At Black Hat and DEF CON, cybersecurity experts were asked to game out how Taiwan could protect its communications and power infrastructure in case of invasion by China.

Source: Kevin M. Law via Alamy Stock Photo

If China attacked Taiwan, how could Taiwan defend its critical communications infrastructure from cyberattack?

Last year, Dr. Nina A. Kollars and Jason Vogt — both associate professors at the US Naval War College (USNWC) Cyber and Innovation Policy Institute (CIPI) — designed a war game to inspire some novel strategies. They enlisted government and private sector cybersecurity experts at Black Hat and DEF CON to participate, and presented the results at ShmooCon earlier this month.

The scenario was this:

August 6, 2030. Relations between the PRC and Taiwan had deteriorated to the breaking point due to the re-election of a liberal, pro-independence party. Rhetoric towards independence was at an all-time high, and several government representatives had openly called for UN recognition of Taiwan as an independent state. The Central Committee of the Communist Party (CCCP) decided that the risk of Taiwan declaring independence was high enough to warrant military intervention. They began preparations for an invasion. With little chance of surprise, the PRC decided to do their utmost to disrupt Taiwan’s military and civilian communications prior to the assault.

The experts came up with 65 ways Taiwan's government could prepare for such a war, ranging from the low tech, like using ham radio when mobile networks go down, to the ambitious, such as investing in modular nuclear reactors or tidal power generation, to the outlandish, for example using civilians or cultural artifacts as deterrents against military strikes.

Related:Thai Police Systems Under Fire From 'Yokai' Backdoor

**Taiwan's Unique Indefensibility**

In designing the war game, "We put very specific emphasis on what we call the 'Zelensky playbook,'" Kollars says. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky made certain that communications could occur between his own people and the capital, and between the capital and the rest of the world. "We went into designing the war game specifically to answer the question: Could the Taiwanese play Zelensky? Even under any kind of duress, could they find a way to keep communicating?"

What was clear early on is that political and geographic factors make Taiwan much more vulnerable to blockade. Ukraine is in mainland Europe, with a long border through which it can receive resources of one kind or another — fuel, Internet connectivity, and food, for example. Taiwan's highly connected populus is served by 16 undersea cables, three of which run through China, making them eminently cuttable. Meanwhile, it imports nearly all of its energy from overseas, and has been phasing out domestic nuclear power, which might otherwise provide a balance. "So pretty quickly you get this pretty dire picture, where it's just a fundamentally different kind of battle," Kollars explains.

Related:Russian FSB Hackers Breach Pakistani APT Storm-0156

"Taiwan is in a very vulnerable position because of its geography, but also because of a million little micro-decisions, which ultimately give you the telecommunications and power system that you have," Vogt says. At the time of Russia's invasion, "Ukraine had a much more diverse set of mobile providers, and the power was much more distributed — there's a lot more connections to other countries. So the Russians were probably never in a position where they could digitally isolate Ukraine, writ large. They tried to do it to the capital, but it was always going to be very hard for them. I think in the Taiwan–China scenario, China has the potential to be much more damaging."

**How to Defend Taiwan from China**

Initially, players devised strategies to combat aggressive but ultimately tempered cyberwarfare: ransomware attacks against data centers, severed submarine fiber optic cables, and forced power outages. Only then did China kick up its game with kinetic strikes, including PRC strikes on Taiwanes aircraft and ensuring that nothing can fly in Taiwanese airspace. In the scenario, PRC also destroyed bridges and key routes to coastal defenses, while also targeting Taiwan's command-and-control systems and all manner of communications systems.

Related:Hamas Hackers Spy on Mideast Gov'ts, Disrupt Israel

How could a small island nation possibly protect its infrastructure against the combined might of the world's second greatest military power?

More than two-thirds (70%) of the solutions proposed by players involved investing in infrastructure for communications, power generation, storage, and data backup and distribution. Some 20% of the ideas focused on recovery — preparing civilians with technical skills, and stockpiling spare resources, for example. Only 10% of recommendations focused on straight cybersecurity.

The physical location of critical resources was also of utmost importance. Some suggested that Taiwan take advantage of its geography by building and stockpiling equipment along its far coast, in forests, and nestled in its eastern mountain range. Some suggested decentralizing its infrastructure, spreading it out in smaller chunks all around the country using solar power and cheap radio systems. Others argued for the opposite: concentrating communications and power systems in fewer, denser areas that China might be reticent to destroy.

