Introduction
The cyber kill chain comprises seven phases which illustrate the various cyberattack stages. Among the cyber kill chain’s steps is the weaponization stage, whereby the intruder develops a malware weapon, such as a worm or virus, to exploit the target’s vulnerabilities (Spring & Hatleback, 2017). Depending on the attacker’s purpose and target, this malware can manipulate undetected and new vulnerabilities (zero-day exploits) or focus on an amalgamation of several vulnerabilities (Dargahi et al., 2019). The paper provides an in-depth discussion of the software used by attackers during the weaponization step and the appropriate countermeasures for this activity.
Software Used for Weaponization
Some standard open access weaponization software types used by hackers include the Veil-Framework, Luckystrike, and Metasploit. According to Hoffmann et al. (2020), these software types typically automate the procedure of weaponizing files and implementing programs for eluding anti-virus, and other prevention/detection means, including UAC, ASLR, and DEP/NX. Spring and Hatleback (2017) identify Veil-Framework (Veil-Evasion) as a tool developed to create Metasploit payloads which bypass or evade conventional anti-virus solutions; it generates payload executables that elude standard anti-virus applications. Luckystrike relates to a PowerShell-based software used to develop malicious documents, particularly Office documents (Dargahi et al., 2019). It enhances the generation of shell documents typified by encrypted codes capable of infecting a network.
Metasploit is compatible with many operating systems (OS) and is easily customized; it is used to develop and execute exploit codes against remote targets. It is an open-source framework utilized by ethical hackers and cybercriminals to probe or scrutinize systematic vulnerabilities on servers and networks (Hoffmann et al., 2020). Other weaponizing software forms include:
- Office-DDE-payloads: A collection of templates and scripts used to create DDE embedded Office documents using a technique known as the macro-less command.
- wePWNise: A tool used to develop VBA codes – architecture-dependent – utilized in Office templates or documents and automates the evasion application controls and manipulate mitigation software (Hoffmann et al., 2020).
- MacroShop: This is an assemblage of scripts, which facilitate payload delivery via Office Macros.
- WorsePDF: This software typically transforms conventional PDF files into malicious ones; additional software includes macro-pack and Cross-Platform Office Macro (“Defense strategies,” n.d.).
Countermeasures for Weaponization
Countermeasures recommended for ensuring cybersecurity during the weaponization phase include training workers on security awareness and technology installation for detecting malicious software accessing the environment. Several advanced attacks are initiated using the social engineering approach. The typical social engineering use in advanced attacks underscores the significance of workforce training. Employees must distinguish social engineering strikes and prospectively dubious emails and be knowledgeable of appropriate notification and incident response processes. Therefore, organizations must develop clear policies and procedures regarding these sites’ access and the permissible information to share online.
Advanced attacks beyond social engineering approaches typically emerge from Web application security susceptibilities. The proper implementation of security controls linked to Web applications can safeguard against conventional attacks. Companies must conform to secure application, and programming deployment approaches as delineated by OWASP (Open Web Application Security Project) and ensure appropriate controls are applied to protect and validate applications (“Defense strategies,” n.d.). Matteson (2018) also recommends reinforcing Web application firewalls (WAF) capabilities using application-specific security evaluations, dynamic and static source code reviews, and safe programming procedures. Desktop application configuration and patching management should also be included in a firm’s overall security plan. Detective processes for tracking outgoing and incoming traffic should also be implemented; this includes intrusion detection frameworks for TCP traffic, Web applications’ WAFs, and malware assessments for emails (“Defense strategies,” n.d.). Protocol trending and Network traffic assessment can help distinguish known security signatures and alerts and detect divergence from developed baselines, indicating malicious activity.
Conclusion
The cyber kill chain has undergone significant improvements to facilitate the enhanced anticipation and recognition of insider threats and the detection of several attack methodologies such as social engineering and advanced ransomware. Some standard open access weaponization software types used by hackers include the Veil-Framework, Luckystrike, and Metasploit. Countermeasures for ensuring cybersecurity during the weaponization phase include security awareness training and technology installation for detecting malicious software accessing the environment.
References
Dargahi, T., Dehghantanha, A., Bahrami, P. N., Conti, M., Bianchi, G., & Benedetto, L. (2019). A Cyber-Kill-Chain based taxonomy of crypto-ransomware features. Journal of Computer Virology and Hacking Techniques, 15, 277–305. Web.
Defense strategies for advanced threats: Mapping the SANS 20 critical security controls to the cyber kill chain. (n.d.). Solutionary. Web.
Hoffmann, R., Napiórkowskia, J., Protasowickia, T., & Stanik, J. (2020). Risk based approach in scope of cybersecurity threats and requirements. Procedia Manufacturing, 44, 655–662. Web.
Matteson, S. (2018). How to identify and defend against the steps of a cybersecurity kill chain. TechRepublic. Web.
Spring, J. M., & Hatleback, E. (2017). Thinking about intrusion kill chains as mechanisms. Journal of Cybersecurity, 3(3), 185–197. Web.