Beware of GDPR Phishing Scams

Several GDPR phishing scams have been detected in the past few days as scammers capitalize on the last-minute rush by companies to ensure compliance ahead of the May 25, 2018 GDPR deadline. Be wary about any GDPR related email requests – they may be a scam.

GDPR Provides Scammers with a New Opportunity

You will probably already be sick of receiving email requests from companies asking if they can continue sending you emails, but that is one of the requirements of GDPR. GDPR requires consent to be obtained to use – or continue to use – personal information. With previous privacy policies failing to comply with the new EU law, email requests are being sent to all individuals on mailing lists and those who have previously registered on websites to re-obtain consent.

All companies that have dealings with EU residents are required to comply with GDPR, regardless of their location. Emails are therefore being sent from companies far and wide. Consumers are receiving messages from companies that they may have forgotten they had dealings with in the past. If personal data is still on file, email requests are likely to be sent asking for permission to retain that information.

The masses of emails now being sent relating to GDPR has created an opportunity for scammers. GDPR phishing scams have been developed to fool users into revealing sensitive information under the guise of GDPR related requests. There have been many GDPR phishing scams identified in recent weeks. It is ironic that a regulation that aims to improve privacy protections for EU residents is being used to violate privacy.

Apple Spoofed in New Phishing Scam

Phishers often spoof large, familiar brands as there is a greater chance that the recipient of the message will have an account with that company. The most popular global brands – Netflix, PayPal, Apple, and Google are all commonly impersonated.

These impersonation scams can be highly convincing. A request is sent via email that seems perfectly reasonable, the emails appear to have been sent from the company, and the email address of the sender is spoofed to appear genuine. The emails contain branding and images which are familiar, and the messages can be almost indistinguishable from genuine communications.

The aim is to get users to click on an embedded hyperlink and visit the company’s website and login. There is usually an urgent call to action, such as a security alert, threat of account closure, or loss of services.

Apple is one such brand that has recently been impersonated in GDPR phishing scams. The aim of the attackers is to get Apple customers to login to a fake site and disclose their credentials. Once the credentials have been obtained, the scammers have access the user’s account, which includes financial information, credit card details, and other personal information.

Airbnb GDPR Phishing Scams Detected

Redscan has detected Airbnb GDPR phishing scams recently. Users of its home sharing platform are required to update their contact details due to GDPR law in order to continue to use the platform. The request is entirely reasonable given so many companies are sending similar emails.

The emails claim to be from Airbnb customer service, contain the correct images and branding, and direct users to a familiar looking website that differs only in the domain name. Users are asked to re-enter their contact information and payment card details.

Watch Out for GDPR Phishing Scams

These scams are just two of several. More can be expected over the coming days in the run up to the compliance deadline and beyond. To avoid falling for the scams, make sure you treat all GDPR-related requests as potentially suspicious.

The easiest way to avoid the scams is to visit the website of the brand by typing the correct address directly into the browser or using your usual bookmark. It should be clear when you login if you need to update your information because of GDPR.

Ransomware Attacks on the Decline but the Threat Level is Still Critical

Ransomware attacks on businesses appear to be declining. In 2017 and 2018 there has been a marked decrease in the number of attacks. While this is certainly good news, it is currently unclear whether the fall in attacks is just a temporary blip or if the trend will continue.

Ransomware attacks may have declined, but there has been a rise in the use of cryptocurrency mining malware, with cybercriminals taking advantage in the high price of cryptocurrencies to hijack computers and turn them into cryptocurrency-mining slaves. These attacks are not as devastating or costly as ransomware attacks, although they can still take their toll, slowing down endpoints which naturally has an impact on productivity.

While ransomware attacks are now occurring at a fraction of the level of 2016 – SonicWall’s figures suggest there were 184 million attacks in 2017 compared to 638 million in 2016 – the risk of an attack is still significant.

Small players are still taking advantage of ransomware-as-a-service – available through darknet forums and marketplaces – to conduct attacks and organized cybercriminal gangs are conducting targeted attacks. In the case of the latter, victims are being selected based on their ability to pay and the likelihood of a payment being made.

These targeted attacks have primarily been conducted on organizations in the healthcare industry, educational institutions, municipalities and the government. Municipalities are targeted because massive disruption can be caused, and attacks are relatively easy to pull off. Municipalities typically do not have the budgets to devote to cybersecurity.

Attacks in healthcare and education industries are made easier by the continued use of legacy software and operating systems and highly complex networks that are difficult to secure. Add to that the reliance on access to data and not only are attacks relatively easy, there is a higher than average chance of a ransom being paid.

