<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>CounterMeasures -  A Security Blog » Rogue AV</title>
	<atom:link href="http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/tag/rogue-av/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu</link>
	<description>Trend Microâ€™s Rik Ferguson blogs about current security issues.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2012 14:48:59 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Conficker, Duqu, Stuxnet, Aliens, Confuxnet!</title>
		<link>http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/conficker-duqu-stuxnet-aliens-confuxnet/</link>
		<comments>http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/conficker-duqu-stuxnet-aliens-confuxnet/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Dec 2011 14:37:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Rik Ferguson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[malware]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vulnerability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[compromise]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[conficker]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cybercrime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[exploit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hack]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hacked]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hacktivism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[malicious code]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rogue AV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[worm_downad]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/?p=3186</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I have just read a Reuters news story where respected &#8220;cyber warfare expert&#8221; John Bumgarner is reported to claim that Conficker was devised and released to act as a global smokescreen for the surgical attack, using Stuxnet on nuclear facilities in Iran. &#160; Bumgarner claims that initial reconnaissance work was carried out using Duqu in [...]<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style " addthis:url='http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/conficker-duqu-stuxnet-aliens-confuxnet/' addthis:title='Conficker, Duqu, Stuxnet, Aliens, Confuxnet! '  ><a class="addthis_button_facebook_like" fb:like:layout="button_count"></a><a class="addthis_button_tweet"></a><a class="addthis_button_google_plusone" g:plusone:size="medium"></a><a class="addthis_counter addthis_pill_style"></a></div>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have just read a <a title="Insight: Did Conficker help sabotage Iran's nuke program?" href="http://ca.reuters.com/article/topNews/idCATRE7B10AP20111202?pageNumber=1&amp;virtualBrandChannel=0&amp;sp=true" target="_blank">Reuters news story</a> where respected &#8220;cyber warfare expert&#8221; John Bumgarner is reported to claim that Conficker was devised and released to act as a global smokescreen for the surgical attack, using Stuxnet on nuclear facilities in Iran.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
Bumgarner claims that initial reconnaissance work was carried out using Duqu in 2007 to identify targets relevant to a later attack by Stuxnet. In November 2008 Conficker was released globally to infect as many machines as possible. When a Conficker infection phoned home, if the victim machine was found to be in a apposite location (Iran) it was flagged as a later target for Stuxnet. He further states that Conficker did no damage to machines outside Iran and that on the infamous April 1st &#8220;activation date&#8221; (of the third variant from March 2009) it was used to pull down Stuxnet to those machines located in interesting locations in Iran.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
Here is the evidence, all of it unsubstantiated as far as I can ascertain, that Bumgarner presents to support his claim:<br />
&nbsp;<br />
1- Both Stuxnet and Conficker show evidence of &#8220;<em>unprecedented sophistication</em>&#8221; leading him to believe that they are related.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
2- Both Stuxnet and Conficker use the same vulnerability to infect machines (<a href="http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS08-067.mspx">MS08-67</a>)<br />
&nbsp;<br />
3 &#8211; Unspecified &#8220;<em>key dates</em>&#8221; in timestamps of unspecified &#8220;<em>different versions</em>&#8221; of Conficker and Stuxnet overlap and also &#8220;<em>helped him to identify April 1 2009 as the launch date for the attack</em>&#8220;.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
4 &#8211; April 1st 2009 was the 30th anniversary of the declaration of an Islamic Republic in Iran. Other unspecified dates also corresponded with days when &#8220;<em>Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said his nation would pursue its nuclear program despite international objections, and another with the day that he made a highly controversial appearance at Columbia University in New York</em>&#8220;.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
As regards the end-game, the eventual infection of machines physically located in the right place inside nuclear facilities, Bumgarner concedes that at this point the malware wasn&#8217;t yet &#8220;<em>in the target</em>&#8220;. So to make that final crucial leap, Stuxnet was designed to infect USB drives, in the hope that someone would later take the same USB drive from a Conficker/Stuxnet infected machine and plug it into a machine located in an air-gapped network in nuclear facility. At that point, Bumgarner states, &#8220;<em>it was checkmate</em>&#8220;.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
Phew, what a ride! You&#8217;ll forgive me I hope if I say that this account stretches my credulity to breaking point. Let me list a few reasons why.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
1 &#8211; If targets outside of IranÂ were surplus to requirements, why did the first iteration of Conficker only exclude computers based in the Ukraine? Why was that restriction later removed? Why not only infect machines in Iran in the first place?Â It is also not true to say that machines infected with Conficker were all unharmed, <a title="Downad/Conficker, whoâ€™s the April Fool?" href="http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/downadconficker-whos-the-april-fool/" target="_blank">Conficker was used to deliver Fake AV </a>and had a <a title="New Downad/Conficker variant spreading over P2P" href="http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/new-downadconficker-variant-spreading-over-p2p/" target="_blank">functional relationship with Waledac botnet C&amp;C</a><br />
&nbsp;<br />
2 &#8211; The levels of sophistication in Conficker and Stuxnet are in different leagues. The original version of Conficker used a single already patched Windows vulnerability to spread, the second variant added the capability to spread via removable drives and by brute forcing passwords against a list of common password variants, neither method sophisticated. There was a level of sophistication in the scale of pseudo-random domains that were generated by the malware as potential C&amp;C locations, but nothing that wasn&#8217;t quickly reverse engineered and understood. In the third variant of Conficker the propagation methods were actually removed, only to reappear again in the fourth significant variant. Stuxnet was a far more sophisticated animal, taking advantage of zero-day vulnerabilities and requiring specialist knowledge of SCADA systems and nuclear facilities.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
