Conficker Summary and Review Dave Piscitello, ICANN Senior Security Technologist 7 May 2010

Similar documents
AT&T Real-Time Network Security Overview

Current counter-measures and responses by CERTs

Indian Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT-In) Annual Report (2010)

ENEE 757 CMSC 818V. Prof. Tudor Dumitraș Assistant Professor, ECE University of Maryland, College Park

Randy Lee FireEye Labs. Understanding Modern Malware.

Botnets: The Advanced Malware Threat in Kenya's Cyberspace

VIRUS TRACKER CHALLENGES OF RUNNING A LARGE SCALE SINKHOLE OPERATION

Korea s experience of massive DDoS attacks from Botnet

Microsoft Security Response Center (MSRC) Microsoft Malware Protection Center (MMPC)

Technical Note. CounterACT: Powerful, Automated Network Protection Inside and Out

1 Infrastructure Security

Cyril Onwubiko Networking and Communications Group ncg.kingston.ac.

SECURITY TERMS: Advisory Backdoor - Blended Threat Blind Worm Bootstrapped Worm Bot Coordinated Scanning

Detecting Computer Worms in the Cloud

Adventures in Cybercrime. Piotr Kijewski CERT Polska/NASK

Computer Security DD2395

Wharf T&T Limited DDoS Mitigation Service Customer Portal User Guide

A Critical Investigation of Botnet

Seminar Computer Security

Cyber Attack Trend and Botnet

Glasnost or Tyranny? You Can Have Secure and Open Networks!

Current Threat Scenario and Recent Attack Trends

Uncover security risks on your enterprise network

Cyber Security & Role of CERT-In. Dr. Gulshan Rai Director General, CERT-IN Govt. of India grai@mit.gov.in

Using Windows Update for Windows Me

Microsoft Software Update Services and Managed Symantec Anti-virus. Michael Satut TSS/Crown IT Support

Agenda. Taxonomy of Botnet Threats. Background. Summary. Background. Taxonomy. Trend Micro Inc. Presented by Tushar Ranka

The Importance of a Multistakeholder Approach to Cybersecurity Effectiveness

Deep Discovery. Technical details

Multifaceted Approach to Understanding the Botnet Phenomenon

Using Windows Update for Windows XP

Comparison of Firewall, Intrusion Prevention and Antivirus Technologies

Network Security Monitoring and Behavior Analysis Pavel Čeleda, Petr Velan, Tomáš Jirsík

Zscaler Cloud Web Gateway Test

Data Centers Protection from DoS attacks. Trends and solutions. Michael Soukonnik, Radware Ltd Riga. Baltic IT&T

From Georgia, with Love Win32/Georbot. Is someone trying to spy on Georgians?

Cryptography and Network Security Chapter 21. Malicious Software. Backdoor or Trapdoor. Logic Bomb 4/19/2010. Chapter 21 Malicious Software

How To Test For Security Protection

IBM Managed Security Services (Cloud Computing) hosted and Web security - express managed Web security

Sapphire/Slammer Worm. Code Red v2. Sapphire/Slammer Worm. Sapphire/Slammer Worm. Sapphire/Slammer Worm. Why Was Slammer So Fast?

Shellshock. Oz Elisyan & Maxim Zavodchik

K7 Mail Security FOR MICROSOFT EXCHANGE SERVERS. v.109

SECURITY BEST PRACTICES FOR CISCO PERSONAL ASSISTANT (1.4X)

Enterprise Incident Response: Network Intrusion Case Studies and Countermeasures

SECURITY PATCH MANAGEMENT INSTALLATION POLICY AND PROCEDURES

WEBTHREATS. Constantly Evolving Web Threats Require Revolutionary Security. Securing Your Web World

Phone Fax

Kaspersky Fraud Prevention: a Comprehensive Protection Solution for Online and Mobile Banking

Kindred Domains: Detecting and Clustering Botnet Domains Using DNS Traffic "" " Matt Thomas" Data Architect, Verisign Labs"

CEH Version8 Course Outline

Automatic Extraction of Domain Name Generation Algorithms from Current Malware

Student Tech Security Training. ITS Security Office

About Botnet, and the influence that Botnet gives to broadband ISP

INFORMATION SECURITY INCIDENT MANAGEMENT PROCESS

Protecting the Infrastructure: Symantec Web Gateway

Malicious Software. Malicious Software. Overview. Backdoor or Trapdoor. Raj Jain. Washington University in St. Louis

WORMS : attacks, defense and models. Presented by: Abhishek Sharma Vijay Erramilli

COMPREHENSIVE SECURITY AUDIT COMMERCIAL TAXES DEPARTMENT, KARNATAKA. Ashish Kirtikar

Introduction: 1. Daily 360 Website Scanning for Malware

Microsoft Security Intelligence Report volume 7 (January through June 2009)

Security Toolsets for ISP Defense

Overview. Common Internet Threats. Spear Phishing / Whaling. Phishing Sites. Virus: Pentagon Attack. Viruses & Worms

Cisco & Big Data Security

Overview. Introduction. Conclusions WINE TRIAGE. Zero day analysis. Symantec Research Labs (SRL)

Cisco IPS Tuning Overview

Data Driven Assessment of Cyber Risk:

Country Case Study on Incident Management Capabilities CERT-TCC, Tunisia

McAfee Avert Labs Finding W32/Conficker.worm

Security A to Z the most important terms

Information Security Threat Trends

Trends in Security Incidents and Hitachi s Activities

An Efficient Methodology for Detecting Spam Using Spot System

WORMS HALMSTAD UNIVERSITY. Network Security. Network Design and Computer Management. Project Title:

ANTIVIRUS BEST PRACTICES

How To Detect An Advanced Persistent Threat Through Big Data And Network Analysis

Spyware. Michael Glenn Technology Management 2004 Qwest Communications International Inc.

ENISA s Study on the Evolving Threat Landscape. European Network and Information Security Agency

Agenda , Palo Alto Networks. Confidential and Proprietary.