In the past, the aim of ransomware gangs was to infect as many users as possible. Now, targeted attacks are conducted with the aim of infecting as many end points as possible within an organization. The more systems and computers that are taken out of action, the greater the disruption and cost of mitigating the attack without paying the ransom.

Most organizations, government agencies, municipalities, have sound backup policies and can recover all data encrypted by ransomware without paying the ransom. However, the time taken to recover files from backups and restore systems – and the cost of doing so – makes payment of the ransom preferable.

The attack on the City of Atlanta shows just how expensive recovery can be. The cost of restoring systems and mitigating the attack was at least $2.6 million – The ransom demand was in the region of $50,000. It is therefore no surprise that so many victims have chosen to pay up.

Even though the ransom payment is relatively low compared to the cost of recovery, it is still far more expensive than the cost of implementing security solutions to prevent attacks.

There is no single solution that can block ransomware and malware attacks. Multi-layered defenses must be installed to protect the entire attack surface. Most organizations have implemented anti-spam solutions to reduce the risk of email-based attacks, and security awareness training is helping to eliminate risky behaviors and teach security best practices, but vulnerabilities still remain with DNS security often lacking.

Vulnerabilities in DNS are being abused to install ransomware and other malware variants and hide communications with command and control servers and call home addresses. Implementing a DNS-based web filtering solution offers protection against phishing, ransomware and malware by preventing users from visiting malicious websites where malware and ransomware is downloaded and blocking C2 server communications. DNS-based web filters also provide protection against the growing threat from cryptocurrency mining malware.

To mount an effective defense against phishing, malware and ransomware attacks, traditional cybersecurity defenses such as ant-virus software, spam filters, and firewalls should be augmented with web filtering to provide security at the DNS layer. To find out more about how DNS layer security can improve your security posture, contact TitanHQ today and ask about WebTitan.

Leominster School District Ransomware Attack Sees $10,000 Ransom Paid

Another school district has fallen victim to a ransomware attack, which has seen files encrypted and systems taken out of action for two weeks. The Leominster school district ransomware attack saw a ransom demand of approximately $10,000 in Bitcoin was issued for the keys to unlock the encrypted files, which includes the school’s entire student database.

School districts attacked with ransomware often face a difficult decision when ransomware is installed. Attempt to restore systems and recover lost data from backups or pay the ransom demand. The first option is time consuming, costly, and can see systems remain out of action for several days. The second option includes no guarantees that the attackers will make good on their promise and will supply valid keys to unlock the encryption. The keys may not be held, it may not be possible to unlock files, or a further ransom demand could be issued. There have been many examples of all three of those scenarios.

The decision not to pay the ransom demand may be the costlier option. The recent ransomware attack on the City of Atlanta saw a ransom demand issued in the region of $50,000. The cost of recovering from the attack was $2.6 million, although that figure does include the cost of improvements to its security systems to prevent further attacks.

School districts are often targeted by cybercriminals and ransomware offers a quick and easy way to make money. The attackers know all too well that data can most likely be recovered from backups and that the ransom does not need to be paid, but the cost of recovery is considerable. Ransom demands are set accordingly – high enough for the attackers to make a worthwhile amount, but low enough to tempt the victims into paying.

In the case of the Leominster ransomware attack, the second option was chosen and the ransom demand of was paid. That decision was taken after carefully weighing up both options. The risk that no keys would be supplied was accepted. In this case, they were supplied, and efforts are well underway to restore files and implement further protections to ensure similar incidents do not occur in the future.

Even though the ransom was paid, the school district was still without access to its database and some of its computer systems two weeks after the attack. Files were encrypted on April 14, but systems were not brought back online until May 1.

Unfortunately for the Leominster School District, ransom payments are not covered by its cyberinsurance policy, so the payment had to come from its general fund.

There is no simple way to defend against ransomware attacks, as no single cybersecurity solution will prove to be 100% effective at blocking the threat. Multiple attack vectors are used, and it is up to school districts to implement defenses to protect the entire attack surface. The solution is to defend in numbers – use multiple security solutions to create layered defenses.

Some of the most important defenses include:

  • An advanced firewall to defend the network perimeter
  • Antivirus and anti-malware solutions on all endpoints/servers
  • Vulnerability scanning and good patch management policies. All software, systems, websites, applications, and operating systems should be kept up to date with patches applied promptly
  • An advanced spam filtering solution to prevent malicious emails from being delivered to end users. The solution should block all executable files
  • Disable RDP if it is not required
  • Provide security awareness training for employees and teach staff and students the skills to enable them to identify malicious emails and stop risky behaviors
  • A web filtering solution capable of blocking access to malicious websites

The cost of implementing these solutions is likely to be far lower than the cost of a ransom payment and certainly lower than the cost of mitigating a ransomware attack.