APT Rosetta Stone or A Plea To The Industry For Shared Names

Last night one of my CTI sharing groups was discussing a report from FireEye regarding APT29 and domain fronting (https://www.fireeye.com/blog/threat-research/2017/03/apt29_domain_frontin.html) when we all realized we had no clue who APT29 is in our own internal systems. 

One member finally shared this mess:


Nobody can agree on names. Even to the untrained eye it's obvious that there's a communication issue present here. The most amazing thing is how simple it would be to fix all of this, but none of these vendors have because #branding #sorrynotsorry #aptlolwut. The excuse "but we'd have to rename everything" is silly, because if you want to present the image of being a quality threat intelligence organization, then you should have a quality intelligence management system where this should be no more difficult than updating a single entry in a database somewhere.

So please, CTI vendors, stop giving things ridiculous names. And CloudStrike, please stop using your regional prefixes? If you haven't already made a attribution mistake, then one day you surely will, and then you're going to be in trouble.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Yara and Rich Headers are full of win

Rich Headers are awesome and you should read about them here: http://www.ntcore.com/files/richsign.htm I was looking at a sample recently and, being the good analyst I am, attempted to automate my DFIR processes using the tools I had handy. Step 1: Get the Rich Headers for the malicious binary. Let's use 9e6658fab423d9b3fabc3578ac5482bf4f21f6fb98949d8ef4f3cad349862b82, a known RAMNIT ransomware sample. $ laika.py 9e6658fab423d9b3fabc3578ac5482bf4f21f6fb98949d8ef4f3cad349862b82 | jq '.scan_result[].moduleMetadata | select(.META_PE) | .META_PE."Rich Header"' { "Checksum": 3183276661, "Hashes": { "SHA1": "dd0f0861bc67028b3cab0d6cdc55a29cc2822f64", "SHA256": "8fd544eee7389c64a29440555f5b968ae0632ed3b989a63402b6d43934a8973e", "MD5": "8451f317057b289c04b2c5b202c09715" }, "Rich Header Values": [ { "Count": 6, "Version":
Read more

"It's Not All Black And White" or "Why You Should Switch From Blacklisting To Whitelisting"

I think the title says a lot here: if you want to defend your information systems, you should switch from blacklisting to whitelisting. But what does that mean? Most people hear "whitelisting" in terms of CND and think "application whitelisting". But there's so many more places to do it! You already hopefully do outbound whitelisting on your firewall. You aren't really  allowing any system to talk out on TCP/3389, right? You do have a DEFAULT:DENY or DENY ANY,ANY down at the bottom of your firewall rules, right? But have you considered whitelisting outbound web traffic at your proxy as well? Most people think of their web proxy reputation lists as block lists, and for good reason: most of them are incomplete. But did you ever consider that maybe that incompleteness as a defensive measure? If you block unknown websites at your web proxy, you're going to block a huge amount of malicious websites. You're probably thinking to yourself but what abou
Read more

"WannaCry Is North Korea!" or "Rich Headers Win Again!"

http://researchcenter.paloaltonetworks.com/2017/04/unit42-the-blockbuster-sequel/ https://twitter.com/neelmehta/status/864164081116225536 Samples from Unit42: a4b3404fffc581ab06d50f3f2243cb56 cab10f19ae0a6deeb7be7bd0b46a0f5f d511fa33bb3c9a238e4b4eae7bae6e84 WannaCry sample from Neel Mehta: 9c7c7149387a1c79679a87dd1ba755bc All 4 samples share significant overlap in their Rich Headers. In fact, the set of IDs and Value pairs in the Rich Headers from the 3 samples I listed above are fully contained within the set of ID and Value pairs in the Rich Headers of the WannaCry sample from Neel Mehta's Twitter post. The WannaCry sample contains several header pairs that are not present within the other samples - I do not know what tools they represent so I am unable to determine the significance of this particular data point. I don't know how significant this overlap is, but in my own repository that particular set of ID and Value pairs was unique to WannaCry and malware att
Read more