"There were some ideas I thought, from a military perspective, were pretty risky," Kollars admits. "One of them was to colocate all of Taiwan's precious assets — like the TSMC semiconductor plant, all of its antiquities from China, large populations, and a nuclear power plant — assuming an adversary wouldn't strike a target that had everything stacked on top of it. That's a heck of a gamble."

Ultimately, the most popular ideas were those that were cheap and practical, like using Bluetooth or Raspberry Pi mesh networks as backups to cellular connectivity. "The thing that surprised us most about this exercise," Vogt recalls, "was how much time they spent talking about the civilian population, and what needed to be done to prepare them: everything from public messaging campaigns on how to be cyber secure to full-on training programs to create civilian cyber cores that could not just protect themselves but also operate and maintain equipment when there's no government around, and keep the communications going for longer periods of time."

**About the Author**

Nate Nelson is a writer based in New York City. He formerly worked as a reporter at Threatpost, and wrote "Malicious Life," an award-winning Top 20 tech podcast on Apple and Spotify. Outside of Dark Reading, he also co-hosts "The Industrial Security Podcast."

War Game Pits China Against Taiwan in All-Out Cyberwar

Cybersecurity firm ESET uncovers PlushDaemon, a previously unknown APT group targeting South Korea, deploying a SlowStepper backdoor. This…

Cybersecurity firm ESET uncovers PlushDaemon, a previously unknown APT group targeting South Korea, deploying a SlowStepper backdoor. This article analyses the attack techniques, the capabilities of the SlowStepper malware, and the growing threat posed by this sophisticated APT group. 

Cybersecurity firm ESET has identified a new China-aligned Advanced Persistent Threat (APT) group, dubbed “PlushDaemon,” behind a cyber espionage operation targeting South Korea.

The attack camaign nvolved a **supply chain compromise**, where attackers infiltrated the legitimate update channels of IPany, a popular South Korean VPN software. PlushDaemon then replaced genuine installers with trojanized versions, which upon download and execution, deployed both the legitimate IPany VPN software and a custom backdoor named SlowStepper.

This means, by replacing the genuine installer with a trojanized version, PlushDaemon successfully embedded a malicious backdoor within the software. As per ESET’s **research**, SlowStepper is a feature-rich backdoor boasting over 30 modules. It is designed for extensive surveillance and data collection.

Written in C++, Python, and Go, the malware possesses a wide range of capabilities, including stealing sensitive data such as system information, user credentials, and network configurations, recording audio and video, enabling attackers to monitor their targets’ activities, and gathering detailed information about the victim’s network environment.

Webpage on the IPany site where the malicious installer was available for download (Via ESET)

In addition, the backdoor features advanced persistence mechanisms, such as deploying files that ensure the continued presence of SlowStepper on infected systems and utilizing legitimate tools to sideload malicious code. The trojanized installer utilize advanced communication methods to connect with command-and-control (C&C) servers.

Instead of embedding IP addresses directly within the malware, SlowStepper crafts DNS queries to retrieve TXT records containing base64-encoded, AES-encrypted C&C server addresses. This multi-layered approach makes detection more challenging.

While ESET telemetry revealed manual downloads of the compromised software, suggesting a broad targeting strategy, the attack specifically focused on entities within South Korea’s critical semiconductor and software industries. The timely intervention of ESET, which alerted IPany to the compromised installer, prevented further widespread infection. 

Although only recently discovered, researchers believe the PlushDaemon APT has been active since 2019, consistently building a diverse and powerful arsenal of tools. The sophistication of SlowStepper and the successful execution of this supply chain attack highlight the growing threat posed by this actor. 

To stay safe from these cyber espionage groups there is an urgent need for continuous monitoring. Organizations must prioritize software update channel security and implement stringent verification procedures to ensure the integrity of all updates. Additionally, proactive **threat intelligence** sharing are vital for identifying and mitigating such attacks before they inflict damage.

