Compromise

Botnet activity warning

A bit of advice from the folks at the CBL, posted with permission and some light editing. I’ve been seeing some folks report longer connection times at some places, and this might explain some of it. It’s certainly possible, even likely, that the large ISPs are getting a lot of this kind of traffic.

A botnet, likely a variant of cutwail, has been for the past several years been specializing in using stolen credentials, doing port 25/587 SMTP AUTH connections to the spoof’d users server, and attempting to relay thru the connection to elsewhere. They will also, in some cases, attempt to log into the MX IP using a brute force attack against the email address. Other miscreants try the same thing with IMAP or POP or even SMTPS.
If they manage to compromise an email account, they use the account to send spam. For corporate accounts they can steal employee identities, request wire transfers, and send out corporately authenticated spam. If they get it, game over, the whole account is compromised and they can and do wreak havoc.
This has been going on for a couple of years, and now is the largest volume of spam from botnets. Cutwail is not the only botnet doing AUTH attacks, but appears to be the most prolific. Attacking POP and IMAP appears to be more recent, and is more related to spear-phishing (spamming executives) and other bad things.
In the last month or two, the behavior has changed a bit. The infections are trying to establish as many connections simultaneously as it can get away with. This is similar behavior to ancient or unpatched versions of qmail. This is swamping some servers by tying up a significant number (or even all) of the TCP sockets available.
The CBL is recommending that folks check their mail servers. If the mail server has a “simultaneous connection per IP limit”, it should be set to some limited number. If it’s not set then set it. Otherwise, your server is at risk for being unable to handle real mail. Make sure your IMAP and POP are secured as well as they are being targeted, too.
The XBL can also help with this. But securing your server is the first step.

Meltdown & Spectre, Oh My

If you follow any infosec sources you’ve probably already heard a lot about Meltdown and Spectre, Kaiser and KPTI. If not, you’ve probably seen headlines like Major flaw in millions of Intel chips revealed or Intel sells off for a second day as massive security exploit shakes the stock.

What is it?
These are all about a cluster of related security issues that exploit features shared by almost all modern, high performance processors. The technical details of how they work are fascinating if you have a background in CPU architecture but the impact is pretty simple: they allow programs to read from memory that they’re not supposed to be able to read.
That might mean that a program running as a normal user can read kernel memory, allowing a malicious program to steal passwords, authentication cookies or even the entire state of the kernels random number generator, potentially allowing it to compromise encryption.
Or it might mean a program running on a virtual machine being able to escape from the sandbox the virtual machine’s hypervisor keeps it in and reading memory of other virtual machines that are running on the same hardware. A malicious user could sign up for a cloud service, such as Amazon EC2 Google Code Engine or Microsoft Azure, repeatedly create temporary virtual machines and grovel through all the other virtual machines running on the same hardware to steal, login credentials or TLS private keys.
Or it might mean a malicious piece of javascript running in a browser from a hostile website or a malicious banner ad being able to steal secrets and credentials not just from your web browser, but from any other software running on your laptop.
It’s pretty bad.
Meltdown and Spectre
One variant has been given the snappy name Meltdown. It (mostly) affects Intel CPUs, and is trivial to exploit reliably by unskilled skript kiddies. It can be mitigated at the operating system level, and all major operating system vendors are doing so, but that mitigation will have significant impact on performance – perhaps 20% slower for common workloads.
The other variant has been named Spectre. It’s more subtle, relying on measuring how long it takes to run carefully crafted code. Whether the code is fast or slow tells the malicious actor whether a particular bit of forbidden memory is zero or one, allowing them to step through reading everything they want. This is likely to be harder to exploit reliably, but is also going to be much harder to mitigate reliably in software (I’ve seen some speculation that it might be impossible to mitigate – I’m pretty sure that’s not true, but it is going to be difficult to do so reliably and will probably have significant performance impact). It affects pretty much everything, including AMD processors (despite what their PR flacks would like you to believe).
What should you do

