SWIFT warns customers of multiple cyber fraud cases

cruelsister

Level 43
Thread author
Verified
Honorary Member
Top Poster
Content Creator
Well-known
Apr 13, 2013
3,224
SWIFT, the global financial network that banks use to transfer billions of dollars every day, warned its customers on Monday that it was aware of "a number of recent cyber incidents" where attackers had sent fraudulent messages over its system.

The disclosure came as law enforcement authorities in Bangladesh and elsewhere investigated the February cyber theft of $81 million from the Bangladesh central bank account at the New York Federal Reserve Bank. SWIFT has acknowledged that the scheme involved altering SWIFT software on Bangladesh Bank's computers to hide evidence of fraudulent transfers.

Monday's statement from SWIFT marked the first acknowledgement that the Bangladesh Bank attack was not an isolated incident but one of several recent criminal schemes that aimed to take advantage of the global messaging platform used by some 11,000 financial institutions.

"SWIFT is aware of a number of recent cyber incidents in which malicious insiders or external attackers have managed to submit SWIFT messages from financial institutions' back-offices, PCs or workstations connected to their local interface to the SWIFT network," the group warned customers on Monday in a notice seen by Reuters.

The warning, which SWIFT issued in a confidential alert sent over its network, did not name any victims or disclose the value of any losses from the previously undisclosed attacks. SWIFT confirmed to Reuters the authenticity of the notice. SWIFT, or the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication, is a cooperative owned by 3,000 financial institutions.

Also on Monday, SWIFT released a security update to the software that banks use to access its network to thwart malware that security researchers with British defense contractor BAE Systems said was probably used by hackers in the Bangladesh Bank heist. BAE's evidence suggested that hackers manipulated SWIFT's Alliance Access server software, which banks use to interface with SWIFT's messaging platform, to cover their tracks.BAE said it could not explain how the fraudulent orders were created and pushed through the system.

But SWIFT provided some evidence about how that happened in its note to customers, saying that in most cases the modus operandi was similar. It said the attackers obtained valid credentials for operators authorized to create and approve SWIFT messages, then submitted fraudulent messages by impersonating those people.

FireEye, the internet security company whose Mandiant unit was hired by Bangladesh Bank to help investigate the heist, said the same group behind that hack had probably attacked other financial targets."FireEye has observed activity in other financial services organizations that is likely by the same threat actor behind the cyber attack on the Bank of Bangladesh," Vivek Chudgar, Mandiant's senior director for the Asia Pacific said in a statement emailed to Reuters.FireEye declined to go into detail.

Rakesh Asthana, the World Informatix Cyber Security CEO, who is overseeing Bangladesh Bank's probe into the hack, declined to discuss the other attacks that SWIFT referred to. He did, though, urge banks to conduct independent security assessments to make sure their networks are secure and prevent future attacks.

“SWIFT builds on security practices established by the customer itself and therefore it is imperative that in the wake of this attack, customers using SWIFT Alliance Access must strengthen their cyber security posture,” Asthana said. Cyber security experts said more attacks could surface as SWIFT's banking clients look to see if their SWIFT access has been compromised.

Shane Shook, a banking security consultant who investigates large financial crime, said hackers were turning to SWIFT and other private financial messaging platforms because such attacks can generate more revenue than going after consumers or small businesses.

"These hacks specifically target financial institutions because smaller efforts result in much larger thefts," he said. "It's much more efficient than stealing from consumers."

Justin Harvey, chief security officer with Fidelis Cybersecurity, said hackers followed the money and would be drawn into such schemes in hopes of emulating a big heist like the one on Bangladesh Bank.
"After the Bangladesh Bank heist became public, every other attacker out there is looking to see if they can do the same," he said. SWIFT spokeswoman Natasha Deteran told Reuters that the commonality in these cases was that internal or external attackers compromised the banks’ own environments to obtain valid operator credentials.

