Huntress Labs researchers uncovered a campaign where Russian-speaking actors impersonated the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) to distribute the Stealc information-stealing malware. Using a fake EFF domain and mimicking the organization's visual branding, the attackers lured victims with promises of privacy-enhancing tools, instead delivering a malicious installer. This installer deployed Stealc, designed to pilfer sensitive data like passwords, cookies, and cryptocurrency wallet information. The campaign leveraged the legitimate cloud storage service MEGA and utilized Pyramid, a new command-and-control framework, to manage infected machines. This represents a concerning trend of threat actors exploiting trusted organizations to distribute increasingly sophisticated malware.
Cybersecurity firm Kaspersky Lab has hired Igor Prosvirnin, a former bulletproof hosting provider operating under the moniker "Prospero." Prosvirnin and his company were notorious for harboring criminal operations, including malware distribution and spam campaigns, despite repeated takedown attempts. Kaspersky claims Prosvirnin will work on improving their anti-spam technologies, leveraging his expertise on the inner workings of these illicit operations. This move has generated significant controversy due to Prosvirnin's history, raising concerns about Kaspersky's judgment and potential conflicts of interest.
Hacker News users discuss Kaspersky's acquisition of Prospero, a domain known for hosting malware and spam. Several express skepticism and concern, questioning Kaspersky's motives and the potential implications for cybersecurity. Some speculate that Kaspersky aims to analyze the malware hosted on Prospero, while others worry this legitimizes a malicious actor and may enable Kaspersky to distribute malware or bypass security measures. A few commenters point out Kaspersky's past controversies and ties to the Russian government, furthering distrust of this acquisition. There's also discussion about the efficacy of domain blacklists and the complexities of cybersecurity research. Overall, the sentiment is predominantly negative, with many users expressing disbelief and apprehension about Kaspersky's involvement.
Security researcher Eric Daigle discovered a significant vulnerability in several "smart" apartment intercom systems. By exploiting a poorly implemented API within these systems, he was able to remotely unlock building doors and individual apartment units using only his phone and publicly available information. He accomplished this by crafting specific HTTP requests that bypassed security measures, granting him unauthorized access. Daigle responsibly disclosed the vulnerability to the affected vendors, prompting them to address the issue and improve their security protocols. This highlighted the risk associated with insecure IoT devices and the importance of robust API security in connected building systems.
HN commenters discuss the prevalence of easily-exploitable vulnerabilities in building access control systems. Several highlight the inherent insecurity of relying solely on cellular connections for such critical infrastructure, pointing out the ease with which cellular signals can be intercepted or spoofed. Others note the conflict between convenience and security, acknowledging that many residents prioritize ease of access over robust protection. Some commenters share anecdotal experiences with similar vulnerabilities in their own buildings, while others suggest potential solutions, such as requiring secondary authentication factors or utilizing more secure communication protocols. The ethical implications of publicly disclosing such vulnerabilities are also debated, with some arguing for responsible disclosure while others emphasize the urgent need for awareness and immediate action. A few commenters question the author's decision to reveal specific technical details, fearing it could empower malicious actors.
Malimite is a free and open-source decompiler designed specifically for iOS and macOS applications. It aims to reconstruct the original Objective-C code from compiled Mach-O binaries, assisting in security research, software analysis, and understanding the inner workings of closed-source apps. Built using Swift, Malimite leverages a custom intermediate representation and features a modular architecture for easy extensibility and improvement. The project is actively under development and welcomes contributions from the community.
HN commenters generally express interest in Malimite's capabilities, particularly its potential for reverse engineering Swift and SwiftUI. Some highlight the difficulty of decompiling Swift and applaud any progress in this area. Others question its effectiveness compared to existing tools like Hopper, mentioning limitations in reconstructing complex control flow and higher-level language constructs. A few raise ethical concerns about the potential for misuse in piracy and intellectual property theft, while others emphasize the importance of such tools for security research and understanding closed-source software. The developer's choice to keep the tool closed-source is also a point of discussion, with some arguing for open-sourcing it to foster community development and scrutiny.
