English
The Internet threat alert status is currently normal. At present, no major epidemics or other serious incidents have been recorded by Kaspersky Lab’s monitoring service. Internet threat level: 1

iFrames = Apple too?

Michael
Kaspersky Lab Expert
Posted June 12, 15:36  GMT
Tags: Website Hacks, Obfuscation
0.2
 

Looking up definitions for 'iframe' does indeed give results about "... a constraint of the H.264 codec specified by Apple to ensure ease of consumer video editing.". Such iframes do contain all necessary rendering information and serve as reference to construct other frames. But here we discuss the other kind of iframes - HTML tags. Iframes can have several attributes and we often encounter them when analysing malicious sites. They are often used in a hidden way to construct drive-by downloads of malware. To hide even more, simple encryption (also called 'obfuscation') is often used, web browsers decrypt that on the fly. Knowing that, we can search for interesting websites. For example doing a web search for "#64#6f#63#75#6d#65#6e#74#2e#77#72#69#74#65" (which decodes to 'document.write'), we instantly get 10,000+ results.



The first entry in our search results is a link to a torrent site where users discuss a malicious package. Ironically in between these search results we also noticed what seems to be an 'infected podcast' hosted at itunes.apple.com - which brings us back to the initial talk about iframes. The injected code contains an iframe redirecting to moshonken(dot)com, a host known for having spread exploits in the past. Currently that host appears to be not operational but malicious code trying to access it is still injected in many legitimate sites, as our search results showed. We detect this code as 'HEUR:Trojan.Script.Iframer' and have reported the problem via Apple's feedback form.


1 comments

Michael

2010 Jun 15, 21:31
0
 

Update Tue Jun 15 17:29:27 UTC

Thanks much for your messages/tweets etc.
To answer some of them:
1. YES, the 10.000+ search results were for the mentioned pattern only. The count for just the malicious host is "About 4,240" according to google.
2. NO, we did NOT notify every victim but picked some random ones only.
3. NO, we did not receive any reply from affected parties BUT we could confirm that at least "Hyderabad International Airport" from our screen capture (whom we had sent alert to as well) appears to having taken care of the problem.
Cheers

Edited by Michael, 2010 Jun 15, 21:42

Reply    
If you would like to comment on this article you must first
login


Bookmark and Share
Share

Analysis

Blog