Thank you for your interest in Obsidian! Please enter your information in the form and we will contact you shortly to schedule a demo.
While the goals of various adversary groups may not change drastically over time, their TTPs will. Effective techniques for initial access, post-authentication activity, and dwell time within a target tenant are an attacker’s bread and butter. The cliche of “emerging identity threats” is actually a blurred line between simple IOCs and cutting-edge techniques.
In this blog post, we explore the unique aspects of residential proxies in identity phishing attacks. We’ll go over some IOCs you can check in your own environment and cover some strategies for detecting current and new trends in these attacks.
In recent weeks, Obsidian observed a set of unique characteristics across several targeted attacks, distinguishing them from others of a similar kind.
Phishing kits and services are taking advantage of proxy networks that utilize a variety of residential IPs. To evade detection and get past conditional access policies, attackers can appear in the same city as a victim while also coming from a residential ISP such as Comcast, Cox, T-Mobile, Verizon, etc. This gives attackers an advantage as opposed to coming from IP space associated with private VPNs or hosting infrastructure which is easier for defenders to identify. As you can imagine, this muddies the waters when performing detection engineering, security operations, and incident response.
Residential proxy networks involve both willing and unwilling parties leasing their bandwidth and IP addresses to other users. These networks are built, deployed, and utilized in various ways, as extensively detailed in a blog post by Sekoia.
In one incident, although the victim organization was not a paying customer of Zscaler, an ISP associated with Zscaler appeared in a compromised login sequence. These logins matched others that were confirmed as true positives, all of which passed through residential proxy IPs.
To our knowledge, Zscaler can operate in a VPN mode via Zscaler Client Connector, potentially routing all machine traffic through its infrastructure. This includes traffic from a residential proxy agent or through a compromised host.
During our testing, residential proxy agents successfully identified residential IPs and routed traffic exclusively through these IPs. However, our testing was not exhaustive, so we cannot definitively exclude the possibility that the Zscaler IP originated from a voluntary proxy agent.
Whether from a residential proxy agent or a compromised host, the mixing of residential IPs with security gateway IPs can significantly complicate security measures for obvious reasons.
In addition to the use of residential proxies, the attackers used an outdated Chrome user agent released in 2019. While detecting phishing through residential proxies poses a challenge, this simple IOC has a very high success rate in identifying these attacks.
When investigating the outdated user agent string across our tenants we noticed a consistent sequence in the stream of login events during the phishing attempt. The below screenshot shows alternating jumps in Chrome versions 78 and 105. These patterns were consistent across multiple attacks when the Chrome 78 user agent string initiated the login sequence.
Obsidian possesses insights into thousands of unique integrations that organizations use to operate their businesses. Among these, two commonly observed applications are “eM Client” and “PERFECTDATA SOFTWARE”. The functionality offered by these applications, combined with their broad scope, makes them appealing tools for attackers. Nearly every instance of their usage coincides with malicious activity.
This type of tactic is not brand new and reports of their usage by bad actors began in 2023 in a blog post published by Darktrace and another blog post published by an independent researcher. While these IOCs are simple and slightly old, they can often be an effective signal that does not rely on detecting the more advanced TTPs.
ChatGPT
Thanks to residential proxies, our once reliable geo anomaly detections will be less effective in detecting adversary activity. Geo anomaly detections are only one aspect of the kill chain; solely relying on these will not suffice. We highlighted this topic in a previous blog post, Rethinking Identity Threat Detection: Don’t Rely on IP Geolocation.
Moving forward, we must adopt an identity-centric approach that prioritizes evaluating the overall activity of a user rather than solely reacting to individual alerts. By adopting this method, we can better spot suspicious account behaviors, avoiding getting bogged down in the minutiae and edge cases that a single alert might present.
The below screenshot is an example of how using an identity-centric triage method helps understand a compromise without getting bogged down in the complexities of emerging TTPs. Paying close attention to suspicious activity as it contrasts with the baseline behavior of an identity will lead to a smoother process in successfully identifying identity compromise.