More stories

  • in

    Google 'formally' bans stalkerware apps from the Play Store

    Image: Mitchell Luo

    Google has updated its Play Store rules to impose a “formal” ban on stalkerware apps, but the company has left a pretty huge loophole in place for stalkerware to be uploaded on the official store as child-tracking applications.
    Stalkerware is a term used to describe apps that track a user’s movements, snoop on calls and messages, and record other apps’ activity.
    Stalkerware, also known as spouseware, is usually advertised to users as a way to discover cheating partners, track children while outside their homes, and as a way to keep an eye on employees at work.
    The primary feature of all stalkerware apps, regardless if they’re intended to be used on smartphones or laptops, is that these apps can be installed and run without the device owner’s knowledge, operating in the operating system’s background.
    Over the past decade, the Play Store has hosted hundreds of applications that fit into the stalkerware category.
    Google, which has intervened to take down stalkerware apps when they’ve been pointed out by security researchers, has usually avoided making public statements on the topic.
    Google imposes stalkerware ban… sort of
    But in an update to its Developer Program Policy today, Google said that all apps that track users and send their data to another device must include an “adequate notice or consent” and show a “persistent notification” that the user’s actions are being tracked by the app.
    The new rules, set to enter into effect next month, on October 1, are a ban on stalkerware apps, by negating their ability to be installed and operate undetected when installed on victim devices. If user-tracking apps don’t add these UI changes, they won’t pass the approval process to be listed on the Play Store.
    But while the new rules seem a step in the right direction, Google has also left a loophole that could be abused by shady stalkerware devs.
    According to Google, apps that track children can continue to operate without requesting consent or showing a persistent notification on screen. Apps that track adults must include these two items, Google said.
    In other words, there’s nothing stopping a stalkerware dev from rebranding their app and continue operating unimpeded. In fact, today’s announcement looks more like a heads-up for all the shady app devs, rather than an actual ban on stalkerware, with app developers having almost two weeks to comply with the rules.
    This exception for child-tracking apps is the same loophole that Google also left in a similar ban it imposed on stalkerware ads in July. A subsequent TechCrunch investigation found that the ban on stalkerware ads was never enforced, which raises the question if this one will, or if it’s more of a PR stunt. More

  • in

    US charges two Iranian hackers for years-long cyber-espionage, cybercrime spree

    Image: FBI

    The US has filed charges and is seeking the arrest of two Iranian nationals believed to have carried out cyber-intrusions at the behest of the Iranian government and for their own personal financial gain.
    In an indictment unsealed today, prosecutors accused Hooman Heidarian and Mehdi Farhadi, both from Hamedan, Iran, of launching cyber-attacks against a wide range of targets since at least 2013.
    Past victims included several US and foreign universities, a Washington think tank, a defense contractor, an aerospace company, a foreign policy organization, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), non-profits, and foreign government and other entities the defendants identified as rivals or adversaries to Iran, with most targets located in the US, Israel, and Saudi Arabia.
    US officials said Heidarian and Farhadi focused on gaining access to their victims’ accounts, computers, and internal networks, from where they stole confidential data and communications pertaining to topics such as national security, foreign policy, nuclear energy, and aerospace.
    Financial data and personally identifiable information wasn’t off-limits, and the two also stole intellectual property, such as unpublished scientific research.
    In addition, the two also targeted and stole personal information and communications of Iranian dissidents, human rights activists, and opposition leaders, according to George M. Crouch Jr., Special Agent in Charge of the FBI Newark Division.
    Prosecutors believe that some of the stolen data was handed over to Iranian government intelligence officials, but that other information was also sold on black markets for the hackers’ personal gains.
    Hacking tactics evolved across the years
    Heidarian and Farhadi’s hacking skills and tactics also evolved across the years. According to court documents, US officials said that Heidarian previously also operated under the hacker monicker of Sejeal, under which he defaced more than 1,000 websites with pro-Iranian messages.
    In another incident, Heidarian is also believed to have mass-spammed Israeli citizens with threatening anti-Israel SMS messages.
    However, Heidarian and Farhadi eventually moved on from these skid-level hacks to adopting the tactics of regular state-sponsored and cybercrime groups.
    This included performing online reconnaissance before launching attacks, using vulnerability scanners to find weak spots in a victim’s network, and using SQL injection exploits to take over vulnerable servers.
    They also dabbled with malware, also deploying keyloggers and remote access trojans (RATs), and eventually built their own botnet for spamming victims and launching DDoS attacks.
    Further, the two also used session hijacking to gain access to accounts using stolen cookie files, and in some instances, they also set up hidden forwarding rules for compromised email accounts.
    Each hacker risks more than 20 years in prison for their crimes, if caught, extradited, and found guilty.
    The DOJ trifecta
    The Heidarian and Farhadi charges come to complete a DOJ trifecta today, with US prosecutors also unsealing indictments against five Chinese hackers believed to be part of China’s APT41 hacker group, and two Russian hackers, involved in the theft of $16.8 million from cryptocurrency users via phishing sites.
    According to Kaspersky researchers, Farhadi is suspected to have been a member of Iranian hacker group APT34. His name was shared on a Telegram channel where a mysterious group leaked the source code of APT34 malware.
    Yesterday, DOJ officials charged two other Iranian hackers, on charges of defacing US websites following the US killing of an Iranian military general.
    Iranian state-sponsored hackers dabbling in both espionage and financially-motivated cybercrime isn’t anything new. The US previously charged another Iranian hacker group in March 2018, which similarly operated as a hacker-for-hire group for the Iranian regime, and also stole and sold academic research and papers from western universities on dedicated Iranian websites.
    Both Heidarian and Farhadi are now wanted by the FBI. More

