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 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 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:
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
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.
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.