Transcription:

ConfickerSummaryandReview ConfickerSummaryandReview DavePiscitello,ICANNSeniorSecurityTechnologist 7May2010 Abstract Thisreportprovidesachronologyofeventsrelatedtothecontainmentof theconfickerworm.itprovidesanintroductionandbriefdescriptionofthe wormanditsevolution,butitsprimaryfocusistopiecetogetherthepostdiscoveryand analysisevents,describethecontainmentmeasures chronologically,anddescribethecollaborativeefforttocontainthespread oftheworm.theauthorcaptureslessonslearnedduringacontainment periodspanningnearlyayearanddescribesrecentactivitiesthatattemptto applythelessonslearnedsothatthesecurityanddnscommunitiescanbe betterpreparedforfutureattacksthatexploittheglobaldns. Thisreportrepresentstheworkoftheauthor,onbehalfoftheICANN SecurityTeam.Theauthorisresponsibleforerrorsoromissions.While membersoftheconfickerworkinggroup,icannssac,individualsecurity researchers,andcertainicannregistrieswereinvitedtocommentor reviewthereport,noneoftheseorganizationswereaskedtoformally endorsethisworkproduct. Introduction TheConfickerwormfirstappearedinOctober2008andquicklyearnedasmuch notorietyascodered 1,Blaster 2,Sasser 3 andsqlslammer 4.Theinfectionisfoundin bothhomeandbusinessnetworks,includinglargemulti nationalenterprise networks.attemptstoestimatethepopulationsofconfickerinfectedhostsatany giventimehavevariedwidely,butallestimatesexceedmillionsofpersonal computers. TheoperationalresponsetoConfickerisperhapsaslandmarkaneventastheworm itself.internetsecurityresearchers,operatingsystemandantivirussoftware vendorsdiscoveredtheworminlate2008.thesepartiesaswellaslawenforcement formedanadhoceffortwithicann,topleveldomain(tld)registriesand registrarsaroundtheworldtocontainthethreatbypreventingconfickermalware writersfromusingtensofthousandsofdomainnamesalgorithmically generated dailybytheconfickerinfection. ConfickermalwarewritersmadeuseofdomainnamesratherthanIPaddressesto maketheirattacknetworksresilientagainstdetectionandtakedown.initial countermeasures sinkholingorpreemptiveregistrationsofdomainsusedto identifyconficker scommandandcontrol(c&c)hosts preventedthemalware writersfromcommunicatingwithconficker infectedsystemsandthus,presumably 1

ConfickerSummaryandReview preventedthewritersfrominstructingthebottedhoststoconductattacksorto receiveupdates.theconfickermalwarewritersrespondedtothismeasureby introducingvariantstotheoriginalinfectionthatincreasedthenumberof algorithmicallygenerateddomainnamesanddistributedthenamesmorewidely acrosstlds.torespondtothisescalation,partiesinvolvedincontainingconficker contactedmorethan100tldsaroundtheworldtoparticipateinthecontainment effort. Thecombinedeffortsofallpartiesinvolvedinthecollaborativeresponseshouldbe measuredbymorecriteriathanmitigationalone.thecontainmentmeasuresdidnot eradicatethewormordismantlethebotnetentirely.still,thecoordinated operationalresponsemeritsattentionbecausethemeasuresdisruptedbotnet commandandcontrolcommunicationsandcausedconfickermalwarewritersto changetheirbehavior.thecollaborativeeffortalsodemonstratedthatsecurity communitiesarewillingandabletojoinforcesinresponsetoincidentsthat threatenthesecurityandstabilityofthednsanddomainregistrationsystemsona globalscale. 2

ConfickerSummaryandReview ConfickerBackground ThissectiondrawsheavilyfromanexcellentpaperontheConfickerworm publishedatthehoneynetprojectbyauthorsfelixlederandtillmannwerner 5. ThedescriptionherelargelytracksanddistinguishesamongConfickervariants whenchangesaffectedtheworm suseofthedns.itdiscussesthewormingeneral terms.thoseinterestedinaverytechnicalanalysisofconficker sinfection armoringandupdateprocesses,variantsofthedomainnamegenerationalgorithms, signaturesthatcanbeusedbyintrusiondetectionsystemstodetectconficker,and disinfectionissues areencouragedtoreadthefullpaper.lederandtillmannhave alsoproducedashortvideoonthestructureofconfickerandmaintainalistof disinfectantsandscannersatthecontainingconfickerwebpage 6.Listsofdomain namesgeneratedbyconfickervariantsmaybeofparticularinteresttothedomain namecommunityandcanbeobtainedthereaswell.anothersourceforthis summaryisansritechnicalreportbyphillipporras,hassensaidi,andvinod Yegneswaran,whichanalyzestheConfickerpackage,processing,andprotocolin considerabledetail. Confickeriscalledawormbecausethefirstdiscoveredvariantattachedtoa program(executable),wasself replicating,and(importantly)usedanetworkasthe deliverymechanism.thiscombinationofcharacteristicsdistinguisheswormsfrom viruses 7.Confickerisactuallyablendedthreat 8 becauseitcanbedeliveredvia networkfileshares,mappeddrivesandremovablemediaaswell.theconficker infectionisatypeofsoftwarecalledadynamiclinklibrary(dll).adllcannot executealonebutmustbeloadedbyorintoarunningapplication.theconficker DLLlauncheswithrundllonWindows,whichletsitrunasastandaloneprocess.A ConfickerinstallerloadsitsDLLintoaWindowsapplicationbyexploitingtheMS08 067vulnerabilityintheWindowsOperatingSystem 9.Thisvulnerabilityallows Confickermalwarewriterstousewhatiscalledabufferoverflowto inject code intothewindowsserverservice. Abufferoverflowisamethodofexploitingsoftwareprogrammingthatfailstocheck boundariesbeforewritinginformationintomemory.theattackerdiscoversthata programisvulnerabletoabufferoverflowbyattemptingtowritemoreinformation intomemorythantheprogrammerhadallocatedtostoreinformation.specifically, theattackerseekstowriteinformationintomemorythatisadjacenttothememory heoverruns.thisadjacentmemorymaycontaindataoritmaycontainexecutable code;ineithercase,theattackedapplicationwillnotoperateasanticipatedwhenit encountersthemaliciouscodetheattackerinjected.inthecaseofconficker,the attackerinjectedexecutablecodethatgivestheattackerremotecontroloverthe infectedcomputerandinparticular,remotecodeexecutionprivileges.usingthe injectedcode,theattackercanaddorchangecodetomaketheinfectedhost computerdowhateveritchooses. 3

