#FactCheck-AI-Generated Viral Image of US President Joe Biden Wearing a Military Uniform

Misinformation is a scourge in the digital world, making the most mundane experiences fraught with risk. The threat is considerably heightened in conflict settings, especially in the modern era, where geographical borders blur and civilians and conflict actors alike can take to the online realm to discuss -and influence- conflict events. Propaganda can complicate the narrative and distract from the humanitarian crises affecting civilians, while also posing a serious threat to security operations and law and order efforts. Sensationalised reports of casualties and manipulated portrayals of military actions contribute to a cycle of violence and suffering. 

A study conducted by MIT found the mere thought of sharing news on social media reduced the ability to judge whether a story was true or false; the urge to share outweighed the consideration of accuracy (2023).  Cross-border misinformation has become a critical issue in today's interconnected world, driven by the rise of digital communication platforms. To effectively combat misinformation, coordinated international policy frameworks and cooperation between governments, platforms, and global institutions are created.

The Global Nature of Misinformation

Cross-border misinformation is false or misleading information that spreads across countries. Out-of-border creators amplify information through social media and digital platforms and are a key source of misinformation. Misinformation can interfere with elections, and create serious misconceptions about health concerns such as those witnessed during the COVID-19 pandemic, or even lead to military conflicts. 

The primary challenge in countering cross-border misinformation is the difference in national policies, legal frameworks and governance policies of social media platforms across various jurisdictions. Examining the existing international frameworks, such as cybersecurity treaties and data-sharing agreements used for financial crimes might be helpful to effectively address cross-border misinformation. Adapting these approaches to the digital information ecosystem, nations could strengthen their collective response to the spread of misinformation across borders. Global institutions like the United Nations or regional bodies like the EU and ASEAN can work together to set a unified response and uniform international standards for regulation dealing with misinformation specifically. 

Current National and Regional Efforts

Many countries have taken action to deal with misinformation within their borders. Some examples include:

• The EU’s Digital Services Act has been instrumental in regulating online intermediaries and platforms including marketplaces, social networks, content-sharing platforms, app stores, etc. The legislation aims to prevent illegal and harmful activities online and the spread of disinformation.
• The primary legislation that governs cyberspace in India is the IT Act of 2000 and its corresponding rules (IT Rules, 2023), which impose strict requirements on social media platforms to counter misinformation content and enable the traceability of the creator responsible for the origin of misinformation. Platforms have to conduct due diligence, failing which they risk losing their safe harbour protection. The recently-enacted DPDP Act of 2023 indirectly addresses personal data misuse that can be used to contribute to the creation and spread of misinformation. Also, the proposed Digital India Act is expected to focus on “user harms” specific to the online world. 
• In the U.S., the Right to Editorial Discretion and Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act place the responsibility for regulating misinformation on private actors like social media platforms and social media regulations. The US government has not created a specific framework addressing misinformation and has rather encouraged voluntary measures by SMPs to have independent policies to regulate misinformation on their platforms.

The common gap area across these policies is the absence of a standardised, global framework for addressing cross-border misinformation which results in uneven enforcement and dependence on national regulations.

Key Challenges in Achieving International Cooperation

Some of the key challenges identified in achieving international cooperation to address cross-border misinformation are as follows:

• Geopolitical tensions can emerge due to the differences in political systems, priorities, and trust issues between countries that hinder attempts to cooperate and create a universal regulation.
• The diversity in approaches to internet governance and freedom of speech across countries complicates the matters further.
• Further complications arise due to technical and legal obstacles around the issues of sovereignty, jurisdiction and enforcement, further complicating matters relating to the monitoring and removal of cross-border misinformation. 

CyberPeace Recommendations 

• The UN Global Principles For Information Integrity Recommendations for Multi-stakeholder Action, unveiled on 24 June 2024, are a welcome step for addressing cross-border misinformation. This can act as the stepping stone for developing a framework for international cooperation on misinformation, drawing inspiration from other successful models like climate change agreements, international criminal law framework etc. 
• Collaborations like public-private partnerships between government, tech companies and civil societies can help enhance transparency, data sharing and accountability in tackling cross-border misinformation. 
• Engaging in capacity building and technology transfers in less developed countries would help to create a global front against misinformation. 

Conclusion

We are in an era where misinformation knows no borders and the need for international cooperation has never been more urgent. Global democracies are exploring solutions, both regulatory and legislative, to limit the spread of misinformation, however, these fragmented efforts fall short of addressing the global scale of the problem. Establishing a standardised, international framework, backed by multilateral bodies like the UN and regional alliances, can foster accountability and facilitate shared resources in this fight. Through collaborative action, transparent regulations, and support for developing nations, the world can create a united front to curb misinformation and protect democratic values, ensuring information integrity across borders.

