Phishing Attack.Phishing takes place when a fraudster tricks Attack.Phishing an individual into sharing sensitive information ( account numbers , Social Security numbers , login credentials , etc . ) by way of fraudulent emails , texts , or counterfeit websites . Phishing Attack.Phishing can also enable a scammer to gain access to a computer or network so that they can install malware , such as ransomware , on a victim 's computer . Phishers are able to achieve this by spoofing Attack.Phishing the familiar , trusted logos of established , legitimate companies . Or , they may pose as Attack.Phishing a friend or family member and are often successful in completely deluding Attack.Phishing their targets . In carrying out attacks , Dark Caracal uses trojanized WhatsApp and Facebook apps to try to lure Attack.Phishing users into clicking malicious links and downloading Android malware , called Pallas , which can collect vast amounts of data . Dark Caracal targets include governments , military organizations , utilities , financial institutions , manufacturing companies and defense contractors . Stealth Mango ( Android ) and Tangelo ( iOS ) , discovered by Lookout Security Intelligence , are surveillanceware tools that target government officials , diplomats , activists and military personnel , specifically in Pakistan , Afghanistan , Iraq , India and the UAE . According to Lookout Security , “ data from U.S. , Australian , and German officials and military have been swept up in the campaign we believe is being run by members in the Pakistani military. ” Fake eFax email deceives Attack.Phishing email recipients by telling them they have received ‘ a new eFax ’ and that they need to click on a link button in the email to retrieve the document . The link goes to a phishing page . This is not a new attack , but has recently been spotted in emails again . Email filtering company , Mailguard , has picked up Attack.Phishing a fake E-Toll notification containing an infected .doc file . According to Mailguard , the file contains a malicious macro that will download malware to the victim ’ s computer . The notification also includes the logos of Microsoft Office and Mailguard in order to appear Attack.Phishing authentic . It even goes as far as to claim that , “ this document is protected by MailGuard '' . DHL branding was mimicked Attack.Phishing and fake shipping notifications were sent out Attack.Phishing , asking recipients to download an attached file that contained highly destructive trojan malware . “ MEWKit Attack.Phishing ” is a phishing attack Attack.Phishing that directly steals Ethereum from users of MyEtherWallet . Using MyEtherWallet as bait Attack.Phishing , it attempts to trick Attack.Phishing Ethereum investors into logging in to the bogus , cloned version of the website in order to steal their credentials . Gmail ’ s new Confidential Mode may invite link-baiting phishing attacks Attack.Phishing . According to analysis by ComputerWorld , “ Confidential Mode works by storing your email in a secure space on Google servers in the cloud . When both sender and recipient use Gmail , the email appears normal . But recipients who do not use Gmail get a link for viewing the email in a browser . The messages you send or receive via Confidential Mode are not actually email . The link is an email , but the message is an email-looking page on the internet that ’ s password-protected . Emails containing the link can , in fact , be forwarded , but only the intended recipient can successfully open the link . When someone gets one of these forwarded mails , they ’ re prompted for their Google login username and password to determine whether or not they ’ re the intended recipient . This is problematic , because it invites link-baiting phishing attacks Attack.Phishing , which could con people into revealing their login information . ” A phishing campaign Attack.Phishing targeting Apple users seeks to dupe Attack.Phishing victims into updating their profiles in preparation for the EU ’ s General Data Protection Regulation ( GDPR ) policies , which go into effect on May 25 . This is just one of many scams exploiting the coming implementation of GDPR policies .

Scammers are flooding the United States with Chinese-language robocalls , causing major headaches from coast to coast . These new robocalls are a lot like the ones you ’ ve already gotten on your phone at all hours of the day and night : Your phone rings , you pick up , and after a brief pause or maybe a quiet click or beep , a prerecorded voice message meets your ears . The recording , which often sounds like a young woman , usually delivers a message about lowering credit-card rates or buying into cheap health insurance . If you fall for the bait Attack.Phishing , you ’ re transferred to a live human who will try anything to get you to hand over your credit-card or bank account info . The important thing to remember is that sales robocalls are illegal in the United States . So , don ’ t expect the person on the other end of the line to follow through on whatever deal they claim to offer . You ’ re much more likely to fall victim to an identity theft scam or credit-card fraud than to score a deal from one of these spam callers . The new Chinese-language version of these calls targets immigrants . The robocalls deliver a recorded message claiming to be Attack.Phishing from the Chinese consulate , saying the recipient is in trouble with Chinese officials , or sometimes that a package is waiting at the Chinese consulate that needs to be picked up . Then , the robocall asks for a deposit or fee , demanding a credit-card number or bank information . Sometimes the robocall or live operator who follows it makes a threat , suggesting that more trouble will come if the person doesn ’ t willingly hand over their financial info , according to the Federal Trade Commission . In New York City alone , police estimate at least 30 residents had been scammed out of $ 3 million , according to National Public Radio . The Chinese Consulate General in New York says it has posted dozens of alerts on its website warning about the scams . `` We would like to restate that the Consulate General in New York would not ask for personal information , deliver parcel pick-up notice or ask people to answer inquiries from police department by way of phone calls . The Consulate General would not ask for bank account information , '' it warned . The scammers are also upping the ante with a tech trick Attack.Phishing called “ spoofing Attack.Phishing . ” Spoofed calls can fake Attack.Phishing caller ID numbers , making them look like Attack.Phishing they ’ re coming from Attack.Phishing a familiar number , nearby area code , your hometown or in this case , the Chinese consulate , according to the Federal Communications Commission , which also issued an alert . So , even if you do n't speak Chinese , why would you get so many calls ? The scammers don ’ t know who they ’ re calling , and it costs virtually nothing to place a phone call , so if they hit a few thousand English-speaking phones for every one Chinese speaker that ’ s totally fine with them . This scam uses many of the same ploys used on unsuspecting English speakers , say in the scam where the caller pretends to be Attack.Phishing from the IRS and is demanding payments on back taxes that don ’ t really exist .

