Big Surprise: Chinese PUPs Deliver Backdoored Drivers

Discussion in 'malware problems & news' started by itman, Mar 21, 2017.

  1. itman

    itman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Posts:
    8,648
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    Affects all Win versions other than latest Win 10 Insider Preview builds.
    https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/big-surprise-chinese-pups-deliver-backdoored-drivers/
     
  2. Minimalist

    Minimalist Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    14,907
    Location:
    Slovenia, EU
    So it looks like this driver is signed so it can be installed?
     
  3. itman

    itman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Posts:
    8,648
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    Don't believe so. It is doing this: The first is a defeat for the Driver Signature Enforcement, a Windows security feature that lets users install digitally signed drivers only from trusted software developers. I have already personally seen one instance of this happening on a Win 10 x64 PC although couldn't ID the malware source. In this instance it installed a kernel mode driver from the user temp directory which definitely is not supposed to allowed in Win 10 x64. However, Process Explorer does exactly this but its driver is signed.

    -EDIT- A bit more detail about this incident which was hideous to say the least. The malware modified the registry to load the kernel driver from User Temp directory at boot time. However, I could find no trace of the driver in User Temp or Win driver directories. Appears the malware deleted the driver after installing the backdoor. The name of the driver pointed me to a driver used in an AV vendor system utility. This implies that somehow the malware developer hijacked a valid Microsoft code signed driver. Note that Win 10 will only allow Microsoft code signed kernel drivers.

    I assume but not sure that Win 10 Secure Boot would have prevented this but that feature is N/A for Win 10 Home versions.
     
    Last edited: Mar 21, 2017
  4. Nitty Kutchie

    Nitty Kutchie Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2015
    Posts:
    160
    Last edited: Mar 21, 2017
  5. itman

    itman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Posts:
    8,648
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    This "puppy" does not use a signed driver. It is a complete bypass of driver signature enforcement:
    https://blog.malwarebytes.com/threat-analysis/2017/03/helpdetectwz-chinese-backdoor-drivers/
     
  6. itman

    itman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Posts:
    8,648
    Location:
    U.S.A.
  7. Minimalist

    Minimalist Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    14,907
    Location:
    Slovenia, EU
    Are you sure that this is a reason? 1607 has been released for more than half a year. Also in 1607 MS enforced driver signing:
    https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/wi...r-signing-changes-in-windows-10-version-1607/

    Is this only coincidence or did this break driver loading procedure?
     
  8. itman

    itman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Posts:
    8,648
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    That is what the Malwarebytes article states:
     
  9. Minimalist

    Minimalist Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    14,907
    Location:
    Slovenia, EU
    OK, thnx. So it runs on 1607.
     
  10. itman

    itman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Posts:
    8,648
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    Here's another DSE bypass: http://www.kernelmode.info/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=3322
    -EDIT- In this case, it exploited the following vulnerability:
    Also from everything I gleaned from the Malwarebytes article, the driver is loaded dynamically so Secure Boot wouldn't prevent this Chinese PUP malware.
     
    Last edited: Mar 21, 2017
  11. itman

    itman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Posts:
    8,648
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    In regards to this, you omitted one important detail:
    So anyone whom upgraded to Win 10 is screwed.
     
  12. itman

    itman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Posts:
    8,648
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    Also from the Malwarebytes article, this backdoor has existed since 2013:
     
  13. Minimalist

    Minimalist Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    14,907
    Location:
    Slovenia, EU
    Yes I saw that. It seems that they are afraid of breaking systems with outdated drivers. Security wise not good decision, but it will probably save their users from a lot of headache.
     
  14. boredog

    boredog Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2015
    Posts:
    2,499
    Ok does this mean they found AV programs on VT? Like those listed here on Wilders that some people here use?

    I see the POC code for loading an unsigned drive in in the Malwarebytes blog.

    The exe in the code is flagged on VT bye 4.
     
    Last edited: Mar 21, 2017
  15. itman

    itman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Posts:
    8,648
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    Don't know what you exactly mean. The Malwarebytes article states author found sigs., samples, or both for previous Chinese apps using almost identical drivers as the current malware. He never mentioned by name the apps or any other ID data on them at VT.
    Give it a shot:cautious: Good test for Cylance .................
     
  16. boredog

    boredog Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2015
    Posts:
    2,499
    I will in a VM. I don't think it is VM aware and am running latest insider update. Cylance quarantines the file right after they are unzipped. It did not make a peep on this file.
     
  17. itman

    itman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Posts:
    8,648
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    The Chinese malware is.

    Don't know about the Githib POC code though.
     
  18. boredog

    boredog Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2015
    Posts:
    2,499
    My main test will see if my Windows version allows it.
     
  19. boredog

    boredog Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2015
    Posts:
    2,499
    Ok screen is what I get from the POC.
     

    Attached Files:

  20. itman

    itman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Posts:
    8,648
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    Appears SmartScreen is blocking the POC code by blacklisting its hash. You will have to disable native SS protection in Win 10 to test.
     
  21. boredog

    boredog Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2015
    Posts:
    2,499
    Appguard and Voodoo.
     

    Attached Files:

  22. itman

    itman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Posts:
    8,648
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    Appguard is blocking the "payload" from executing as it should.

    Not impressed with the VoodooShield alert. All it says is it has been previously detected by blacklisting. You already knew that from the SmartScreen alert.
     
  23. Nitty Kutchie

    Nitty Kutchie Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2015
    Posts:
    160
  24. boredog

    boredog Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2015
    Posts:
    2,499
    Crowdstrike thought it was 81 % malicious. yup already knew about the VMProtect.
     
  25. boredog

    boredog Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2015
    Posts:
    2,499
    Voodoo did suggest to block the file.
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice