Slashdot Mirror


Not Just Equifax. Rival Site Transunion Served Malware Too -- and 1,000 More Sites (arstechnica.com)

An anonymous reader quotes Ars Technica: Equifax isn't the only credit-reporting behemoth with a website redirecting visitors to fake Adobe Flash updates. A security researcher from AV provider Malwarebytes said transunioncentroamerica.com, a TransUnion site serving people in Central America, [was] also sending visitors to the fraudulent updates and other types of malicious pages... Malwarebytes security researcher Jerome Segura says he was able to repeatedly reproduce a similar chain of fraudulent redirects when he pointed his browser to the transunioncentroamerica.com site. On some occasions, the final link in the chain would push a fake Flash update. In other cases, it delivered an exploit kit that tried to infect computers with unpatched browsers or browser plugins... "This is not something users want to have," Segura told Ars...

Equifax on Thursday was quick to say that its systems were never compromised in the attacks. TransUnion said much the same thing. This is an important distinction in some respects because it means that the redirections weren't the result of attackers having access to restricted parts of either company's networks. At the same time, the incidents show that visitors to both sites remain much more vulnerable to malicious content than they should be.

Both sites hosted fireclick.js, an old script from a small web analytics company which pulls pages from sites like Akamai, SiteStats.info, and Ostats.net. "It appears that attackers have compromised the third-party library," writes BankInfoSecurity, adding that Malwarebytes estimates over a 1,000 more sites are using the same library.

14 of 68 comments (clear)

  1. That's it. by jargonburn · · Score: 2

    Kill it! Kill it with fire!
    Seriously.

    1. Re:That's it. by Aighearach · · Score: 2

      "Whatever the problem, solve it with fire! ;)" -- Magical Kyoko

  2. Have incompetent security, get hacked by gweihir · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Noting surprising here. And unless these people get limited in their greed and stupidity by really unpleasant and, most important, personal consequences for the CEO when that happens, nothing will change. No, I am not talking about firing them. I am talking about them paying for the damage and, depending how extreme their failure, prison time.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    1. Re:Have incompetent security, get hacked by Billly+Gates · · Score: 2

      This.

      NOTHING will change until litigation kicks in.

      HA! Good luck buddy. I read Trans-Union makes $233 million a year from these adnetworks. You think they will sit and take this or fight out tooth and nail!

      We have a political party who feels any regulation === communism and we will turn into Venezuela if we secure people quite literally! Diane Feinstein who is the leader of the other party is based in Silicon Valley.

      You think Silicon Valley who makes up her district which makes money off these slimy ad networks and supplies her with voters and millions of campaign contributions is going to put an end this? Hell no!

      I would not be surprised if the new tax bill includes sections to PREVENT litigation in order to help secure the job creators and Miss Finstein will side with the Republicans on this based on her district and money from the .COMs she has received who do not want to be sued.

      The corruption is so bad it stinks and everyone who is doing the ill deeds are selfish to the nth degree and only care about their own interests.

    2. Re:Have incompetent security, get hacked by CaptainDork · · Score: 2

      Your remarks address issues other than legal.

      "Those who don't learn from history are bound to repeat it. Those who do learn are bound to predict it." ~ © 2017 CaptainDork

      For a template of what's to come, look at fire codes.

      We did not have those until a critical number of people died.

      We are on a similar trajectory for data security.

      "Enough is enough and more than enough is too late." ~ © 2017 CaptainDork

      When "All your base are belong to us," litigation will kick in.

      So it is written, so let it be done.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    3. Re:Have incompetent security, get hacked by gweihir · · Score: 2

      Indeed. People do stupid things until something really important breaks. Then some measures are put in place, these days usually via liability. Then more important things break. Then some better measures are put in place. Repeat until breaking of important things gets rare enough that people forget (Tchernobyl...Fuckushima: 25 years).

      Those who do learn are a small minority and usually ignored, see also the story of Kassandra. All others usually need several catastrophes to get a glimmer of insight that things maybe should be done differently.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  3. It's not Equifix or TransUnion by Billly+Gates · · Score: 5, Informative

    Each site freaking horrible 20+ ad networks, brokers, analytics, and marketing networks middleman who are the ones being compromised. It is the fireclick.js which directs data from somewhere that uses data from somewhere which then piggybacks from somewhere else until BAM the malware JS gets executed and the pop up appears.

    This system is totally unacceptable and retarded! All it takes if you use 20 different ad networks with ad brokers gettings things from the highest bidder is JUST ONE compromised or malicious player and the the trust is done.