  • in

    US charges two Russians for stealing $16.8m via cryptocurrency phishing sites

    Max Pixel

    The US Department of Justice has filed charges today against two Russian nationals for orchestrating a multi-year phishing operation against the users of three cryptocurrency exchanges.
    The two suspects stand accused of creating website clones for the Poloniex, Binance, and Gemini cryptocurrency exchanges, luring users on these fake sites, and collecting their account credentials. These phishing operations began around June 2017.
    US officials said the Russian duo — made up of Danil Potekhin (aka cronuswar) and Dmitrii Karasavidi; residents of Voronezh and Moscow, respectively — used the stolen credentials to access victim accounts and steal their Bitcoin (BTC) and Ether (ETH) crypto-assets.
    In total, US officials estimated the victims in the hundreds. Court documents cite 313 defrauded Poloniex users, 142 Binance victims, and 42 users at Gemini.
    Losses were estimated at $16,876,000.
    According to a superseding indictment unsealed today, Potenkhin and Karasavidi transferred the stolen funds into intermediary accounts set up using fake identities at other cryptocurrency exchange portals, such as Poloniex, Binance, Gemini, and Bittrex.
    In a press release today, US Treasury Department said that despite efforts to launder stolen funds across different exchanges, accounts, and blockchains, some of the funds stolen by the two hackers have been traced and seized by the US Secret Service. Treasury officials have also imposed sanctions on the two suspects.
    Suspects also engaged in crypto-market manipulation
    But the DOJ said the two Russians weren’t pleased with only stealing funds. The two also engaged in market manipulation using cheap altcoins (alternative crytocurrency coins).
    “The defendants first created a number of fictitious accounts on the same [exchange] platform and each account purchased an inexpensive digital currency known as GAS prior to the manipulation,” DOJ official said, citing an incident that occurred between July 2017.
    “Then, on October 29, 2017, the defendants took control of the three victim customer accounts and used the digital currency contained in those accounts, with a value of over $5 million at that time, to purchased GAS at the same time, which increased demand and price.
    “The defendants and their co-conspirators then quickly converted the digital currency in their fictitious accounts from GAS to Bitcoin and other digital currencies, causing the value of GAS to plummet.”
    According to a recorded press release today, US Attorney for the Northern District of California David Anderson said the two Russians face up to 59 years in prison for their crimes.
    The two remain at large.
    [embedded content] More

  • in

    Reolink Go PT security camera review: Surveillance in far-flung places

    Pros
    ✓355-degree pan, 140-degree tilt
    ✓Solar panel charger

    Cons
    ✕Will not work without SIM and data plan

    On the surface, the Reolink Go PT external security camera is almost the same as the Reolink Argus PT camera. But it has one small but important difference.

    You can place this camera almost everywhere. I say almost because this security camera will transmit signals from wherever it is to your mobile phone — as long as there is a cell phone signal.
    The Go PT can run on 4G LTE and 3G networks. You do not need to connect this device to Wi-Fi to keep track of your valuables.
    You do not even need to plug it into a power supply. The Go PT comes with a rechargeable battery or you can charge your Go PT device using the optional solar power pack.
    Like the Reolink Argus PT, the Go PT has a 355-degree horizontal panning and 140 degrees tilt to monitor an almost complete field of view. Like the Argus PT, it has a PIR motion sensor, alerts, and will broadcast a voice alert. in fact, these cameras are almost the same.
    All you need for the Go PT is to by a SIM and set up a data contract for the card. That’s it.
    Top ZDNET Reviews

    The beauty of this device is that you can mount it far away from your Wi-Fi access point, and it will monitor and transmit via 3G or 4G data.
    The Reolink app manages the Go PT and the controls are the same for all of the Reolink cameras. Connecting the camera to the app is simple.
    I spent far longer getting the SIM card contract set up and activated than the time I spent connecting the camera to the app, and screwing the unit to the shed.
    The biggest difference I noticed between the Argus PT and the Go PT was the mounting frame for the camera.
    I felt that the Reolink Argus PT mount was flimsy, yet the mount for the Go PT — practically the same camera — was significantly better quality. It is still plastic, but I was happy to install this without fashioning an alternative mount for the camera.
    With the solar panel included, the Reolink Go PT costs just under $290, but if you have a large property, are out of Wi-Fi range, this extra cost could be something to consider. 
    If you want to make sure your outbuildings are secure, and you have no power to these places, then the Reolink Go PT should certainly be on your list of security products to buy.

