Exploitation of Remote Services
Adversaries may exploit remote services to gain unauthorized access to internal systems once inside of a network. Exploitation of a software vulnerability occurs when an adversary takes advantage of a programming error in a program, service, or within the operating system software or kernel itself to execute adversary-controlled code. A common goal for post-compromise exploitation of remote services is for lateral movement to enable access to a remote system. An adversary may need to determine if the remote system is in a vulnerable state, which may be done through Network Service Discovery or other Discovery methods looking for common, vulnerable software that may be deployed in the network, the lack of certain patches that may indicate vulnerabilities, or security software that may be used to detect or contain remote exploitation. Servers are likely a high value target for lateral movement exploitation, but endpoint systems may also be at risk if they provide an advantage or access to additional resources. There are several well-known vulnerabilities that exist in common services such as SMB(Citation: CIS Multiple SMB Vulnerabilities) and RDP(Citation: NVD CVE-2017-0176) as well as applications that may be used within internal networks such as MySQL(Citation: NVD CVE-2016-6662) and web server services.(Citation: NVD CVE-2014-7169)(Citation: Ars Technica VMWare Code Execution Vulnerability 2021) Additionally, there have been a number of vulnerabilities in VMware vCenter installations, which may enable threat actors to move laterally from the compromised vCenter server to virtual machines or even to ESXi hypervisors.(Citation: Broadcom VMSA-2024-0019) Depending on the permissions level of the vulnerable remote service an adversary may achieve Exploitation for Privilege Escalation as a result of lateral movement exploitation as well.
Procedure Examples |
|
Name | Description |
---|---|
Flame |
Flame can use MS10-061 to exploit a print spooler vulnerability in a remote system with a shared printer in order to move laterally.(Citation: Kaspersky Flame)(Citation: Kaspersky Flame Functionality) |
WannaCry |
WannaCry uses an exploit in SMBv1 to spread itself to other remote systems on a network.(Citation: LogRhythm WannaCry)(Citation: FireEye WannaCry 2017)(Citation: US-CERT WannaCry 2017) |
Wizard Spider |
Wizard Spider has exploited or attempted to exploit Zerologon (CVE-2020-1472) and EternalBlue (MS17-010) vulnerabilities.(Citation: FireEye KEGTAP SINGLEMALT October 2020)(Citation: DFIR Ryuk's Return October 2020)(Citation: DFIR Ryuk in 5 Hours October 2020) |
Fox Kitten |
Fox Kitten has exploited known vulnerabilities in remote services including RDP.(Citation: ClearkSky Fox Kitten February 2020)(Citation: CrowdStrike PIONEER KITTEN August 2020)(Citation: ClearSky Pay2Kitten December 2020) |
Earth Lusca |
Earth Lusca has used Mimikatz to exploit a domain controller via the ZeroLogon exploit (CVE-2020-1472).(Citation: TrendMicro EarthLusca 2022) |
Stuxnet |
Stuxnet propagates using the MS10-061 Print Spooler and MS08-067 Windows Server Service vulnerabilities.(Citation: Nicolas Falliere, Liam O Murchu, Eric Chien February 2011) |
QakBot |
QakBot can move laterally using worm-like functionality through exploitation of SMB.(Citation: Crowdstrike Qakbot October 2020) |
Emotet |
Emotet has been seen exploiting SMB via a vulnerability exploit like EternalBlue (MS17-010) to achieve lateral movement and propagation.(Citation: Symantec Emotet Jul 2018)(Citation: US-CERT Emotet Jul 2018)(Citation: Secureworks Emotet Nov 2018)(Citation: Red Canary Emotet Feb 2019) |
Empire |
Empire has a limited number of built-in modules for exploiting remote SMB, JBoss, and Jenkins servers.(Citation: Github PowerShell Empire) |
Bad Rabbit |
Bad Rabbit used the EternalRomance SMB exploit to spread through victim networks.(Citation: Secure List Bad Rabbit) |
NotPetya |
NotPetya can use two exploits in SMBv1, EternalBlue and EternalRomance, to spread itself to other remote systems on the network.(Citation: Talos Nyetya June 2017)(Citation: US-CERT NotPetya 2017)(Citation: US District Court Indictment GRU Unit 74455 October 2020) |
Ember Bear |
Ember Bear has used exploits for vulnerabilities such as MS17-010, also known as `Eternal Blue`, during operations.(Citation: CISA GRU29155 2024) |
InvisiMole |
InvisiMole can spread within a network via the BlueKeep (CVE-2019-0708) and EternalBlue (CVE-2017-0144) vulnerabilities in RDP and SMB respectively.(Citation: ESET InvisiMole June 2020) |
APT28 |
APT28 exploited a Windows SMB Remote Code Execution Vulnerability to conduct lateral movement.(Citation: FireEye APT28)(Citation: FireEye APT28 Hospitality Aug 2017)(Citation: MS17-010 March 2017) |
Conficker |
Conficker exploited the MS08-067 Windows vulnerability for remote code execution through a crafted RPC request.(Citation: SANS Conficker) |
PoshC2 |
PoshC2 contains a module for exploiting SMB via EternalBlue.(Citation: GitHub PoshC2) |
Lucifer |
Lucifer can exploit multiple vulnerabilities including EternalBlue (CVE-2017-0144) and EternalRomance (CVE-2017-0144).(Citation: Unit 42 Lucifer June 2020) |
Tonto Team |