1.  **Hackers cloned NordVPN website to drop banking trojan**
2.  **Hackers clone ProtonVPN website with password stealer**
3.  **Fake VPN website delivering password-stealing malware**
4.  **N. Korean APT37 Unleashes Dolphin Backdoor on S. Korea**
5.  **Dark web hackers selling S. Korean, US payment card data**

Chinese PlushDaemon APT Targets S. Korean IPany VPN with Backdoor

Such routers typically lack endpoint detection and response protection, are in front of a firewall, and don't run monitoring software like Sysmon, making the attacks harder to detect.

Source: LJSphotography via Alamy Stock Photo

Dozens of organizations have been infected with router malware that uses a packet-sniffing technique to minimize its footprint.

Rather than their far more popular Cisco counterparts, the campaign, which Black Lotus Labs named "J-magic," hones in on Juniper-brand routers at the edge of high-value networks. Exposed enterprise routers are tapped with a variant of a quarter-century-old backdoor, "cd00r," which stays dormant until it receives an activation phrase — a "magic packet." Only then does it grant access to a reverse shell, from which its attackers can steal data, manipulate configurations, and spread to more devices.

"There's been a lot of emphasis on small office/home office (SOHO) devices, but attackers are just as active in the enterprise space," warns Danny Adamitis, principal information security engineer with Black Lotus Labs. "It's just that they're living on these devices that don't really have endpoint detection and response (EDR), that are in front of a firewall, and don't really run things like Sysmon, so it's a little bit harder for people to detect these attacks."

**Backdoor Malware Infests Juniper Routers**

Exactly how the hackers obtained initial access to affected routers is unknown, but the openings they exploited are clear. Around half the Juniper routers victimized by J-magic were configured as virtual private network (VPN) gateways, and the other half possessed exposed Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF) ports, which allow administrators to remotely manage and configure network settings, but also allow attackers to sneak through and do the same. These routers served as points of entry and control for much larger networks, affording attackers a wide canvas for their malicious deeds.

Related:Omdia Finds Phishing Attacks Top Smartphone Security Concern for Consumers

To exploit these prized devices, the attackers install their malware, cd00r, in a position where it can observe all TCP traffic coming into the edge device. Then it waits for one of five predefined packets meeting highly specific conditions, which act like an activation phrase. When a packet meeting one of these presets is received, the program will spawn a reverse shell connected to the attacker's IP address, through the port specified in the magic packet.

The technique works because it circumvents the already limited methods defenders have for picking up on edge malware. In a typical infection, Adamitis says, "If you're able to monitor traffic from a firewall or router, you can see that there is a beacon that occurs at a set interval. And if you perform a time series analysis, you can see activity continuously occurring with that interval, and it kind of stands out. With something like this, you don't have that consistent call out. This will evade that form of detection."

Related:Automox Releases Endpoint Management With FastAgent

A J-magic attack isn't entirely complete upon reception of the magic packet, though. To confirm that the handler is the intended attacker — not just some passerby trying to piggyback on their work — cd00r sends out a "challenge" string encrypted with a hardcoded public key. Only if the attacker passes this test — by returning the string back using their associated private key — do they obtain control over the reverse shell, and with it the power to control the infected device, steal enterprise data, and deploy further malware.

Evidence of these J-magic infections dates back to September 2023, but the majority of cases appear to have popped up in the spring and summer of 2024. In that year or so, cd00r spread to the US, the UK, Russia, Norway, India, and more countries in between, affecting organizations in construction, bioengineering, insurance, and IT services, among others.

**Blind Spot in Edge Network Cybersecurity**

Easily overlooked is the fact that cd00r, though updated with new features, is a 25-year-old program. It was originally developed and released in 2000, as a proof-of-concept (PoC) for an "invisible" backdoor, on the information security website Packet Storm.

Related:15K Fortinet Device Configs Leaked to the Dark Web

That such an old, and in some ways atavistic, malware would still suffice in 2025 speaks to just how much attackers can get away with in edge networks.

"On your corporate laptop, you probably have Windows Defender and something from your favorite EDR vendor. There tend to be a lot of vendors for end-user workstations, but edge devices don't really seem to have anything on them. So by living in those blind spots, attackers are able to get away with using this 20-year-old malware, because there's no one and nothing on that particular device to actually capture that sort of user interaction," Adamitis says.

"The reporting around these kinds of enterprise-grade routers tends to be a lot more sparse," he adds. "What we're trying to say is: We think there might be this low visibility spot in the perimeter."