3 &#8211; I would theorise that the creators of Stuxnet chose to also use the MS08-67 vulnerability because its effectiveness is demonstrated by the fact that Conficker is still one of the most prevalent infections in enterprise networks, three years after its initial appearance. Why would you make two pieces of malware that propagate using the same vulnerability and yet rely on one to download the other?<br />
&nbsp;<br />
4 &#8211; The &#8220;activation date&#8221; of April 1 was <strong>coded into</strong> the third variant of Conficker. You don&#8217;t need unspecified time-stamps on unspecified files to tell you that.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
5 &#8211; April 1st is also April Fool&#8217;s day in many countries around the world, it&#8217;s also the anniversary of the founding of Apple Inc., the founding of the Serious Organised Crime Agency (SOCA) in the UK, the birth of the Republic of Ireland and the land blockade of West Berlin by the East German military. Get my point? As regards President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad saying that his country would continue to pursue it&#8217;s nuclear program, well surely, pick a day, pick any day&#8230;<br />
&nbsp;<br />
Then of course there&#8217;s the difficult conclusion, relying on persons unknown to plug a USB device into a Confuxnet infected machine, then unknowingly taking that same USB drive and plugging it into a PLC in a nuclear facility. Given the &#8220;unprecedented sophistication&#8221; of everything that has gone before, it&#8217;s this one just a tiny bit of a shot in the dark? A little bit &#8220;hit and hope&#8221;?<br />
&nbsp;<br />
Sorry Mr. Bumgarner, it could be true, of course it could, and it could be that you have been misreported, but on the evidence you present so far, I just don&#8217;t buy it.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
If I were a government with this kind of resource at my disposal, wouldn&#8217;t it make sense for one of my operatives in the target facility to simply take the USB containing Stuxnet right there for me?<br />
&nbsp;<br />
I know, there weren&#8217;t any aliens.<br />
&nbsp;</p>
<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style " addthis:url='http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/conficker-duqu-stuxnet-aliens-confuxnet/' addthis:title='Conficker, Duqu, Stuxnet, Aliens, Confuxnet! '  ><a class="addthis_button_facebook_like" fb:like:layout="button_count"></a><a class="addthis_button_tweet"></a><a class="addthis_button_google_plusone" g:plusone:size="medium"></a><a class="addthis_counter addthis_pill_style"></a></div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/conficker-duqu-stuxnet-aliens-confuxnet/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How to check if you are a victim of Ghost Click</title>
		<link>http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/how-to-check-if-you-are-a-victim-of-operation-ghost-click/</link>
		<comments>http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/how-to-check-if-you-are-a-victim-of-operation-ghost-click/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Nov 2011 22:27:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Rik Ferguson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bad guys always lose]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[countermeasures]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[data protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Family Safety]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mac OS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[malware]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Underground Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vulnerability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Apple]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[botnet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[compromise]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cybercrime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DNS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fake AV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fraud]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hack]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hacked]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[malicious code]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rogue AV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[security]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/?p=3130</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#160; Trend Micro and the FBI are very pleased to announce today the dismantling of a criminal botnet, in what is the biggest cybercriminal takedown in history. &#160; This concerted action against an entrenched criminal gang is highly significant and represents the biggest cybercriminal takedown in history. Six people have been arrested through multinational law [...]<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style " addthis:url='http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/how-to-check-if-you-are-a-victim-of-operation-ghost-click/' addthis:title='How to check if you are a victim of Ghost Click '  ><a class="addthis_button_facebook_like" fb:like:layout="button_count"></a><a class="addthis_button_tweet"></a><a class="addthis_button_google_plusone" g:plusone:size="medium"></a><a class="addthis_counter addthis_pill_style"></a></div>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><div id="attachment_3131" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 510px"><a href="http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/265838484_c6c4980b55.jpg"><img src="http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/265838484_c6c4980b55.jpg" alt="Ghost in the Machine" title="Ghost in the Machine" width="500" height="460" class="size-full wp-image-3131" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">used by permission from flattop341 Flickr photostream</p></div><br />
&nbsp;</p>
<p>Trend Micro and the <a href="http://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2011/november/malware_110911/malware_110911" target="_blank">FBI</a> are very pleased to announce today the dismantling of a criminal botnet, in what is <a title="Esthost Taken Down â€“ Biggest Cybercriminal Takedown in History" href="http://blog.trendmicro.com/esthost-taken-down-%e2%80%93-biggest-cybercriminal-takedown-in-history/" target="_blank">the biggest cybercriminal takedown in history</a>.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
This concerted action against an entrenched criminal gang is highly significant and represents the biggest cybercriminal takedown in history. Six people have been arrested through multinational law enforcement cooperation based on solid intelligence supplied by Trend Micro and other industry partners. more than 4 million victims in over 100 countries have been rescued from the malign influence of this botnet and an infrastructure of over 100 criminal servers has been dismantled with minimal disruption to the innocent victims.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
If you are worried that you might have been a victim of this criminal activity, the FBI have made an online tool available which will allow you to check if your DNS server settings have been tampered with.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
First you will need to discover what your current DNS server settings are:<br />
&nbsp;<br />