    ZDNet Recommends More

  • in

    Chrome now lets high-risk APP users scan suspicious files on demand

    Google has added a new feature today to APP; its security program meant for high-risk users, such as journalists, political organizations, and activists.
    Starting with today, APP users browsing the web with Chrome can send suspicious files they just downloaded to Google servers and have them scanned for malware.
    The feature is the latest addition to APP, or the Google Advanced Protection Program.
    Launched in 2017, the APP is a special program from Google, not enabled for all users. Nonetheless, while the program was launched with high-risk individuals in mind, there’s no restriction on who can apply, and anyone can sign up for the APP via the program’s official website.
    To sign up, all a user has to do is own and connect a hardware security key to their Google account. Once they do, their Gmail account will be protected by the security key, which will serve as a 2FA method, and the user’s incoming emails will be scanned more thoroughly for potential threats, such as malware-laced attachments, phishing links, and emails coming from known state-sponsored groups.
    The APP initially launched as a set of extra security features added to an individual’s Gmail account, but the program expanded in 2019 to users browsing the web with Google’s Chrome browser.
    Starting last year, Google began showing warnings to APP users when they downloaded files using Chrome that looked to be malicious.
    Earlier today, Google says it updated this warning to add an option to let APP users upload the file to Google servers and have it scanned by the Google Safe Browsing service, using its internal static and dynamic analysis techniques.
    The new feature is ideal for users who can’t afford to buy an antivirus program, such as activists with low income, or living in US sanctioned countries where some security vendors might not have a presence.
    For APP users to take advantage of this new feature, they have to browse the web using Chrome and be signed into Chrome with their APP-protected Google account.
    [embedded content] More

  • in

    My stolen credit card details were used 4,500 miles away. I tried to find out how it happened

    On a Thursday back in February I was relaxing and watching TV when my evening was interrupted by the ping of a text message from my bank.
    “You will shortly receive an SMS to confirm recent activity on your card.”
    I was puzzled. I certainly hadn’t made any strange or unexpected purchases that day, so what was this about? About 30 seconds later, I received my answer in a second text message.
    It said my credit card details had been used less than a minute before to try to make a payment of £108 at a store with an unfamiliar name. 
    A quick search online revealed it to be a supermarket in the city of Paramaribo, Suriname – a small country on the north-eastern coast of South America, bordered by Brazil, Guyana and French Guiana. That’s quite a long way from my home in London, so I was pretty sure I hadn’t popped into that store to pick anything up in the last 60 seconds.
    The alert asked me to confirm the transaction by replying with ‘Yes’ or ‘No’. It did cross my mind that perhaps this was a double- or triple-bluff scam and that by responding to an unexpected text message, I would be making a big mistake. Just in case, I chose to phone the bank instead.
    They confirmed that yes, someone had attempted to use my card details over 4,500 miles away from London – but the attempted payment was blocked as suspicious, so no money was stolen. 
    I cancelled my card and ordered a new one as the recommended safety precaution, given someone else had my details. But as a reporter I was left wondering how did this happen? 
    How was it that my bank details were somehow stolen, passed onto someone on the other side of the world and almost successfully used at what looked to be a small retailer in Suriname?
    Credit cards are a solution – and part of the problem
    Debit and credit cards are a part of everyday life that we don’t think about, but not so long ago they would have felt like a strange concept to those using physical currency to buy things. The first UK credit card was issued in 1966, while the first debit card didn’t arrive in the UK until 1987.
    Now, there are over 51 million debit cardholders in the UK, accounting for 96% of adults, while over 32 million UK adults have a credit card. According to the trade association UK Finance, total spending on credit and debit cards accounted for over £800 billion during 2018, with over 20 billion transactions over the course of the year.
    Such is the increased popularity of using card payments – helped by online shopping and the ability to make contactless payments in stores – that it’s overtaken cash as the most common form of payment in the UK, and the number of card payments is still growing.
    SEE: Identity theft protection policy (TechRepublic Premium)
    We’re using them a lot more online, too. That makes it easier for us all to buy all manner of goods and services, but it also means that if crooks have the details they can use your account even if the physical card is safe in your pocket, because with online shopping, which only requires the input of credit card numbers, the card doesn’t need to be present. 
    And the unfortunate truth is that crooks have access to a lot of credit card numbers, thanks to almost constant waves of data breaches from companies big and small.