Tonto Team has used EternalBlue exploits for lateral movement.(Citation: TrendMicro Tonto Team October 2020) |
menuPass |
menuPass has used tools to exploit the ZeroLogon vulnerability (CVE-2020-1472).(Citation: Symantec Cicada November 2020) |
TrickBot |
TrickBot utilizes EternalBlue and EternalRomance exploits for lateral movement in the modules wormwinDll, wormDll, mwormDll, nwormDll, tabDll.(Citation: ESET Trickbot Oct 2020) |
Dragonfly |
Dragonfly has exploited a Windows Netlogon vulnerability (CVE-2020-1472) to obtain access to Windows Active Directory servers.(Citation: CISA AA20-296A Berserk Bear December 2020) |
MuddyWater |
MuddyWater has exploited the Microsoft Netlogon vulnerability (CVE-2020-1472).(Citation: DHS CISA AA22-055A MuddyWater February 2022) |
Threat Group-3390 |
Threat Group-3390 has exploited MS17-010 to move laterally to other systems on the network.(Citation: Unit42 Emissary Panda May 2019) |
FIN7 |
FIN7 has exploited ZeroLogon (CVE-2020-1472) against vulnerable domain controllers.(Citation: CrowdStrike Carbon Spider August 2021) |
Mitigations |
|
Mitigation | Description |
---|---|
Disable or Remove Feature or Program |
Disable or remove unnecessary and potentially vulnerable software, features, or services to reduce the attack surface and prevent abuse by adversaries. This involves identifying software or features that are no longer needed or that could be exploited and ensuring they are either removed or properly disabled. This mitigation can be implemented through the following measures: Remove Legacy Software: - Use Case: Disable or remove older versions of software that no longer receive updates or security patches (e.g., legacy Java, Adobe Flash). - Implementation: A company removes Flash Player from all employee systems after it has reached its end-of-life date. Disable Unused Features: - Use Case: Turn off unnecessary operating system features like SMBv1, Telnet, or RDP if they are not required. - Implementation: Disable SMBv1 in a Windows environment to mitigate vulnerabilities like EternalBlue. Control Applications Installed by Users: - Use Case: Prevent users from installing unauthorized software via group policies or other management tools. - Implementation: Block user installations of unauthorized file-sharing applications (e.g., BitTorrent clients) in an enterprise environment. Remove Unnecessary Services: - Use Case: Identify and disable unnecessary default services running on endpoints, servers, or network devices. - Implementation: Disable unused administrative shares (e.g., C$, ADMIN$) on workstations. Restrict Add-ons and Plugins: - Use Case: Remove or disable browser plugins and add-ons that are not needed for business purposes. - Implementation: Disable Java and ActiveX plugins in web browsers to prevent drive-by attacks. |
Vulnerability Scanning |
Vulnerability scanning involves the automated or manual assessment of systems, applications, and networks to identify misconfigurations, unpatched software, or other security weaknesses. The process helps prioritize remediation efforts by classifying vulnerabilities based on risk and impact, reducing the likelihood of exploitation by adversaries. This mitigation can be implemented through the following measures: Proactive Identification of Vulnerabilities - Implementation: Use tools like Nessus or OpenVAS to scan endpoints, servers, and applications for missing patches and configuration issues. Schedule regular scans to ensure timely identification of vulnerabilities introduced by new deployments or updates. - Use Case: A scan identifies unpatched software, such as outdated Apache servers, which could be exploited via CVE-XXXX-XXXX. The server is promptly patched, mitigating the risk. Cloud Environment Scanning - Implementation: Use cloud-specific vulnerability management tools like AWS Inspector, Azure Security Center, or GCP Security Command Center to identify issues like open S3 buckets or overly permissive IAM roles. - Use Case: The scan detects a misconfigured S3 bucket with public read access, which is remediated to prevent potential data leakage. Network Device Scanning - Implementation: Use tools to scan network devices for vulnerabilities, such as weak SNMP strings or outdated firmware. Correlate scan results with vendor advisories to prioritize updates. - Use Case: Scanning detects a router running outdated firmware vulnerable to CVE-XXXX-YYYY. The firmware is updated to a secure version. Web Application Scanning - Implementation: Use dynamic application security testing (DAST) tools such as OWASP ZAP or Burp Suite to scan for common vulnerabilities like SQL injection or cross-site scripting (XSS). Perform regular scans post-deployment to identify newly introduced vulnerabilities. - Use Case: A scan identifies a cross-site scripting vulnerability in a form input field, which is promptly remediated by developers. Prioritizing Vulnerabilities - Implementation: Use vulnerability scoring frameworks like CVSS to assess severity. Integrate vulnerability scanning tools with ticketing systems to assign remediation tasks based on criticality. - Use Case: A critical vulnerability with a CVSS score of 9.8 affecting remote access servers is prioritized and patched first. *Tools for Implementation* Open Source Tools: - OpenVAS: Comprehensive network and system vulnerability scanning. - OWASP ZAP: Dynamic scanning of web applications for vulnerabilities. - Nmap with NSE Scripts: Network scanning with scripts to detect vulnerabilities. |