On a PC, open the <strong>Start</strong> menu by clicking the Start button or the Windows icon in the lower left of your screen, in theÂ  <strong>Search</strong> box type &#8220;<strong>cmd</strong>&#8221; and hit return (for Windows 95 users, select &#8220;<strong>Start</strong>&#8220;, then &#8220;<strong>Run</strong>&#8220;).This should open a black window with white text. In this window type &#8220;<strong>ipconfig /all</strong>&#8221; and hit return. Look for the entry that reads &#8220;DNS Servers&#8221; and note down the numeric addresses that are listed there.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
On a Mac (yes they can be victims too), click on the <strong>Apple</strong> icon in the top left of your screen and select &#8220;<strong>System Preferences</strong>&#8220;, from the Preferences panel select the &#8220;<strong>Network</strong>&#8221; icon. Once this window opens, select the currently active network connection on the left column and over on the right select the <strong>DNS</strong> tab. note down the addresses of the DNS servers that your computer is configured to use.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
You can check to see if these addresses correspond to servers used by the criminals behind Operation Ghost Click by using <a href="https://forms.fbi.gov/check-to-see-if-your-computer-is-using-rogue-DNS" target="_blank">this online tool provided by the FBI</a>, simply enter the IP addreses, one by one and click the &#8220;check ip&#8221; button.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
If you feel that you computer may have been infected, you can visit <a href="http://housecall.trendmicro.com/" target="_blank">Trend Micro&#8217;s HouseCall </a>for a free scan and clean-up and <a href="https://forms.fbi.gov/dnsmalware" target="_blank">notify the FBI by submitting this form</a>. You should also contact your Internet Service Provider for advice on restoring your legitimate DNS settings.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
Ongoing updates on this threat can be found on our <a href="http://us.trendmicro.com/us/trendwatch/current-threat-activity/operation-ghost-click/index.html"> Operation Ghost Click landing page</a>.<br />
&nbsp;</p>
<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style " addthis:url='http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/how-to-check-if-you-are-a-victim-of-operation-ghost-click/' addthis:title='How to check if you are a victim of Ghost Click '  ><a class="addthis_button_facebook_like" fb:like:layout="button_count"></a><a class="addthis_button_tweet"></a><a class="addthis_button_google_plusone" g:plusone:size="medium"></a><a class="addthis_counter addthis_pill_style"></a></div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/how-to-check-if-you-are-a-victim-of-operation-ghost-click/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>30</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Malvertising, who&#8217;s responsible?</title>
		<link>http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/malvertising-whos-responsible/</link>
		<comments>http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/malvertising-whos-responsible/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Apr 2011 12:18:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Rik Ferguson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[malware]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Engineering]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Underground Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vulnerability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[compromise]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cybercrime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[exploit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fake AV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fraud]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[malicious code]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rogue AV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[web]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/?p=2721</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Online advertisements are a part of our daily browsing experience asÂ they areÂ alsoÂ an essential part of companiesâ€™ online marketing strategies. So how do we know, when visiting websites that carry these networked advertisements, whether we are opening ourselves up to criminal compromise through malicious ads? Â &#160; Tweet from the New York Times after they fell victim [...]<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style " addthis:url='http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/malvertising-whos-responsible/' addthis:title='Malvertising, who&#8217;s responsible? '  ><a class="addthis_button_facebook_like" fb:like:layout="button_count"></a><a class="addthis_button_tweet"></a><a class="addthis_button_google_plusone" g:plusone:size="medium"></a><a class="addthis_counter addthis_pill_style"></a></div>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Online advertisements are a part of our daily browsing experience asÂ they areÂ alsoÂ an essential part of companiesâ€™ online marketing strategies. So how do we know, when visiting websites that carry these networked advertisements, whether we are opening ourselves up to criminal compromise through malicious ads?</strong><br />
Â &nbsp;</p>
<p><a href="http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/NYTTwitter.png" target="_blank"><img src="http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/NYTTwitter.png" alt="" width="510" height="283" border="0" /></a><br />Tweet from the New York Times after they fell victim to criminal ads</p>
<p>Â &nbsp;<br />
Web site owners use trusted content networks to provide advertisements for their websites, and criminals are actively targeting this trust relationship as it represents a weak link in the chain of content control. Criminals create shell companies to place advertisements that hide malicious contentÂ in ads that are subsequently placed with high profile advertising networks. These malvertisements are then syndicated across many hundreds of web sites silently infecting as many victims as possible, as <a title="NYT victim of malicious advertising" href="http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/new-york-times-pushes-fake-av-malvertisement/" target="_blank">these</a> <a title="Farm Town Malicious Ads" href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/04/12/farm_town_malicious_ads/" target="_blank">examples</a> <a title="Malvertising continues to pound legitimate web sites" href="http://www.csoonline.com/article/675064/malvertising-continues-to-pound-legitimate-web-sites" target="_blank">illustrate</a>.<br />
Â &nbsp;<br />
