Tuesday, August 29, 2017

I May be Mentally Ill

In a recent post, I pointed out that the one who quickly sees False Flag Operations, as an explanation for violence that appears to come from their side, is s strong indicator of mental illness. I was a bit lazy and not able to find an example in the news. I like to link. *smiley emoji*

Within a short time of publishing the post, a new story went around about a man stabbed by an Antifa black man. The "victim" claimed it was due to his Nazi-like haircut.

Is this the haircut of a Nazi?


As it turns out, the man made up the story and stabbed himself.  This is a classic false flag operation!

BUT WAIT!!!!
He was near lots of surveillance cameras, bought the knife near by, knowing that this would make the news... Once you start thinking about false flags, you can't stop!  You see them everywhere. You can't make yourself stop thinking about a thing!

All I know is, it is likely that this guy is a left wing nut who wanted to make it look like he was a right wing nut, so that he could make them look like crazies. Or, he may be a right wing guy trying to make look like a dumb left wing guy, not capable of pulling off a False Flag operation.

If you followed that, like me, you may have issues.  Actually, I am not sure I follow it. This may clear it up.

Monday, August 28, 2017

Keep an Eye on Your Index Fund Dollars. You May be Surprised.

Keep and eye on your Index fund money

There has been a lot of talk about index funds in the last six months.

Warren Buffett recently said he recommends you, and his wife, don’t pick your own stocks, but simply “buy an S&P 500 low-cost index fund”. 

I recently heard on the news that at least 60% of the money in the market is in index funds.

Some Wall Street types are referring to Index fund investors as “dumb money” and worrying that no one is looking a company stats any more.

I am not going to talk about these things. They are for more nuanced investors. I am just a fairly smart guy who is a bit risk averse and likes things that make some sense.

We know we should not pick our own stocks unless we really understand the business sector that a company is in and the performance metrics of the business. Very savvy investors even look at management teams and may even compare them to the management teams of rival companies. Most of us to not have time to do that for more than a company or two.  We can’t even look at one whole market sector, let alone the whole market. It really does make sense from this perspective to look at index funds, but wait…

We are also told to diversify our portfolios.  All the more reason to use an index fund. Only…

We are also told to not put all our eggs in one basket. We should have a good speared of U.S. and foreign stocks, we should have a lot of different business sectors. There are international index funds, so we are covered there too.

BUT WAIT

You and I probably thought that if we bought an S&P 500 Index fund that we’d be getting a good mix of the S&P 500. WRONG!!  All your eggs are in one basket! If we look at just the top 25 holdings, 12.5% of your portfolio in in Tech stocks! That’s right, the index is weighted, usually by market cap or some sort of adjusted market cap. If you go down the list, the top is dominated by Tech, finance, pharmaceuticals, and finance

Breaking down your ownership by sector in the top 50 of the S&P 500.

Sector

%

Aerospace

0.64

Consumer Goods

2.77

Finance

6.13

Insurance

0.87

Oil

3.02

Pharma

4.28

Retail

0.56

Soda

1.61

Technology

16.4

Telecom

2.96

Tobacco

1.44

(blank)

6.8

Total

47.48

 

That’s right, just under 50% of your investment in 500 companies is in only 50 companies, and a very unbalanced 16% is in the tech sector. If we look at the bottom 50 companies, you only have 1.4% in them.

As always, these are just things to consider.  I have no useful money advice.

 

Friday, August 25, 2017

Detecting Attackers in a Windows Active Directory Network

I Smell Attackers

TL;DR If you know Pass the hash, Mimikatz, and BloodHound, jump down to the detection section.

The Pain

Windows and the Active Directory environment are pervasive in the corporate world. Due to high adoption and lax patching and misconfiguration issues on many fronts, the “AD network” is often the first thing that an attacker or red team looks at.

Since time immemorial, attackers of Windows have known that any authenticated user can enumerate the list of local admins on a Windows machine. Slightly less known, is that authenticated users can also enumerate session info on a Windows machine, that is, who is logged in. The rise of Mimikatz and Invoke-Mimikatz has made life hard on defenders. Mimikatz steals tokens, hashes, and depending on settings, plaintext passwords, of any user interactively logged into a machine.

Using the admin and session enumeration tools allows an attacker with the tiniest foothold to leverage Mimikatz, extend the foothold, and collect more credential. If you don’t know pass the hash and cred theft there are only two sources you need to get up to speed. The important thing to know is that the attacker moves from machine to machine collecting an ever-growing set of credentials.  As the set of credentials grows, they have a larger set of machines they can exploit. This is often exponential. The attacker’s Mount Everest is getting access to Domain Administrator credentials.  Once the attacker has these, they can get to all the data on all the machines in the domain, and can setup unbeatable persistence.     

Enter BloodHound

As a defender, BloodHound is your worst enemy. It is the leading tool, by miles, in mapping trust relationships in an Active Directory domain. Watch this video and feel your world crumble. Unleash the tool in your environment and you won’t sleep for weeks. But, I digress…

BloodHound uses lists of admins on hosts, AD group memberships, AD ACLs, logged in sessions, and a bit more, to map where an attacker can use Mimikatz next, what credentials they will get there and what new access they will gain with the new creds. The BloodHund team refers to the extension of the attack and the escalation chain as derived admin rights. In the past, finding these was trial and error and went one step at a time.  That is, the attacker gets some access and tests everywhere to see if the cred works to gain admin rights. The attacker gets a little more access and tests everything again and so on. This is slow and noisy. BloodHound assesses all this with regular user access before any exploit tool is ever run. A typical attack graph looks like this.

There are even plugins that have been written to automate the attack path, once found, so that the exploitation can occur quickly before defenders can cut off access.

Prior Detections

Unless the defender has the tools and understands their expected net flow, the discovery done by tools like BloodHound blends into standard Windows traffic.  Keep in mind that almost every Windows admin has, at some point, been told that 40% of LAN traffic is Windows’ super chatty browser and NetBIOS traffic.

One of the reasons that plugins are needed to exploit an attack path quickly is that most detections are based on AV or anti-malware tools. They are likely to draw actual attention. Once the attacker has gotten this far, the horse is out of the barn and it is often a race to try to detect and cut off all of their persistence mechanisms and find all the other compromised hosts.  Many shops never even detect any of this.  *sad emoji*

More below

Detecting the Foothold

As stated, the attacker only needs a tiny foothold to start enumerating your Windows environment. They don’t even need local admin rights on their initial compromised host. They only need a domain user account to perform the enumeration. At some point, they will need admin rights to steal creds, or they can phish them, or … so many paths to destruction.

Enumeration of local admins and user sessions generates traffic that we can log. No one seems to log it though, probably because the settings seem useless and probably noisy, but in practice, the noise is easily filtered. If you use a lot of SMB file sharing, you will get many useless logs, but they are easily scrubbed.

In both enumeration cases, the attacker connects to the \\machine\IPC$ share of the host it enumerates.

Since Windows 7 and 2008 R2, we have had the option to “Audit File Share”.  In your Group Policy, this is under “Object Access” in “Advanced Audit Policy Configuration”.

This setting is little used, probably because warnings say it can be chatty and even the file server teams at Microsoft don’t suggest turning it on. I’ll cover it more later, but the good news is, you don’t need the setting on busy file servers or Domain Controllers, as long as you have the setting on a lot of other machines.

The event we are looking for is in the Security event log and is event ID 5140. The Share Name of \\*\IPC$ is the key here. You can toss out any 5140 that does not have this value. The Subject Account Name and Domain will be that of the comprised account that is running the scan. The Source Address is the IP address of the host running the scan. You can filter out the source IP of 127.0.0.1 to reduce noise. The computer that logs this, of course, is the target of the attack.

Don’t call security just yet.  There are other legitimate reasons that something might access your IPC$, but they are far and few between. One of my monitoring systems generates a ton of these so I filter its IP address out. Going back to what I said earlier about not having to put this on your DCs and file servers, so you don’t get buried in logs… the key with this detection is to collect the logs on a large set of machines. You can do a simple group by source IP and count to see that some IPs are clearly doing something bad. Attacker detected!  *happy jumping guy emoji*

In two weeks, with very few hosts logging this event, I have had great success. I have found two blue teams scanning our user network. In our prod network, I have detected two red teams, numerous legitimate vulnerability scanners, and one other curiosity that I am investigating. *slightly smug nerdy guy emoji*

Looking at the Logs

One of the places I collect my logs, that is VERY handy for this situation, is Microsoft Operations Management Suite Online (OMS). I can setup email alerts every time we see an IPC$ event.  The basic query look like this.

(Type=SecurityEvent) EventID=5140 \\\\*\\IPC$

I have some known good destinations that I filter out:

(Type=SecurityEvent) EventID=5140 "\\\\*\\IPC$" NOT (Computer="server.domain.com" OR Computer="otherone.domain.com")

I can pipe that to a SQLish query and see who the top talkers are.  This is key to finding the attacker and not just a little legitimate noise.

Based on the size of your environment you will want to scope the number of hits from a single IP and a time range.  That said, even very few hits, from one IP to several sources, is likely an attack.

One easy and low cost way to get these events at scale might be Windows Event Forwarding. Without correlating the scans across many hosts, you are likely to chase many false positives.

Call to Arms

Stop giving out local admin rights like candy.

As a defender, map your environment with BloodHound. You may want to get the Xanax ready first.

Monitor those IPC$ connections.

Read my next piece on blinding enumeration tools.