**About the Author**

Nate Nelson is a writer based in New York City. He formerly worked as a reporter at Threatpost, and wrote "Malicious Life," an award-winning Top 20 tech podcast on Apple and Spotify. Outside of Dark Reading, he also co-hosts "The Industrial Security Podcast."

Black 'Magic' Targets Enterprise Juniper Routers With Backdoor

Enterprise-grade Juniper Networks routers have become the target of a custom backdoor as part of a campaign dubbed J-magic.
According to the Black Lotus Labs team at Lumen Technologies, the activity is so named for the fact that the backdoor continuously monitors for a "magic packet" sent by the threat actor in TCP traffic. 
"J-magic campaign marks the rare occasion of malware designed

Custom Backdoor Exploiting Magic Packet Vulnerability in Juniper Routers

Advanced persistent threat group PlushDaemon, active since 2019, is using a sophisticated modular backdoor to collect data from infected systems in South Korea.

Source: BeeBright via Shutterstock

A newly discovered Chinese threat group has targeted a South Korean VPN developer with a supply chain attack aimed at deploying a custom backdoor to collect data for cyber-espionage purposes.

The group, dubbed PlushDaemon by the researchers at ESET Research who discovered it, typically aims to hijack legitimate updates of Chinese applications in its malicious operations "by redirecting traffic to attacker-controlled servers," according to a blog post by ESET researcher Facundo Muñoz published on Jan. 22. "Additionally, we have observed the group gaining access via vulnerabilities in legitimate web servers," he wrote.

However, the researchers also discovered the group in May 2024 planting malicious code in an NSIS installer for the Windows version of the VPN software of South Korean company IPany, representing a departure from its typical operations, they said. ESET notified IPany and the malicious installer was removed from the company's website.

PlushDaemon has been active since at least 2019, engaging in cyberespionage operations against individuals and entities in mainland China, Taiwan, Hong Kong, South Korea, the US, and New Zealand. The group is the exclusive user of several types of malware in its malicious activities, mostly notably a custom, modular backdoor for collecting various data from infected machines, called SlowStepper for Windows, according to ESET.

**Atypical Supply-Chain Attack**

The first sign of the supply-chain attack came in May 2024, when ESET researchers noticed detections of malicious code in an NSIS installer for Windows that users from South Korea had downloaded from the IPany website.

"The victims appear to have manually downloaded a ZIP archive containing a malicious NSIS installer from the URL https://ipany\[.\]kr/download/IPanyVPNsetup.zip," Muñoz wrote. However, the researchers didn't find suspicious code on the download page "to produce targeted downloads, for example by geofencing to specific targeted regions or IP ranges." This led them to believe that "anyone using the IPany VPN might have been a valid target."

Several users attempted to install the Trojanized software in the network of a semiconductor company and an unidentified software development company in South Korea. Further research found even older cases of infection via the campaign, with the two oldest coming from a victim in Japan in November 2023 and a victim in China in December 2023, the researchers said.

**SlowStepper Backdoor**

The payload in the supply chain attack is PlushDaemon's own SlowStepper backdoor, which has more than 30 modules. However, the group used a "lite" version of the backdoor in the IPany attack, which contains fewer features than other previous and newer versions, the researchers said.

The backdoor features a multistage command-and-control (C2) protocol using DNS, and is known for its ability to download and execute dozens of additional Python modules with espionage capabilities.

"Both the full and Lite versions make use of an array of tools programmed in Python and Go, which include capabilities for extensive collection of data, and spying through recording of audio and videos," Muñoz wrote.

The researchers found PlushDaemon's tools stored in a remote code repository hosted on the Chinese platform GitCode, under the LetMeGo22 account. At the time of writing, the profile was private.

**Another Chinese APT Emerges**

China already has a raft of known and active APTs that regularly and persistently engage in cyberespionage activities against the US and its allies. One of the most notable operations of late was the infiltration of US broadband provider networks by Chinese APT Salt Typhoon; however, the investigation into that incident was dealt a significant blow on Jan. 21, when President Trump, on his second day back in office, fired the cyber safety board looking into it.

However, with a new, sophisticated actor like PlushDaemon now emerging from the shadows, organizations need to be more vigilant than ever against malicious cyber activity from China, Muñoz said.