Exploit Protection |
Deploy capabilities that detect, block, and mitigate conditions indicative of software exploits. These capabilities aim to prevent exploitation by addressing vulnerabilities, monitoring anomalous behaviors, and applying exploit-mitigation techniques to harden systems and software. Operating System Exploit Protections: - Use Case: Enable built-in exploit protection features provided by modern operating systems, such as Microsoft's Exploit Protection, which includes techniques like Data Execution Prevention (DEP), Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR), and Control Flow Guard (CFG). - Implementation: Enforce DEP for all programs and enable ASLR to randomize memory addresses used by system and application processes. Windows: Configure Exploit Protection through the Windows Security app or deploy settings via Group Policy. `ExploitProtectionExportSettings.exe -path "exploit_settings.xml"` Linux: Use Kernel-level hardening features like SELinux, AppArmor, or GRSEC to enforce memory protections and prevent exploits. Third-Party Endpoint Security: - Use Case: Use endpoint protection tools with built-in exploit protection, such as enhanced memory protection, behavior monitoring, and real-time exploit detection. - Implementation: Deploy tools to detect and block exploitation attempts targeting unpatched software. Virtual Patching: - Use Case: Use tools to implement virtual patches that mitigate vulnerabilities in applications or operating systems until official patches are applied. - Implementation: Use Intrusion Prevention System (IPS) to block exploitation attempts on known vulnerabilities in outdated applications. Hardening Application Configurations: - Use Case: Disable risky application features that can be exploited, such as macros in Microsoft Office or JScript in Internet Explorer. - Implementation: Configure Microsoft Office Group Policies to disable execution of macros in downloaded files. |
Network Segmentation |
Network segmentation involves dividing a network into smaller, isolated segments to control and limit the flow of traffic between devices, systems, and applications. By segmenting networks, organizations can reduce the attack surface, restrict lateral movement by adversaries, and protect critical assets from compromise. Effective network segmentation leverages a combination of physical boundaries, logical separation through VLANs, and access control policies enforced by network appliances like firewalls, routers, and cloud-based configurations. This mitigation can be implemented through the following measures: Segment Critical Systems: - Identify and group systems based on their function, sensitivity, and risk. Examples include payment systems, HR databases, production systems, and internet-facing servers. - Use VLANs, firewalls, or routers to enforce logical separation. Implement DMZ for Public-Facing Services: - Host web servers, DNS servers, and email servers in a DMZ to limit their access to internal systems. - Apply strict firewall rules to filter traffic between the DMZ and internal networks. Use Cloud-Based Segmentation: - In cloud environments, use VPCs, subnets, and security groups to isolate applications and enforce traffic rules. - Apply AWS Transit Gateway or Azure VNet peering for controlled connectivity between cloud segments. Apply Microsegmentation for Workloads: - Use software-defined networking (SDN) tools to implement workload-level segmentation and prevent lateral movement. Restrict Traffic with ACLs and Firewalls: - Apply Access Control Lists (ACLs) to network devices to enforce "deny by default" policies. - Use firewalls to restrict both north-south (external-internal) and east-west (internal-internal) traffic. Monitor and Audit Segmented Networks: - Regularly review firewall rules, ACLs, and segmentation policies. - Monitor network flows for anomalies to ensure segmentation is effective. Test Segmentation Effectiveness: - Perform periodic penetration tests to verify that unauthorized access is blocked between network segments. |
Exploitation of Remote Services Mitigation |
Segment networks and systems appropriately to reduce access to critical systems and services to controlled methods. Minimize available services to only those that are necessary. Regularly scan the internal network for available services to identify new and potentially vulnerable services. Minimize permissions and access for service accounts to limit impact of exploitation. Update software regularly by employing patch management for internal enterprise endpoints and servers. Develop a robust cyber threat intelligence capability to determine what types and levels of threat may use software exploits and 0-days against a particular organization. Make it difficult for adversaries to advance their operation through exploitation of undiscovered or unpatched vulnerabilities by using sandboxing, if available. Other types