Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by n1 on Sunday January 22 2017, @07:02PM   Printer-friendly
from the aaand-it's-gone... dept.

Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:

It was only a matter of time until ransomware groups that wiped data from thousands of MongoDB databases and Elasticsearch clusters started targeting other data storage technologies. Researchers are now observing similar destructive attacks hitting openly accessible Hadoop and CouchDB deployments.

Security researchers Victor Gevers and Niall Merrigan, who monitored the MongoDB and Elasticsearch attacks so far, have also started keeping track of the new Hadoop and CouchDB victims. The two have put together spreadsheets on Google Docs where they document the different attack signatures and messages left behind after data gets wiped from databases.

In the case of Hadoop, a framework used for distributed storage and processing of large data sets, the attacks observed so far can be described as vandalism.

That's because the attackers don't ask for payments to be made in exchange for returning the deleted data. Instead, their message instructs the Hadoop administrators to secure their deployments in the future.

According to Merrigan's latest count, 126 Hadoop instances have been wiped so far. The number of victims is likely to increase because there are thousands of Hadoop deployments accessible from the internet -- although it's hard to say how many are vulnerable.

The attacks against MongoDB and Elasticsearch followed a similar pattern. The number of MongoDB victims jumped from hundreds to thousands in a matter of hours and to tens of thousands within a week. The latest count puts the number of wiped MongoDB databases at more than 34,000 and that of deleted Elasticsearch clusters at more than 4,600.

A group called Kraken0, responsible for most of the ransomware attacks against databases, is trying to sell its attack toolkit and a list of vulnerable MongoDB and Elasticsearch installations for the equivalent of $500 in bitcoins.

-- submitted from IRC


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by requerdanos on Sunday January 22 2017, @10:14PM

    by requerdanos (5997) Subscriber Badge on Sunday January 22 2017, @10:14PM (#457454) Journal

    Why wouldn't it be vandalism if they had asked for a ransom?

    It's rather that vandalism+ransom is a superset of vandalism implying* that some recovery method exists under control of the opposing force. Saying simply vandalism doesn't imply any forthcoming recovery and doesn't imply anyone asking for a ransom.

    In car terms, it's sort of like the difference between putting a secret chemical in the fuel tank that stops use of the car, and demanding payment for a neutralizing counteragent ("ransom"), vs. simply putting sugar in the gas tank and tacking a note to the windshield saying "hey secure your fuel tank next time" ("vandalism").

    Both include vandalism as critical steps in the method, but if the method is only that one step, then calling the method by that step is convenient shorthand.

    (* implying doesn't mean guaranteeing, of course)

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2