"The numerous components in the PlushDaemon toolset and its rich version history show that, while previously unknown, this China-aligned APT group has been operating diligently to develop a wide array of tools, making it a significant threat to watch for," he wrote.

To that end, ESET included a link to its GitHub repository that contains a comprehensive list of indicators of compromise (IoCs) and samples of PlushDaemon activity.

**About the Author**

Elizabeth Montalbano is a freelance writer, journalist, and therapeutic writing mentor with more than 25 years of professional experience. Her areas of expertise include technology, business, and culture. Elizabeth previously lived and worked as a full-time journalist in Phoenix, San Francisco, and New York City; she currently resides in a village on the southwest coast of Portugal. In her free time, she enjoys surfing, hiking with her dogs, traveling, playing music, yoga, and cooking.

Chinese Cyberspies Target South Korean VPN in Supply Chain Attack

Feeling creative? Have something to say about cybersecurity? Submit your caption and our panel of experts will reward the winner with a $25 gift card.

What motivates you? What will change how you do security? Send us a cybersecurity-related caption to describe the above scene and our favorite entry will win its wordsmith a $25 gift card.

Here are four convenient ways to submit your ideas before the Feb. 12 deadline:

*   Via social media: Bluesky, LinkedIn, Facebook, and X. (If you win, we'll respond to you on the same platform, requesting your email address.)
    

**Last Month's Winner**

Shout out — and a $25 gift card — to Paul Mauriks, ICT security specialist, technology solutions, at the Department of Justice and Community Safety in Victoria, Australia for sending us the winning caption for last month's "Sneaking Around" cartoon. Some noteworthy contenders included "I guarantee you there are no backdoors to our network," "Finally found a way to get rid of all that old IT gea.," and "‘Yeah, asset disposal by ‘Back Door Inc.’ I’ll do the supplier assessment thing on Monday…’" Congrats to Paul, and a big thank you to all who participated.

**About the Author**

Cartoonist

John Klossner has been drawing technology cartoons for more than 15 years. His work regularly appears in Computerworld and Federal Computer Week. His illustrations and cartoons have also been published in The New Yorker, Barron's, and The Wall Street Journal.

Name That Toon: Incentives

The US Department of Commerce will prohibit the import of components for connected vehicles from China or Russia, as the US continues to ban technology it sees as potential national security threats.

Source: Hsyn20 via Shutterstock

Smart-vehicle makers are facing supply chain disruption as the US Department of Commerce plans to enforce new regulations banning the import of connected-vehicle technology from China and Russia over cybersecurity fears.

The Commerce Department pursued new regulations after President Biden declared a national emergency over concerns that the United States had become overreliant on China for information and communications technology and services (ICTS). The rule mandates that companies and their suppliers eliminate hardware or software imported from China or Russia in their vehicle connectivity system (VCS) or in their automated driving system (ADS).

It aims to address two concerns: vulnerabilities that would allow a nation-state or criminal organization to implant a backdoor in automotive hardware or software; and the collection of data on US drivers through diagnostic features and other mechanisms, says Yoav Levy, CEO and co-founder of automotive cybersecurity provider Upstream.

"The threat is definitely real," he says. "There are many cases where cars could be hacked — including the safety elements within the cars — and there were many cases where data was stolen or leaked. ... But so far, we haven't seen something like that on a huge scale."

Related:Leveraging Behavioral Insights to Counter LLM-Enabled Hacking

The concerns come as software-defined vehicles (SDVs) shake up the automotive market, while also potentially increasing the cyberattack surface area of automobiles. In the past, vehicle makers created a variety of platforms for their different models, and the number of processors — known as electronic control units (ECUs) — quickly climbed. While the post-pandemic chip shortage slowed the shift to new platforms, manufacturers now aim to quickly reduce the number of ECUs and other hardware needed for the VCS and ADS systems. While current models, for example, can have as many as 130 ECUs, Rivian has already reduced the number of ECUs to seven in its second generation R1 vehicles.

**Wielding the Cyber-Ban Hammer**

Rivian aside, most automobiles have a wide variety of components sourced from China, raising concerns that the United States' reliance on the technologies could allow future compromises.