Malvertisments, as they are referred to, have become increasingly common over the past few years and continue to be a growing problem. The potential number of victims available to criminals through a syndicated ad will often far outstrips the potential return for compromising an individual website. Internet users are unknowingly putting themselves at risk when they visit legitimate websites, which happen to be carrying malvertisements, designed to invisibly and automatically infect them through drive-by downloads. A drive-by download usually involves a chain of events; the victim visits a website which in this case is carrying a malvertisement, the malvertisement will contain content (most often JavaScript or Adobe Flash) which will be automatically executed by the browser. The purpose of the JavaScript is to automatically and invisible redirect the browser to a server hosting exploits (commonly a criminal exploit kit such as Yes!, Eleonore or Phoenix for example) these exploits are then used to push out the final malicious payload of the criminalâ€™s choosing. In some cases exploits for technologies such as Adobe Flash are embedded directly within the malvertisements and this has the same end result of delivering a malicious payload. Once infected, your PC is compromised or your virtual wallet lifted in a number of ways; from pushing fake security software which attempts toÂ fool the you into believing that your PC is infected with any number of entirely bogus malware which only this (paid-for) application can remove, to criminals stealing your personal or financial details and/or obtaining remote access to your PC.<br />
Â &nbsp;<br />
So where does the responsibility lie? Is it with the web site that is hosting the malicious adverts, the network distributing them, or the consumer who visits the website? Really the responsibility, as well as the potential for damage, is shared. Web site owners and ad-networks alike suffer embarrassing brand damage when their customers are infected and the victim of course suffers the pain of information or identity theft and financial loss.<br />
Â &nbsp;<br />
It is certainly true to say that if the right checks and balances were in place the problem would largely cease to exist, at least on legitimate websites. Clients of ad-networks should be applying pressure to their provider of choice to ensure that the appropriate checks are made before the advert goes out. Ideally, automated systems need to be in place at the advertising content providers, to run the ads through a sandbox before they are released into the public domain, checking for any kind of active or malicious code. Third party providers should perform specific checks to verify URLs and detect any unexpected or unwanted behaviour such as automated redirections, even if not malicious no web user wants to be bounced off to a third party website simply as a result of rendering an ad in their browser and no website owner would want their visitors stolen in this way either!<br />
Â &nbsp;<br />
In the meantime, Internauts should ensure that they have the appropriate anti-malware software installed on their PC to minimise the risk. Free options include tools such as <a title="Free Tools and Services from Trend Micro" href="http://uk.trendmicro.com/uk/products/personal/free-tools-and-services/" target="_blank">Browser Guard</a>, which blocks exploit attempts and detects malicious JavaScript, stopping it from executing. When choosing anti-malware software, itâ€™s important not to focus purely on software that will scan for bad files, but also that will stop PCs (and not just browsers) from connecting to malicious destinations.<br />
&nbsp;</p>
<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style " addthis:url='http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/malvertising-whos-responsible/' addthis:title='Malvertising, who&#8217;s responsible? '  ><a class="addthis_button_facebook_like" fb:like:layout="button_count"></a><a class="addthis_button_tweet"></a><a class="addthis_button_google_plusone" g:plusone:size="medium"></a><a class="addthis_counter addthis_pill_style"></a></div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/malvertising-whos-responsible/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Facebook open JavaScript hole</title>
		<link>http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/facebook-open-javascript-hole/</link>
		<comments>http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/facebook-open-javascript-hole/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Feb 2011 16:41:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Rik Ferguson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Hacking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Engineering]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vulnerability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Web 2.0]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cybercrime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[exploit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Facebook]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hack]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[malicious code]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[malware]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rogue AV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[security]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/?p=2630</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#160; Yesterday Facebook made some important changes to the way in Facebook Pages, the fan pages set up by brands, bands and even cucumbersÂ could be created.Â  &#160; In the past the tabs which could be added to these pages have been set up in two ways; the first used the FacebookÂ FBMLÂ app. This allowed page tabs [...]<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style " addthis:url='http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/facebook-open-javascript-hole/' addthis:title='Facebook open JavaScript hole '  ><a class="addthis_button_facebook_like" fb:like:layout="button_count"></a><a class="addthis_button_tweet"></a><a class="addthis_button_google_plusone" g:plusone:size="medium"></a><a class="addthis_counter addthis_pill_style"></a></div>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><div id="attachment_2638" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 310px"><a href="http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/frames.jpg"><img src="http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/frames-300x225.jpg" alt="" title="frames" width="300" height="225" class="size-medium wp-image-2638" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Used under creative commons from Editor B Flickr photostream</p></div><br />
&nbsp;<br />
Yesterday Facebook made some important changes to the way in Facebook Pages, the fan pages set up by <a title="Trend Micro" href="http://www.facebook.com/#!/Trendmicro" target="_blank">brands</a>, <a title="Clearly Deluded" href="http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Clearly-Deluded/106902222716888" target="_blank">bands</a> and even <a title="Cucumbers" href="http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Cucumbers/110485145640040" target="_blank">cucumbers</a>Â could be created.Â <br />
&nbsp;<br />
In the past the tabs which could be added to these pages have been set up in two ways; the first used the FacebookÂ FBMLÂ app. This allowed page tabs to be created using static Facebook Markup Language (<a title="Wikipedia - FBML" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook_features#FBML" target="_blank">FBML</a>) or <a title="Wikipedia - HTML" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTML" target="_blank">HTML</a>,Â it wasn&#8217;t particularly engaging but it was very simple to use. The second method for creating page tabs was by adding a custom Facebook app inside a standard FBML tab. This meant the customÂ app could request external data from a third party and display it inside the page tab. This content though was subject to many technical limitations, as it was all proxied through Facebook which broke many things including tracking pixels, JavaScript and Flash.Â <br />
&nbsp;<br />
