-----Original Message----- From: Marc Maiffret [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 10:48 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: CodeRed: the next generation The following is a description of a "variant" "Code Red" worm that we have found to be in the wild. Sorry for the rough content but we thought it would be best to get this information out sooner and worry about pretty text formating later ;-] ---------------------- In this text, we will be refering to the original "Code Red" worm as CRv1 and the second generation "Code Red" worm as CRv2. This does not preclude further generations/varioations still in the wild, it is just an analysis of the worms we have access to. This information is not currently public. Well, sort of is (we published the disassembly of CRv1, so CRv1 targeting info may be known), but the existance of CRv2 with different targeting has not been verified until now as far as we know. For the evidence surrounding the impetus for this second worm search, please examine Stuart Staniford's ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) excellent statistical analysis of worm hit data. The CRv2 worm has the following charecteristics: second:milisecond randomness added to ip selection process removal of web page hack display (no notice to the end users via a defaced page) All other parts of the worm are the same. (still attacks whitehouse.gov (but the IP address has been blackholed), has time limits/definitions of attack, notworm lysine) The worst part about this means that our original tracking methodology (sensors early in the sequence) is no longer accurate, since CRv2 infected hosts do not contact early hosts, nor reliably contact any point (other than the blackholed IP address that use to point to whitehouse.gov). This means that potentially ALL(ie: global, coprehensive) ids/logs data must be organized and sorted to find infected hosts. The Differences: It has 13 or so pertient bytes changed, adding a time based randomness factor and disabling page defacement. The code had been there all along. It had intentially (we must assume) been disabled in CRv1 , then reenabled near the end of the cycle. There has been discussion that this was a natural progression of the worm code, however, we do not beleive this is the case. From analsysis of CRv1, there seems to be no distinct way to shift the nessecary bytes to generate CRv2. Hence, it is my belief that this is a modified worm, rereleased. It has been posited that the CRv1 was a target aqusition mechanism, gathering data on infectable hosts to gain a high initital base for the following CRv2 infection. The Ip Selection Process: We will display the effecive CRv1(sequence), and the effective CRv2(timebased) ip selection processes. This is a one byte change, at offset 9C2. it changes the storage of some time based computations that were performed in CRv1 but discarded. The new byte changes the storage location from EBP-1B0( a general purpose holder stack var) to EBP - 18C(the location of the ip). This means that the timevars are actively used in CRv2, while being discarded in CRv1. These are the targeting algorithms(complete, as far as we can discern) that are the asm in the CRv1 worm and also in the CRv2 worm. Seeding the "PRNG" for these examples seed is used for ip through the first iteration of the connect loop. the seed does not change between CRv1 and CRv2, but each thread in the worm has a mildly different seed. seed = threadcount(based on 1) * 50F0668D; CRv1: The ipselection process in CRv1 is a simple sequence generator. This caused the early sequences that we noticed and refered to in our (eEye's) initital warning advisory: ip = (ip * 0x0CF3383) + 0x76BFE53; CRv2: The ipselection process in CRs2 is signifigantly more complex. It takes use of time and a whole lot more input operations. In the following secmsec is the DWORD pair of seconds and mseconds returned from GetSystemTime ip = (ip + secmsec*secmsec*0x0CD59E3 + secmsec*0x1E1B9) * 0x0CF3383 + 0x76BFE53 Other Details: Coincidentally, if this isn't general public knowledge, the worm is smart enough to avoid attacking the 127.x.x.x and 224.x.x.x subnets using the following logic after setting the ip. if( (ip & 0xFF == 0x7f) || (ip & 0xFF == 0xE0) )ip +=0x20DA9; the Hacked Page: The second difference between CRv1 and CRv2 is that CRv2 does not deface the webpage of an infected system. It does this by having 12 bytes different from CRv1. When TcpSockSend is hooked(this still happens), CRv2 points this to a basic redirect that performs harmless actions and returns without actually changing any content. Crv1 pointed to a replacement, CRv2 points to basically a donothing function. what is happeinging is that the label "PADDING_BYTES" actually is padding bytes in CRv1(the code does not disassemble to any sane code). CRv1: We've used ida's data feature to show the "padding data" as dwords(instead of a bunch of bytes) CD4 - EB F8 jmp short near ptr HOOK_FAKE_TCPSOCKSEND+4 ; Jump CD6 - 22 6E 84 32 PADDING_BYTES dd 32846E22h CDA - 03 75 B3 CA dd 0CAB37503h CDE - 5A 04 56 34 dd 3456045Ah CE2 - 12 B8 78 56 dd 5678B812h CE6 - 34 12 B8 78 dd 78B81234h CEA - 56 34 dw 3456h CEC - 12 db 12h ; the code at CD4 jumps to the hooked TcpSockSend, sending the hacked Webpage. CRv2: what happens is that the CRv2 changes this, to: CD4 - B8 78 56 34 12 mov eax,12345678h CD9 - B8 78 56 34 12 mov eax,12345678h CDE - B8 78 56 34 12 mov eax,12345678h CE3 - B8 78 56 34 12 mov eax,12345678h CE8 - B8 78 56 34 12 mov eax,12345678h basically doing nothing. it then executes a chunk of code down at the below this: CED - 58 pop eax CEE - 50 push eax CEF - 8B BD 68 FE FF FF mov edi,[ebp-198h] CF5 - 89 47 F2 mov [edi-0Eh], eax CF8 - C3 retn This code basically replaces eax, saves it again(didn't make sense to me in the CRv1 context, but does here), sets edi to the data pointer, and resets a quick bit of code pointing to a ISAPI data struct that was on the stack beforehand. This secodn bit of code is called at the start of the RVA processing, so all operations are already set by the time it gets here, making this code just a repeat. CRv2 fufills numerous questions that we had noticed in early analysis of CRv1, such as the nessecity of the self modifying code in CRv1. although CRv1 did modify it's own code, it didn't ever really touch the modified code, CRv2 makes use of this feature to implement the bypass. Credits: ============= Stuart Staniford Nick FitzGerald Vern Paxson Ryan Russel Signed, Ryan Permeh eEye Digital Security Team http://www.eEye.com/Retina -Network Security Scanner http://www.eEye.com/Iris -Network Traffic Analyzer ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Delivery co-sponsored by Trend Micro ============================================================================ TREND MICRO REAL-TIME VIRUS ALERTS If you would like to know about a virus outbreak before CNN and ZDNet get Trend Micro Virus Info Feed FREE. Simply copy and paste a small piece of code to give your visitors a real-time top 10 list and the latest virus advisories. Setup takes just 10 minutes and requires no server-side code on your Web site. All content is updated automatically from Trend Micro's Web site. http://www.antivirus.com/banners/tracking.asp?si=8&bi=237&ul=/syndication/ vinfo/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=13131&t=13131 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
