{"id":6968,"date":"2017-03-14T08:10:22","date_gmt":"2017-03-14T16:10:22","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.palada.net\/index.php\/2017\/03\/14\/news-759\/"},"modified":"2017-03-14T08:10:22","modified_gmt":"2017-03-14T16:10:22","slug":"news-759","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.palada.net\/index.php\/2017\/03\/14\/news-759\/","title":{"rendered":"How not to phish a security researcher on Twitter"},"content":{"rendered":"

Credit to Author: Christopher Boyd| Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 15:00:00 +0000<\/strong><\/p>\n

You’ve compromised a few accounts. You’ve worked up a list of people most likely to click your links\u00a0or send you personal data. You’ve figured\u00a0out your fake Twitter verification scam and the bogus accounts are ready to roll. You’re feeling good about your general angle of approach, but – watch out! – because things are about to go horribly wrong.<\/p>\n

For my part, I don’t go to the zoo and put my head in a crocodile’s mouth. I try to avoid sunbathing on NASCAR tracks. I wouldn’t download a car.<\/p>\n

With that in mind, then, I can’t quite fathom the rationale behind picking your an\u00a0Infosec researcher\u00a0as the target of a “Get verified on Twitter” scam, especially given that I’m already verified:<\/p>\n

\"Get<\/a><\/p>\n

\n

“We just verified your account message us”<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Yes, of course you did.<\/p>\n

It’s highly likely they didn’t bother to check my profile bio or they’d have made their excuses and left. That’s what I keep telling myself, anyway. There’s no accounting for that rare breed of\u00a0YOLO scammer.<\/p>\n

I gave them a follow to see what they’d send by DM, because that’s usually how they do things. Not long after:<\/p>\n

\"message<\/a><\/p>\n

\n

“Hello we need you to confirm some info to keep your verified account can you do this”<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Things have now changed a little – they’re no longer telling me I can get verified, or that they have verified me; it’s now all about keeping said status.<\/p>\n

I was all geared up to send some DMs their way in response but a technical hitch left me unable to do so. At this point, a game of “Please send me a message somehow” commenced in the hope that they might take the bait and show me what their scam consisted of:<\/p>\n

\"Sliding<\/a><\/p>\n

If the recipient had been a bot, then it’s possible nothing would be forthcoming because they’re not always created with the ability to reply. If there was<\/em> a person at the other end, then I might get a DM to my inbox. If they were feeling particularly adventurous, they might fire over a message publicly. Would they\u00a0send a security researcher who spends their time writing about scams and has “Malware Analyst @malwarebytes” on their bio a phish attempt? A phish attempt that would not only be hugely unproductive for them, but also likely end up as a bout of mockery, account cancellation, and a blog post?<\/p>\n

\"To<\/a><\/p>\n

To coin a phrase, “whoops”.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

“We need you to confrim [sic] your name age twitter password and email address and phone number”<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

As it turns out, spelling “Twitter” like “TVVITTER” is not a key indicator of success. In the end, they couldn’t even muster a semi-decent phishing page, or a phishing page at all for that matter. Just a barebones attempt at being the Wallet Inspector and simply asking me to send them my credentials. In fact, the Wallet Inspector had been busy:<\/p>\n

\"Phishy,<\/a><\/p>\n

Lots of attempts at luring\u00a0people into DM conversations, and making a beeline for\u00a0their logins.<\/p>\n

Immediately after being called out, the scammers went into panic mode and started deleting incriminating tweets which let me throw in a Watchmen reference, so that was nice.<\/p>\n

\n

“Do you seriously think I would explain if there were even the slightest possibility you could affect the outcome? I did it 35 minutes ago.” pic.twitter.com\/a9AKvje0KN<\/a><\/p>\n

\u2014 Chris Boyd (@paperghost) March 12, 2017<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Top tip: always screenshot everything before making a move. It’s one weird trick that scammers hate.<\/p>\n

I’m not sure what use blocking me was at this point, because the damage (for them) was already done. At least it made them feel a bit better, I guess?<\/p>\n

\"blocked\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Time to play out their last, desperate, phishy moments…<\/p>\n

\n

yo @verified<\/a> @Support<\/a> you have phishing going on at @HQ_TVVITTER<\/a> pic.twitter.com\/UE7D7PEAZN<\/a><\/p>\n

\u2014 Chris Boyd (@paperghost) March 12, 2017<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\n

@paperghost<\/a> @verified<\/a> @Support<\/a> @HQ_TVVITTER<\/a> SUSPENDED! That was fast cc @martijn_grooten<\/a><\/p>\n

\u2014 DEY! (@DEYCrypt) March 12, 2017<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Now that’s a fast takedown (roughly a minute or so?) by Twitter.<\/p>\n

And so my brief encounter with an overly ambitious Twitter phisher comes to an end. I’d like to say parting is such sweet sorrow, but Banhammers are great so I guess I’m not that bothered. Remember: no random Twitter feed can grant you verified status and especially not one making creative use of the English language to spell “Twitter”. If someone asks you for login credentials either publicly or by DM, report them to the appropriate channels and go about your business.<\/p>\n

Unless it’s inspecting wallets, in which case you’ll probably be appearing on the blog in the near future…<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Christopher Boyd<\/em><\/p>\n

The post How not to phish a security researcher on Twitter<\/a> appeared first on Malwarebytes Labs<\/a>.<\/p>\n

https:\/\/blog.malwarebytes.com\/feed\/<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Credit to Author: Christopher Boyd| Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 15:00:00 +0000<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
What happens when a phisher decides to try and directly phish a security researcher on Twitter? This.<\/p>\n

Categories: <\/p>\n