ConfickerSummaryandReview Topreventdetection,certainwormsembedthemselvesinabenignmanneronthe infectedcomputer,i.e.,intoaprogramorsoftwarethatisexpectedtorunona computerrunningthewindowsoperatingsystem.thewormthenattemptsto disablesoftwarethatcoulddetectorremovetheinfection.confickervariants disablewindowsautomaticupdate,windowssecuritycenter,windowsdefender andwindowserrorreporting.latervariantsalsouseddnsfilteringtoblock antimalwareprogramsfromobtainingupdates(e.g.,virussignaturesthatwould allowtheresidentavsoftwaretodetectandremoveconfickerrelatedmalware). ConfickermalwarealsoresetstheWindowsSystemRestorepoint 10,whichcontains informationthatcouldbeusedtoremoveconfickermalwarebyrestoringthe infectedcomputer sfilesystemandregistrytoversionssavedpriortotheinfection. EarlyvariantsoftheConfickermalwareenlistedaninfectedmachineintoa Confickerbotnet.Onceenlisted,themalwarerunningoninfectedcomputersusesa domaingenerationalgorithm(dga)tocreateadailylistofdomainnames.the Confickermalwarewritersusedthesamealgorithmtogenerateanidenticallist.The writersthenregisteredasmallnumberofthesedomainsandsetupname resolutionservicefortheselectedsubsetofdomainssothatthedomainnames assignedtointernetrendezvouslogicpoints i canberesolvedtoipaddressesbydns resolvers.theconfickermalwarewritersdidnotappeartousethegenerated domainnamesroutinely,presumablybecausetheydeterminedthenameshadbeen blocked.alatervariantshiftedthebotnetfromemployingrendezvouslogicpoints toapeer to peernetwork.malwareoperatingoninfectedhostsdiscoverotherbots bydetectingattacksfromanotherinfectedhosts,confirmingthecodetheattacking hostsattempttoinjectisthesameasitsowncode,andconnectingbacktothe attackerusinghttpsothathostswithmatchedinfectionscansharefilesdirectly. TheConficker infectedcomputersattempttoconnecttohttpserversoperatingon rendezvouslogicpointsbycontactingdomainsfromthedaily generatedlistof domainnames.iftheyareabletoresolveadomainnameandconnecttoanhttp server,thebottedmachinesareabletoreceiveadditionalmalwareorinstructions toperformcertainactionsusingalready presentexecutables.thewormusesstrong cryptographictechniques(rsaandmd6)tocontrolwhatcodecanbeloadedonto aninfectedbox.allcode"loads"mustbecorrectlysignedortheywillberejected. Presumably,onlytheConfickermalwarewriterhastheprivatesigningkeyfor updates.insomecases,theconfickerbotwillbetoldtotryvariousmeansof infectingotherhosts(e.g.,throughanonymousnetworkshares).inothercases,the Confickerbotscanbecomeanarmythatcanbedirectedatwillbyrendezvous pointstosupportawiderangeofmaliciousorcriminalactivities. Botnetsareextremelydifficulttodismantle.Botnetscanremainoperational andwill continuetoserveasplatformsfornumerousattacks foraslongasthebotted i Arendezvouslogicpointisaserverthatisfunctionallysimilartoacommandand control(c&c)server. 4

ConfickerSummaryandReview computersremaininfectedandaslongasthebotscanremotelycommunicatewiththe rendezvouspoint(s). Thefollowingsectionoffersachronologyofeventsthatdescribehowthesecurity, intelligenceanddnscommunitieswereabletodisruptcommunicationsbetween Confickerinfectedhostsandrendezvouslogicpoints. OriginandEvolutionoftheConfickerWorkingGroup PriortotheformationoftheConfickerWorkingGroup,operatingsystemand securitysoftwarevendors(microsoft,symantec,f Secure),othersecurityresearch organizations(shadowserverfoundation,teamcymru)andtheintelligence community(usfederalbureauofinvestigation,ussecretserviceandtheus DepartmentofDefense)hadmonitoredandanalyzedConfickerandhadcooperated tocontainthethreat.f Securehadbegun spot sinkholing ii domainnamesthat Confickerbotswereattemptingtocontacttoestimatethesizeofthebotnet.Several operatorsofthetopleveldomainsinwhichconfickermalwarewriterswere registeringdomains(verisign,afilias,neustar,pir,andws)werealreadyinvolved atthispoint,andicannstaffassistedthesecurityresearchersincontactingcnnic toadvisethemofthethreatandaskfortheirparticipationinthecontainmenteffort. TosupporteffortstomonitorConfickertraffic,analyzetheinfection,identify infectedhostsandestimatethesizeofthebotnet,supportintelligencewas registering500domainnamesidentifiedasconfickeralgorithmicallygenerated domainsperdayacrossasmallnumberoftopleveldomains,throughanicann accreditedregistrar,alice sregistry,inc.aspartofthepreemptiveregistration action,supportintelligenceconfigurednameserverstoresolvetoipaddressesof sinkholinghostsunderthecontrolofsecurityresearchersandmalwareanalysts. Preemptivedomainregistrationshadpreviouslybeenappliedwithsomesuccessby FireEyeMalwareDetectionLabstothwarttheSrizbibotnetinearlyNovember 11 andsecurityresearcherswerehopingforsimilarsuccessbyapplyingthesame technique.inthecaseofconficker,preemptiveregistrationwastoservetwo purposes:preventconfickerinfectedhostsfromcommunicatingwithc&cand directtraffictosinkholehostswheretheconfickerbottrafficcouldbefurther monitoredandanalyzed.on28january2009,asecurityresearcheratsupport IntelligencecontactedICANNstaffregardingtheConfickerthreat.Support Intelligence sblockingactivitieswereself fundedandtheorganizationwasseeking supportfromicanntoobtainfinancialrelieforreimbursementfromregistriesfor thedomainsithadandwascontinuingtoregister. ii The verb sinkholereferstoanactivitywheretrafficsuspectedtobeassociatedwithabotnetis redirectedtoacomputer(s)operatedbysecurityresearchersorlawenforcementforobservationor todivertanattackawayfromanintendedtarget. 5

