A good policy in your technology career, or life in general, is to, to quote a former president, “don’t do stupid shit”. If we look historically at major IT outages or data breaches, there’s always some universal tenants–some piece of critical infrastructure was left completely unsecured, or someone put the private keys on Github. In fact, just last week I wrote my column for Redmond Mag, on some common patterns, mostly specific to SQL Server, but applicable to many other types of applications. I wanted to call it Data Breach Bingo, but I didn’t enough space in my column for 25 vulnerabilities.
While we’re here, it’s important that when thinking about security, you think about the basics first. The GRU operatives working for the Russian government likely aren’t targeting your data–it’s some bot network looking for a blank SA password running on a SQL Server that’s got port 1433 open to the internet. If you are on twitter, I highly recommend following Swift on Security a rather serious parody account (of Taylor Swift) that focuses on good security practices. That twitter account also hosts an excellent website called DecentSecurity.com that talks about the basics of how you should be securing your personal and business environments. While you might not be protected from the GRU, you can avoid most of the other “hackxors” in the world that are really just dumb bots.
The reason why I wrote this post, was that my colleague Meagan Longoria (b|t), shared with me a post-mortem from a ransomware attack on the Department of Transportation in the state of Colorado. I would really like to applaud the state for putting out this document, even though it doesn’t paint the organization in the best light. I’m going to use this space to talk about some of the things highlighted in the report.
“A virtual server was created on February 18, 2018. The virtual server was directly connected into the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) network, as if it was a local on premise system. The virtual server instance also had an internet address and did not have OIT’s standardized security controls in place.”
Ok, this sounds pretty much like they deployed a VM to either Azure or AWS, and they had a network connection back into their on-premises network. This in and of itself is not problematic, but not applying security policy in the provider is a problem. Both Azure and Amazon have standard security templates and policies that can be configured and applied at deployment.
“The account utilized to establish the connection into the CDOT network was a domain administrator account – this is the highest level privileged account, and means that 1) the account cannot be disabled for too many failed login accounts, and 2) it provides the highest level of access to the agency domain controllers (gatekeepers for all access to everything in the department).”
There’s a lot going on here. I read this as that they joined the server to the Active Directory domain, and used a domain admin account to perform the join. Neither of these are problematic. The next sentence is wrong–domain admin accounts can absolutely be disabled, however this indicates to me, that the department had the “never disable this login” checkbox check. Bad move. Also, in an ideal world, you would never have a domain admin log into member servers, so its password was never in kernel memory, but that’s not how this (or many) hacks work.
“Later, OIT was informed by the vendor that when an external IP address is requested, the vendor automatically opens the Remote Desktop protocol to the internet. The Remote Desktop protocol is how this attack was initiated.”
This is my biggest complaint about both Amazon and Microsoft Azure, especially in the timeframe of this attack, both services defaulted to having a public IP address and didn’t actively discourage public ports from being opened. While it’s a totally bad practice that should be enforced by policy, up until a few months ago on the Azure side, it was very easy to do.
“An attacker discovered this system available on the internet, broke into the Administrator account using approximately 40,000 password guesses until the account was compromised. From there, the attacker was able to access CDOT’s environment as the domain administrator, installing and activating the ransomware attack.”
This is a statement that will sound somewhat impressive to lay people. 40,000 password guesses sounds like a whole lot, however for an automated script that would take seconds. This means they either had approximately 3 character passwords (I’m guessing they didn’t), or the domain administrator was using a common dictionary based password. You can use add-ons to Active Directory to limit the types of passwords users can use, and while this may be painful for normal users, it is absolutely critical for high privilege users like DBAs or System Admins. They should also have separate user accounts for logging in as domain admin, and multi-factor authentication configured.
This is also the part where I would usually say you should have network segmentation configured to block the malware from spreading, but if someone pwns your domain controllers all the segmentation in the world won’t help that much. An attacker could even go as far to install their malware via group policy. Good luck cleaning that one up.
The state of Colorado had a really robust backup solution, and some good network practices (smart firewalls) that were able to limit the spread of the malware. So they were able to recover from this attack relatively quickly. It’s important to worry about big things, but doing all of the little things right and most importantly not doing stupid things will go a long way to securing your environment.
Contact the Author | Contact DCAC