Banning technology from China and sanctioning Russia is nothing new, says Ivan Novikov, CEO at API security firm Wallarm. The US government has already raised cybersecurity concerns over telecommunications equipment from Huawei, Chinese-made cargo equipment at US seaports, home routers made by Chinese manufacturer TP-Link, and popular social media app TikTok.

Related:Strategic Approaches to Threat Detection, Investigation & Response

"This is kind of the next logical step," he says.

The new commerce regulations will prohibit any "transactions involving VCS hardware and covered software designed, developed, manufactured, or supplied" by people or organizations linked to China or Russia, according to a 213-page final rule, which will be put into effect after months of comments.

Yet, many implementation details remain unclear, Novikov says.

"The open question here is who will enforce the regulations, because the usual enforcement of security requirements and crash \[safety\] tests is under the Department of Transportation," he says. "It's unclear how these two agencies can work together, and how this final DoT requirements or restrictions or controls can work."

**Securing Supply Chains & the Economy?**

The impact on the supply chain will be significant, experts say. The first tier of OEMs — large US and international companies — are not the problem. Their products, however, often come from suppliers that source their own components from Chinese companies, says Alex Oyler, director for North America at industry consultancy SBD Automotive.

It's just one more way that the supply chain is currently undergoing changes, he says. Many carmakers are looking to rewrite their relationships with providers as they move to software-defined vehicles.

Related:Trusted Apps Sneak a Bug Into the UEFI Boot Process

"We're in a bit of a different phase of software-defined vehicle in the sense that OEMs are actually starting to become a lot more prescriptive in the specification of the components that they're sourcing," Oyler says. "It's more of what's called a build-to-print relationship, where they provide not the functional requirements, but requirements for the component architecture — we want this processor, we need this memory, we need this GPU."

The shift to other sources of supply will take years, with the Biden administration allowing carmakers a grace period to comply with the regulations: Software components can no longer be sourced from China and Russia starting with 2027 car models, while by 2030 car models must contain no hardware from prohibited sources.

Making such changes will not be easy, says Upstream's Levy.

"It's not that easy to replace a supplier," he says. "There are financial implications with the supply chain — maybe it's going to be more expensive, or there may be some changes to software that they would need to do for the for the new supplier — an adjustment to the architecture. ... It really depends on what they are actually going to replace."

**About the Author**

Veteran technology journalist of more than 20 years. Former research engineer. Written for more than two dozen publications, including CNET News.com, Dark Reading, MIT's Technology Review, Popular Science, and Wired News. Five awards for journalism, including Best Deadline Journalism (Online) in 2003 for coverage of the Blaster worm. Crunches numbers on various trends using Python and R. Recent reports include analyses of the shortage in cybersecurity workers and annual vulnerability trends.

US Ban on Automotive Components Could Curb Supply Chain

A highly targeted cyber-intelligence campaign adds fuel to the increasingly complex relationship between the two former Soviet states.

Source: Daniren via Alamy Stock Photo

A suspected Russia-nexus threat actor has been executing convincing spear phishing attacks against diplomatic entities in Kazakhstan.

UAC-0063, active since at least 2021, was first documented by Ukraine's Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT-UA) in 2023. With medium confidence, CERT-UA tied it to APT28 (aka Fancy Bear, Forest Blizzard, Strontium, Sofacy), from the General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU) Military Unit 26165. APT28 is best known for its high-profile attacks against Western governments: the Democratic National Committee (DNC) hack of 2016, campaigns against parliamentary bodies in Germany, Norway, and the Netherlands, and much more.

UAC-0063, specifically, has used cyber operations to collect intelligence from government entities, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), academic institutions, and energy and defense organizations in Eastern Europe — most notably Ukraine — as well as Central Asia, including Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and other countries in the vicinity, including Israel and India.

Its latest ongoing campaign, which, in a blog post, researchers from Sekoia date back to at least 2022, may fold into a broader effort by Vladimir Putin's government to gain strategic insights into, and advantage over, a former Soviet state that has sought to broaden its diplomatic horizons in recent years.

**Phishing Kazakh Diplomats**

On Oct. 16, 2024 — one month after it'd been deployed in the wild — researchers spotted a diplomatic document uploaded to VirusTotal. It appeared to be a legitimate draft of a joint declaration between the chancellor of Germany and heads of Central Asian countries.