"We have made the Alliance interface software update mandatory as it is designed to help banks identify situations in which attackers have attempted to hide their traces - whether these actions have been executed manually or through malware," she said.
 

omidomi

Level 71
Verified
Honorary Member
Top Poster
Malware Hunter
Well-known
Apr 5, 2014
6,008
The Bangladesh central bank had no firewall and was using a second-hand $10 network when it was hacked earlier this year. Investigation by British defense contractor BAE Systems has also shown that the SWIFT software used to make payments was compromised, enabling the hackers to send money around the world without leaving any trace in Bangladesh.

In February, unknown hackers broke into the Bangladesh Bank and almost got away with just shy of $1 billion. In the event, their fraudulent transactions were cancelled after they managed to transfer $81 million when a typo raised concerns about one of the transactions. That money is still unrecovered, but BAE has published some of its findings.

The SWIFT organization is owned by 3,000 financial companies and operates a network for sending financial transactions between financial institutions. Institutions using the network must have existing banking relationships; SWIFT transactions do not actually send money but instead send payment orders that must then be settled by having the institutions involved moving money between accounts.

SWIFT's security stems from two major sources. Notionally, it's a private network, and most banks set up their accounts such that only certain transactions between particular parties are permitted. The network privacy means that it should be hard for someone outside a bank to attack the network, but if a hacker breaks into a bank—as was the case here—then that protection evaporates. The Bangladesh central bank has all the necessary SWIFT software and authorized access to the SWIFT network. Any hacker running code within the Bangladesh bank also has access to the software and network.

If an organization can't keep its endpoint secure, it leaves itself very vulnerable to being electronically robbed. That appears to be the case here—Bangladeshi police investigators told Reuters that the bank lacked any firewalls and was using second-hand $10 switches on its network. These switches did not allow for the regular LAN to be segmented or otherwise isolated from the SWIFT systems. The lack of network security infrastructure has hindered the investigation. It's still not known how the hackers penetrated the network, but it looks like the bank didn't make it difficult for them to do so.

Once inside the network, the hackers modified software called Alliance Access to both make the transactions and hide the evidence. Alliance reads and writes SWIFT messages to files on the filesystem, and it records transaction information in an Oracle database. The hackers created malware that removed integrity checks within the Alliance software and then monitored the transaction files sent through the system, searching the payment orders and confirmations for specific terms. These terms and the responses to them were specified by a Command and Control server in Egypt.

When a message with one of the search terms was found, the malware would do different things depending on the kind of message. Payment orders were modified to increase the amounts being moved, updating the Alliance database with new values. Confirmation messages from the SWIFT network were also modified. Confirmations are printed and stored in the database. Before being printed, the malware would alter the confirmations to show the original, correct transaction value; it also deleted conformations from the Alliance database entirely.

It's still not clear how the initial transactions were entered into the system to trigger the malware in the first place.

Getting the money out is also difficult. It is being laundered through the Philippines, and that laundering is currently being investigated by the Philippine senate. The $81 million that was successfully stolen was sent to the Philippines to accounts at the Rizal Commercial Banking Corp (RCBC) held by two Chinese nationals who organize gambling junkets in Macau and the Philippines. The money was moved to several Philippine casinos and then subsequently to international bank accounts. Philippine casinos are exempted of anti-money laundering law that requires them to report suspicious transactions, making them an attractive target for this kind of crime.

The Treasurer of RCBC has resigned, and the manager of one of its branches is facing criminal charges after she withdrew $427,000 from an account linked to the theft. The Governor of the Bangladesh Bank, Atiur Rahman, also resigned in March over the heist.
 

_CyberGhosT_

Level 53
Verified
Honorary Member
Top Poster
Content Creator
Well-known
Aug 2, 2015
4,286
Wow, very bad indeed.
Nice share Cruelsis.
PeAcE
 

About us

  • MalwareTips is a community-driven platform providing the latest information and resources on malware and cyber threats. Our team of experienced professionals and passionate volunteers work to keep the internet safe and secure. We provide accurate, up-to-date information and strive to build a strong and supportive community dedicated to cybersecurity.

User Menu

Follow us

Follow us on Facebook or Twitter to know first about the latest cybersecurity incidents and malware threats.

Top