As a typical end user you should apply your security patches as normal to mitigate Meltdown. macOS was patched on December 6th, the Windows kernel has mitigation in place. The latest release candidate of the Linux kernel has mitigation patches in place, which’ll presumably trickle out to various distributions over the next few days.
You should also update your browser. One nasty vector Spectre can use is timing attacks from malicious javascript. Chrome and Firefox have partial mitigation in their mainline development, and Microsoft have announced fixes for IE11 and Edge.
Keep updating your ‘phones. At least some of the ARM chips in iPhone and Android are vulnerable, and the more constrained ‘phone environment may make targeted attacks more likely.
If you’re using any virtual machines or cloud hosted services then your provider has probably already done rolling reboots so they can patch their hypervisors to mitigate Meltdown. You’ll still need to update your kernel yourself, to protect against attacks within your machine, even though your provider has patched their hypervisors.
Performance (and Email)
The operating system level mitigation for Meltdown works by having the CPU throw away a bunch of information every time the thread of execution goes from the kernel back to the application. Most common applications will switch between kernel code and application code a lot so this has a significant performance impact.
Initial tests with PostgreSQL show slowdowns as bad as 23%, but more realistic workloads look to be maybe 5-15% slower, depending on the workload and the hardware features available.
I wondered whether there’d be much impact on network service performance, so I set up a test network with a couple of mailservers running latest release candidates of the Linux kernel. I sent mail from one to the other, using postfix, smtp-source and smtp-sink – smtp-source and -sink are test tools distributed with postfix that make it easy to send mail or to receive and discard mail.
I wasn’t really expecting to find any performance impact for something that was likely network limited, but ran some tests anyway, slinging a few million emails from one machine to the other and turning mitigation on and off on the sender and receiver. There wasn’t any performance impact that I could measure – if it’s there it was well below the noise floor.
So you’ll probably see slight performance degradation for some things, especially disk-heavy workloads, but nothing to worry too much about.

Email address as identity

A few months ago I was talking about different mailbox tools and mentioned email addresses are the keys to our online identity. They are, email addresses are the magic key that authenticates us and opens access to different accounts.
The bad guys know this too. The Justice department recently announced a plea deal related to compromised email accounts. The individual in question gained access to faculty, staff and student email accounts. They then used access to these accounts to access Facebook, iCloud, Google, LinkedIn and Yahoo accounts.
https://twitter.com/pwnallthethings/status/897930523120738304
https://twitter.com/pwnallthethings/status/897931383431061504
https://twitter.com/pwnallthethings/status/897932050111406081
Mediapost published an article this week referencing a survey performed at this year’s BlackHat conference.

Anatomy of a successful phishing attempt

Earlier this year the Exploratorium was the victim of a phishing attack. They’ve posted an article on what happened and how they discovered and dealt with the issue.
But they didn’t just report on the attack, they dissected it. And, as is appropriate for a organization with a mission of education, they mapped out what they discovered during the investigation.

There are a couple of things that stand out to me about this attack. One is that of the more interesting pieces to me is that there was a delay between the compromise and the start of the attack. The Exploratorium calls it “the pivot” and describes it as the hacker deciding what to do next. The second is that the phisher actively interacted with the victim’s account. All new mail was sent to the trash automatically so she wouldn’t see incoming mail. Some mail was actively replied to so more people would click on the message. The phisher took steps to retain access to the account for as long as possible.
One thing that the Exploratorium didn’t see was any actual access to Exploratorium files or information. That may be because the Exploratorium itself wasn’t the target. Once a phisher / hacker has access to the email account, they have access to almost everything in your online life: calendars, bank accounts, credit accounts, the list goes on. Email addresses are our online identity and getting access to the address can open access to so much more.
Quite frankly it can happen to any of us. Earlier this week we received a phishing message that looked very plausible. It came from a law firm, mentioned a subpoena and even had an attachment personalized to our company. The attachment wasn’t opened so we were fine, but I can see how that kind of email might trick someone into getting infected.
We all need to be careful online. Email is a wonderful thing, but it’s insecure. It’s a great way for criminals to get into our space and wreck havoc on our computers and our lives.