    There are over 51 million debit card holders in the UK, accounting for 96% of adults.
    Image: Getty Images/iStockphoto
     So how are cyber criminals gaining access to all this data, how do they trade it and just how big is this illicit underground economy?
    “It’s a really interesting question because it doesn’t have a clear answer. This sounds really Rumsfeldian but there are just unknown unknowns,” says Troy Hunt, creator of Have I Been Pwned?, a website that allows people to check if their email address, password or other personal data has been compromised in a breach. 
    Have I Been Pwned? currently contains data on almost 10 billion compromised accounts from over 450 websites and data dumps that have been released publicly by hackers – but that’s almost certainly just scratching the surface of the information that’s been stolen over the years, because there are many more data breaches where the data hasn’t been publicly dumped by the hackers.
    “We know there’s a huge amount of incidents, which have made the headlines, which aren’t in the system,” says Hunt. 
    There are also many more breaches at smaller companies which might not even make headlines, but could still involve the personal data of thousands of people being stolen. 
    Businesses need to be more careful with your data
    There are a number of ways criminals can steal data. 
    One classic example of this is point-of-sale (PoS) malware, which is malicious software that gets installed by gangs onto the PoS terminals that shops, restaurants, bars and other retailers use to take payments by card – a key part of almost any retail business.
    And it’s because they’re a part of the furniture that many of these systems are so vulnerable, because organisations forget they’re computer systems that can contain vulnerabilities and need to be updated. Businesses can go years without being aware that customer payment information was being copied and stolen every time a transaction was made. 
    It’s possible to install malware onto PoS terminals physically but such systems can also be compromised across the corporate network itself as the result of a hacking campaign. 
    The attack might start with a phishing email aimed at unwary employees or a more technical approach targeting the network’s internet-facing remote ports as a way to get onto the network and move across the network to the PoS unit to install malware.
    This is possible because most PoS systems run on a modified version of Windows, meaning that the computer can be vulnerable to attack like other Windows devices. And while most Windows systems on a network should be receiving regular security patches to ensure they can’t fall victim to attack, it’s all too easy for the PoS terminal to be forgotten about.
    That was the case with the retailer Dixons Carphone, which had PoS malware installed on over 5,000 terminals between July 2017 and April 2018 and card information of more than five million customers being accessed by hackers. 
    A report by the Information Commissioner’s Office pointed to “systematic failures” in how the retailer safeguarded personal data and managed the security of its networks – including the failure to patch systems against known vulnerabilities.

    PoS systems can be vulnerable to attack, just like other Windows devices.
    Image: Getty Images/iStockphoto
    There are expectations that larger businesses will, for the most part, budget for IT security and upgrade the network when needed, but for smaller businesses that approach might not be as simple – yet they’re going to be targeted by hackers too, especially if they’re viewed as an easy target.
    “Change is hard for everybody, especially for small businesses. If that credit card terminal is working, do you want to spend hundreds to upgrade to a new system you have to learn to use? Businesses just want to be paid as normal,” says Kevin Lee, digital trust and safety architect at Sift, a payment-fraud prevention company.
    That’s why PoS malware remains so common – and potentially how my card details got stolen. But it’s far from the only way it could’ve occurred.
    SEE: Hiring Kit: Security Analyst (TechRepublic Premium)
    Another common means of card information being stolen is directly from ATMs. While it’s possible to remotely install malware on cash machines – after all, they’re mostly just Windows PCs and often old versions of Windows at that – physically tampering with the devices provides attackers with an even simpler means of stealing bank details.
    These skimming attacks see criminals placing their own card-reading components on top of the real device, allowing them to not only see the card details contained within the mag stripe, but also able to see the PIN code – providing them with all the data they need to make payments and withdrawals – or collect that information to sell it.
    “It’s entirely possible that you’ve used your card at an ATM and there’s been a skimmer that’s read your card and someone has figured out how to clone your card and sold it online. That’s entirely feasible – your card might not have been involved in a breach at all, but a skim,” says Leigh-Anne Galloway, head of commercial security research at Cyber R&D Lab.
    “There’s still a large amount of skimmers in circulation. They’re still pretty popular because they work.”
    Your data could be on an underground market
    In some cases, criminals will use stolen card information for themselves, simply using the details either to clone the card, or to make purchases online. But tying purchases made on a stolen card directly to their own identity is likely to risk getting them caught sooner rather than later.
    That’s why selling stolen card details online is the lower risk choice for crooks with large numbers of credit card details to sell. And with large scale data breaches so common, the cyber-criminal underground markets specialising in trading stolen information are extremely busy.
    “Cyber criminals are just looking for a way to monetise the data that they get and often it’s a lot more complicated than people realise. If you’re good at writing malware, but you don’t know what to do with credit card information, that’s why you’d turn to the underground,” says Liv Rowley, threat intelligence analyst at Blueliv. “Sometimes it’s clear following big-data breaches and they’re handed off,” she says.
    There are dozens of different card shops at any one time as criminals attempt to trade stolen details while also remaining outside the eyes of the law. Some remain in business for a long time, while others get shut down – either by law enforcement, or by the operators themselves in an effort to avoid getting caught. One of the largest and most successful is Joker’s Stash, which is often used as a way to sell millions of credit card details and other personal information at any one time. 