References

• https://economics.mit.edu/sites/default/files/2023-10/A%20Model%20of%20Online%20Misinformation.pdf 
• https://www.indiatoday.in/global/story/in-the-crosshairs-manufacturing-consent-and-the-erosion-of-public-trust-2620734-2024-10-21 
• https://laweconcenter.org/resources/knowledge-and-decisions-in-the-information-age-the-law-economics-of-regulating-misinformation-on-social-media-platforms/ ‍
• https://www.article19.org/resources/un-article-19-global-principles-for-information-integrity/

Executive Summary

This report analyses a recently launched social engineering attack that took advantage of Microsoft Teams and AnyDesk to deliver DarkGate malware, a MaaS tool. This way, through Microsoft Teams and by tricking users into installing AnyDesk, attackers received unauthorized remote access to deploy DarkGate that offers such features as credential theft, keylogging, and fileless persistence. The attack was executed using obfuscated AutoIt scripts for the delivery of malware which shows how threat actors are changing their modus operandi. The case brings into focus the need to put into practice preventive security measures for instance endpoint protection, staff awareness, limited utilization of off-ice-connection tools, and compartmentalization to safely work with the new and increased risks that contemporary cyber threats present.

Introduction

Hackers find new technologies and application that are reputable for spreading campaigns. The latest use of Microsoft Teams and AnyDesk platforms for launching the DarkGate malware is a perfect example of how hackers continue to use social engineering and technical vulnerabilities to penetrate the defenses of organizations. This paper focuses on the details of the technical aspect of the attack, the consequences of the attack together with preventive measures to counter the threat.

Technical Findings

1. Attack Initiation: Exploiting Microsoft Teams

The attackers leveraged Microsoft Teams as a trusted communication platform to deceive victims, exploiting its legitimacy and widespread adoption. Key technical details include:

• Spoofed Caller Identity: The attackers used impersonation techniques to masquerade as representatives of trusted external suppliers.
• Session Hijacking Risks: Exploiting Microsoft Teams session vulnerabilities, attackers aimed to escalate their privileges and deploy malicious payloads.
• Bypassing Email Filters: The initial email bombardment was designed to overwhelm spam filters and ensure that malicious communication reached the victim’s inbox.

2. Remote Access Exploitation: AnyDesk

After convincing victims to install AnyDesk, the attackers exploited the software’s functionality to achieve unauthorized remote access. Technical observations include:

• Command and Control (C2) Integration: Once installed, AnyDesk was configured to establish persistent communication with the attacker’s C2 servers, enabling remote control.
• Privilege Escalation: Attackers exploited misconfigurations in AnyDesk to gain administrative privileges, allowing them to disable antivirus software and deploy payloads.
• Data Exfiltration Potential: With full remote access, attackers could silently exfiltrate data or install additional malware without detection.

3. Malware Deployment: DarkGate Delivery via AutoIt Script

The deployment of DarkGate malware utilized AutoIt scripting, a programming language commonly used for automating Windows-based tasks. Technical details include:

• Payload Obfuscation: The AutoIt script was heavily obfuscated to evade signature-based antivirus detection.
• Process Injection: The script employed process injection techniques to embed DarkGate into legitimate processes, such as explorer.exe or svchost.exe, to avoid detection.
• Dynamic Command Loading: The malware dynamically fetched additional commands from its C2 server, allowing real-time adaptation to the victim’s environment.

4. DarkGate Malware Capabilities

DarkGate, now available as a Malware-as-a-Service (MaaS) offering, provides attackers with advanced features. Technical insights include:

• Credential Dumping: DarkGate used the Mimikatz module to extract credentials from memory and secure storage locations.
• Keylogging Mechanism: Keystrokes were logged and transmitted in real-time to the attacker’s server, enabling credential theft and activity monitoring.
• Fileless Persistence: Utilizing Windows Management Instrumentation (WMI) and registry modifications, the malware ensured persistence without leaving traditional file traces.
• Network Surveillance: The malware monitored network activity to identify high-value targets for lateral movement within the compromised environment.

5. Attack Indicators

Trend Micro researchers identified several indicators of compromise (IoCs) associated with the DarkGate campaign:

• Suspicious Domains: example-remotesupport[.]com and similar domains used for C2 communication.

