Security-X

Forum Security-X => News => Discussion démarrée par: igor51 le août 25, 2020, 12:00:23

Titre: [FireEye]A Hands-On Introduction to Mandiant's Approach to OT Red Teaming
Posté par: igor51 le août 25, 2020, 12:00:23
A Hands-On Introduction to Mandiant's Approach to OT Red Teaming

Operational technology (OT) asset owners have historically considered
  red teaming of OT and industrial control system (ICS) networks to be
  too risky due to the potential for disruptions or adverse impact to
  production systems. While this mindset has remained largely unchanged
  for years, Mandiant's experience in the field suggests that these
  perspectives are changing; we are increasingly delivering value to
  customers by safely red teaming their OT production networks.


 

This increasing willingness to red team OT is likely driven by a
  couple of factors, including the growing number and visibility of
  threats to OT systems, the increasing adoption of IT hardware and
  software into OT networks, and the maturing of OT security teams. In
  this context, we deemed it relevant to share some details on
  Mandiant's approach to red teaming in OT based on years of experience
  supporting customers learning about tangible threats in their
  production environments.


 

In this post we introduce Mandiant's approach to OT red teaming and
  walk through a case study. During that engagement, it took Mandiant
  only six hours to gain administrative control on the target's OLE for
  Process Control (OPC) servers and clients in the target's Distributed
  Control System (DCS) environment. We then used this access to collect
  information and develop an attack scenario simulating the path a
  threat actor could take to prepare for and attack the physical process
  (We highlight that the red team did not rely on weaknesses of the DCS,
  but instead weak password implementations in the target environment).


 


  NOTE: Red teaming in OT production systems requires
    planning, preparation and "across the aisle"
    collaboration. The red team must have deep knowledge of industrial
    process control and the equipment, software, and systems used to
    achieve it. The red team and the asset owner must establish
    acceptable thresholds before performing any activities.


 

Visit our website for     href="/content/fireeye-www/en_US/products/industrial-systems-and-critical-infrastructure-security.html">more
  information or to request     href="/content/fireeye-www/en_US/mandiant.html">Mandiant
    services or     href="/content/fireeye-www/en_US/mandiant/threat-intelligence.html">threat intelligence.


 

Mandiant's Approach for Safe Red Teaming in OT


 

Mandiant's approach to red teaming OT production systems consists of
  two phases: active testing on IT and/or OT intermediary systems, and
  custom attack modeling to develop one or more realistic attack
  scenarios. Our approach is designed to mirror the OT-targeted attack
  lifecycle—with active testing during initial stages (Initial
  Compromise, Establish Foothold, Escalate Privileges, and Internal
  Reconnaissance), and a combination of active/passive data collection
  and custom threat modeling to design feasible paths an attacker would
  follow to complete the mission.


 


      src="https://www.fireeye.com/content/dam/fireeye-www/blog/images/ot-red-team/picture1.png" alt="" />
 
 Figure 1: Mandiant OT red teaming approach


 
 

Mandiant's OT red teaming can be scoped in different ways depending
  on the target environment, the organization's goals, and the asset
  owner's cyber security program maturity. For example, some
  organizations may test the full network architecture, while others
  prefer to sample only an attack on a single system or process. This
  type of sampling is useful for organizations that own a large number
  of processes and are unlikely to test them one by one, but instead
  they can learn from a single-use case that reflects target-specific
  weaknesses and vulnerabilities. Depending on the scope, the red
  teaming results can be tailored to:


 
 

Red Teaming in OT Provides Unique Value to Defenders


 

Red teaming in OT can be uniquely helpful for defenders, as it
  generates value in a way very specific to an organizations' needs,
  while decreasing the gap between the "no holds barred" world
  of real attackers and the "safety first" responsibility of
  the red team. While it is common for traditional red teaming
  engagements to end shortly after the attacker pivots into a production
  OT segment, a hybrid approach, such as the one we use, makes it
  possible for defenders to gain visibility into the specific strengths
  and weaknesses of their OT networks and security implementations. Here
  are some other benefits of red teaming in OT production networks:


 
 

Applying Our Approach in the Real World: Big Steam Works


 

During this engagement, we were tasked with gaining access to
  critical control systems and designing a destructive attack in an
  environment where industrial steaming boilers are operated with an
  Distributed Control System (DCS). In this description, we redacted
  customer information—including the name, which we refer to as
  "Big Steam Works"—and altered sensitive details. However,
  the overall attack techniques remain unchanged. The main objective of
  Big Steam Works is to deliver steam to a nearby chemical production company.