Sunday, August 20, 2017

Keep an Eye on Those Bond Investment Fees

While re-balancing my portfolio stock/bond/cash ratios, I discovered something I had not seen before…

While I talk about my Fidelity account, it is almost certain that this issue will be found with most brokerages. 

If you use the Brokerage link option to manage your 401K investments, and if you have other Fidelity investment accounts, it is worth taking a look at your “core position”.  Depending on the account type, your “un-invested” money is not in cash. When you sell a stock or bond, if you don’t re-invest, it sits in a core position. 

If you aren’t leaving your money in the core for long, it doesn’t matter much.  If you decide to use it to “pull some money out of the scary market”, this is probably a bad place for it to sit. Your core position is probably mostly bonds, so it may just be your default bond allocation. 

If the position is a non-cash position, like in the Brokerage link account or the one you get with an ESPP, then the money is in a super low risk investment. The key here is that they are in a managed investment with fees! Everyone knows how to invest for low risk and low returns, so this should be free or near free.  The fees are low for mutual and bond funds in general, but for some default positions, surprisingly high for the lack of value the fund manager has to deliver.

I find 3 possible core positions in my plans:
·         SPAXX 0.42%
·         FZFXX 0.35%
·         FDRXX 0.35%

I don’t like to give investment advice, just things to ponder, but I will point out that there are many Vanguard funds with much lower expense ratios, like 0.07% .  Many of these are in super low risk government bonds. Most consider those bonds less risky than cash due to inflation.  All three above have about 70% of your money in cash, 25% in government bonds and 5% misc. As far as I can tell, you are paying a higher fee to have your money as cash.

Before you say, “All this is sub 1% stuff, so what”, take a look at the cost of a long term over pay. Take a look at a comparison. 





FWIW, if you are using Index Funds for you Stock investments, the expense ratios should be crazy low as well.  How hard is it to read the S&P 500 and buy a bunch for your investors??? 

As always, trust no one…

Wednesday, August 9, 2017

Strong Indicator of Mental Illness Identified

I have thought this for some time, but Sebastian Gorka's pronouncement that the Minnesota mosque attack may have been "The Left" trying to make "The Right" look bad, compelled me to type... He even claims that there has been a series of these attacks by the left in the last six months. A claim that I can't substantiate with news reports and he does not back.

For those who don't know the term, because you don't read spy novels or aren't mentally ill, this is called a "False Flag Operation". This is when you blow up a day care center and blame it on your enemy.  Maybe you use their IED of choice to sell the scenario. Yes, IED of choice is something the right learns from watching too much 24. I am talking to you Justice Scalia.

There are two vital things to know about FFOs:

  • To commit such an act is beyond morally reprehensible. It makes you far worse then your enemy.
  • If you see an event and your first thought is "This may be an FFO", this is due to the availability error. It means that you are so morally reprehensible, that it is something you'd consider doing to promote your cause.  
FFOs are a common conspiracy theory of the right and... wait for it, they strongly correlate with mental illness

Please do NOT Google false flag. It will lead you to terrible places on the web. FFO is the go to explanation given by nearly every alt-right, white supremacist, "patriot" group, etc., if something bad happens in the world.

This is just my opinion, so you can't sue me. I mean, the links are legit and the science is, but I don't even play a doctor on TV.


Monday, August 7, 2017

Copying the NTAuth Enterprise store certificates from one Forest to another

The enterprise NTAuth store is a key Active Directory configuration item. It is key to allowing user to login with smartcards. When using PKI cross forest, we usually use the PKISync.ps1 script to lihnk the two forests PKI configurations. This script is designed to allow cross forest certificate enrollment, wich it does well.  It does not cover the NTAuth config for smartcards.  This seems to get missed a lot. 

Below is a two liner to copy the NTAuth in one forest to another, assuming the NTAuth object exists and just needs to be populated. 




$caLIst = (Get-ADObject -SearchBase "CN=NTAuthCertificates,CN=Public Key Services,CN=Services,CN=Configuration,DC=domain1,DC=com" -SearchScope Base -Filter * -Properties * -Server domain1.com).cACertificate


foreach($ca in $caLIst) {Set-ADObject "CN=NTAuthCertificates,CN=Public Key Services,CN=Services,CN=Configuration,DC=domain2,DC=com" -add @{cacertificate=$ca}}


Thursday, July 20, 2017

Fake News Explained in Three Pictures

As I read this story about one of failed businessman Donald Trump's lawyers telling complete and utter lies on on ABC News, it occurred to me why these lies are working.  The Secret Service is known for working hard to be non-partisan. When they are forced to call one of Trump's lawyers a liar, you know something is amiss.

Here is why it works on his supporters.






Inputting falsified referrals to this site violates the terms of service of this site and is considered unauthorized access (hacking).