August 2016: The Month in Email

August was a busy month for both Word to the Wise and the larger world of email infrastructure.

A significant subscription attack targeted .gov addresses, ESPs and over a hundred other industry targets. I wrote about it as it began, and Spamhaus chief executive Steve Linford weighed in in our comments thread. As it continued, we worked with M³AAWG and other industry leaders to share data and coordinate efforts to help senders recover from the attack.
In the aftermath, we wrote several posts about abuse, blocklists, how the industry handles these attacks currently, and how we might address these issues going forward. And obviously this has been on my mind before this attack — I posted about ongoing problems with internet security, how open subscription forms contribute to the problem, and other ways that companies inadvertently support phishing operations.
I posted about the history of email, and recounted some of my earliest experiences, when I had a .bitnet and a .gov address. Did you use email before SMTP? Before email clients? I’d be curious to hear your stories.
Speaking of email clients, I did two posts about how mail gets displayed to the end user: Gmail is displaying authentication results, which should provide end users with a bit more transparency about how authentication is used to deliver or block messages, and Microsoft is partnering with Litmus to improve some of the display issues people face using Outlook. These are both notable — if this is not your first time reading this blog, you know about my constant refrain that delivery is a function of sending people mail they want to engage with. If the mail is properly formatted and displayed, and people have a high degree of confidence that it’s been sent from someone they want to get mail from, that goes a long way towards improving engagement in the channel.
On that note, I spoke at length with Derek Harding about how marketers might change their thinking on deliverability, and he wrote that up for ClickZ. I also participated in the creation of Adobe’s excellent Teaching the Email Marketer How to Fish document (no, not phish…).
Steve was very busy behind the scenes this month thinking about abuse-related topics in light of the SBL issues, but he wrote up a quick post about the Traffic Light Protocol, which is used to denote sensitive information as it is shared.
Finally, for my Ask Laura column this month, I answered questions about delivery and engagement metrics and about permissions with purchased lists. As always, if you have a general question about email delivery, send it along and I’ll consider it for the column.

Ashley Madison Compromise

Last month Brian Krebs reported that the Ashley Madison database was compromised. Ashley Madison is a dating site that targets married folks who are looking to have affairs. Needless to say, there is a lot of risk for users if their data is found on the released data. Today what is supposedly the Ashley Madison data was released.
The release of this data can have some significant impacts on the site members. Of course there’s the problem of credit card numbers being stolen, but that’s something most of us have to deal with on a regular basis. But there can also be significant relationship repercussions if/when a spouse discovers that their partner has registered on a site to have affairs.
When I first heard of the compromise I wondered if they had my data. You see, they have one of my spamtraps on their unsubscribe list. It just so happened that I visited an unsubscribe link, hosted by Ashley Madison (http://unsub.ashleymadison.com/?ref=2). This was during the time when I decided to unsubscribe from all the spam coming into one of my spamtraps. Is my email address going to be a part of this data dump? If my email address is there, what name do they have associated with it? This is the trap that gets mail addressed to multiple other people. Maybe it’s my email address but their name. Are they at risk for relationship problems or legal problems due to my attempt to unsubscribe?
Of course, Ashley Madison had no incentive to make sure their data was correct. In fact, they were sued for faking data to entice paying members. How much of the released data is false and will there be real harm due to that?
I expect in the next few days someone (or multiple someones) will put up a website where those of us who are curious can search the data. I just hope that people realize how much of the data is likely to be false. Even Arstechnica cautions readers from jumping to conclusions.