ConfickerSummaryandReview DiscussionsrelatingtheongoingConfickerresponseactivitiesappearedonseveral securitylistsinparallelwiththeseactivities,whichincreasedawarenessofthe globalnatureandscaleofthethreat.forexample,personnelatregistryoperator AfiliaswerediscussingConfickermonitoring,blocking,andfundingissueswith severalrelevantpartiespriortosupportintelligencecontactingicann.cert CC staffhadcontactedstaffatdomainnameregistryoperatorneustartoaskwhether NeustarmightarrangeforsomeassistancefromtheBIZregistrytohelpcontain Conficker.On31January2009,NeustarreceivedbriefingsdescribingSupport Intelligence spreemptiveregistrationinitiativefrommicrosoftstaffandother securityresearchersviaprivatecorrespondence.combined,thesedialogswere essentialinengagingresourcestocontainconficker,buttheywereloosely coordinatedinthesensethatnotallpartieswerekeptinformedatalltimes, informationsharedwasnotuniform,andthatdisseminationofinformationrelied heavilyonindividualwebsoftrust. Bythistime,severalorganizations(Symantec/Kaspersky,eNom)hadbegun contributingfundstoassistwithpaymentofthefeessupportintelligencewas incurringtocontainconficker.thisfinancialaidhelpedpayfororrecover registrationfeestocctlds.recognizingthatthecurrentmethodofpreemptive registrationwas fundamentallyunsustainable evenwithmicrosoft scontributions andthattheoperationalresponseimposedanunreasonableandprecariousburden onasingleindividual,neustarcontactedicann schiefinternetsecurityadvisor andthechairmanoficann ssecurityandstabilityadvisorycommittee(ssac). On3February2009,whileattendinganICANNDNSSSRretreat,severalparties alreadyinvolvedinthecontainmenteffortmetinatlantatoconductabriefingfor seniormanagementfromicannandgtldregistries.participatingwere: ICANNseniormanagement,generalcounsel,andsecuritystaff, Lawenforcement(FBI/NCFTA), Securityresearchers(Microsoft,SupportIntelligence,ISC),and GTLDregistryoperators(VeriSign,Afilias,NeuStar) ParticipantsreviewedhowConfickerhadbeenhandledtodate(seeabove),and discussedhowtosustaintheeffortthroughfebruaryandmarchandhowtomanage publicdisclosure.theoperatorsoftheaffectedregistries initially,biz,com,info, NET,andORG volunteeredtheirparticipationandsetaboutblockingdomain names.theparticipantsdiscussedwaysthaticannmightassistinthepreemptive registrationeffort.icann ssecuritystaffagreedtocoordinatepreemptive registrationswithcctldsandtofacilitateongoingcommunicationsamongthe participants.icannseniormanagementandgeneralcounselagreedtoconsider declaringtheconfickerresponsetobeaspecialcircumstance(exceptioncase)and tomanagecontractualwaiveraspectsoftheresponsesothatthegtldregistries couldcontinuetheirpreemptiveregistrationactivitiesthrough1april2009.the participantsagreedtocontinuetoconferenceregularlytoreportstatusandto exploremechanismstocontainormitigatefuture,similarthreats. 6

ConfickerSummaryandReview BasedontrafficanalysisandintelligencegatheredrelatedtoConfickeravailableat thetimeofthemeeting,participantsagreedthattheoperationalresponseplanput intoactioninatlantawouldhavetocontinueforseveralmonthsandaworkflow emerged:researcherswouldgeneratethedailylistsandcontactthetargeted registries,whowouldthentakemeasurestoblockconfickerbotnetoperatorsfrom registeringthedomainnames. On12February,Microsoftpublishedapressreleaseannouncing partnershipwith technologyindustryleadersandacademiatoimplementacoordinated,global responsetotheconficker(a.k.a.downadup)worm 12 andofferinga$250,000 rewardforinformationleadingtothearrestandconvictionofconficker swriters 13. TheannouncementacknowledgedtheparticipationandcooperationofICANN, registryoperators(neustar,verisign,cnnic,afilias,publicinternetregistry)as wellasglobaldomainsinternationalinc.,m1dglobal,aol,symantec,f Secure,ISC, researchersfromgeorgiainstituteoftechnology,theshadowserverfoundation, ArborNetworksandSupportIntelligence.Atthispoint,ArborNetworksjoinedto complementsinkholeoperations.followingthisannouncement,thepressbegan referringtotheadhocpartnershipastheconfickercabal 14.Thepartnershiplater preferredandcontinuestousethenameconfickerworkinggroup. FromearlyFebruarythroughmid April,thestafffromICANNsecurity,services, complianceandlegaldepartmentscoordinatedaseriesofcallswithpartieswho agreedtocollaborateasadnsoperationalresponseteam.theteam,consistingof involvedgtldregistryandregistrarrepresentatives,mettocontinuetoshare informationandtodiscussongoingeffortstocontainconficker.thegroupwas explicitlyavoluntarycollaborationthatfocusedspecificallyontheconficker situation,establishedmechanismsforvettingadditionalmemberstoensuretrustin thoseinvolvedandmadenodeterminationsrelatedtoanycontractualmatters. Manyofthesepartieswerealsoengagedinthebroadersecuritycommunity Confickerworkinggroup.BythispointtheCWGhadmultiplefunctioning subgroups,includingsinkholeoperators,malwareanalyzers,dnsoperators, remediationtoolproducers,etc. On20February,MicrosoftreceivedreportsofaConficker.Cvariant iii.security researchersdeterminedbyexamininginfectionsamplesthatthisvarianthadamore aggressivedomaingenerationalgorithm.cognizantthatthesecurityanddomain namecommunitieswereblockingregistrations,theconfickermalwarewriters seemedintenttotestthelevelofcommitmentoftheconfickerworkinggroup.in AnalysisofConficker.C 15,Parras,Saidi,andYegneswarandescribeConficker.Cas a directretorttotheactionoftheconfickercabal,whichrecentlyblockedalldomain iii ThelabelingofConfickervariantsbecomesconfusingatthispoint.OnesecurityresearcheratSRI obtainedavirussampleandlabeleditb++whereasotheranalystslabeledthevariantc.the8march 2009SRIanalysisofConficker.CthusdescribesthevariantothersinthecommunitylabeledD.Some membersofthesecuritycommunitynowrefertothe1april2009variantasconficker.c/d.atable comparingcertainfeaturesoftheconfickervariantsappearsinappendixa. 7