of virtualization and application microsegmentation may also mitigate the impact of some types of exploitation. The risks of additional exploits and weaknesses in implementation may still exist. (Citation: Ars Technica Pwn2Own 2017 VM Escape) Security applications that look for behavior used during exploitation such as Windows Defender Exploit Guard (WDEG) and the Enhanced Mitigation Experience Toolkit (EMET) can be used to mitigate some exploitation behavior. (Citation: TechNet Moving Beyond EMET) Control flow integrity checking is another way to potentially identify and stop a software exploit from occurring. (Citation: Wikipedia Control Flow Integrity) Many of these protections depend on the architecture and target application binary for compatibility and may not work for all software or services targeted. |
Threat Intelligence Program |
A Threat Intelligence Program enables organizations to proactively identify, analyze, and act on cyber threats by leveraging internal and external data sources. The program supports decision-making processes, prioritizes defenses, and improves incident response by delivering actionable intelligence tailored to the organization's risk profile and operational environment. This mitigation can be implemented through the following measures: Establish a Threat Intelligence Team: - Form a dedicated team or assign responsibility to existing security personnel to collect, analyze, and act on threat intelligence. Define Intelligence Requirements: - Identify the organization’s critical assets and focus intelligence gathering efforts on threats targeting these assets. Leverage Internal and External Data Sources: - Collect intelligence from internal sources such as logs, incidents, and alerts. Subscribe to external threat intelligence feeds, participate in ISACs, and monitor open-source intelligence (OSINT). Implement Tools for Automation: - Use threat intelligence platforms (TIPs) to automate the collection, enrichment, and dissemination of threat data. - Integrate threat intelligence with SIEMs to correlate IOCs with internal events. Analyze and Act on Intelligence: - Use frameworks like MITRE ATT&CK to map intelligence to adversary TTPs. - Prioritize defensive measures, such as patching vulnerabilities or deploying IOCs, based on analyzed threats. Share and Collaborate: - Share intelligence with industry peers through ISACs or threat-sharing platforms to enhance collective defense. Evaluate and Update the Program: - Regularly assess the effectiveness of the threat intelligence program. - Update intelligence priorities and capabilities as new threats emerge. *Tools for Implementation* Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIPs): - OpenCTI: An open-source platform for structuring and sharing threat intelligence. - MISP: A threat intelligence sharing platform for sharing structured threat data. Threat Intelligence Feeds: - Open Threat Exchange (OTX): Provides free access to a large repository of threat intelligence. - CIRCL OSINT Feed: A free source for IOCs and threat information. Automation and Enrichment Tools: - TheHive: An open-source incident response platform with threat intelligence integration. - Yeti: A platform for managing and structuring knowledge about threats. Analysis Frameworks: - MITRE ATT&CK Navigator: A tool for mapping threat intelligence to adversary behaviors. - Cuckoo Sandbox: Analyzes malware to extract behavioral indicators. Community and Collaboration Tools: - ISAC Memberships: Join industry-specific ISACs for intelligence sharing. - Slack/Discord Channels: Participate in threat intelligence communities for real-time collaboration. |
Application Isolation and Sandboxing |
Application Isolation and Sandboxing refers to the technique of restricting the execution of code to a controlled and isolated environment (e.g., a virtual environment, container, or sandbox). This method prevents potentially malicious code from affecting the rest of the system or network by limiting access to sensitive resources and critical operations. The goal is to contain threats and minimize their impact. This mitigation can be implemented through the following measures: Browser Sandboxing: - Use Case: Implement browser sandboxing to isolate untrusted web content, preventing malicious web pages or scripts from accessing sensitive system files. - Implementation: Use tools like Google Chrome's built-in sandbox or deploy solutions like Bromium to secure user web interactions. Application Virtualization: - Use Case: Deploy critical or high-risk applications in a virtualized environment to ensure any compromise does not affect the host system. - Implementation: Use application virtualization platforms to run applications in isolated environments. Email Attachment Sandboxing: - Use Case: Route email attachments to a sandbox environment to detect and block malware before delivering emails to end-users. - Implementation: Integrate security solutions with sandbox capabilities to analyze email attachments. Endpoint Sandboxing: - Use Case: Run all downloaded files and applications in a restricted environment to monitor their behavior for malicious activity. - Implementation: Use endpoint protection tools for sandboxing at the endpoint level. |