"The first step, when you open this document, is that it asks you to enable macros," recalls Amaury Garçon, cyber threat intelligence (CTI) analyst at Sekoia Threat Detection & Research (TDR), adding that the document was obscured by "shapes" at first sight. "Some phishing documents look really ugly or have a bad shape \[at first\] — they prompt the user to enable macros, because if you don't enable macros you can't write text in the document, can't move images, etc.," he notes.

Clicking "enable" would trigger various malicious, unseen commands on a target device. While the user was made privy to the full, unadulterated lure document, in the background their security settings would be downgraded so as to remove the need for future "enable macros" prompts. Next a second, blank document was created and opened by a hidden instance of Microsoft Word. The Visual Basic (VB) code associated with this hidden document — now enabled by default, of course — dropped and executed a malicious HTML application (HTA) containing a backdoor named "HatVibe."

The purpose of HatVibe is to receive and execute code from a remote server. Though Sekoia couldn't identify the payloads associated with this phishing campaign, CERT-UA has previously observed HatVibe downloading and executing a more complex Python backdoor named "CherrySpy."

**What This Means for Kazakhstan and Russia**

Six weeks after researchers spotted the first VirusTotal upload associated with this campaign, on Nov. 27, Putin went on a two-day state visit to the country he deemed Russia's "true ally," Kazakhstan. He and Kazakhstan's president, Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, used the opportunity afforded by the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) summit to discuss various areas for economic partnership — particularly around the energy sector — and signed agreements over energy, education, and transportation.

"Central Asia is a real point of interest for Russian influence," Maxime Arquillière, senior CTI analyst at Sekoia TDR explains. "We know that Kazakhstan is a close ally, but since the beginning of the Ukraine war, Kazakhstan has distanced itself a little bit from Russia, trying to develop new connections with both Western states and also China."

Kazakhstan's centrality in the Asian continent positions it nicely as a trade bridge between China and Europe, particularly while Ukraine and Russia are consumed by war. And as Sekoia notes in its blog, the country's gradually broadening geopolitical ties are evident in recent agreements with Mongolia and Afghanistan's new Taliban government, and, most notably, its balanced position on the war in Ukraine — supporting Ukraine's right to territorial integrity without outright condemning Russia's invasion.

This latest cyber campaign, then, fits neatly into Russia's broader initiatives with regard to its Central Asian neighbor. Sekoia identified 11 lure documents in all, each one legitimate and likely having originated with Kazakhstan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, pertaining to diplomatic business between Kazakhstan and potential partner nations.

Exactly how the threat actor obtained these documents is not known. They include, for example:

*   Letters from Kazakhstan's embassies in Afghanistan and Belgium, regarding diplomatic and economic developments.
    
*   A draft of a joint statement between Germany and Central Asian states, following a Sept. 16, 2024, summit in Astana.
    
*   Administrative reports and briefings on the Kazakh president's visits to Mongolia and New York.
    

"It's really coherent with the \[need for\] Russian intelligence to conduct this kind of cyber espionage, to know about the strategic interests between Kazakhstan and European states," Arquillière says.

**About the Author**

Nate Nelson is a writer based in New York City. He formerly worked as a reporter at Threatpost, and wrote "Malicious Life," an award-winning Top 20 tech podcast on Apple and Spotify. Outside of Dark Reading, he also co-hosts "The Industrial Security Podcast."

Russian APT Phishes Kazakh Gov't for Strategic Intel

Seven system recovery programs contained what amounted to a backdoor for injecting any untrusted file into the system startup process.

Source: Ognyan Yosifov via Alamy Stock Photo

A vulnerability in trusted system recovery programs could allow privileged attackers to inject malware directly into the system startup process in Unified Extensible Firmware Interface (UEFI) devices.

Seven real-time recovery products — Howyar SysReturn, Greenware GreenGuard, Radix SmartRecovery, Sanfong EZ-back System, WASAY eRecoveryRX, CES NeoImpact, and SignalComputer HDD King — all make use of "reloader.efi," the Microsoft-signed Extensible Firmware Interface (EFI) file at issue.

The problem, ESET explains in a new report, is that reloader.efi uses a custom loader that enables the application to load even unsigned binaries during the boot process. In essence, it's a backdoor for sneaking any kind of file into a system's startup, past UEFI Secure Boot. The issue has been assigned CVE-2024-7344, and earned a "medium" 6.5 Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) rating, as it requires administrator privileges to exploit.