• Malicious File Hashes:some text
  • AutoIt Script: 5a3f8d0bd6c91234a9cd8321a1b4892d
  • DarkGate Payload: 6f72cde4b7f3e9c1ac81e56c3f9f1d7a
• Behavioral Anomalies:some text
  • Unusual outbound traffic to non-standard ports.
  • Unauthorized registry modifications under HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run.

Broader Cyber Threat Landscape

In parallel with this campaign, other phishing and malware delivery tactics have been observed, including:

1. Cloud Exploitation: Abuse of platforms like Cloudflare Pages to host phishing sites mimicking Microsoft 365 login pages.
2. Quishing Campaigns: Phishing emails with QR codes that redirect users to fake login pages.
3. File Attachment Exploits: Malicious HTML attachments embedding JavaScript to steal credentials.
4. Mobile Malware: Distribution of malicious Android apps capable of financial data theft.

Implications of the DarkGate Campaign

This attack highlights the sophistication of threat actors in leveraging legitimate tools for malicious purposes. Key risks include:

• Advanced Threat Evasion: The use of obfuscation and process injection complicates detection by traditional antivirus solutions.
• Cross-Platform Risk: DarkGate’s modular design enables its functionality across diverse environments, posing risks to Windows, macOS, and Linux systems.
• Organizational Exposure: The compromise of a single endpoint can serve as a gateway for further network exploitation, endangering sensitive organizational data.

Recommendations for Mitigation

1. Enable Advanced Threat Detection: Deploy endpoint detection and response (EDR) solutions to identify anomalous behavior like process injection and dynamic command loading.
2. Restrict Remote Access Tools: Limit the use of tools like AnyDesk to approved use cases and enforce strict monitoring.
3. Use Email Filtering and Monitoring: Implement AI-driven email filtering systems to detect and block email bombardment campaigns.
4. Enhance Endpoint Security: Regularly update and patch operating systems and applications to mitigate vulnerabilities.
5. Educate Employees: Conduct training sessions to help employees recognize and avoid phishing and social engineering tactics.
6. Implement Network Segmentation: Limit the spread of malware within an organization by segmenting high-value assets.

Conclusion

Using Microsoft Teams and AnyDesk to spread DarkGate malware shows the continuous growth of the hackers’ level. The campaign highlights how organizations have to start implementing adequate levels of security preparedness to threats, including, Threat Identification, Training employees, and Rights to Access.

The DarkGate malware is a perfect example of how these attacks have developed into MaaS offerings, meaning that the barrier to launch highly complex attacks is only decreasing, which proves once again why a layered defense approach is crucial. Both awareness and flexibility are still the key issues in addressing the constantly evolving threat in cyberspace.

Reference:

• https://thehackernews.com/2024/12/attackers-exploit-microsoft-teams-and.html
• https://socprime.com/blog/darkgate-malware-detection/

Introduction

The CID of Jharkhand Police has uncovered a network of around 8000 bank accounts engaged in cyber fraud across the state, with a focus on Deoghar district, revealing a surprising 25% concentration of fraudulent accounts. In a recent meeting with bank officials, the CID shared compiled data, with 20% of the identified accounts traced to State Bank of India branches. This revelation, surpassing even Jamtara's cyber fraud reputation, prompts questions about the extent of cybercrime in Jharkhand. Under Director General Anurag Gupta's leadership, the CID has registered 90 cases, apprehended 468 individuals, and seized 1635 SIM cards and 1107 mobile phones through the Prakharna portal to combat cybercrime. 

This shocking revelation by, Jharkhand Police's Criminal Investigation Department (CID) has built a comprehensive database comprising information on about 8000 bank accounts tied to cyber fraud operations in the state. This vital information has aided in the launch of investigations to identify the account holders implicated in these illegal actions. Furthermore, the CID shared this information with bank officials at a meeting on January 12 to speed up the identification process.

Background of the Investigation

The CID shared the collated material with bank officials in a meeting on 12 January 2024 to expedite the identification process. A stunning 2000 of the 8000 bank accounts under investigation are in the Deoghar district alone, with 20 per cent of these accounts connected to various State Bank of India branches. The discovery of 8000 bank accounts related to cybercrime in Jharkhand is shocking and disturbing. Surprisingly, Deoghar district has exceeded even Jamtara, which was famous for cybercrime, accounting for around 25% of the discovered bogus accounts in the state.

As per the information provided by the CID Crime Branch, it has been found that most of the accounts were opened in banks, are currently under investigation and around 2000 have been blocked by the investigating agencies.

Recovery Process

During the investigation, it was found out that most of these accounts were running on rent, the cyber criminals opened them by taking fake phone numbers along with Aadhar cards and identity cards from people in return these people(account holders) will get a fixed amount every month. 