So what is the big change? Well Facebook now allowÂ <a title="Wikipedia - iframe" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iframe#Frames" target="_blank">iframes</a> to be <a href="http://developers.facebook.com/blog/post/462">included inside Facebook apps</a> on page tabs, meaning that all that Facebook proxying can be avoided. While this is no doubt great news for legitimate developers it will undoubtedly make life for those with malicious intent much easier too.Â <br />
&nbsp;<br />
It is now possible to set up a Facebook page, create a default landing tab (the one you first see when you visit the page) and include an appÂ that contains an iframe. That iframe can for example contain JavaScript which immediately and without user interaction redirects you to any site it chooses. Say for example<a title="DIY Cybercrime" href="http://blog.trendmicro.com/diy-cybercrime-exploits-loaders-and-affiliates-part-1/" target="_blank"> a page containing Fake AV or a page where an exploit kit </a>is waiting to silently infect you with malware.Â <br />
&nbsp;<br />
No more <a title="Wikipedia - Likejacking" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Likejacking" target="_blank">likejacking </a>required, no more having to <a title="Are you being stalked?" href="http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/are-you-being-stalked-yes-by-scammers-again/" target="_blank">persuade users to install your app</a>, if a criminal can make the bait sweet enough just to get you to visit the page, that is all they will require to start the chain that leads to your computer being compromised and used for criminal purposes.Â <br />
&nbsp;<br />
Of course Facebook ask their developers to agree to a code of conduct that prohibits such activities, but when it comes to criminals, thatâ€™s a bit like taking a driving license away from a joyrider.Â <br />
&nbsp;<br />
I have informed Facebook of this oversight in their new functionality and will update this blog posting if I hear back from them.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
Thanks to Stig Edvartsen for his eagle-eyes and Heidi Obschil-M&uuml;ller for the iframe<br />
&nbsp;</p>
<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style " addthis:url='http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/facebook-open-javascript-hole/' addthis:title='Facebook open JavaScript hole '  ><a class="addthis_button_facebook_like" fb:like:layout="button_count"></a><a class="addthis_button_tweet"></a><a class="addthis_button_google_plusone" g:plusone:size="medium"></a><a class="addthis_counter addthis_pill_style"></a></div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/facebook-open-javascript-hole/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>9</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Dutch Authorities move on Bredolab</title>
		<link>http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/dutch-authorities-move-on-bredolab/</link>
		<comments>http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/dutch-authorities-move-on-bredolab/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Oct 2010 10:53:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Rik Ferguson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bad guys always lose]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[malware]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[botnet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fake AV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[malicious code]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rogue AV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[spam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZeuS]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/?p=2422</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[According to a press releaseÂ today from the High Tech Crime Team of the National Crime Squad in the Netherlands, action has been taken to isolate 143 servers from the Internet. &#160; The servers were actively involved in the BredolabÂ botnet, from the release they would appear to be command and control servers. The servers were hosted [...]<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style " addthis:url='http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/dutch-authorities-move-on-bredolab/' addthis:title='Dutch Authorities move on Bredolab '  ><a class="addthis_button_facebook_like" fb:like:layout="button_count"></a><a class="addthis_button_tweet"></a><a class="addthis_button_google_plusone" g:plusone:size="medium"></a><a class="addthis_counter addthis_pill_style"></a></div>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>According to a <a href="http://www.om.nl/actueel/nieuws-_en/@154338/dutch_national_crime/">press release</a>Â today from the High Tech Crime Team of the National Crime Squad in the Netherlands, action has been taken to isolate 143 servers from the Internet.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
The servers were actively involved in the <a href="http://us.trendmicro.com/imperia/md/content/us/trendwatch/researchandanalysis/bredolab_final.pdf">Bredolab</a>Â botnet, from the release they would appear to be command and control servers. The servers were hosted by a company called LeaseWeb, one of the largest hosting providers in the Netherlands, who fully cooperated in the coordinated takedown operation.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
<div id="attachment_2423" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 550px"><img class="size-full wp-image-2423 " title="celebdeath1" src="http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/celebdeath1.jpg" alt="" width="510" height="281" /><p class="wp-caption-text">Bredolab infection mails</p></div><br />
&nbsp;<br />
Bredolab is primarily a downloading platform and has served to distribute fake AV and ZeuS to victim computers. The botnet, which originated in Russia, only rose to prominence in August 2009. Dutch Authorities estimate that it was capable of infecting 3 million computers per month at its peak. The primary initial trigger for infection with Bredolab was usually though mail, but infection vectors have been widely abused and also include drive-by download and even propagation through other forms of malware, for example, Cutwail has been seen to drop Bredolab as a payload, and Bredolab has been known to return the favour!<br />
Â &nbsp;<br />
It is unclear right now whether the botnet has been effectively decapitated or it this only represents a setback to the criminals behind it. The bots remain infected with the malware so if alternative command &amp; control servers exist, then reconfiguration and regrouping remains a possibility. TrendLabs are investigating current activity levels of the botnet and I will update this blog as soon as new information is available.</p>
<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style " addthis:url='http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/dutch-authorities-move-on-bredolab/' addthis:title='Dutch Authorities move on Bredolab '  ><a class="addthis_button_facebook_like" fb:like:layout="button_count"></a><a class="addthis_button_tweet"></a><a class="addthis_button_google_plusone" g:plusone:size="medium"></a><a class="addthis_counter addthis_pill_style"></a></div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/dutch-authorities-move-on-bredolab/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Kaspersky download site hacked to spread fake AV</title>
		<link>http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/kaspersky-download-site-spread-fake-av/</link>