Compromises and phishing and email

Earlier this month, Sendgrid reported that a customer account was compromised and used for phishing. At the time Sendgrid thought that it was only a single compromise. However, they did undertake a full investigation to make sure that their systems were secure.
Today they released more information about the compromise. It wasn’t simply a customer account, a Sendgrid employee’s credentials were hacked. These credentials allowed the criminals to access customer data, and mailing lists. Sendgrid has a blog post listing things customers should do and describing the changes they’re making to their systems.
Last month it was Mandrill. Today it’s Sendgrid. It could be anyone tomorrow.
Security is hard, there’s no question about it. Users have to have access. Data has to be transferred. Every user, every API, every open port is a way for a bad actor to attempt access.
While it wasn’t said directly in the Sendgrid post, it’s highly likely that the employee compromise was through email. Most compromises go back to a phish or virus email that lets the attacker access the recipient’s computer. Users must be ever vigilant.
We, the email industry, haven’t made it easy for users to be vigilant. Just this weekend my best friend contacted me asking if the email she received from her bank was a phishing email. She’s smart and she’s vigilant, and she still called the number in the email and started the process without verifying that it was really from the bank. She hung up in the transaction and then contacted me to verify the email.
She sent me headers, and there was a valid DMARC record. But, before I could tell her it wasn’t a phishing email, I had to go check the whois record for the domain in question to make sure it was the bank. It could have been a DMARC authenticated email, but not from the bank. The whois records did check out, and the mail got the all clear.
There’s no way normal people can do all this checking on every email. I can’t do it, I rely on my tagged addresses to verify the mail is legitimate. If the mail comes into an address I didn’t give the sender, then it’s not legitimate – no matter what DMARC or any other type of authentication tells me. But most people don’t have access to tagged or disposable addresses.
I don’t know what the answers are. We really can’t expect people to always be vigilant and not fall for phishing. We’re just not all present and vigilant every minute of every day.
For all of you who are going to tell me that every domain should just publish a p=reject statement I’ll point out DMARC doesn’t solve the phishing problem. As many of us predicted, phishers just move to cousin and look alike domains. DMARC may protect citi.com, but citimarketingemail.com or citi.phisher.com isn’t.
We’ve got to do better, though. We’ve got to protect our own data and our customer’s data better. Email is the gateway and that means that ESPs, with their good reputations and authentication, are prime targets for criminals.

Arrests in ESP data breach

The FBI announced today arrests of three people in the ESP data breaches from the compromises of various ESPs a few years ago.
Krebs on Security: Feds Indict Three in 2011 Epsilon Hack
Department of Justice: Three Defendants Charged with One of the Largest Reported Data Breaches in U.S. History
After stealing over a billion addresses from 8 ESPs, the lists were monetized through affiliate marketing. The owner of the affiliate program was one of the people arrested.
More on Monday.

Dealing with compromised user accounts

M³AAWG is on a roll lately with published documents. They recently released the Compromised User ID Best Practices (pdf link).

AOL compromise

Lots of reports today of a security problem at AOL where accounts are sending spam, or are being spoofed in spam runs or something. Details are hazy, but there seems to be quite a bit of noise surrounding this incident. AOL hasn’t provided any information as of yet as to what is going on.

People are your weakest link

Social engineering is a long standing way to compromise security. Chunkhost reports today that they discovered accounts being compromised through social engineering of Sendgrid support. While the compromise did not work it was a close call. The only thing that saved the targeted customers was their implementation of 2 factor authentication.
We know many of our customers individually and personally, and are still careful about changing contact addresses and passwords. With larger customer bases, it’s vital that every person in the change follow security processes.

Target breach started from email

According to Brian Krebs the compromise of Target’s POS system probably originated with a phishing attack against one of Target’s vendors. This attack compromised credentials of the HVAC vendor and possibly allowed the hackers entrance into Target’s systems.
Interestingly, Brian mentions Ariba, a company I’ve been forced to deal by a large customer of ours. I’m not sure if there really is an attack vector where a vendor can get access through Ariba to the internal systems of the customers. However, my experience with Ariba has been frustrating and problematic, so I’ll be happy to believe their security is as broken as their email.
Email is a great way to interact with people and companies. It’s great for growing communities and businesses. But it is also a way for attackers to get access to your computer and the websites you interact with. Protect yourself, and your company, by running security software. And, please, don’t open attachments or click on links in emails and provide usernames and passwords.