A hacker tricked approximately 18,000 aspiring cybercriminals ("script kiddies") by distributing a fake malware builder. Instead of creating malware, the tool actually infected their own machines with a clipper, which silently replaces cryptocurrency wallet addresses copied to the clipboard with the attacker's own, diverting any cryptocurrency transactions to the hacker. This effectively turned the tables on the would-be hackers, highlighting the risks of using untrusted tools from underground forums.
HN commenters largely applaud the vigilante hacker's actions, viewing it as a form of community service by removing malicious actors and their potential harm. Some express skepticism about the 18,000 figure, suggesting it's inflated or that many downloads may not represent active users. A few raise ethical concerns, questioning the legality and potential collateral damage of such actions, even against malicious individuals. The discussion also delves into the technical aspects of the fake builder, including its payload and distribution method, with some speculating on the hacker's motivations beyond simple disruption.
Favicons, small icons associated with websites, are a valuable tool in OSINT research because they can persist even after a site is taken down or significantly altered. They can be used to identify related sites, track previous versions of a website, uncover hidden services or connected infrastructure, and verify ownership or association between seemingly disparate online entities. By leveraging search engines, browser history, and specialized tools, investigators can use favicons as digital fingerprints to uncover connections and gather intelligence that might otherwise be lost. This persistence makes them a powerful resource for reconstructing online activity and building a more complete picture of a target.
Hacker News users discussed the utility of favicons in OSINT research, generally agreeing with the article's premise. Some highlighted the usefulness of favicons for identifying related sites or tracking down defunct websites through archived favicon databases like Shodan. Others pointed out limitations, noting that favicons can be easily changed, intentionally misleading, or hosted on third-party services, complicating attribution. One commenter suggested using favicons in conjunction with other OSINT techniques for a more robust investigation, while another offered a practical tip for quickly viewing a site's favicon using the curl -I command. A few users also discussed the potential privacy implications of browser fingerprinting using favicons, suggesting it as a potential avenue for future research or concern.
Summary of Comments ( 5 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43283884
Hacker News users discussed the sophistication of the Stealc malware operation, particularly its use of Telegram for command-and-control and its rapid iteration to incorporate features from other malware. Some questioned the attribution to Russian actors solely based on language, highlighting the prevalence of Russian speakers in the cybersecurity world regardless of nationality. Others pointed out the irony of using "EFF" in the impersonation, given the Electronic Frontier Foundation's focus on privacy and security. The effectiveness of the multi-stage infection process, including the use of legitimate services like Discord and Telegram, was also noted. Several commenters discussed the blog post's technical depth, appreciating the clear explanation of the malware's functionality and the investigation process. Finally, some users expressed skepticism about the actual impact of such malware, suggesting the targets are likely low-value and the operation more opportunistic than targeted.
The Hacker News post titled "Exposing Russian EFF Impersonators: The Inside Story on Stealc and Pyramid C2" has several comments discussing the linked article about a malware campaign.
Several commenters focus on the technical aspects of the operation. One commenter points out the amateur nature of some of the attackers' mistakes, such as using easily identifiable infrastructure and leaving personally identifiable information exposed. They speculate that this sloppiness could indicate either inexperienced actors or a deliberate attempt to create a distraction. This commenter also expresses skepticism about attributing the attacks specifically to Russia based solely on language used in the malware's code and communication.
Another commenter questions the efficacy of the malware's distribution methods, highlighting the reliance on social engineering and fake websites, which they suggest are relatively unsophisticated tactics. They wonder if the target audience for these attacks might be less technically savvy users who are more susceptible to such lures.
There's a discussion thread about the usage of Telegram for command-and-control infrastructure, with commenters analyzing the benefits and drawbacks from the attacker's perspective. One commenter mentions the irony of using a platform known for its focus on privacy and security for malicious purposes. Another points out the ease with which law enforcement or security researchers could potentially infiltrate or monitor such channels.
Some commenters express concern about the broader implications of these attacks, particularly the potential for escalation and the targeting of critical infrastructure. They discuss the increasing sophistication and frequency of state-sponsored cyberattacks and the need for better defenses.
Finally, a few commenters commend the researchers for their work in uncovering and exposing the campaign, emphasizing the importance of such efforts in combating cybercrime. They also discuss the difficulty in attributing attacks definitively and the complexities of international cooperation in addressing these kinds of threats.