		<comments>http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/kaspersky-download-site-spread-fake-av/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Oct 2010 10:47:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Rik Ferguson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Hacking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[malware]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Site Compromise]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[compromise]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cybercrime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fake AV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hack]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hacked]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[malicious code]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rogue AV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[web]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/?p=2402</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[UPDATE: According to a report in ITPro by Jennifer Scott, Kaspersky have been in touch to confirm that their servers were in fact compromised and the redirection was very real. The breach was made by exploiting &#8220;a third party app used for site admin&#8221;. The malicious redirection was in place for three and a half [...]<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style " addthis:url='http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/kaspersky-download-site-spread-fake-av/' addthis:title='Kaspersky download site hacked to spread fake AV '  ><a class="addthis_button_facebook_like" fb:like:layout="button_count"></a><a class="addthis_button_tweet"></a><a class="addthis_button_google_plusone" g:plusone:size="medium"></a><a class="addthis_counter addthis_pill_style"></a></div>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>UPDATE</strong>: According to <a href="http://www.itpro.co.uk/627817/updated-kaspersky-hit-by-cyber-criminals">a report in ITPro</a> by Jennifer Scott, Kaspersky have been in touch to confirm that their servers were in fact compromised and the redirection was very real. The breach was made by exploiting &#8220;a third party app used for site admin&#8221;. The malicious redirection was in place for three and a half hours.<br />
________________________________________________________________________________<br />
&nbsp;<br />
Several reports in Kaspersky user forums seem to indicate that the security software manufacturer was recently compromised by cybercriminals trying to punt fake security software.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
Fake anti virus software is most often spread through booby-trapped web pages, designed to show up high in search results for popular or newsworthy terms; for example recently people searching for information about the Stuxnet malware <a title="Stuxnet Used in Blackhat SEO Campaign" href="http://blog.trendmicro.com/stuxnet-used-in-blackhat-seo-campaign/">were targeted</a>. This is a technique so established that TrendLabs have been able to develop automated tools to proactively monitor and block these pages as they appear. If true, this compromise of a legitimate download site, particularly a security vendor could represent an important new change of tactics by the scareware pushers.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
Kaspersky users in three separate forums; <a title="  Kaspersky website hacked??" href="http://www.calendarofupdates.com/updates/index.php?showtopic=32851" target="_blank">Calendar of Updates</a>, <a title="77.78.246.143 Malware detected when I am on Kaspersky's website?" href="http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20101017163622AAigNK1&amp;r=w">YahooAnswers</a>Â and Kaspersky&#8217;s own <a title="Kaspersky USA Download Link = Attack Page???, Really??" href="http://forum.kaspersky.com/index.php?showtopic=189198" target="_blank">Kaspersky Lab forum</a> have complained that links to download Kaspersky&#8217;s home user security software from their USA download siteÂ were redirecting them to a malicious web page pushing fake AV known as Security Tool. One user posted the below screen capture<br />
&nbsp;<br />
<img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-2404" title="capture2sa" src="http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/capture2sa.jpg" alt="" width="508" height="354" /><br />
&nbsp;<br />
According to forum posts Kaspersky have stated that there was no compromise of their servers. Somewhat incongruous then is the post by one forum user going by the handle of Micha, who appears to come from Kaspersky Lab in Japan according to his profile. HeÂ posted the following:<br />
&nbsp;</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;Hello,</p>
<p>Thanks, it should be fixed.</p>
<p>Cheers &#8220;</p></blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;<br />
Security vendors have often been the target of both malicious and mischievous hackers and without fail, honesty and transparency have always been the best policy in the aftermath of such an event.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
Thanks to <a title="Kaspersky Website Redirected Users to Rogue Scanner Page" href="http://msmvps.com/blogs/donna/archive/2010/10/19/kaspersky-website-redirected-users-to-rogue-scanner-page.aspx" target="_blank">Donna</a> for the heads-up.</p>
<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style " addthis:url='http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/kaspersky-download-site-spread-fake-av/' addthis:title='Kaspersky download site hacked to spread fake AV '  ><a class="addthis_button_facebook_like" fb:like:layout="button_count"></a><a class="addthis_button_tweet"></a><a class="addthis_button_google_plusone" g:plusone:size="medium"></a><a class="addthis_counter addthis_pill_style"></a></div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/kaspersky-download-site-spread-fake-av/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>11</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The economics of fear</title>
		<link>http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/the-economics-of-fear/</link>
		<comments>http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/the-economics-of-fear/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 May 2010 13:53:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Rik Ferguson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Family Safety]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[malware]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Engineering]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Underground Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cybercrime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fake AV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[malicious code]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rogue AV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scareware]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[web]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/?p=2005</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In the world of computer security, there are two kinds of anti-virus software &#8211; stuff that works and stuff that doesnâ€™t work at all. The problem for the average user is telling them apart, and this is something which criminals can make money from. A lot of money. &#160; Have you ever had a window [...]<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style " addthis:url='http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/the-economics-of-fear/' addthis:title='The economics of fear '  ><a class="addthis_button_facebook_like" fb:like:layout="button_count"></a><a class="addthis_button_tweet"></a><a class="addthis_button_google_plusone" g:plusone:size="medium"></a><a class="addthis_counter addthis_pill_style"></a></div>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In the world of computer security, there are two kinds of anti-virus software &#8211; stuff that works and stuff that doesnâ€™t work at all. The problem for the average user is telling them apart, and this is something which criminals can make money from. A lot of money.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
