« Welcome!
New rogues from well known domain »

Malware armoring is now the norm. :’(

April 14th, 2008

Traditionally, we have seen advanced behavior in malware trickle down from the top tier threats to the more common samples. One such disturbing trend is armoring. This is when malware actively defends itself against removal and analysis. This can be achieved in many different ways and we often use the less subtle of these traits as a quick method of confirming infection.  It is obvious that a system is infected with malware, if the user suddenly finds he cannot run common tools, such as the registry editor, or the task manager.

We now routinely encounter samples that go one step further, preventing common code analysis tools such as ollydbg, or IDApro from running, or executing a different payload altogether. This is an effort on the part of the bad guys to delay analysis for as long as possible.  It also forces the development of expensive in-house tools to take malware apart.

Most security analyst use virtualization in one form or another as part of their day to day operations. Launching samples inside of a guest virtual machine, running on a host computer is much faster than actually infecting a real computer. You don’t have to re-image your machine once the malware has been scrutinized, simply reset the image. This makes virtual machines an ideally suited testing environment. The malware authors have become aware of this, and are now implementing methods in which malcode will actually verify if it in a virtual environment before executing.

 As this trend gradually becomes the norm, we are seeing 3rd party software, that offer anti-virtualization armoring techniques for the less skilled attackers.  

 

What was once reserved for advanced threats has now become the norm. It is disheartening to see how rapidly this occured. These new capabilities do have the strange side effect of making the use of virtualization safer, from an end user’s perspective, as most of the malware will assume it is in this environment for dissection purposes, and thus refuse to execute.

Jean Taggart

    This entry was posted on Monday, April 14th, 2008 at 9:13 am and is filed under Malware Trends. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

    Comments:

    • (0) comments
    • |
    • Add your comments




RSS feed to this site Twitter Linkedin YouTube Channel

 

RSS feed to this site Jerome Segura is a Security Analyst working at ParetoLogic.

You can contact him at:
MalwareDiaries Email

 

Pages

  • Live Malware Map
  • VB2009 pictures
  • Zheng™ Technology
  • About
  • Contact Us



Security Software

  • XoftSpySE Anti-Spyware
  • Anti-Virus PLUS
  • Privacy Controls



Malware Top 10

  • Koobface Worm
  • DNS Changer Trojan
  • Fake Alert Trojan
  • Windows System Suite
  • Smart Protector
  • Home Antivirus 2010
  • PC Antispyware 2010
  • System Security
  • AVCare
  • Perfect Defender 2009



Archives

  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008



Categories

  • Adware (1)
  • Banker Trojans (3)
  • Botnets (2)
  • Conferences (4)
  • DDos (1)
  • Exploits (33)
  • Fake codecs (30)
  • IM threats (1)
  • Interviews (5)
  • Keyloggers (1)
  • Mac security (15)
  • Malware Trends (67)
  • Phishing (7)
  • Podcast (1)
  • ransomware (1)
  • Research (33)
  • Rogue software (47)
  • Rootkits (2)
  • scams (3)
  • Social Networking (4)
  • Uncategorized (110)
  • Wireless Security (1)
  • world map (1)



 
 
 

© 2009 ParetoLogic Inc.