    Rowley: “Cyber criminals are just looking for a way to monetise the data that they get.”
    Image: Getty Images/iStockphoto
    This particular forum also has ties to Fin7, a prolific hacking group that has stolen details about millions of credit cards from retailers, restaurants, casinos and others over the years. If Fin7 is behind a data breach, the details often turn up for sale on Joker’s Stash.
    Earlier this year, US authorities directly linked Fin7 to Joker’s Stash, among other carding forums, in an indictment following the arrest of Ukranian nationals accused of being members of the hacking group.
    However, it doesn’t appear as if my details being stolen was related to any of these breaches – at least any that are in the public light – so what are the other options if it was stolen in a data breach?
    There are smaller carding forums where users turn up to sell data they’ve stolen, and potential buyers can barter to buy as many or as few as they’d like – sometimes details on a single stolen card can cost under a dollar. 
    SEE: Cybersecurity 101: Protect your privacy from hackers, spies, and the government (ZDNet)
    In many cases, the process is completely automated and users can establish who can be trusted via the reviews that have been left by previous buyers – much like any other peer-to-peer online retail environment.
    “You don’t really need to interact with anyone, you just go there, search what you’re looking for and just buy it. It’s nice for cyber criminals because it’s a pain-free process,” says Rowley. The pain is felt, of course, by the victims instead.
    Two seconds that make all the difference
    It could be that my card details passed through a few different hands before ending up in South America – but why, of all places, was it a gas station or a small convenience store where it looks like a copy of the card was attempted to be used? 
    Printing cards is a relatively simple process for criminals, and the physical tools they need to do it aren’t actually illegal. After all, plastic identity cards exist in many workplaces, and they need to be able to print them out, while it’s also possible to buy and use an embosser to punch raised bank details and personal information onto cards so they look like the real thing.
    “You’re a cyber criminal and you’ve bought this data, and it’s just raw numbers. You take that data, you take a plastic card and print out the correct bank information, you pop up the letters for the name and numbers that should be on it,” Rowley explains. “Then you write the information on the magnetic stripe and that should work,” she adds.
    For cyber criminals, the perfect place to test if these cards – and the bank details they’ve stolen – work is small retailers as they often don’t have sophisticated security in place.
    “Gas stations are a great place to test credit card numbers because you don’t have to deal with the gas attendant – you slide the card in and if it works you get a free tank of gas and keep going. If it doesn’t work, there’s no harm in trying. If it works at a gas station, it’s a green light to make larger transactions,” says Kevin Lee.
    There’s no way to find out what the person using my details was attempting to buy, but it’s likely if the transaction had gone through, they would have attempted to milk my bank account for much more than the £108. Fortunately, the attempt at using my card was almost immediately detected and stopped by the bank.
    “We have two seconds to make the decision. We would’ve decided in the first two seconds to decline that,” says Paul Davis, retail fraud director at the UK’s Lloyds Bank. 
    Lloyds Banking Group has 12 different systems to analyse transactions for unusual payments, and it works with external companies and Visa to examine the vast amount of payments which are made every single day. These systems need to find a balance between flagging potentially suspicious activity, while also not standing in the way of regular transactions.
    “The fraud engine will look at things like who you’re trying to pay, how much you’re paying them, have you ever made a payment like that before,” Davis explains – pointing out how the unexpected location of my payment that was attempted using my card likely played a role in identifying it as potentially suspicious.
    “I don’t know how many of our customers make transactions in Suriname – probably not many – so that’s more likely to flag an alert,” he says. 