 

For the scope of this red team, the customer wanted to focus
  entirely on its OT production network. We did not perform any tests in
  IT networks and instead begun the engagement with initial access
  granted in the form of a static IP address in Big Steam Work's OT
  network. The goal of the engagement was to deliver consequence-driven
  analysis exploring a scenario that could cause a significant physical
  impact to both safety and operations. Following our red teaming
  approach, the engagement was divided in two phases: active testing
  across IT and/or OT intermediary systems, and custom attack modeling
  to foresee paths an attacker may follow to complete its mission.


 

We note that during the active testing phase we were very careful to
  maintain high safety standards. This required not only highly skilled
  personnel with knowledge about both IT and OT, but also constant
  engagement with the customer. Members from Big Steam Works helped us
  to set safety thresholds to stop and evaluate results before moving
  forward, and actively monitored the test to observe, learn, and remain
  vigilant for any unintended changes in the process.


 


  Phase 1 – Active Testing


 

During this phase, we leveraged publicly accessible offensive
  security tools (including Wireshark, Responder, Hashcat, and
  CrackMapExec) to collect information, escalate privileges, and move
  across the OT network. In close to six hours, we achieved
  administrative control on several Big Steam Works' OLE for Process
  Control (OPC) servers and clients in their DCS environment. We
  highlight that the test did not rely on weaknesses of the DCS, but
  instead weak password implementations in the target environment.
  Figure 2 details our attack path:


 


      src="https://www.fireeye.com/content/dam/fireeye-www/blog/images/ot-red-team/picture2.png" alt="" />
 
 Figure 2: Active testing in Big Steam
    Work's OT network


 
  1. We collected network traffic using Wireshark to map network
        communications and identify protocols we could use for credential
        harvesting, lateral movement, and privilege escalation. Passive
        analysis of the capture showed Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol
        (DHCP) broadcasts for IPv6 addresses, Link-Local Multicast Name
        Resolution (LLMNR) protocol traffic, and NetBios Name Service
        (NBT-NS) traffic.
  2. We responded to broadcast LLMNR, NBT-NS,
        and WPAD name resolution requests from devices using a publicly
        available tool called Responder. As we supplied our IP address in
        response to broadcasted name resolution requests from other clients
        on the subnet, we performed man-in-the-middle (MiTM) attacks and
        obtained NTLMv1/2 authentication protocol password hashes from
        devices on the network.
  3. We then used Hashcat to crack the
        hashed credentials and use them for further lateral movement and
        compromise. The credentials we obtained included, but were not
        limited to, service accounts with local administrator rights on OPC
        servers and clients. We note that Hashcat cracked the captured
        credentials in only six seconds due to the lack of password strength
        and complexity.
  4. With the credentials captured in the first
        three steps, we accessed other hosts on the network using
        CrackMapExec. We dumped additional cached usernames, passwords, and
        password hashes belonging to both local and domain accounts from
        these hosts.
  5. This resulted in privileged access and control
        over the DCS's OPC clients and servers in the network. While we did
        not continue to execute any further attack, the level of access
        gained at this point enabled us to perform further reconnaissance
        and data collection to design and conceptualize the last steps of a
        targeted attack on the industrial steaming boilers.

 

The TTPs we used during the active testing phase resemble some of
  the simplest resources that can be used by threat actors during real
  OT intrusions. The case results are concerning given that they
  illustrate only a few of the most common weaknesses we often observe
  across Mandiant OT red team engagements. We highlight that all the
  tools used for this intrusion are known and publicly available. An
  attacker with access to Big Steam Works could have used these methods
  as they represent low-hanging fruit and can often be prevented with
  simple security mitigations.