The CID has been unrelenting in its pursuit of cybercriminals. Police have recorded 90 cases and captured 468 people involved in cyber fraud using the Prakharna site. 1635 SIM Cards and 1107 mobile phones were confiscated by police officials during raids in various cities.

The Crime Branch has revealed the names of the cities where accounts are opened

1. Deoghar 2500
2. Dhanbad 1183
3. Ranchi 959
4. Bokaro 716
5. Giridih 707
6. Jamshedpur 584
7. Hazaribagh 526
8. Dumka 475
9. Jamtara 443

Impact on the Financial Institutions and Individuals

These cyber scams significantly influence financial organisations and individuals; let us investigate the implications.

• Victims: Cybercrime victims have significant financial setbacks, which can lead to long-term financial insecurity. In addition, people frequently suffer mental pain as a result of the breach of personal information, which causes worry, fear, and a lack of faith in the digital financial system. One of the most difficult problems for victims is the recovery process, which includes retrieving lost cash and repairing the harm caused by the cyberattack. Individuals will find this approach time-consuming and difficult, in a lot of cases people are unaware of where and when to approach and seek help. Hence, awareness about cybercrimes and a reporting mechanism are necessary to guide victims through the recovery process, aiding them in retrieving lost assets and repairing the harm inflicted by cyberattacks.

• Financial Institutions: Financial institutions face direct consequences when they incur significant losses due to cyber financial fraud. Unauthorised account access, fraudulent transactions, and the compromise of client data result in immediate cash losses and costs associated with investigating and mitigating the breach's impact. Such assaults degrade the reputation of financial organisations, undermine trust, erode customer confidence, and result in the loss of potential clients. 

• Future Implications and Solutions: Recently, the CID discovered a sophisticated cyber fraud network in Jharkhand. As a result, it is critical to assess the possible long-term repercussions of such discoveries and propose proactive ways to improve cybersecurity. The CID's findings are expected to increase awareness of the ongoing threat of cyber fraud to both people and organisations. Given the current state of cyber dangers, it is critical to implement rigorous safeguards and impose heavy punishments on cyber offenders. Government organisations and regulatory bodies should also adapt their present cybersecurity strategies to address the problems posed by modern cybercrime.

Solution and Preventive Measures

Several solutions can help combat the growing nature of cybercrime. The first and foremost step is to enhance cybersecurity education at all levels, including:

• Individual Level: To improve cybersecurity for individuals, raising awareness across all age groups is crucial. This can only be done by knowing the potential threats by following the best online practices, following cyber hygiene, and educating people to safeguard themselves against financial frauds such as phishing, smishing etc.
• Multi-Layered Authentication: Encouraging individuals to enable MFA for their online accounts adds an extra layer of security by requiring additional verification beyond passwords. 
• Continuous monitoring and incident Response:  By continuously monitoring their financial transactions and regularly reviewing the online statements and transaction history, ensure that everyday transactions are aligned with your expenditures, and set up the accounts alert for transactions exceeding a specified amount for usual activity.   
• Report Suspicious Activity: If you see any fraudulent transactions or activity, contact your bank or financial institution immediately; they will lead you through investigating and resolving the problem. The victim must supply the necessary paperwork to support your claim.

How to reduce the risks

• Freeze compromised accounts: If you think that some of your accounts have been compromised, call the bank immediately and request that the account be frozen or temporarily suspended, preventing further unauthorised truncations

• Update passwords: Update and change your passwords for all the financial accounts, emails, and online banking accounts regularly, if you suspect any unauthorised access, report it immediately  and always enable MFA that adds an extra layer of protection to your accounts.

Conclusion

The CID's finding of a cyber fraud network in Jharkhand is a stark reminder of the ever-changing nature of cybersecurity threats. Cyber security measures are necessary to prevent such activities and protect individuals and institutions from being targeted against cyber fraud. As the digital ecosystem continues to grow, it is really important to stay vigilant and alert as an individual and society as a whole. We should actively participate in more awareness activities to update and upgrade ourselves.  

References 

• https://avenuemail.in/cid-uncovers-alarming-cyber-fraud-network-8000-bank-accounts-in-jharkhand-involved/
• https://www.the420.in/jharkhand-cid-cyber-fraud-crackdown-8000-bank-accounts-involved/
• https://www.livehindustan.com/jharkhand/story-cyber-fraudsters-in-jharkhand-opened-more-than-8000-bank-accounts-cid-freezes-2000-accounts-investigating-9203292.html

‍