    For cyber criminals, the perfect place to test cards is small retailers as they often don’t have sophisticated security in place.
    Image: Getty Images/iStockphoto
    The location, combined with the merchant, the history of other transactions there – and whether they’re fraudulent or not – and the amount being paid all helps the bank come to a decision. And in this case, it correctly decided that the transaction was fraudulent – but these decisions have to be made quickly and without blocking genuine attempts at purchases.
    “The more data we have, the better this system is and the more likely we’ll stop more fraud and interrupt fewer genuine cases,” says Davis.
    In some cases, it’s easier to spot that attempts at fraud are happening, such as if criminals make lots of requests at once using sequential card numbers – indicating that they’re working their way down a list. In that case, attempted transactions for card numbers yet to be tested can be preemptively blocked.
    “If there’s a merchant we’ve never seen before and all of a sudden we get 10,000 payments with almost sequential numbers, or with a pattern, they stand out as being suspicious. We block those payments before it even gets to the fraud-detection engine,” Davis explains.
    Cyber criminals have in the past been able to get away with this type of trick – it’s what led to attackers being able to steal over £2 million from 9,000 Tesco Bank customers in November 2016 – but advances in fraud detection mean they’re more able to be easily blocked.
    In some cases companies may not even realise that they’ve been breached.
    “Breaches aren’t always reported. In our experience, the number of merchants who’ve potentially had a breach, but haven’t yet noticed it, is a lot higher,” says Davis. “A lot of people’s card data is being traded on the web and so to keep the systems secure we’re reliant on systems we run in banks.”
    Credit card fraud is far from unusual
    But it isn’t just by directly stealing bank information that cyber criminals are able to get what they need to to abuse personal data to commit fraud. Names, social media accounts, addresses, birthdays and all sorts of other information is potentially out there and can be used to build false profiles or socially engineer victims into falling victim to cybercrime. It has even happened to high-profile politicians.
    “Oftentimes, you can gather enough from social media to log in to their accounts or answer security questions,” says Charity Wright, cyber threat intelligence advisor at IntSights.
    Information from stolen accounts can be put up for sale on underground forums and, if the victim has reused their email password on other important accounts, it could easily provide a means of attackers getting hold of much more information, potentially even online bank accounts.
    Wright’s role involves searching the open and underground web for information about CEOs, executives and other high-profile individuals to see what information is out there – and crucially help stop cyber criminals from using and abusing it. She also looked at what information about me was out there and perhaps, surprisingly, given my job, there’s not much to find based on my name.
    “Your digital footprint is limited to professional and social media from what I can tell, which is excellent given your public profile in the media,” she said.

    Your social media channels can be a treasure trove of personal data.
    Image: Getty Images/iStockphoto
    Nonetheless, via skimming, PoS malware or something else, cyber criminals were able to get hold of my bank details – despite how I write about cybersecurity everyday and know how to take precautions to help protect myself. 
    However, I’m certainly not the only person I know whose had their bank information or other personal details stolen over the years and I won’t be the last; a lot of people have fallen victim to similar fraud and even many of the security researchers I spoke to when trying to find out what happened to my card details have fallen foul of cyber criminals at one point or another.
    “I don’t think there’s as much of a stigma of being caught out by credit card fraud; I don’t think as many people would feel it now. It’s just one of these things that happens and a lot of the time it’s completely out of your hands as you’re finding now – you have no idea where or how it happens,” says Chris Boyd, lead malware intelligence analyst at Malwarebytes.
    “And when PoS malware can lurk on networks for a year or more, how are you going to know?”
    I was fortunate that an attempt at using my bank account was spotted; many haven’t been so lucky – and they’ve had criminals use card details to make very large purchases. Boyd found himself a victim of one of these schemes.
    “The short version is I got contacted and told there was fraud on my card,” he explains. “Usually you hear about small amounts claimed, people will get hold of card details and take a little bit here and there – but this was about £14,000!”
    SEE: Identity management 101: How digital identity works in 2020 (ZDNet)
    As with my case, it wasn’t possible to pin down how exactly the card details got stolen, but in this instance, the scale of the purchase was unusual.
    “Somehow, someone had got my credit card details and they’d gone to a specialist wine supplier, an organisation that sells huge quantities of wine to shops, and put in a baffling order for £14,000 of wine,” says Boyd.
    “The Great Wine Heist,” as he describes it just goes to show that even those who are deeply knowledgeable about security can fall victim to cybercrime – and in most cases, they’re unlikely to find out how it happened, either.
    “You realise there’s only a small amount of places you buy from regularly and an even smaller amount of outliers, so it’s easy to figure out your day-to-day movements and what you spend,” Boyd explains.
    “But then you still hit a brick wall because none of it comes in handy for finding out what happened to your information,” he adds.
    Some people seemingly haven’t actively fallen victim to fraud, yet it still feels as if it’s only a matter of time before something happens.
    “For me, as an American, I have a social security number and I have no doubt that my social security number is somewhere out there on the dark web, it’s just a matter of luck I haven’t had my identity stolen yet. That’s the point we’re at, it’s so easy to lose control of your data,” says Liv Rowley.
    Take precautions to keep data safe and secure
    It might feel as if getting your card details stolen is inevitable due to the sheer number of organisations that fall victim to hacking and malware campaigns. Nonetheless, it is possible to take precautions against credit card fraud.
    “Don’t let your card out of your sight. Keep in control of your card because if you give it up, you don’t know if it’ll be skimmed or have the details written down,” says Paul Davis.
    While it’s impossible to know if any organisation is about to become a victim of a data breach, on the whole, it’s recommended that people buy from trusted vendors, so in the worst case scenario even if details do get leaked, information about the leak emerges eventually. This might not be the case if people buy from online – or other – stores that have been set up with the intent of stealing personal data.
    However, the individual can only do so much to stay safe online, when it ultimately falls to the organisations that are handling personal data to keep it from going missing. 
    Legislation like the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) provides an extra incentive for organisations to keep personal data of customers and consumers safe, because if the company falls victim to a breach and is judged to have managed security irresponsibly, they could face a huge financial penalty. 