ConfickerSummaryandReview registrationsassociatedwiththeaandbstrains. TheConficker.Cvariant introducedtwofunctionalchanges.thefirstalteredthecontrolchannel communicationsfromac&ctoapeer to peermodel.conficker.calsochangedthe domainnamegenerationalgorithmandrendezvouslogicpointselectionmethod: Conficker.Cnowselectsitsrendezvouspointsfromapoolofover50,000randomly generateddomainnamecandidateseachday.conficker.cfurtherincreases Conficker'stop leveldomain(tld)spreadfromfivetldsinconfickera,toeight TLDsinB,to110TLDsthatmustnowbeinvolvedincoordinationeffortstotrack andblockconficker.c'spotentialdnsqueries. Withthislatestescalationindomainnamemanipulation,Conficker.Cposeda significantchallengetothosehopingtotrackitscensusandcontainthethreatit posed.theconficker.cvariantalsohighlightedtheweaknessofblockingname registrationsasacountermeasure.themeasuredoesnotscale.byintroducing increasinglylargenumbersofpossibleregistrationsandspreadingtheseacrossa largenumberoftldregistries,theconfickerwritersincreasedthelikelihoodof oversightorerror,andalsoincreasethenumberoforganizationsthathadto collaborate. LederandWermannoteintheirreportthatthenewConfickervariantimprovedthe domaingenerationalgorithmmeasurably,butatthesametimerevealed informationthatthewritersshouldhavetakencaretohide: Conficker.Ccontains codethatwillstarttolookforupdatesafter1april2009localtime...itisthis hardcodeddatevaluewithinthecodethathasgeneratedsuchahighdegreeofpress speculationaboutwhattheconfickerbotnetwillormorelikelywon'thappenon AprilFoolsday. HardcodingthedateintotheConficker.Cvariantwasnotvery cleverandinfact,showsthateveninthevirusworldthosewhofailtostudyhistory aredoomedtorepeatit:hardcodingipaddressesofinfectioncodehadearlier providedsecurityresearcherswiththemeanstoblockcommunicationsbetween botsandc&cs. Atthispoint,theCWGfacedseveraluncertaintiesandchallenges.CWGmembers andothershadmadeseveralrepairandremovaltoolsavailable,butthegroupcould notenforceremediationordeterminehowmanyhostsinfectedbypriorconficker variantsremainedinfectedandhadbeenupgradedbytheconfickermalware writersfromtheoriginalavariant(andthuscouldbefurtherupgradedto Conficker.Considerableeffortstomakethepublicawareofthethreatwere underway,butthecwghadtoanticipatethatconficker.cwouldinfectadditional (new)hosts.thecwgfocusedcertainofitsmonitoringactivitiesondetermining whetheranyofthealgorithmicallygenerateddomainsduplicatednamesalready registeredinatldandothereffortstocontinuetoidentifythedomainnames ConfickergeneratedandmaketheseavailabletoTLDssothattheycouldbeblocked. ICANNsecuritystaffandICANNregionalliaisonscontactedthelistofCCTLD operatorsthatsecurityresearchershadidentifiedastargetsforconficker registrations,suppliedeachoperatorwithatailoredlistofnamesconficker 8

ConfickerSummaryandReview malwarewriterswouldattempttoregister,andadvisedthemtojoinsecurity mailinglistswherednsresponseissuesrelatedtotheconfickerwormsare discussed;however,certaincctldoperatorswouldnotblockthenamesonthelist withoutacourtorder.icannstaffalsocontactedthechairoftheccnsoandthe managersoftheregionalcctldgroups(centr,aptld,aftld,lactld)toassist incallingattentiontotheanticipatedevent. TheanticipatedApril1updateeventreceivedconsiderablepublicattention 16.The ConfickerWorkingGroup,complementednowbyanumberofCCTLDs,preparedfor theevent.icannsecuritystaffandconfickerworkinggroupmembersrecognized that100%awarenessortimelyparticipationacrosssuchalargenumberofregistry operatorswasdoubtful.cooperationamongthevariousregistriesoperators, althoughunlikelytofullystopconficker,wouldenabletheanti viruscommunity andthoseinvolvedtobettertrackandunderstandthespreadofthewormandthen tousethatinformationtohelpdisinfectsystems. By30March2009,securityresearchersinvolvedinTheHoneynetProjecthad sufficientlyanalyzedconficker.ctopositivelyidentifytheinfection 17.Detection signaturesweremadeavailableandquicklyincludedinfreeandfor feenetwork scanners(nmap,tenablesecurity snessus,mcafeefoundstoneenterprise,and Qualys).Giventhenumberofsystemsthatremainedinfectedandnotpatched, securityresearchersconcededthatthatnumberofsystemsstillinfectedwithearlier ConfickervariantsandstillnotpatchedtomitigatetheMS08 67wouldbeupdated on1april2009withtheconficker.evariantandthattheextentandsuccessofthe updatecouldnotbepredicted. TheintentoftheConficker.Evariantwastoremoveallbutthecoremalware functionalityandupgradecontactedhostswiththenewp2pcommunications ability.accordingtomicrosoftmalwareprotectioncenter 18,theConficker.Evariant executesaself terminationroutinewhenthedateismay32009.thewormdeletes itsmainexecutablecomponentonthisdate.howeverthedllpayloadcomponent (detectedasworm:win32/conficker.e.dll)remainstocontinueparticipatingin P2Pcommunicationamonginfectedpeers. On21September2009,SRIreleaseda ConfickerP2PProtocolandImplementationAnalysis 19.Inthereport,theauthors describethenewp2pscan baseddiscoverymethodconfickermalwarewriters wouldnowusetojoinaninfectedhostintotheconfickerp2pnetwork,themeans bywhichpeerssharemalwareexecutables,andmore. OngoingConfickerWorkingGroupActivity EffortscontinuetoblockregistrationofConfickerdomains.Trafficanalysisefforts havebeenhelpfulindevelopingabetterunderstandingofthedistributionofthe wormandintendedapplicationsoftheconfickerbotnet 20.Microsoftandsecurity vendorscontinuetostudymethodsfordetectionandremovalofknownvariants. 9