Have you ever had a window pop-up on your computer that said something along the lines of:</p>
<blockquote><p><strong>Â â€ś<em>Warning!!! Your computer contains various signs of viruses and malware programs. Your system requires immediate anti virus check. Click to perform a quick and free scan of your PC</em>â€ť</strong></p></blockquote>
<p>You have? Well youâ€™re not alone.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
I want to share with you some research carried out by one of my colleagues in TrendLabs, Bob McArdle. I canâ€™t mention any names for fear of prejudicing ongoing investigations, but to be honest the names are irrelevant as they change so often anyway. Over the course of a year one criminal gang, letâ€™s just call them Company X, made over <strong>$180 million US dollars </strong>by selling malware to their victims in at least 30 different countries around the globe.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
You would be forgiven for asking why people would pay for malicious software and the answer is of course, they had no idea it was malicious in the first place.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
The gang creates very convincing looking fake security programs designed to fool the victim into believing that their computer is badly infected. These scareware programs are then distributed by creating web pages designed to rank very highly in search engine results for popular current search terms or newsworthy events. As soon as the malicious search result is clicked a pop-up message like the above appears and the infection chain begins.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
Here is a video of one such scam in action related to <a href="http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/facebook-un-named-app-scare-leads-to-malware/">this incident </a>I blogged about a while ago.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
<object width="500" height="405"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/zDxWGumxkBw&#038;hl=en_GB&#038;fs=1&#038;border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="sameDomain"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/zDxWGumxkBw&#038;hl=en_GB&#038;fs=1&#038;border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="sameDomain" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="405"></embed></object><br />
&nbsp;<br />
So how did they make so much money? Well firstly while the scan on offer might be free, the bogus results always show the machine to be very badly infected when in fact no scan at all has taken place. The worried user is then prompted to pay for the full version of the â€śsecurityâ€ť software so that the non-existent malware can be cleaned up. So now, you have given your credit card details to criminals, downloaded malware onto your PC and paid somewhere between $50 &#8211; $100 US dollars for the privilege. This game is a volume one â€“ if the gang can redirect 100,000 searches and only 1% of them pay for the product â€“ they net <strong>$50,000 US for a dayâ€™s work</strong>.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
The second part of the business model involves these machines that the criminals have now infected. As the infected user surfs the web, the malicious software quietly replaces all of the ads the user sees with ads belonging to one of the gangâ€™s affiliates, most often pushing fake pharmaceuticals and the like. The gang get a kickback of two or three cents every single time an advertisement is replaced. Logs from one of the gangâ€™s servers showed about a million ads replaced per day, <strong>netting them another $25,000 US per day</strong>, and this was only one of the gangâ€™s botnets. So thatâ€™s $25K per botnet, per day.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
The third part of Company Xâ€™s business model revolved around customer support strangely enough. Company Xâ€™s biggest problem of course, was credit card refunds. Customers who realised that they had been scammed would contact their card provider demanding a refund. After a while the credit card provider would refuse to do business with Company X and Company X would need to create another fake subsidiary company, complete with Fake IDs for all of their directors. To combat this, these criminals decided to invest heavily in call centres â€“ setting up call centres in the US, Asia and Eastern Europe.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
You see the Rogue AV would regularly ask the users to update their version, paying a small fee to do so â€“ and would annoy the user with pop-ups until they did so. A lot of customers complied, however others rang the support line demanding the product be fixed. Each Rogue AV had a couple of settings that could be altered so that the users would never be prompted for updates again â€“ the staff at the call centres simply stepped the users through to this point, <strong>all for the modest fee of $20 for the phone call</strong>.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
Think before you click, not all security software is created equal.</p>
<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style " addthis:url='http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/the-economics-of-fear/' addthis:title='The economics of fear '  ><a class="addthis_button_facebook_like" fb:like:layout="button_count"></a><a class="addthis_button_tweet"></a><a class="addthis_button_google_plusone" g:plusone:size="medium"></a><a class="addthis_counter addthis_pill_style"></a></div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/the-economics-of-fear/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>New York Times pushes Fake AV malvertisement.</title>
		<link>http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/new-york-times-pushes-fake-av-malvertisement/</link>
		<comments>http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/new-york-times-pushes-fake-av-malvertisement/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Sep 2009 23:56:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Rik Ferguson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[malware]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Site Compromise]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Underground Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cybercrime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rogue AV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[web]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/?p=1309</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Earlier today, the New York Times issued a warning over Twitter and also on the front page of the web site. The newspaper advised visitors that they had had reports from &#8220;some NYTimes.com readers&#8221; relating to a malicious pop-up window while browsing the site. Â  In the warning, the influential newspaper stated their belief that [...]<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style " addthis:url='http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/new-york-times-pushes-fake-av-malvertisement/' addthis:title='New York Times pushes Fake AV malvertisement. '  ><a class="addthis_button_facebook_like" fb:like:layout="button_count"></a><a class="addthis_button_tweet"></a><a class="addthis_button_google_plusone" g:plusone:size="medium"></a><a class="addthis_counter addthis_pill_style"></a></div>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Earlier today, the New York Times issued a <a href="http://twitter.com/nytimes/status/3958547840" target="_blank">warning over Twitter </a>and also on the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/13/business/media/13note.html?_r=1" target="_blank">front page </a>of the web site. The newspaper advised visitors that they had had reports from &#8220;some NYTimes.com readers&#8221; relating to a malicious pop-up window while browsing the site.</p>