    Organisations must do more to ensure personal data does not go missing.
    Image: Getty Images/iStockphoto
    British Airways, for example, was issued with a penalty of £183 million after personal data – including bank details – of over 500,000 customers was stolen, with “poor security arrangements” blamed.
    But even if your personal information is stolen in a big batch alongside hundreds of thousands, maybe even millions of others – and it isn’t your fault – it’s still hard not to feel as if your bank account being used, or your password being used, is a personal attack.
    “Most of the time, it’s not personal, the same with things like account takeovers and credential stuffing – you’re one of a million people on a list and that’s the criteria as to why it’s happened, that’s literally it,” says Troy Hunt.
    And it does indeed look as if some of my information was up for sale, with several cards at least partially matching my card number advertised on an underground forum for the price of $25, according to one researcher I asked to dig around.  
    No information about my address was listed, which appears to suggest that my details are potentially more likely to have been stolen via the use of a skimmer or PoS malware, rather than an online retailer that would also need my address to send out an item. 
    That’s all educated guesswork on my part. I’m unlikely to ever find out how exactly my card details got stolen, how they ended up in South America and who was attempting to use them. I, however, was fortunate that the bank managed to pick up suspicious activity and blocked anything from happening – many others aren’t so lucky.
    But as long as there’s bank information and other personal data out there for cyber criminals to keep grabbing, exchanging and exploiting, it’ll keep happening. For victims, while it may be frustrating, even upsetting, perhaps knowing they haven’t been individually targeted could provide some comfort, even if they too never really work out how it happened. More

  • in

    US charges five hackers part of Chinese state-sponsored group APT41

    (Image: file photo)
    The US government has filed charges today against five Chinese nationals for hacking into more than 100 companies across the world, part of a state-sponsored hacking group known as APT41.
    According to court documents unsealed today, US officials said the group has hacked software development companies, computer hardware manufacturers, telecommunications providers, social media companies, video game companies, healthcare, non-profit organizations, universities, think tanks, from where they stole proprietary source code, code-signing certificates, customer data, and valuable business information.
    Victim companies resided in countries such as the US, Australia, Brazil, Chile, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Japan,Malaysia, Pakistan, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam.
    US officials said APT41 members also compromised foreign government computer networks in India and Vietnam, as well as pro-democracy politicians and activists in Hong Kong. Attacks against he UK government were also executed, but were not successful.
    The APT41 group is one of today’s most infamous and most active state-sponsored hacking groups. ATP41’s operations were first detailed in their full breadth in a FireEye report published in August 2019, with the report linking the group to some of the biggest supply-chain attacks in recent years, and to older hacks going to as early as 2012.

    Some of APT41’s largest supply-chain attacks
    Image: FireEye
    At the time, the report was also ground-breaking, as FireEye researchers revealed how the the group conducted both cyber-espionage for the Chinese regime but also intrusions for personal financial gain, usually executed outside normal working hours. Most of these side-hacks usually targeted gaming companies, from where the hackers stole source code or in-game digital currency.
    In some cases, APT41 was also spotted deploying ransomware and installed malware that mined cryptocurrency for the group’s members. While it’s unknown how many of these incidents have occurred, the DOJ named one victim of a ransomware attack as “a non-profit organization dedicated to combating global poverty.”
    Five Chinese nationals indicted
    According to court documents obtained by ZDNet, the indictments came in two waves, but were unsealed today. The first two APT41 members were identified and charged in August 2019, following the FireEye report. According to a copy of the 2019 indictment, these charges stemmed from allegedly hacking high technology and video gaming companies, and a United Kingdom citizen. The two suspects were identified as:
    Zhang Haoran (张浩然), 35
    Tan Dailin (谭戴林), 35
    Three more APT41 members were charged in a separate indictment filed last month, in August 2020. These three were charged with most of the APT41 intrusions.
    Jiang Lizhi (蒋立志), 35
    Qian Chuan (钱川), 39
    Fu Qiang (付强), 37
    US officials said the three were employees of Chengdu 404 Network Technology, a front company that operated under the close supervision of PRC officials. Court documents also revealed that US officials intercepted online chats between Jiang and another Chinese hackers, conversations where Jiang touted knowing and operating under Gong An, a high-ranking official in the Chinese Ministery of Public Security.

    In a really interesting reveal, US government had intercepted communications where operators bragged about their close relationship with Ministry of State Security (MSS) 4/
    — Dmitri Alperovitch (@DAlperovitch) September 16, 2020

    All five APT41 members remain at large, and their names have been added to the FBI’s Cyber Most Wanted List.