Michele Bachmann Announces She's Done

U.S. Representative Michele Bachmann (R-Minnesota) announced today that she’s not going to seek re-election in 2014.
Last time around, the race between her and Minnesota businessman Jim Graves was very close. Mr. Graves lost by a very narrow margin. Graves had already announced his intention to take on Ms. Bachmann again next year. As the news came out on Bachmann’s decision, both camps made it clear that they think their person would have won the rematch. Just yesterday, Minnesota Public Radio explained that Graves seemed to be facing “an uphill battle vs. Bachmann.” At the same time, recent polling by the Graves campaign showed him slightly ahead of Bachmann. The race certainly would have been very close, but it was looking to be a scenario much like last time around, which, at the end of the day, Ms. Bachmann did end up winning.
So if she’s got at least a fair shake at winning, why wouldn’t she take it all the way? Well, that’s what brings us to why I’m writing about this here. It seems that Bachmann’s failed 2012 presidential campaign was accused of stealing the email list of Network of Iowa Christian Home Educators (NICHE) back in 2011. In a bit of an attempt to re-write history, they later came to an after-the-fact settlement to label the action a “rental” and NICHE received a $2,000 payment from the Bachmann campaign.
And that’s just one of multiple ethics issues Minnesota’s face of the Tea Party is facing. In March, her attorney confirmed that Bachmann is under investigation by the Office of Congressional Ethics for alleged misuse of campaign funds. One of her own 2012 presidential campaign staffers, Peter Waldron, filed a complaint that Ms. Bachmann’s campaign improperly used leadership PAC funds to pay campaign staff. There were further allegations regarding payment of staffers and attempting to require exiting staffers to sign non-disclosure agreements prohibiting them from talking to police or attorneys. And the FBI is now said to be involved.
I’ve consulted for multiple email service providers who have told me how challenging it can be to work with political senders. At least one ESP prohibits this kind of mail outright, out of frustration with candidates regularly playing fast and loose with permission. PACs, parties, candidates and other groups seem to buy, sell or trade lists constantly, and as a result, spam complaints and blocking would often follow. Thus, it doesn’t surprise me to see Ms. Bachmann’s campaign engaging in something email list-related that they probably thought was just common usage, when the rest of us in the email community would find that use unwelcome and unethical. (And it’s not just her party guilty of this kind of thing.)

Password security

Many of us have lots of accounts on various networking sites, but how much attention do we pay to password security?
If you haven’t heard, someone managed to compromise the Associated Press’ twitter account today. Not only was the account compromised, but they put out a fake tweet claiming that there were explosions at the White House and President Obama was injured.
A funny prank? Maybe. But tweets like this have a real world effect. For instance, the stock market plunged 140 points after the initial reports, rebounding when people realized it wasn’t true.
It’s not clear how the AP twitter password was compromised. There are many possibilities including classic social engineering through to compromised machines inside AP with password sniffers on them.
The lesson here is that we’re all targets, even ‘soft’ seeming targets like social media accounts. Practice safe computing.

Services, abuse and bears

A couple weeks ago I wrote a post about handling abuse complaints. As a bit of a throwaway I mentioned that new companies don’t always think about how their service can be abused before releasing it on the unsuspecting internet.
Today’s blog post by Margot Romary at the Return Path In the Know blog reminds me that it’s not always new companies that don’t think about abuse potential before launching services.