 


  Phase 2 – Custom Attack Modeling


 

For roughly a week, Mandiant gathered additional information from
  client documentation and research on industrial steaming boilers. We
  then mirrored the process an attacker would follow to design a
  destructive attack on the target process given the results achieved
  during phase 1. At this point of the intrusion, the attacker would
  have already obtained complete control over Big Steam Works' OPC
  clients and servers, gaining visibility and access to the DCS environment.


 

Before defining the path to follow, the attacker would likely have
  to perform further reconnaissance (e.g., compromising additional
  systems, data, and credentials within the Big Steam Works DCS
  environment). Specifically, the attacker could:


 
 

Our next step was to develop the custom scenario. For this example,
  we were tasked with modeling a case where the attacker was attempting
  to create a condition that had a high likelihood of causing physical
  damage and disruption of operations (see Figure 3). In this scenario,
  the attacker attempted to achieve this by lowering the water level in
  a boiler drum below the safe threshold while not tripping the burner
  management system or other safety mechanisms. If successful, this
  would result in rapid and extreme overheating in the boiler. Opening
  the feedwater valve under such conditions could result in a
  catastrophic explosion.


 


      src="https://www.fireeye.com/content/dam/fireeye-www/blog/images/ot-red-team/picture3.png" alt="" />
 
 Figure 3: Custom attack model diagram for
    Big Steam Works


 

Figure 3 describes how a real attacker might pursue their mission
  after gaining access to the OPC servers and clients. As the actor
  moves closer to their goals, it becomes more difficult to assess both
  the probability of success and the actual impact of their actions due
  to nuances specific to the client environment and additional safety
  and security controls built into the process. However, the analysis
  holds significant value as it illustrates the overall structure of the
  physical process and potential attacker behaviors aimed at achieving
  specific end goals. Furthermore, it proceeds directly from the results
  obtained during the first phase of the red teaming.


 

The model presents one feasible combination of actions that an
  attacker could perform to access devices governing the boiler drum and
  modify the water level while remaining undetected. With the level of
  access obtained from phase 1, the attacker would likely be able to
  compromise engineering workstations (EWS) for the boiler drum's
  controller using similar tools. This would likely enable the actor to
  perform actions such as changing the drum level setpoints, modifying
  the flow of steam scaling, or modifying water flow scaling. While the
  model does not reflect all additional safety and security measures
  that may be present deeper in the process, it does account for the
  attacker's need to modify alarms and control sensor outputs to remain undetected.


 

By connecting the outcomes produced in the test to the potential
  physical impacts and motivations involved in a real attack, this model
  provided Big Steam Works with a realistic overview of cyber security
  threats to a specific physical process. Further collaboration with the
  customer enabled us to validate the findings and support the
  organization to mitigate the risks reflected in the model.


 

Outlook


 

Mandiant's OT red teaming supports organizations by combining both
  the hands-on analysis of vulnerabilities and weaknesses in IT and OT
  networks with the conceptual modeling of attacker goals and possible
  avenues to reach specific outcomes. It also enables security
  practitioners to adopt the attacker's perspective and explore attack
  vectors that may otherwise have not been conceived regardless of their
  value as low-hanging fruit for OT intrusions.


 

Our approach presents realistic scenarios based upon technical
  evidence of intrusion activity upon OT intermediary systems in the
  tested network. In this way, it is tailored to support
  consequence-driven analysis of threats to specific critical systems
  and processes. This enables organizations to identify attack scenarios
  involving digital assets and determine safeguards that can best help
  to protect the process and ensure the safety of their facilities.


 

Head over to our website for     href="/content/fireeye-www/en_US/products/industrial-systems-and-critical-infrastructure-security.html">more
  information or to request     href="/content/fireeye-www/en_US/mandiant.html">Mandiant
  services or     href="/content/fireeye-www/en_US/mandiant/threat-intelligence.html">threat intelligence.


Source: A Hands-On Introduction to Mandiant's Approach to OT Red Teaming (http://)