ConfickerSummaryandReview SecurityresearcherscontinuetopublishanddistributeConfickerscanners, signaturesforintrusionsystems,andgeneralinformation.effortstotargetoutreach toparticularlyinfestednetworkscontinue. TheConfickerinfectionrateremainshighforBandCvariantsbutdecliningforC/E. Remediationcontinuestoposechallenges.Securityresearcherscontinuetotrack Conficker.AnOctober2009snapshotbytheShadowserverFoundationestimates thenumberofsystemsinfectedwithconfickera/b/cvariantsatapproximately sevenmillion 21.TheConfickerWorkingGroupmaintainsvisualtimelineand chronologyofconfickerat[22]totrackhistorical,currentandfutureevents. ActivitiestodetectConfickervariantsandremediateConficker infectedhostswill undoubtedlycontinueforsometime.thisisinevitablegiventhemillionsofinfected computersandhistoricallymarginalsuccessinremediatingmalware.lessons learnedduringtheconfickercontainmentperiodarediscussedinalatersectionof thispaper.securityanddnscommunitiesareworkingtodeviselong termand sustainableapproachesfordealingwithnotonlyconfickerbutalsofuture,similar threats.these,too,arediscussedinalatersectionofthispaper. TheImportanceofRolesinConfickerWorkingGroup AlltheactionsrelatedtomitigatingtheConfickerwormwerenotdirectlynor entirelywithintheremitofanyindividualcwgparticipant.throughoutthe chronologyofconfickerevents,allthecollaboratingpartiesperformedrolesthat wereappropriatetotheirorganizations corecompetencies:malwareresearchers reverseengineeredthedropper/installer,trafficanalysisengineersidentifiedthe lociofinfestations,icannfacilitatedcommunicationsbetweenregistriesand partieswhocompiledthec&cdomainlists,andregistryoperatorsblocked registrationsofconfickerdomains.thecollaboratingpartiestriedtoadheretothe bestpracticesofpublicdisclosureofsecurityincidentsandeventsbymaintaininga lowprofile,protectingsensitiveinformation,andsharingonlyinformationthatthe adhocpartnershipagreedtoshare. SeveralCWGmemberspubliclyexpressedtheirsurpriseandgratitudeformember willingnesstoengageintheconfickercontainment 23.Manysecurityandregistry organizationshadnotencounteredcircumstancessuchasthoseconfickerposed andthusdidnothavecommunicationschannelsinplacetocoordinatecontainment efforts.cwgmembersindicatedthaticann sabilitytofacilitateandexpedite communicationswithtldregistriesacceleratedprocessesthatwouldunderother circumstanceshavechallengingifnotimpossibletoobtainduringthewindowsof opportunityconfickeraffordedthem.icannsecuritystaffandregionalliaisons initiallyfilledthisgapbyrelayinginformationgatheredbysecurityresearchersto TLDoperatorsandlaterbyintroducingcollaboratorsandprovidingdirectcontact information.registryoperatorsblockedconfickerdomainsandadvisedicann 10

ConfickerSummaryandReview counselandseniormanagementofthemeasurestheytooktopreventthe registrationofauto generateddomainsbytheconfickermiscreants.theseadhoc methodsprovidedsomeinsightintohowcertainformalconstructsmightprove beneficialinfutureresponseefforts. ConfickerToday InfectiontrackingbytheCWGshowsthatConficker.Cpopulationshavediminished overthepastyearbutthatnumberofcomputersinfectedconfickera+bisstilllarge (graphscourtesyofconfickerworkinggroup 24 ). Overthepastyear,theShadowserverFoundationhastrackedtheConficker populations(a+b,c,andaggregate),whichremaininthemillions. 11

ConfickerSummaryandReview LessonsLearned Severallessonsmaybelearnedfromthechronologyandeventsrelatedto containingtheconfickerworm.perhapsthemostpositivelessonlearnedisthat DNS,security,andlawenforcementcancollaboratewhenanincidentofglobal proportionisidentified.apositiveresultfromtheadhocresponsewasthatthe participantsdisruptedthebotnetcommunicationsandthusprevented opportunitiestoputthebotnettomisuse.thecontainment,however,was temporary,andtheconfickermalwarewriterscounteredbymakingthe containmentmeasureincreasinglydifficulttocoordinateandsustain. TheConfickercollaborativeresponsesreliedlargelyonvolunteereffortsand goodwill,informalcommunicationschannels,interventionaloperationalpractices, informalagreements,andassumptionsthatresponsewouldbeuniformand unilateral.eachofthesedependenciesexposedcertainweaknesses: Adhoccollaborativeresponsemaynotbescalableorsustainable.Intheabsenceof (complementary)formalstructuresorcommitments,certainproblemsthat encumberedorconfoundedtheconfickerresponsewillpersist.theconficker responsewasahighlydistributedeffortthatleveragedmanyvolunteersaswellas fulltimestaffacrossmultipleorganizationstogetthejobdone.weneedtoconsider thefactthatwecannotrelyonhavingsufficientresourcesofthecaliberthatwere engagedforconfickertobeavailableatamoment snoticeasarealthreat.aswe studythreatstothedns,weneedtoalsoconsiderthatwehavenotyetencountered asituationwhereresourcesmightbeneededformultiple,simultaneousincidents involvingtheglobaldns. 12