Get a helmet

There’s been a lot of interesting reaction to Steve’s security post yesterday. A lot of people seem upset that we have pointed out one of the ways that ESPs may be getting compromised. Complaints range from the message being overly simplistic, through to complaints that we just don’t understand how much of an issue security is, through to complaints that we’re not pointing out that some ESPs actually are secure. Some people have even provided counter examples of how simple it is to compromise any company, so why are we picking on ESPs.
Security is a problem any company faces. Some industries are bigger targets than others, and ESPs have really jumped up the target list. ESPs are getting lists stolen. ESPs are getting reputations stolen.
There’s one ESP I know for a fact that has lost multiple customer lists 3 times. Three companies I get email from are hosted there. When all three of those tagged addresses started getting spam, the only logical assumption was that the ESP was compromised. Again. Those are companies I want to hear from, though, and I changed addresses on their sites after every breach. What’s distressing, though, is the total lack of response from either the customer or the ESP to my notices about the breaches. To be fair, the problem seems to have stopped more recently.
Silence and refusal to address an issue is a big problem. An address I gave a company on the Only Influencers list was stolen (I’m not going to say leaked because I actually trust them to not have violated their privacy policy) sometime back in early 2011. I didn’t notice right away because my spam filters were catching the mail, but eventually the spammers managed to get one into my inbox. When I saw it, I started checking and realized that address had been compromised a long time ago. I notified the company, with as much history of the address as I could. I ended my message with:

I know your customers' passwords

Go to your ESP customer login page and use “View Source” to look at the HTML (under “Page” on Internet Explorer, “Tools->Web Developer” on Firefox, and “View” on Safari).
Go on, I’ll wait.
Search for the word autocomplete. If it says something like autocomplete=”off” then your web developers have already thought about this security issue. If it doesn’t, then you might have a serious security problem.
What’s going on here? You’ve probably noticed that when you’re filling in a web form your browser will often offer to fill in data for you once you start typing. This feature is supported by most modern browsers and it’s very convenient for users – but it works by recording the contents of the form in the browser, including the username and password.
As a bad guy that’s very interesting data. I can take some off-the-shelf malware and configure it with the URLs of a bunch of ESP login pages. Then I just need to get that malware installed on your customers desktops somehow. A targeted web drive-by malware attack, maybe based on targeted hostile banner ads is one approach, but sending email to people likely to be ESP customers is probably more effective. Maybe I’ll use hostile email that infects the machine automatically, or – most likely – I’ll use a phishing attack, sending a plausible looking email with an attachment I’m hoping recipients will open.
Once the malware is installed it can rummage through the users browser files, looking for any data that matches the list of login pages I gave it. I just need to sit back and wait for the malware to phone home and give me a nicely packaged list of ESPs, usernames and passwords. Then I can steal that customer’s email lists and send my next phishing run through that ESP.
This isn’t a new issue – it’s been discussed since browsers started implementing autocompletion over a decade ago, and it’s been a best practice to include autocomplete=”off” for password fields or login forms for years.
How serious a risk is this for ESPs? Well, I looked at the customer login pages at several ESPs that have a history of being compromised and none of them are using autocomplete=”off”. I looked at several that haven’t been compromised that I know of, and they’re all using either autocomplete=”off” or a complex (and reasonably secure-looking) javascript approach to login. Correlation isn’t causation, but it’s fairly strong circumstantial evidence.
ESPs should fix this hole if they haven’t already. If any customers are upset about having to actually type in their password (really?) they can take a look at secure password management tools (e.g. 1Password, LastPass or KeePass).
Thanks to Tim at Silverpop for reminding me that this is a serious security hole that many ESPs haven’t plugged yet and pointing me at some of these resources.
More on passwords and application security tomorrow.

