Hacker News Reader

Comment by matt_wulfeck | Hacker News Reader

> Finally, before they left, they encrypted her computer with ransomware, demanding $130 to unlock it, to cover up the more invasive attack on her computer.

Anyone having hard time swallowing this? They broke in and were totally undetected when they planted a... rootkit (unclear from article). While undetected they silently stole user credentials... Then to cover it all up, they ransomware'd the computer?

It's like breaking into a house and putting a bug in the wall, and then to cover the tracks you smash in the front door and leave the water running in the sink.

If the attacker was completely undetected, why intentionally jeopardize that?

View on HN

No it makes perfect sense. If you want to land an advanced persistent threat but your entry is detectable a distraction is ALWAYS a great psychological tool. The very best and long lasting victories are made when you convince the loser that they've won.

So the premise is that they clear the ransomware and think its over. But its not.

And the standard way to clear the ransomware is to re-image the machine and restore from backups. So the infection has to be hidden above the operating system level. BIOS/SSD/HDD firmware etc.

Unless of course you don't provision machines, or keep backups. In which case hiding on a machine being "cleaned" would be simples.

If you capture user credentials it doesn't really matter because you can just come back a month later. Especially if they had domain admin access and created a golden ticket. Also if you infect a user as opposed to a machine your infection will be back the moment the user logs in.

Would it not also be standard procedure to update credentials after being compromised? How long would those credentials even typically be valid for?

Ahh well if you only compromised passwords then it depends on the domain policy. Often something like 90 or 180 days, but sometimes also only 1 month. But the ticket is different. An attacker can sign and create their own ticket and determine how long it is valid. Obviously an attacker is going for the maximum time which I think is indefinitely for golden tickets (can't quite recall now). Also it's hard to remove the trust in such a ticket once it's been created, it user to be so bad that the entire Forest (with all domains had to be rebuilt) but afaik it's easier(but not trivial) now.

What does golden ticket mean here? Is some kind of microsoft credential? you should be able to detect any kind of leftover account. a backdoor would seem be better.

and on this whole area, i would not encrypt someones machine - unless you are trying to scare someone, it would be better to have never known.

"The very best and long lasting victories are made when you convince the loser that they've won"

saved!

"The very best and long lasting victories are made when you convince the loser that they've won." -- that's catchy, but I don't agree. Often the result will be "damn that was close, better enhance the defences". Whereas the ignorant just carry on.

yeah except that they were found out because of this "distraction," so it seems to have been a mistake

Why is it hard to swallow? Really it's a classic magician's trick - misdirection.

Think of it this way: if you are responsible for security, you never assume that you're fully protected. If you're a smart hacker, it should be the same thing: you never assume that you won't be detected.

> It's like breaking into a house and putting a bug in the wall, and then to cover the tracks you smash in the front door and leave the water running in the sink.

I think it's more akin to breaking into a house, putting a bug in the wall, and then stealing some cash in case the homeowner had a silent alarm or nosy neighbors or some other way you could be caught.

It's really like breaking in to steal their passport and spare keys out of the safe, but deciding you're going to make off with some cash, a few TVs, and smash up the place so it's harder to figure out what you stole and find good forensics.

If your shoe prints only led to the safe and back out, it would be obvious what you stole; if they're all over the house and the whole place is a wreck, then it's harder to tell what you were (actually) there for.

It's really just used as a distraction. But I like you Home Alone reference. However, the Wet Bandits weren't very good at their job.

The wet bandits had a great scam. They just didn't account for an improbably skilled child to be alone in a house that should be empty.

You're right! They did have a good scam going.

It's a classic distraction tactic. You create some big visible threat/situation to focus their attention on. While your real threat is happening unnoticed as they are too busy dealing with the distraction.

It's like breaking in to plant a bug in the wall, but you had to break a window to get in. They'd notice the broken window, so you steal the TV so they won't be suspicious of a break without an apparent motive.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com