    Image: FBI/DOJ
    In addition, two Malaysian businessmen were also charged for conspiring with two of the APT41 members to profit from intrusions at video game companies. The two were arrested on Monday, September 14, by Malaysian authorities in the Malaysian city of Sitiawan.
    According to court documents, the two have been identified as Wong Ong Hua, 46, and Ling Yang Ching, 32, owners of Sea Gamer Mall, a website that sold digital currency for various online games — currency that US officials believe was sometimes provided by APT41 members illegally, following intrusions at gaming companies.
    In a live-streamed press conference today, FBI Deputy Director David L. Bowdich, said the Bureau is currently seeking the extradition of the two Malaysian businessmen to the US, to face their charges.
    The FBI, which spearheaded the investigation, also obtained a court warrant earlier this month and seized “hundreds of accounts, servers, domain names, and command-and-control (C2) ‘dead drop’ web pages” used by APT41 in past operations.
    Third Chinese state hacking group disrupted by US officials since 2017
    The arrests today are part of a larger US crackdown against Chinese cyber-espionage and theft of intellectual property from US companies. US authorities previously charged three other Chinese hackers in November 2017 (believed to be part of Chinese hacker group APT3) and two other hackers in December 2018 (believed to be part of Chinese hacker group APT10).
    Earlier this year, the FBI said it was investigating more than 1,000 cases of Chinese theft of US technology.
    “Today’s charges, the related arrests, seizures of malware and other infrastructure used to conduct intrusions, and coordinated private sector protective actions reveal yet again the Department’s determination to use all of the tools at its disposal and to collaborate with the private sector and nations who support the rule of law in cyberspace,” said Assistant AttorneyGeneral John C. Demers.
    “Regrettably, the Chinese communist party has chosen a different path of making China safe for cybercriminals so long as they attack computers outside China and steal intellectual property helpful to China,” added Deputy Attorney General Jeffrey A. Rosen. More

  • in

    Cerberus banking Trojan source code released for free to cyberattackers

    The source code of the Cerberus banking Trojan has been released as free malware on underground hacking forums following a failed auction. 

    Speaking at Kaspersky NEXT 2020 on Wednesday, Kaspersky cybersecurity researcher Dmitry Galov said that the leaked code, distributed under the name Cerberus v2, presents an increased threat for smartphone users and the banking sector at large.  
    Cerberus is a mobile banking Trojan designed for the Google Android operating system. In circulation since at least July 2019, the Remote Access Trojan (RAT) is able to conduct covert surveillance, intercept communication, tamper with device functionality, and steal data including banking credentials by creating overlays on existing banking, retail, and social networking apps. 
    The malware is able to read text messages that may contain one-time passcodes (OTP) and two-factor authentication (2FA) codes, thereby bypassing typical 2FA account protections. OTPs generated through Google Authenticator may also be stolen. 
    CNET: Razer leak exposes thousands of customers’ private data
    In early July, Avast researchers discovered Cerberus in Google Play, wrapped up and disguised as a legitimate currency converter. It is thought that when the application was submitted to Google for approval, the functions were innocent and legitimate — but once a large user base was established, an update package deployed the Trojan on victim devices. 
    Later in the same month, Hudson Rock spotted Cerberus going to auction. An advert was posted by the maintainer of the malware, revealing that the development team was breaking up, and so a new owner was being sought. 
    The operator set a starting price of $50,000 — with the aim of generating up to $100,000 — for the malware’s .APK source code, client list, servers, and code for administrator panels. The auctioneer claimed that Cerberus generated $10,000 in revenue per month. 
    However, it seems there were no takers. 
    TechRepublic: Cyberattacks against schools are on the rise
    “Despite Cerberus’ Russian speaking developers earmarking a new vision for the project in April this year, auctions for the source code began in late July due to the breakup of the development team,” Kaspersky says. “Due to an unclear culmination of factors, the author later decided to publish the project source code for premium users on a popular Russian-speaking underground forum.”
    The cybersecurity firm says that following the free release of Cerberus source code in the underground, there was an “immediate rise” in mobile app infections across Europe and Russia. Of particular note, Galov says, is that previous clients were not encouraged to strike Russian mobile device users — but the moment the code was released, the attack landscape changed.
    When Cerberus was offered as Malware-as-a-Service (MaaS), the scope of the threat was contained to attack groups able to pay for the code, on subscription from $4,000 for one month to $12,000 for a year. Now the developer has washed their hands of the project and released the source code for free, we may not only see rising adoption of Cerberus, but also potentially new variants based on the leaked code in the future. 
    See also: Your email threads are now being hijacked by the QBot Trojan
    “We continue to investigate all found artifacts associated with the code, and will track related activity,” Galov commented. “But, in the meantime, the best form of defense that users can adopt involves aspects of security hygiene that they should be practicing already across their mobile devices and banking security.”

    Previous and related coverage
    Have a tip? Get in touch securely via WhatsApp | Signal at +447713 025 499, or over at Keybase: charlie0 More