Kaspersky Lab: Flame And Stuxnet Virus Share Common Origin

Related info:

Flame Virus Developed By U.S. Government

Kaspersky At Cyber Security Conference: ‘It’s Not Cyber War, It’s Cyber Terrorism And I’m Afraid It’s Just The Beginning Of The Game … I’m Afraid It Will Be The End Of The World As We Know It’

Obama Ordered The Stuxnet Attack On Iran’s Nuclear Facilities – And Yes: This Is An Act Of War!

President Obama Ordered Stuxnet Attacks On Iran Nuclear Facilities

US And Israel Created Stuxnet, Lost Control Of It

Flame Super-Virus Threatening To Cripple Entire Nations Has ‘Hallmarks Of The NSA’

Diving Into Flame, Researchers Find A Link To Stuxnet (threatpost, June 11, 2012):

Researchers digging through the code of the recently discovered Flame worm say they have come across a wealth of evidence that suggests Flame and the now-famous Stuxnet worm share a common origin.

Researchers from Kaspersky Lab say that a critical module that the Flame worm used to spread is identical to a module used by Stuxnet.a, an early variant of the Stuxnet worm that began circulating in 2009, more than a year before a later variant of the worm was discovered by antivirus researchers at the Belarussian firm VirusBlokAda. The claims are the most direct, to date, that link the Flame malware, which attacked Iranian oil facilities, with Stuxnet, which is believed to have targeted Iran’s uranium-enrichment facility at Natanz. If true, they suggest a widespread and multi-year campaign of offensive cyber attacks against multiple targets within that country.

According to the Kaspersky researchers, early versions of Stuxnet were, in fact, created out of components that were part of what they refer to as the “Flame platform”. But they believe development of the two malicious programs diverged after 2009, suggesting that two different development teams may have been working independently for a single entity to create malware with specific objectives, according to Kaspersky researchers, writing on the company’s blog, Securelist.

Researchers at Kaspersky and elsewhere initially thought that Stuxnet and Flame were very different pieces of software, and that there was little evidence of a link or common ancestor.
However, there was plenty of circumstantial evidence from the start that suggested some connection. For one thing, both Stuxnet and Flame infections were concentrated in Iran and neighboring countries – an unusual pattern of infection compared to other malware. Second, Flame relied on many of the same mechanisms to spread from computer to computer, including USB-based infections and exploitation of a vulnerabilities in Windows’ Autorun feature and a print spooler vulnerability – both of which were used by Stuxnet to spread.

Subsequent research suggests that claims about the distinctness of Flame were premature. In their work, Kaspersky researchers worked off clues generated by their own automated virus analysis technology, which spotted a malicious file that it considered a variant of Stuxnet in October 2010. Kaspersky analysts at the time studied the variant and saw few similarities to Stuxnet. They dismissed the categorization as a “false positive” and renamed the malware “Tocy.a”

More than two years later, however, those same researchers stumbled on Tocy.a as they looked for older malware samples that resembled Flame. Noting the history of Tocy.a and its initial designation as a Stuxnet variant, the researchers probed deeper into why the companies artificial intelligence saw the two pieces of malicious code as so similar to each other, but not to other samples from Kaspersky’s massive library of malware.

Their conclusion: a module originally found in an early Stuxnet variant dubbed “Resource 207.” The module, a little more than 350,000 bytes long, was used by Stuxnet.a to to do “privilege escalation” – tricks to give the attackers administrator-level access to systems they compromise. Resource 207 disappeared from later versions of Stuxnet that spread more widely and, thus, received more attention from researchers – its code absorbed into other Stuxnet components.

Looked at closely, however, Resource 207 from the early version of Stuxnet was nearly identical to a module in the Flame malware. Kaspersky now considers it a “Flame plug-in. Or, to be more precise proto-Flame.” In fact, it matches almost exactly with a contemporary Flame file called “mssecmgr.ocx.” The two elements contain similar bones: components with nearly identical names, identical string decryption algorithms and nearly identical methods of writing shell code components within each.

Like handwriting analysts, the Kaspersky researchers have concluded that at least some elements of both Stuxnet and Flame were created by the same hand – or hands. Resource 207 is, they believe, an early component of what they now consider the ‘Flame’ platform.

“By the time Stuxnet was created (in January-June 2009), the Flame platform was already in existence,” the researchers write. “we currently date [Flame’s] creation to no later than summer 2008, [when it] already had a modular structure.”

The worm known as Stuxnet, they believe, used a module built on the Flame platform. That module was probably created specifically to operate as part of Stuxnet. Researchers believe it originally exploited a previously unknown (zero-day) vulnerability that enabled an escalation of privileges, presumably by exploiting an issue later patched by Microsoft with MS09-025. The module was then removed in 2010 as the Stuxnet authors shifted focus to a new method of propagation using the vulnerability patched by Microsoft in its MS10-046 update in August 2010. After 2009, the evolution of the Flame platform continued independently from Stuxnet, and Kaspersky researchers theorize that the work on the malicious programs was tasked to two independent developer teams, which they termed ”Team F” (Flame) and ”Team D” (for “Tilded,” the Stuxnet program). “Each of these teams has been developing its own platform since 2007-2008 at the latest, but snippets of their common origins appear in both pieces of malware.”

In addition to the concrete link between Flame and Stuxnet, researchers also discovered that there was a fifth zero-day vulnerability being used by a version of Stuxnet is 2009, which was included in the resource 207 module shared by Stuxnet and Flame. Exploit code for that flaw, which is an elevation-of-privilege bug, was included in a variant of Stuxnet that was in use in early 2009. The code for that variant was compiled in February 2009 and the bug was unknown at the time. Microsoft patched the vulnerability with bulletin MS09-025, four months later.

“The same programmer who did the attack on this bug and the MS10-073 bug used in Stuxnet.b, which also was an elevation of privilege,” Roel Schouwenberg, a senior malware researcher at Kaspersky, said in a press conference Monday. “It was definitely very interesting to see.”

Schouwenberg said that researchers are unsure why resource 207 was removed from the Stuxnet code at some point, but it may have been a way to keep the two attack tools separate.

“One theory is that Flame was a more general purpose cyber-espionage tool and they didn’t want to mix the two platforms more than was necessary,” he said.

The implications of the researchers’ discoveries are intriguing. Many security experts will be unsurprised to learn that two pieces of malicious code with such similar targets and objectives may have come from the same source. Many assumed the Flame malware had links back to a foreign government, rather than criminal hacking groups. News last week about the worm’s use of a never-before-seen cryptographic collision attack to enable the malware to impersonate a Microsoft software update more or less sealed the case.

However, recent news reports citing unnamed government sources give the U.S. credit for creating Stuxnet. That suggests that the U.S. or its allies may have been behind the Flame malware also. That, in turn, has stoked public debate about the wisdom of conducting offensive cyber operations – covert or otherwise. That debate, like the investigation into Flame itself, is likely to intensify, rather than fade, as time goes by.

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.