ConfickerSummaryandReview Likeothermalwarewriters,worm/botnetwriterswilladapttocountermeasures deployedtodetectorcontainthem.however,westillseeevidencethatwhilebotnet writershaveadaptedtothecontainment,theystillappeartopreferdnstohardencodedipaddressesandstillusesecondlevellabelsacrossmultipletlds.the DNSislikelytocontinuetobepartofmalwarewritertoolkits.Itisthusappropriate toconsiderwaystobuildonthesuccessfulelementsofthisincidentresponseand improvethoseaspectsthatwerenotsosuccessful. Informalcommunicationsmaynotbesufficientforallglobalincidentresponseefforts, especiallyinsituationswherethereiszerotoleranceforerrororomission.conficker demandedconstantattentionfromresponders.confickervariantsgeneratednew domainlistsdaily.securityresearchersmonitoredtrafficandanalyzedcode samplescontinuouslyinanticipationofnewvariants.duringthemonthsofeffortto containconficker,communicationsamongresponderscouldbecharacterizedas havingspikes,lags,anddormantperiodswheresomepartieswereunableto respondorunresponsive.incertaincases,contactinformationavailabletoparties wasnotaccurate,orwasnotsufficienttoreachapartywithauthoritytoacton behalfofthecontactedorganization.inothercases,icannstaffdeterminedthat someregistrycontactinformationmaintainedbyianawasnotaccurateorwasnot thecontactataregistrywithauthoritytoparticipateinincidentresponse.formal channelswithagreed uponormandatoryexchangesandexchangefrequencies shouldbeconsideredforfutureresponseefforts. Maintainingconsistency,completenessandaccuracyofinformationduringthecourse ofalongincidentresponseeffortischallenging.duringtheconfickerresponse, partiesinitiallyusedavailableratherthanformalcommunicationschannels(e.g., securitymaillists,teleconferences,privateemail,etc.)andreliedoncontact informationathandorpassedhandtohand.theconfickerworkinggroup establishedcommunicationschannelsasthecontainmenteffortgrew,butsensitive informationwasnotconsistentlyclassified,encryptedorsigned.thenatureand levelofdetailcommunicatedamongtheparticipantswasunintentionallybut predictablynotuniform.theadhocnatureofthesecommunicationsalsoresultedin differentpartiesreceivinginformationatdifferenttimes,whichmadeitdifficultto maintainbroadsituationalawareness.noindividualororganizationperformed formalactiontrackingorauditing,andthuschroniclingtheincidentresponsefor post incidentreviewandanalysishasbeendifficult.inparticular,informationthat ispotentiallyvaluableinimprovingresponsetofutureglobalincidentsmaybelost orasyetundisclosed. Scalingtrustishard.Volunteereffortsrelyonpersonalwebsoftrust.Most participantsintheconfickerresponseknewsomeorseveralotherparticipantsbut itisunlikelythatanyonekneweveryoneandunlikelierstillthatanyonecould produceanaccurateaccountingofallpartiestoallinformationsharingduringthe courseofthecontainmenteffort. 13

ConfickerSummaryandReview Operationalprocessesthatrelyonblocklistsataregistrylevelarenotscalable.The mostobviousreasonisthatpreemptiveblockingscalespoorly:inresponsetothe blockingefforts,conficker swritersincreasedthenumbersofalgorithmically generateddomainsandthenumbersoftlds.theoperationalburdentoblock domainsincreasesinseveralways;forexample,distributionofnamesacrosslarger numbersoftlds,removalofthenamesfromavailablepoolscanbecomeexpensive, non compensatedcostsforregistryoperators.registriesalsofiltereddomainsto assurethatall collisions betweenconficker sdgadomainsanddomainsthatare alreadyregisteredintldswerenotadverselyaffected. CertainactivitiesrelatedtoincidentresponseraisecontractualissuesforICANN, registries,andregistrars.inthecaseofconficker,icannandgtldregistrieswere abletoresolvemattersrelatingtodomainfeesquickly.thecommunitycannotrely onallcontractualmatterstobesoeasilyhandledforallfutureincidents.regarding theeasebywhichconficker relatedcontractualmatterswereresolve,onesecurity expertobserved(anonymously)that, inthefirstexampleofbreakingtherules, you regivensomeleeway.thesecondtime,thestakesarehigher,andyouhaveto bewarethatasinglemistakewillbedisproportionatelyhighlighted. Certaincountermeasuresorpreemptiveactionscannotbeimplementedunilaterallyby alltldoperators.someregistryoperatorsrequirecourtordersbeforetheytakea particularactioninresponsetoaglobalincident.inascenariolikeconficker,where listsofmaliciousdomainsaregenerateddaily,evenaonedaydelaytoprocessa courtordercaninhibittheresponse. Weshouldrefrainfromconcludingfromtheselessonslearnedthatformal structuresmustreplacevoluntaryones.forexample,establishingformalstructures doesnotaddresstheissuethatsometldswillnotbewillingtoparticipateorto continuetoparticipateincertainkindsofresponseindefinitely.relyingentirelyon formalstructuresmayexcludeparticipationbycertainindividualsforarangeof political,legal,orpersonalreasons.rather,weshouldbearinmindthatresponses withinadequateresourceswillbemorepronetoerrororomissionthanthosegiven adequateresources.effectiveresponsewillinevitablyandultimatelydependupon thesupportandparticipationofrelevantstakeholders,notablythosewhohave delegatedresponsibilityforthevariousassetsinvolved.inotherwords,while certainformalstructurescancomplementandrenderadhocresponsesmore effective,bothmaybenecessarytodealwithfutureeventsoftheconfickerkind. WayForward BaseonthelessonslearnedfromthecollaborativeresponsetoConficker,one elementofawayforwardistoformalizerelationshipsamongpartiesthatbecome involvedwhensecurityeventsofaglobalnatureoccur.icann(theentityand community)hasestablishedcertainformalrelationshipsandstructuresandis workinginconcertwithotherorganizationsonothers. 14

ConfickerSummaryandReview WithinthespecificcontextofglobalsecurityeventsinvolvingabuseoftheDNSand domainregistrationservices,andusingconfickerasalearningexperience,icann andthegtldregistrieshavedevelopedanexpeditedregistrysecurityrequest Process(ERSR) 25.Throughthisprocess,gTLDregistriescannowinformICANNofa presentorimminentsecuritythreatagainsttheregistryorthednsinfrastructure andrequestacontractualwaiverforactionstheregistrymighttakeorhastakento mitigateoreliminatethethreat.thecontractualwaiverwouldprovideexemption fromcompliancewithaspecificprovisionoftheregistryagreementforthetime periodnecessarytorespondtothethreat.theersrallowsaregistrytomaintain operationalsecurityduringanincidentwhilekeepingrelevantparties(e.g.,icann, otheraffectedproviders,etc.)informedasappropriate. TheERSRisintendedtohelpregistriesdealwithmaliciousactivityinvolvingthe DNSofscaleandseveritythatthreatenssystematicsecurity,stabilityandresiliency ofatldorthedns.itcanalsobeusedincircumstanceswherearegistrydiscovers unauthorizeddisclosure,alteration,insertionordestructionofregistrydata.the ERSRwouldalsobeanappropriateprocessforaneventwiththepotentialtocause atemporaryorlong termfailureofoneormoreofthecriticalfunctionsofagtld registryasdefinedinicann sgtldregistrycontinuityplan 26. Today,manyorganizationssupportavarietyofactivitiesthatareintendedto improveinternetsecurityawarenessandrespondtosecurityincidents.icann securitystaffhasstudiedincidentandemergencyresponseatnationaland internationallevelstounderstandhowtheseactivitiesmightbecoordinated, especiallyincircumstanceswherethednsiscentraltoglobalincidentsorwhere eventsthreatenthesecurity,stability,orresiliencyofdomainnameserviceata globallevel.withtheassistanceoftheseorganizations,icannhasdevelopedan operationalconceptplanandbusinesscaseforadns CERT 27. Asproposedintheconceptplan,theDNS CERTwouldactasasecuritycoordination centertoassistdnsoperatorsandsupportingorganizationsbyproviding information,expertiseorresourcestorespondtothreatstothesecurity,stability andresiliencyofthednsefficientlyandinatimelymanner.again,asproposed,the centralpurposesofthedns CERTwouldbetomaintainsituationalawareness, facilitateinformationsharing,improvecoordinationwithinthednsoperational community,andimprovecoordinationwiththebroadersecurityandotheraffected communities. Inadditiontotheseprograms,ICANN ssecurityteamisstudyinghowtoimprove andmaintainaccuratecontactinformationincooperationwiththesecurity communityandregistryoperators.staffwillalsostudywaystoimproveand formalizemonitoringresponsestoglobalincidentswhiletheyareinprogress(e.g., auditingandtracking),methodstochronicleincidentresponses,andwaysto coordinatepost incidentreviewandassessment.thesemaybeincorporatedinto thedns CERTprogramasitevolves,ortheyformbethebasesforotherinitiatives 15

