had to set up a firewall. They had switched from Linux 2
           | years prior under the guise that it was more secure than
           | windows out of the box. I wish Linux security was talked
           | about more. The people who know how to do it assume everyone
           | does, and the people who don't... don't know what they don't
           | know.
        
       | supriyo-biswas wrote:
       | Are LOLBINs still an issue for most companies? I was under the
       | impression that most endpoint detection products simply trace all
       | syscalls, and therefore can somewhat accurately extract
       | information about exploitation events without relying on a
       | "foreign" file artifact.
        
         | some_random wrote:
         | LOLBINs are very much an issue at pretty much every company
         | there is, just because there's a way to detect them doesn't
         | mean they're actually detected, or that an alert is made, or
         | that the alert is triaged correctly, or that EDR is even turned
         | on, etc
        
         | kryogen1c wrote:
         | > Are LOLBINs still an issue for most companies?
         | 
         | Depends. The TS/SCI enclave at Raytheon R&D is probably locked
         | down. However, most of the (sub)contracting work is done by
         | small-medium business America and they've never even heard of
         | lolbins.
        
           | IIAOPSW wrote:
           | lolbin is the trash can for all these meaningless technoblab
           | alerts that you laugh at right?
        
         | waihtis wrote:
         | it's a needle in the haystack issue. plus most EDR products do
         | not actually alert on benign looking syscalls as it'll quickly
         | cause an false positive overload
        
           | supriyo-biswas wrote:
           | I would be very surprised if EDR products didn't use some
           | form of anomaly detection (e.g. autoencoders[1], ANN
           | embeddings etc.)
           | 
           | I've gotten into trouble with employers over editing system
           | configuration files and trying to start reverse shells, and I
           | can't imagine execve() or connect()+dup2() are malicious
           | either.
           | 
           | [1] https://www.evilsocket.net/2022/08/15/Process-behaviour-
           | anom...
        
             | some_random wrote:
             | They do, it just doesn't work very well.
        
             | alephnerd wrote:
             | Some are working on it (SentinelOne is a notable player
             | with the capacity), but ML domain experience in the
             | Cybersecurity space is severely lacking as a lot of
             | Cybersecurity PMs and Founders are ex-Networking types who
             | view ML/AI as marketing hype.
             | 
             | Source: am a PM in the space who has been banging heads
             | with these types of people
        
             | waihtis wrote:
             | They might and some definitely do, but at large enough
             | scale maintaining a good anomaly detection signal to noise
             | ratio becomes very difficult.
             | 
             | A single ubuntu terminal spawn will generate something like
             | 20 system calls. Now multiply that with however many
             | actions you take during 8 hours of using a computer with
             | your generic corp of over 10k hosts.
        
       | fredgrott wrote:
       | No mention of Unix, MacOSX, or Linux.
       | 
       | Is there an un-equal hardening of such tools or is it more of the
       | popularity of MS Windows in the marketplace?
        
       | aigoochamna wrote:
       | "Living off the land" in the context of this document means using
       | readily available command line tools and utilities on infected
       | devices?
        
         | supriyo-biswas wrote:
         | Yes, see for example [1].
         | 
         | [1] https://github.com/LOLBAS-Project/LOLBAS
        
           | aigoochamna wrote:
           | Thanks, that makes more sense. Reading the document as an
           | outsider was confusing :p
           | 
           | For a minute, I was worried there were some crazy
           | nationalistic Chinese dudes living in the woods behind my
           | house.
        
             | IIAOPSW wrote:
             | There might be.
        
             | tiahura wrote:
             | No, they're at your local research university.
        
             | malikNF wrote:
             | This exactly what I thought as well. Glad I am not the only
             | one.
        
         | rolph wrote:
         | summary pgh 3 [One of the actor's primary tactics, techniques,
         | and procedures (TTPs) is living off the land, which uses built-
         | in network administration tools to perform their objectives.
         | This TTP allows the actor to evade detection by blending in
         | with normal Windows system and network activities, avoid
         | endpoint detection and response (EDR) products that would alert
         | on the introduction of third-party applications to the host,
         | and limit the amount of activity that is captured in default
         | logging configurations. Some of the built-in tools this actor
         | uses are: wmic , ntdsutil , netsh , and PowerShell .]
        
           | badrabbit wrote:
           | ntdsutil does not ship with windows by default
        
         | ars wrote:
         | On Linux servers I always uninstall the compiler and dev tools.
         | I actually wrote a little script to dry-run uninstall every
         | single package on the server one by one, and if uninstalling it
         | doesn't remove anything important I'll go ahead an uninstall
         | it.
         | 
         | I'm left with only a bare minimum of stuff, even things like
         | man pages or simple utils I'll uninstall.
        
           | SoftTalker wrote:
           | If the intruder as gotten far enough to be in a position to
           | run a compiler, he'll just upload it if it isn't there.
        
             | ars wrote:
             | Maybe, maybe not. Compilers are quite large, especially
             | once you include dev versions of system libraries.
        
         | ginko wrote:
         | Kind of disappointing. I was hoping for a story about Chinese
         | cells homesteading in Middle America to avoid detection between
         | their cyber exploits.
        
           | tiahura wrote:
           | Given the recent news about Chinese hacks of Guam, I was
           | thinking sailboat live aboard spies.
        
           | CrzyLngPwd wrote:
           | Same. I felt clickbaited.
        
       | hnthrowaway0315 wrote:
       | I heard that IoT devices can be (and were) exploited in the same
       | way and used in DDoS attacks. Fascinating work on both sides for
       | $laymen.
        
       | WhereIsTheTruth wrote:
       | [flagged]
        
       | waihtis wrote:
       | For the Linux variant of LOLBINs, see GTFOBINS
       | https://gtfobins.github.io/
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-05-28 23:02 UTC)