Biblio

As malware detection algorithms and methods become more sophisticated, malware authors adopt equally sophisticated evasion mechanisms to defeat them. Anecdotal evidence claims Living-Off-The-Land (LotL) techniques are one of the major evasion techniques used in many malware attacks. These techniques leverage binaries already present in the system to conduct malicious actions. We present the first large-scale systematic investigation of the use of these techniques by malware on Windows systems.In this paper, we analyse how common the use of these native system binaries is across several malware datasets, containing a total of 31,805,549 samples. We identify an average 9.41% prevalence. Our results show that the use of LotL techniques is prolific, particularly in Advanced Persistent Threat (APT) malware samples where the prevalence is 26.26%, over twice that of commodity malware.To illustrate the evasive potential of LotL techniques, we test the usage of LotL techniques against several fully patched Windows systems in a local sandboxed environment and show that there is a generalised detection gap in 10 of the most popular anti-virus products.

Code reuse attacks based on return oriented programming (ROP) are becoming more and more prevalent every year. They started as a way to circumvent operating systems protections against injected code, but they are now also used as a technique to keep the malicious code hidden from detection and analysis systems. This means that while in the past ROP chains were short and simple (and therefore did not require any dedicated tool for their analysis), we recently started to observe very complex algorithms – such as a complete rootkit – implemented entirely as a sequence of ROP gadgets. In this paper, we present a set of techniques to analyze complex code reuse attacks. First, we identify and discuss the main challenges that complicate the reverse engineer of code implemented using ROP. Second, we propose an emulation-based framework to dissect, reconstruct, and simplify ROP chains. Finally, we test our tool on the most complex example available to date: a ROP rootkit containing four separate chains, two of them dynamically generated at runtime.