Privileged Account Management |
Privileged Account Management focuses on implementing policies, controls, and tools to securely manage privileged accounts (e.g., SYSTEM, root, or administrative accounts). This includes restricting access, limiting the scope of permissions, monitoring privileged account usage, and ensuring accountability through logging and auditing.This mitigation can be implemented through the following measures: Account Permissions and Roles: - Implement RBAC and least privilege principles to allocate permissions securely. - Use tools like Active Directory Group Policies to enforce access restrictions. Credential Security: - Deploy password vaulting tools like CyberArk, HashiCorp Vault, or KeePass for secure storage and rotation of credentials. - Enforce password policies for complexity, uniqueness, and expiration using tools like Microsoft Group Policy Objects (GPO). Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA): - Enforce MFA for all privileged accounts using Duo Security, Okta, or Microsoft Azure AD MFA. Privileged Access Management (PAM): - Use PAM solutions like CyberArk, BeyondTrust, or Thycotic to manage, monitor, and audit privileged access. Auditing and Monitoring: - Integrate activity monitoring into your SIEM (e.g., Splunk or QRadar) to detect and alert on anomalous privileged account usage. Just-In-Time Access: - Deploy JIT solutions like Azure Privileged Identity Management (PIM) or configure ephemeral roles in AWS and GCP to grant time-limited elevated permissions. *Tools for Implementation* Privileged Access Management (PAM): - CyberArk, BeyondTrust, Thycotic, HashiCorp Vault. Credential Management: - Microsoft LAPS (Local Admin Password Solution), Password Safe, HashiCorp Vault, KeePass. Multi-Factor Authentication: - Duo Security, Okta, Microsoft Azure MFA, Google Authenticator. Linux Privilege Management: - sudo configuration, SELinux, AppArmor. Just-In-Time Access: - Azure Privileged Identity Management (PIM), AWS IAM Roles with session constraints, GCP Identity-Aware Proxy. |
Update Software |
Software updates ensure systems are protected against known vulnerabilities by applying patches and upgrades provided by vendors. Regular updates reduce the attack surface and prevent adversaries from exploiting known security gaps. This includes patching operating systems, applications, drivers, and firmware. This mitigation can be implemented through the following measures: Regular Operating System Updates - Implementation: Apply the latest Windows security updates monthly using WSUS (Windows Server Update Services) or a similar patch management solution. Configure systems to check for updates automatically and schedule reboots during maintenance windows. - Use Case: Prevents exploitation of OS vulnerabilities such as privilege escalation or remote code execution. Application Patching - Implementation: Monitor Apache's update release notes for security patches addressing vulnerabilities. Schedule updates for off-peak hours to avoid downtime while maintaining security compliance. - Use Case: Prevents exploitation of web application vulnerabilities, such as those leading to unauthorized access or data breaches. Firmware Updates - Implementation: Regularly check the vendor’s website for firmware updates addressing vulnerabilities. Plan for update deployment during scheduled maintenance to minimize business disruption. - Use Case: Protects against vulnerabilities that adversaries could exploit to gain access to network devices or inject malicious traffic. Emergency Patch Deployment - Implementation: Use the emergency patch deployment feature of the organization's patch management tool to apply updates to all affected Exchange servers within 24 hours. - Use Case: Reduces the risk of exploitation by rapidly addressing critical vulnerabilities. Centralized Patch Management - Implementation: Implement a centralized patch management system, such as SCCM or ManageEngine, to automate and track patch deployment across all environments. Generate regular compliance reports to ensure all systems are updated. - Use Case: Streamlines patching processes and ensures no critical systems are missed. *Tools for Implementation* Patch Management Tools: - WSUS: Manage and deploy Microsoft updates across the organization. - ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus: Automate patch deployment for OS and third-party apps. - Ansible: Automate updates across multiple platforms, including Linux and Windows. Vulnerability Scanning Tools: - OpenVAS: Open-source vulnerability scanning to identify missing patches. |
Detection
Detecting software exploitation may be difficult depending on the tools available. Software exploits may not always succeed or may cause the exploited process to become unstable or crash. Also look for behavior on the endpoint system that might indicate successful compromise, such as abnormal behavior of the processes. This could include suspicious files written to disk, evidence of Process Injection for attempts to hide execution, evidence of Discovery, or other unusual network traffic that may indicate additional tools transferred to the system.