Browsers, security and paranoia

MAAWG is coming up and lots of us are working on documents, and presentations. One of the recent discussions is what kind of security recommendations, if any, should we be making. I posted a list of things including “Don’t browse the web with a machine running Windows.”
Another participant told me he thought my recommendation to not use a windows machine to browse the web was over the top and paranoid. It may be, but drive by malware attacks are increasing. Visiting big sites may not be enough to protect you, as hackers are compromising sites and installing malware to infect visitors to those sites. Some ad networks have also been used to spread malware.
Criminals have even figured out how to install malware on a machine from email, without the recipient having to click or open attachments.
Avoiding the internet from a machine running Windows is a security recommendation I don’t expect many people to follow, but I do not think security and anti-virus software is enough to protect people from all of the exploits out there.
Of course, there are a lot of reasons that one might be forced to use a particular browser or operating system. For instance, I was on the phone with my bank just today to ask if they supported Safari. They say they do, but there are some things that just don’t work. The customer service rep said that they recommend Internet Explorer to all their users. She then suggested I switch browsers. No thanks, I’ll deal with the broken website.
Compromises are a major threat, and criminals are spending a lot of time and money on creating ways to get past current security. No longer is “not clicking on malware” enough to protect users. When a security clearinghouse is compromised and used as a vector for a targeted attack against Google, none of us are safe. When a security company is compromised, none of us are safe.
I realize my recommendation to avoid browsing the web on a Windows based machine is more wishful thinking than practical. I also know that other browsers and operating systems will be targeted if enough people move away from currently vulnerable operating systems. And I know that a simple, offhand suggestion won’t fix the problem.
As someone who’s been online long enough to see the original Green Card spam I know that online dangers evolve. But I can’t help thinking that most of us aren’t taking the current threats seriously enough.

Is any data safe?

Today another major retailer announced their customer files were compromised. This company had clearly implemented some security that kept hackers from getting too much information. Passwords were hashed and credit card numbers were kept on a separate server, which does signal that the company designed with security in mind. Nevertheless, personal information was compromised.
Is there anyway to keep information safe if it’s accessible from the internet? Some of my uber-security conscious friends would say no. I am beginning to believe them.

Are you ready for the next attack?

ESPs are under attack and being tested. But I’m not sure much progress in handling and responding to the attacks has been made since the Return Path warning or the Epsilon compromise.
Last week a number of email marketers became aware that attacks against ESPs and senders were ongoing. The shock and surprise many people exhibited prompted my Spear Phishing post on Friday.
The first round of phishing went out on Wednesday, by Friday they were coming from a different ESP. Whether this was a compromised ESP customer or employee it doesn’t matter. ESPs should have reaction plans in place to deal with these threats.
It’s been months since the first attacks. This is more than enough time to have implemented some response to reports of attacks. Yet, many people I talked to last week had no idea what they should or could be doing to protect themselves and their customers.
Last time the attacks were publicly discussed I was frustrated with many of the “how to respond” posts because few of them seemed to address the real issue. People seemed to be pushing agendas that had nothing to do with actually fixing the security holes. There were lots of recommendations to sign all mail with DKIM, implement 2 factor authentication, deploy validation certificates on web properties, or adhere to sender’s best practices.
None of those recommendations actually addressed the gaping security hole: Humans.

First spam to Epsilon leaked address

This morning I received the first two spams to the address of mine that was compromised during the Epsilon compromise back in April. Actually, I received two of them. One was the “standard” Adobe phish email. The other was similar but referenced Limewire instead of Adobe.

Be on the lookout

I’m hearing more rumors of ESPs seeing customer accounts being compromised, similar to what happened with The Children’s Place.

Another security problem

I had hoped to move away from security blogging this week and focus on some other issues. But today I see that both CAUCE and John Levine are reporting that there is malware spam coming from a Cheetahmail customer.
Looking at what they shared, it may be that Cheetahmail has not been compromised directly. Given mail is only coming from one /29, which belongs to one customer it is possible that only the single customer account has been compromised. If that is the case, then it’s most likely one of the Cheetahmail users at the customer got infected and their Cheetahmail credentials were stolen. The spammer then gained access to the customer’s Cheetahmail account. It’s even possible that the spammer used the compromised customer account to launch the mail. If this is the case, the spammer looked exactly like the customer, so most normal controls wouldn’t have noticed this was a spammer.
This highlights the multiple vectors these criminals are using to gain access to ESPs and the mailing systems they use. They’re not just trying to compromise the ESPs, but they’re also attempting to compromise customers and access their accounts so that the spammer can steal the ESPs hard won and hard fought sending reputation.
Everyone sending mail should be taking a long, hard look at their security. Just because you’re not an ESP doesn’t mean you aren’t a target or that you can get away with lax security. You are also a target.