    Looking at the rest of the site (I am not a web architect but others reading this post who are please reply) show some red flags. Curl shows it uses IIS 7.5 which went EOL in 2015! No COR headers so cross domain shit can be run from anywhere from the network of players, and no forcing HTTPS to prevent snooping in a man in the middle attack.

    This is why we run adblockers. And website owners have the gullibility to call us thieves for doing so. I mean even the bad SSL certificates have trusts in a chain. There is no trust when anyone can insert themselves in without encryption.

    We need a better solution from the IEEE or W3C or something to address the problem.

    1. Re:It's not Equifix or TransUnion by Scutter · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If it's your website, you are responsible for the ad content you serve on it. This ridiculous "pass the buck" ecosystem that we've allowed to be created is the problem. End users who get infected by a bad site are told "Oh, gee, well I guess you should just use an antivirus. Also, pretty please turn off your ad blocker so we can make a little money to keep the site running for you?". The end user has no way of knowing who the ad network is, nor do they have any way to hold that network responsible.

      No, this is ABSOLUTELY Equifax and Transunion's fault. THEY are serving bad ads on their site. THEY are the ones who contracted with companies with terrible security. THEY are the ones inserting that bad security into their web site. THEY are responsible for any breaches as a result of that negligence. It's time to stop allowing these sites to keep getting away with this behavior over and over.

      --

      "Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"
    2. Re:It's not Equifix or TransUnion by Billly+Gates · · Score: 2

      If it's your website, you are responsible for the ad content you serve on it. This ridiculous "pass the buck" ecosystem that we've allowed to be created is the problem. End users who get infected by a bad site are told "Oh, gee, well I guess you should just use an antivirus. Also, pretty please turn off your ad blocker so we can make a little money to keep the site running for you?". The end user has no way of knowing who the ad network is, nor do they have any way to hold that network responsible.

      No, this is ABSOLUTELY Equifax and Transunion's fault. THEY are serving bad ads on their site. THEY are the ones who contracted with companies with terrible security. THEY are the ones inserting that bad security into their web site. THEY are responsible for any breaches as a result of that negligence. It's time to stop allowing these sites to keep getting away with this behavior over and over.

      They are a for profit company. A comment in the parent URL mentioned they make $233,000,000 a year in ads. That is alot of cash. They can't just say no. The shareholders have a right to demand a return and not make their website for free as it costs money to produce and Trans-Union has a fiduciary responsibility .

      Who they outsource with has no control who they outsource with and they bid with another sourcer and so on. It's impossible to keep track and secure.

    3. Re: It's not Equifix or TransUnion by Monster_user · · Score: 2

      No. The solution is that there should be such backlash and such bad press from advertising on sites for high profit companies centered around highly sensitive information, like Equifax and Transunion, or sites which contain HIPAA protected information, etc., that risking malvertising should result in the immediate firing of a CEO, CIO and CTO.

      They should not be forgiven for this. Forgiving them only encourages negligence in the name of profit. What benefit is it to the consumer to have their data and personal computer put at unnecessary risk? What benefit is there to the economy to increase the amount of micromanagement required of every citizen?

    4. Re:It's not Equifix or TransUnion by Billly+Gates · · Score: 3, Informative

      Looking at the rest of the site (I am not a web architect but others reading this post who are please reply) show some red flags. Curl shows it uses IIS 7.5 which went EOL in 2015!

      Not sure what you're talking about - IIS 7.5 is win2008R2, and Microsoft will be releasing patches for that for many years to come:

      https://blogs.technet.microsof...

      win2008R2 is out of "mainstream" support, but is in "extended" support.

      Not that Equifax & Transunion don't have lots of other flaws...

      Server 2008 R2 is, but IIS 7.5 is not.

  4. Re:It's not Equifix or TransUnion - YES IT IS by Fly+Swatter · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Companies whose job is to secure the data of an entire nation should have an extreme case of NIH Syndrome. Sadly now its all copy-paste third party junk that no one can really trust.

  5. Re:You leak my data when I don't have a reltionshi by CaptainDork · · Score: 2

    Sorry to inform, but size matters.

    You lose the bankroll battle.

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  6. When will these IDIOTS learn by chromaexcursion · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you need to have a secure site you can't use cross links.
    Anything financial needs to have a secure site.
    These "business" decisions are penny wise, pound foolish.
    How many more CEOs have to resign in disgrace for the idiots to catch on?