References
- National Vulnerability Database. (2017, September 24). CVE-2014-7169 Detail. Retrieved April 3, 2018.
- National Vulnerability Database. (2017, June 22). CVE-2017-0176 Detail. Retrieved April 3, 2018.
- National Vulnerability Database. (2017, February 2). CVE-2016-6662 Detail. Retrieved April 3, 2018.
- Dan Goodin . (2021, February 25). Code-execution flaw in VMware has a severity rating of 9.8 out of 10. Retrieved April 8, 2025.
- CIS. (2017, May 15). Multiple Vulnerabilities in Microsoft Windows SMB Server Could Allow for Remote Code Execution. Retrieved April 3, 2018.
- Broadcom. (2024, September 17). VMSA-2024-0019: Questions & Answers. Retrieved April 8, 2025.
- Gostev, A. (2012, May 30). Flame: Bunny, Frog, Munch and BeetleJuice…. Retrieved March 1, 2017.
- Gostev, A. (2012, May 28). The Flame: Questions and Answers. Retrieved March 1, 2017.
- US-CERT. (2017, May 12). Alert (TA17-132A): Indicators Associated With WannaCry Ransomware. Retrieved March 25, 2019.
- Noerenberg, E., Costis, A., and Quist, N. (2017, May 16). A Technical Analysis of WannaCry Ransomware. Retrieved December 8, 2024.
- Berry, A., Homan, J., and Eitzman, R. (2017, May 23). WannaCry Malware Profile. Retrieved March 15, 2019.
- The DFIR Report. (2020, October 18). Ryuk in 5 Hours. Retrieved October 19, 2020.
- The DFIR Report. (2020, October 8). Ryuk’s Return. Retrieved October 9, 2020.
- Kimberly Goody, Jeremy Kennelly, Joshua Shilko, Steve Elovitz, Douglas Bienstock. (2020, October 28). Unhappy Hour Special: KEGTAP and SINGLEMALT With a Ransomware Chaser. Retrieved October 28, 2020.
- ClearSky. (2020, December 17). Pay2Key Ransomware – A New Campaign by Fox Kitten. Retrieved December 21, 2020.
- Orleans, A. (2020, August 31). Who Is PIONEER KITTEN?. Retrieved December 21, 2020.
- ClearSky. (2020, February 16). Fox Kitten – Widespread Iranian Espionage-Offensive Campaign. Retrieved December 21, 2020.
- Wikipedia. (2018, January 11). Control-flow integrity. Retrieved March 12, 2018.
- Nunez, N. (2017, August 9). Moving Beyond EMET II – Windows Defender Exploit Guard. Retrieved March 12, 2018.
- Chen, J., et al. (2022). Delving Deep: An Analysis of Earth Lusca’s Operations. Retrieved July 1, 2022.
- Nicolas Falliere, Liam O Murchu, Eric Chien 2011, February W32.Stuxnet Dossier (Version 1.4) Retrieved November 17, 2024.
- CS. (2020, October 7). Duck Hunting with Falcon Complete: A Fowl Banking Trojan Evolves, Part 2. Retrieved September 27, 2021.
