Krypt3ia

(Greek: κρυπτεία / krupteía, from κρυπτός / kruptós, “hidden, secret things”)

Archive for the ‘EPIDEMIOLOGY’ Category

WANNACRY: PATIENT ZERO AND MALWARE EPIDEMIOLOGY

leave a comment »

Continuing on the hot topic of the month I had some thoughts about WannaCry’s infection vector and heat maps that I have been seeing all over the place. I wanted to see who patient zero may be and having played many a game of Pandemic, I thought maybe this approach might yield something of use. In looking online I found only two heat maps that give a timeline that shows what may be patient zero’s location(s) but in doing this research I cam to the conclusion that this may be impossible without the help of all of the AV vendors out there. When trying to ascertain who may be patient and country zero for this malware it becomes apparent that you have to rely on various vendors who may or may not have seen the malware with their products. So far I have Malwarebytes timeline and Symantec. Now, given that Symantec has a larger market share I will go with them for the base assessment of patient zero on Wannacry but if the other vendors want to kick on and give a timeline for each of their products seeing infections I would welcome the data.

Since Wannacry traversed the net via SMB attacks (ETERNALBLUE and DOUBLE PULSAR) it may be possible to see just who was infected first and just maybe, get a lock on where that SMB connection came from. This might help the investigations into who did this at least nominally because one would assume the adversary used a proxy box or some other obfuscation to launch the initial attack… Unless, they are inept n00bs that is, so maybe something could come of this line of investigation. Anyway, the best timeline(s) I saw were Malwarebytes and Symantec as I said above. Here are the findings of those two companies telemetry;

Malwarebytes has the first infection in Russia.

Symantec see’s the first infection vector in Thailand.

Which is correct? Are either of them right? I am not able to be sure but, given at least the market share of Symantec both legally and illegally, I would be looking to Thailand as the potential patient zero here. Now, in talking to people on Twitter about this someone (@Tinkersec) notes that there is IP space in Thailand that starts with 1.0.128.0-1.0.255.255 1.1.128.0-1.1.255.255 so there is the possibility according to his theory, that a scripted scan looking for 445 open on the internet could have just hit on those addresses because the script started scanning at say 1.1.1.1 (or 0.0.0.0) to 255.255.255.255 which I can grok. Either way, if Thailand was patient Zero, and that IP space for Thailand Chiang Rai Tot Public Company Limited, an telco in Thailand.

This line of thought is quite possible and I like it (thanks Tink!) it would explain the rando Thailand hit as the first infections started to show up. Now, how though would this work if not for some scripted mass-scan? Well, someone would either have to be phished on a very small targeted scale to start this or the malware was physically implanted in a network and set free. So far I am not seeing too much talk about how this thing all started so I would like to put all this out there as a possible explanation as to the how. I am not aiming at the who because right now it is a festival of attribution out there and my opinion of that is low. The how is more important and in fact could lead to the who if the gumshoe work is done properly.

Still, I would like more data… Anyone from said AV vendors care to speak up?

K.

EDIT: Someone just mentioned passive DNS too on the killswitch site. Say, anyone in the DNS world wanna stop talking about Trumps servers and weigh in on Wannacry telemetry?

Written by Krypt3ia

2017/05/24 at 12:48

Posted in EPIDEMIOLOGY, Malware