ConfickerSummaryandReview instigatedbyotherorganizations.icannwillconsiderwhatifanyroleitshould performuponreviewoftheinitiatives. ConcludingRemarks Incertainrespects,thecollaborativeresponsetoConfickerwasasinglevolleyin whatisarguablyanearlybattleofalongcampaign.icannandothermembersof thecwgwillcontinuetoassistinremediationeffortsrelatedtotheconfickerworm. Individualorganizationswillnodoubtusetheirexperiencestohelpdefinerolesin futureglobalincidents.thednsandinternetsecuritycommunitiesmustalso considerhowtheytogethermightestablishmoreformalcollaborativeresponseto futureoccurrencesofconfickerandotherthreatstothednssecurity,stabilityand resiliencyofsimilarnatureandscale. 16

ConfickerSummaryandReview Appendix A. Table of Conficker Variants Variant & date Conficker.A 2008-11-21 Conficker.B 2008-12-29 SRI Conficker.C a.k.a. Conficker.D 2009-02-20 Conficker.E 2009-04-01 Bot Evolution Infects via MS08-67, anonymous shares Resets system restore point, disables security services HTTP callback to download files Infects via MS08-67, anonymous shares, shares with weak passwords, network maps, removable media Reset system restore point Disables security software and security updates via DNS filtering Infects via MS08-67, anonymous shares, shares with weak passwords, network maps, removable media Disables security software and security updates via DNS filtering Changes bot from HTTP C&C to P2P Sets 1 April 2009 as activation date for new DGA Initial exploit uses MS08-67 Only installs if prior Conficker variants present Disables security software and security updates via DNS filtering Resets system restore point Updates to pure P2P network Self-terminates on 3 May 2009: remove all Conficker executables except DLL DNS/Domain Abuse 250 pseudo-randomly generated domains registered in 5 TLDs 250 pseudo-randomly generated domains registered in 8 TLDs Tens of thousands of pseudo-randomly generated domains registered in 100+ TLDs 17

ConfickerSummaryandReview Citations 1Code Red (Computer Worm), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/code_red 2 Blaster worm, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/blaster_worm 3 Sasser (Computer Worm), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/sasser_worm 4SQLSlammer,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SQL_slammer_(computer_worm) 5 Know Your Enemy: Containing Conficker, http://www.honeynet.org/papers/conficker 6ContainingConficker,http://iv.cs.uni-bonn.de/wg/cs/applications/containing-conficker/ 7TheDifferenceBetweenaComputerVirus,WormandTrojanHorse, http://www.webopedia.com/didyouknow/internet/2004/virus.asp 8 What is a Blended Threat? http://www.securityskeptic.com/blendedthreat.htm 9 Microsoft Security Bulletin MS08-067 - Critical, 23 October 2008, http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/ms08-067.mspx 10HowtoRestoreWindowsXPtoapreviousstate, http://support.microsoft.com/kb/306084 11DisconnectingfromtheSrizbiBotnet, http://www.fireeye.com/securitycenter/srizbi_notify.html 12Microsoft Collaborates With Industry to Disrupt Conficker Worm, http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement 2 12feb09 en.htm 13MS puts up $250K bounty for Conficker author, http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/02/12/conficker_reward/ 14ConfickerCabal,http://www.confickercabal.com/ 15 Analysis of Conficker.C, http://mtc.sri.com/conficker/addendumc/ 16 Alert: April 1 "Conficker" Computer Worm, http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/03/26/tech/cnettechnews/main4894856.shtml 17Conficker Researchers Counter April 1 Update With Detection Scan, http://www.crn.com/security/216401818 18MicrosoftMalwareProtectionCenter Win32/Conficker.E, http://www.microsoft.com/security/portal/entry.aspx?name=worm:win32/conficker.e 19ConfickerP2PProtocolandImplementationAnalysishttp://mtc.sri.com/Conficker/P2P/ 20ConfickerInfectionDistribution, http://www.confickerworkinggroup.org/wiki/pmwiki.php/any/infectiondistribution 21ShadowserverFoundationConfickerstatisticspage, http://www.shadowserver.org/wiki/pmwiki.php/stats/conficker 22ConfickerTimeline,http://www.confickerworkinggroup.org/wiki/pmwiki.php/ANY/Timeline 23ShadowserverFoundationAnnouncesNewEffortToCombatConficker https://infosecurity.us/?p=6238 24ConfickerWorkingGroupInfectionTracking http://www.confickerworkinggroup.org/wiki/pmwiki.php/any/infectiontracking 25ExpeditedRegistrySecurityRequestProcess, http://icann.org/en/registries/ersr/ 26gTLDRegistryContinuityPlan,http://icann.org/en/registries/continuity/gtld registrycontinuity plan 25apr09 en.pdf 27GlobalDNS CERTBusinessCase, http://www.icann.org/en/topics/ssr/dns cert business case 10feb10 en.pdf 18