- US-CERT. (2018, July 20). Alert (TA18-201A) Emotet Malware. Retrieved March 25, 2019.
- Symantec. (2018, July 18). The Evolution of Emotet: From Banking Trojan to Threat Distributor. Retrieved March 25, 2019.
- Mclellan, M.. (2018, November 19). Lazy Passwords Become Rocket Fuel for Emotet SMB Spreader. Retrieved March 25, 2019.
- Donohue, B.. (2019, February 13). https://redcanary.com/blog/stopping-emotet-before-it-moves-laterally/. Retrieved March 25, 2019.
- Schroeder, W., Warner, J., Nelson, M. (n.d.). Github PowerShellEmpire. Retrieved April 28, 2016.
- Mamedov, O. Sinitsyn, F. Ivanov, A.. (2017, October 24). Bad Rabbit ransomware. Retrieved January 28, 2021.
- Scott W. Brady. (2020, October 15). United States vs. Yuriy Sergeyevich Andrienko et al.. Retrieved November 25, 2020.
- US-CERT. (2017, July 1). Alert (TA17-181A): Petya Ransomware. Retrieved March 15, 2019.
- Chiu, A. (2016, June 27). New Ransomware Variant "Nyetya" Compromises Systems Worldwide. Retrieved March 26, 2019.
- US Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency et al. (2024, September 5). Russian Military Cyber Actors Target U.S. and Global Critical Infrastructure. Retrieved September 6, 2024.
- Goodin, D. (2017, March 17). Virtual machine escape fetches $105,000 at Pwn2Own hacking contest - updated. Retrieved March 12, 2018.
- Hromcova, Z. and Cherpanov, A. (2020, June). INVISIMOLE: THE HIDDEN PART OF THE STORY. Retrieved July 16, 2020.
- Smith, L. and Read, B.. (2017, August 11). APT28 Targets Hospitality Sector, Presents Threat to Travelers. Retrieved November 17, 2024.
- Microsoft. (2017, March 14). Microsoft Security Bulletin MS17-010 - Critical. Retrieved August 17, 2017.
- FireEye. (2015). APT28: A WINDOW INTO RUSSIA’S CYBER ESPIONAGE OPERATIONS?. Retrieved August 19, 2015.
- Burton, K. (n.d.). The Conficker Worm. Retrieved February 18, 2021.
- Nettitude. (2018, July 23). Python Server for PoshC2. Retrieved April 23, 2019.
- Hsu, K. et al. (2020, June 24). Lucifer: New Cryptojacking and DDoS Hybrid Malware Exploiting High and Critical Vulnerabilities to Infect Windows Devices. Retrieved November 16, 2020.
- Daniel Lughi, Jaromir Horejsi. (2020, October 2). Tonto Team - Exploring the TTPs of an advanced threat actor operating a large infrastructure. Retrieved October 17, 2021.
- Symantec. (2020, November 17). Japan-Linked Organizations Targeted in Long-Running and Sophisticated Attack Campaign. Retrieved December 17, 2020.
- Boutin, J. (2020, October 12). ESET takes part in global operation to disrupt Trickbot. Retrieved March 15, 2021.
- CISA. (2020, December 1). Russian State-Sponsored Advanced Persistent Threat Actor Compromises U.S. Government Targets. Retrieved December 9, 2021.
- FBI, CISA, CNMF, NCSC-UK. (2022, February 24). Iranian Government-Sponsored Actors Conduct Cyber Operations Against Global Government and Commercial Networks. Retrieved September 27, 2022.
- Falcone, R. and Lancaster, T. (2019, May 28). Emissary Panda Attacks Middle East Government Sharepoint Servers. Retrieved July 9, 2019.
- Loui, E. and Reynolds, J. (2021, August 30). CARBON SPIDER Embraces Big Game Hunting, Part 1. Retrieved September 20, 2021.
Связанные риски
Риск | Связи | |
---|---|---|
Боковое перемещение злоумышленника по локальной сети
из-за
наличия технических (программных) уязвимостей
в программном обеспечении
Конфиденциальность
Целостность
|
2
|
Каталоги
Мы используем cookie-файлы, чтобы получить статистику, которая помогает нам улучшить сервис для вас с целью персонализации сервисов и предложений. Вы может прочитать подробнее о cookie-файлах или изменить настройки браузера. Продолжая пользоваться сайтом, вы даёте согласие на использование ваших cookie-файлов и соглашаетесь с Политикой обработки персональных данных.