**Backdoor to the UEFI Boot Process**

The standard way to load, prepare, and execute UEFI images in system memory is with the autological LoadImage and StartImage functions. The Microsoft-approved "reloader" application goes its own way, using a custom mechanism that allows it to load any binary, trusted or otherwise, at startup.

"Maybe it's a lack of secure coding awareness," Martin Smolár, malware researcher at ESET, guesses of the developers' motives in implementing the custom loader. "Or maybe it's because they found it convenient to create such a functionality. Because when a developer makes a change \[to a signed program\] they need to send it to Microsoft to get it re-signed. This means that they don't need to every time they create a new update or something like that."

Reloader.efi loads arbitrary binaries from a specific, encrypted file, "cloak.dat." When ESET decrypted cloak.dat, it found that it contained an unsigned executable primarily designed for classroom environments. "Its core function is to provide real-time system recovery, ensuring that students from different classes can work in a teacher-predefined computer environment within shared computer labs," Smolár says, though he adds that the same component might be used in other settings, like public Internet cafes. The larger point is that the unsigned executable is run during the startup process, completely bypassing UEFI Secure Boot checks.

This odd classroom recovery software is perfectly honest, but an attacker could easily swap it out for something worse. If they could just get a hold of administrator privileges on a targeted machine, an attacker could access the EFI system partition (ESP) and substitute their own malicious file in place of cloak.dat. Then all they'd need is a quick system reboot to drop any malicious file they wished into the startup process.

**Why UEFI Bugs Are So Bad**

UEFI is a kind of sacred space — a bridge between firmware and operating system, allowing a machine to boot up in the first place.

Any malware that invades this space will earn a dogged persistence through reboots, by reserving its own spot in the startup process. Security programs have a harder time detecting malware at such a low level of the system. Even more importantly, by loading first, UEFI malware will simply have a head start over those security checks that it aims to avoid. Malware authors take advantage of this order of operations by designing UEFI bootkits that can hook into security protocols, and undermine critical security mechanisms like UEFI Secure Boot or HVCI (Hypervisor-Protected Code Integrity), Windows' technology for blocking unsigned code in the kernel.

To ensure that none of this can happen, the UEFI Boot Manager verifies every boot application binary against two lists: "db," which includes all signed and trusted programs, and "dbx," including all forbidden programs. But when a vulnerable binary is signed by Microsoft, the matter is moot.

Microsoft maintains a list of requirements for signing UEFI binaries, but the process is a bit obscure, Smolár says. "I don't know if it involves only running through this list of requirements, or if there are some other activities involved, like manual binary reviews where they look for not necessarily malicious, but insecure behavior," he says.

Microsoft has previously alluded to UEFI binaries being "approved through manual review." In response to an inquiry from Dark Reading, a Microsoft spokesperson provided the following clarification:

"Our process is designed to meet the evolving standard for analysis of third-party binary code, while ensuring effective scalability across our vast ecosystem. It begins with vetting and analysis with the partner, understanding the components they are requesting to be signed, and aspects of the design and functionality that may require additional security measures. Submissions are run through automated security analysis and are manually reviewed through a rigorous process. As a result, we may require additional security reviews, investigations with the submitting partner, or other mitigations. We remain committed to evolving our vetting process to better the security of our ecosystem as we operate within this ever-changing threat landscape."

ESET first discovered CVE-2024-7344 in July 2024. Since then, all vulnerable applications have been fixed, and Microsoft revoked the old, vulnerable binaries in its Jan. 14, 2025, Patch Tuesday update.

**About the Author**

Nate Nelson is a writer based in New York City. He formerly worked as a reporter at Threatpost, and wrote "Malicious Life," an award-winning Top 20 tech podcast on Apple and Spotify. Outside of Dark Reading, he also co-hosts "The Industrial Security Podcast."

Trusted Apps Sneak a Bug Into the UEFI Boot Process

Cybersecurity researchers have detailed an attack that involved a threat actor utilizing a Python-based backdoor to maintain persistent access to compromised endpoints and then leveraged this access to deploy the RansomHub ransomware throughout the target network.
According to GuidePoint Security, initial access is said to have been facilitated by means of a JavaScript malware downloaded named

Tag

#backdoor