<div id="attachment_1310" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 620px"><a href="http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/NYTTwitter.png"><img class="size-full wp-image-1310" title="NYTimes Twitter posting" src="http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/NYTTwitter.png" alt="NYTimes Twitter posting" width="510" height="283" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">NYTimes Twitter posting</p></div>
<p>Â </p>
<p>In the warning, the influential newspaper stated their belief that the pop-ups were the result of an &#8220;unauthorised advertisement&#8221;. From some <a href="http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?f=38&amp;t=1481195" target="_blank">online discussion</a> it looks as though the problem may have been ongoing for upwardsÂ of 24 hours.</p>
<p>Â </p>
<p>The pop-up window itself, (screen shot captured by quick-witted reader of <a title="Media Memo" href="http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/20090913/home-delivery-the-new-york-times-serves-up-some-malware/" target="_blank">All Things Digital</a>) was the all-too-familiar sightÂ of rogue antivirus software informing the NYTimes reader that their computer is infected with random, spurious, non-existent malware and promising &#8220;Full System Cleanup&#8221; for a fee of course.</p>
<div id="attachment_1311" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 606px"><a href="http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/14-09-2009-00-21-00.png"><img class="size-full wp-image-1311" title="Image courtesy of All Things Digital" src="http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/14-09-2009-00-21-00.png" alt="Image courtesy of All Things Digital" width="510" height="305" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Image courtesy of All Things Digital</p></div>
<p>Â </p>
<p>The malicious software being punted in this case,Â is similar to what we were seeing in much of the black-hat SEO around the 9/11 attacks, as reported previously on the <a title="Fake AV for September 11" href="http://blog.trendmicro.com/fakeav-for-september-11/" target="_blank">TrendLabs malware blog</a>.</p>
<p>Â </p>
<p>In this particular example, the malicious site and sofware is being hosted by a German provider, Hetzner AG, which has a <a href="http://www.google.com/safebrowsing/diagnostic?site=AS:24940" target="_blank">colourful track record</a> when it comes to spewing dodgy content, having hosted literally hundreds of malicious URLS.</p>
<p>Â <br />
Here&#8217;s a really simple tip to remember. If you *ever* see a browser pop-up window that arrives uninvited, telling you your PC is infected, ignore it, it is a scam. Close the window, empty your browser cache and to be on the safe side, run a real scanner like <a title="HouseCall" href="http://housecall.trendmicro.com/uk/housecall7" target="_blank">HouseCall</a>. To be more fully protected in future, make sure you install an antimalware program that will also block malicious URLs, rather than simply looking for malicious files.</p>
<p>Â </p>
<p><strong>UPDATE</strong>: <a title="Troy Davis on Twitter" href="http://twitter.com/troyd" target="_blank">Troy Davis</a> was fortunate enough to be able to examine the attack in real-time and provides an excellent code level analysis <a title="Anatomy of a Malware Ad on NYTimes.com" href="http://troy.yort.com/anatomy-of-a-malware-ad-on-nytimes-com" target="_blank">here</a>.</p>
<p>Â </p>
<p><strong>UPDATE</strong>: The fake AV program being pushed in this attack was called Personal Antivirus and is very much a classic piece of scareware.</p>
<p><a href="http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/1-PAVscan.png"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-1331" title="1-PAVscan" src="http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/1-PAVscan.png" alt="1-PAVscan" width="510" height="358" /></a></p>
<p>Â </p>
<p>On install the application will start â€śscanningâ€ť your machine for problems. On a completely fresh installation of Windows Vista,Â it supposedly detected 38 threats.</p>
<p><a href="http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/4-PAV-scan-results-on-clean-sys.png"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-1332" title="4-PAV scan results on clean sys" src="http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/4-PAV-scan-results-on-clean-sys.png" alt="4-PAV scan results on clean sys" width="318" height="133" /></a></p>
<p>Â </p>
<p>Of course none of these imaginary threats can be removed until you pay to activate you copy of this useless software, not only giving away your cash but also of course all your credit card and personal details at the same time, double-whammy for the cybercrooks.</p>
<p><a href="http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/3-PAV-cost.png"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-1333" title="3-PAV cost" src="http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/3-PAV-cost.png" alt="3-PAV cost" width="510" height="372" /></a></p>
<p>Â </p>
<p>If you choose not to activate the software immediately you will then be served at random intervals with fake messages informing you of yet more detected problems, when you hit the â€ś<em>Block</em>â€ť button, you are again prompted to pay for the software, and so it continues&#8230;</p>
<p><a href="http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/7-PAV-fake-warnings.png"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-1334" title="7-PAV fake warnings" src="http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/7-PAV-fake-warnings.png" alt="7-PAV fake warnings" width="318" height="108" /></a></p>
<p>Â </p>
<p>For cleanup, use <a href="http://housecall.trendmicro.com/uk/housecall7" target="_blank">HouseCall</a> or any other reputable security software, a helpful list of what is real (as opposed to FakeAV) can be found <a href="http://www.ccssforum.org/trusted-vendors.php" target="_blank">here</a>.</p>
<p>Â </p>
<p><strong>If the software you are being punted isnâ€™t on the list, then do not install it.</strong></p>
<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style " addthis:url='http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/new-york-times-pushes-fake-av-malvertisement/' addthis:title='New York Times pushes Fake AV malvertisement. '  ><a class="addthis_button_facebook_like" fb:like:layout="button_count"></a><a class="addthis_button_tweet"></a><a class="addthis_button_google_plusone" g:plusone:size="medium"></a><a class="addthis_counter addthis_pill_style"></a></div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://countermeasures.trendmicro.eu/new-york-times-pushes-fake-av-malvertisement/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>17</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

