Cutwail’s Poorly Written Code Leads to Heavy SSL Traffic

February 6th, 2010

This past week, we posted some of Cutwail’s recent spamming activity. As we were digging into the elevated levels of Cutwail activity, the researchers over at Shadowserver posted on the unusual SSL traffic originating from infected hosts. Dark Reading picked up the story and came up with question marks, “what is Pushdo up to?”:

“It’s unclear thus far whether this is a test-run for phony SSL connections gone amuck that ended up exposing this Pushdo [Cutwail] traffic, or something else. Stewart says it’s possible there could be more to the latest activity, such as the botnet’s rotating its target lists. “It’s hard to say,” he says.” 

Having recently researched the downloader, we took a second look. The answer to the question “what is Pushdo [Cutwail] up to?”…the heavy SSL traffic Cutwail is sending to these new sites is a result of coding error. The Cutwail writers wanted to cloak their connections to their own payload sites listed in our previous post, and released an implementation that failed to meet that delicate goal. Instead, they killed a fly with a sledgehammer. While they could have implemented a few minor tweaks to make the SSL connections to decoy sites appear more “web browser like” to a network monitor, they failed to do so and wrote unnecessary unreliable dependencies into their SSL connection rate limiter. Also, the rate limiting code is implemented in such a way that it simply would not used to evade DDoS tracking. We observed two sets of routines in the code that form the basis of that conclusion…

As described in our previous post, 1. downloader code is injected into a spawned SVCHOST.exe.

2. Within this thread, the delimited list of payload serving hard-coded addresses are split into individual strings:

75.126.159.19:443;75.126.159.19:443;89.149.254.213;

89.149.244.141;94.75.233.173:443;94.75.233.174:443;

94.75.233.171;94.75.233.172;89.149.244.23;

aaa.oduvanchic.com;aaa.news2days.ru;firea*seye.com;

f*ckbriankrebs.com;antisgetout.cn;

3. The SSL “camoflauge thread” (the one that connects to the cia, google, and legitimate site) is started

thread_launch

4.  An RC4 encryption key is generated based on the value returned in the “lowpart” value returned from a QueryPerformanceCounter call
5. An attempt is made every 20 seconds to download the spam bot payload from the above list of addresses using the generated RC4 key
6. When a payload has been downloaded, it is decrypted using the above key, and executed directly or injected into another SVCHOST.exe process
7. After succesful execution, the mutex “00012-1010212-12012012-1211″ is created

mutex_creation

In the background the camoflauge thread is busy doing the following actions:
1. Attempts to open the mutex “00012-1010212-12012012-1211″
2. If the mutex is not found, it will spawn a thread to perform a fake ssl transaction with a random hostname from the embedded list (of legitimate sites or “decoys”) every 5 seconds
3. If the mutex *is* found, the thread will stop launching fake ssl transactions and exit

connection_starter_check

What this means in plainer terms is that a flurry of fake SSL connections are continuously launched until the payload is succesfully downloaded, after the mutex to stop making new connections is created and accessed. What happens if the payload servers are taken down (as we saw in our research lab), and a payload is never downloaded from these sites? It means no ’stop’ mutex will be created by the initial Cutwail thread on the infected host and then found by the SSL camoflage thread, and the half baked SSL connections will continue to bombard the decoy sites!

U.S. Cybersecurity Changes with H.R. 4061

February 4th, 2010

It seems that the recent and unusually public disclosure of the Google breach (and dozens of other U.S. corporations) has turned some heads. As Google reaches out to the NSA for help to secure its networks, a prominent cybersecurity bill passed the House today. It will drive large new cybersecurity efforts in the U.S. and will be an interesting bill to follow through the Senate. A summary of H.R. 4061 here.

Internet Security 2010 — YOUR SYSTEM IS INFECTED

February 3rd, 2010

Rogueware Internet Security 2010 (not to be confused with PC Tools Internet Security 2010) is moving its way to the top of ThreatFire’s community stats to be one of the highest hitting FakeAv/scareware/rogueware packages for January 2010 and the beginning of Feb. Not only is its prevalence glaring, but the infection itself visually and functionally stands out:

InternetSecurity2010 Desktop

Victims of this scam will have a hard time ignoring the screaming new message on their desktop, “YOUR SYSTEM IS INFECTED”. The familiar red X appears in the system tray in the lower right corner of the screen, and multiple phony scan images subsequently pop up.

InternetSecurity2010_2_install

Next up is a phony but thorough listing of all the detected malware that doesn’t really exist on the user’s system, described with a “Critical vulnerabilities found!” header and a mishmash of security industry buzzwords thrown together in a non-sensical phrase “Proactive system found several active vulnerabilities on your computer”…

InternetSecurity2010_3_Critical_Vulnerabilities

And, after shocking the user with this series of blatently false warnings, coming up is the money maker, a suggestion that the user get a license or pay for Internet Security 2010:

InternetSecurity2010_4_GetLicense

If the user ignores the above warnings and tries to continue their work, they instead are assailed with scare-tactic messaging from the bottom right corner of the screen…”Click here to protect your computer from spyware!”…

InternetSecurity2010_5_ClickHeretoProtect

And “System Warning! Continue working in unprotected mode is very dangerous”, another phony taunt…

InternetSecurity2010_5_Systemwarning

Good thing that ThreatFire can keep this stuff off of your system in the first place, and Spyware Doctor+AV is known to effectively clean up previously infected systems.