Cybercriminals are finding it more difficult to maintain the malicious URLs and deceptive domains used for phishing attacks Attack.Phishing for more than a few hours because action is being taken to remove them from the internet much more quickly . That does n't mean that phishing Attack.Phishing -- one of the most common means of performing cyber-attacks -- is any less dangerous , but a faster approach to dealing with the issue is starting to hinder attacks . Deceptive domain names look like Attack.Phishing those of authentic services , so that somebody who clicks on a malicious link may not realise they are n't visiting the real website of the organisation being spoofed Attack.Phishing . One of the most common agencies to be imitated Attack.Phishing by cyber-attackers around the world is that of government tax collectors . The idea behind such attacks Attack.Phishing is that people will be tricked Attack.Phishing into believing they are owed money by emails claiming to be Attack.Phishing from the taxman . However , no payment ever comes , and if a victim falls for such an attack , they 're only going to lose money when their bank details are stolen Attack.Databreach , and they can even have their personal information compromised Attack.Databreach . In order to combat phishing Attack.Phishing and other forms of cyber-attack , the UK 's National Cyber Crime Centre -- the internet security arm of GCHQ -- launched what it called the Active Cyber Defence programme a year ago . It appears to have some success in its first 12 months because , despite a rise in registered fraudulent domains , the lifespan of a phishing URL has been reduced and the number of global phishing attacks Attack.Phishing being carried out by UK-hosted sites has declined from five percent to three percent . The figures are laid out in a new NCSC report : Active Cyber Defence - One Year On . During that time , 121,479 phishing sites hosted in the UK , and 18,067 worldwide spoofing Attack.Phishing UK government , were taken down , with many of them purporting to be Attack.Phishing HMRC and linked to phishing emails in the form of tax refund scams . An active approach to dealing with phishing domains has also led to a reduction in the amount of time these sites are active , potentially limiting cybercriminal campaigns before they can gain any real traction . Prior to the launch of the program , the average time a phishing website spoofing Attack.Phishing a UK government website remained active was for 42 hours -- or almost two days . Now , with an approach designed around looking for domains and taking them down , that 's dropped to ten hours , leaving a much smaller window for attacks to be effective . However , while this does mean there 's less time for the attackers to steal Attack.Databreach information or finances , it does n't mean that they 're not successful in carrying out attacks . The increased number of registered domains for carrying out phishing attacks Attack.Phishing shows that crooks are happy to work a little bit harder in order to reap the rewards of campaigns -- and the NCSC is n't under any illusion that the job of protecting internet users is anywhere near complete . `` The ACD programme intends to increase our cyber adversaries ' risk and reduces their return on investment to protect the majority of people in the UK from cyber attacks , '' said Dr Ian Levy , technical director of the NCSC . `` The results we have published today are positive , but there is a lot more work to be done . The successes we have had in our first year will cause attackers to change their behaviour and we will need to adapt . '' A focus on taking down HMRC and other government-related domains has helped UK internet users , but cyber-attacks are n't limited by borders , with many malicious IPs hosted in practically every country used to carry out cyber-attacks around the world -- meaning every country should be playing a part . `` Obviously , phishing Attack.Phishing and web-inject attacks are not connected to the UK 's IP space and most campaigns of these types are hosted elsewhere . There needs to be concerted international effort to have a real effect on the security of users , '' says the report .

Cybercriminals are finding it more difficult to maintain the malicious URLs and deceptive domains used for phishing attacks Attack.Phishing for more than a few hours because action is being taken to remove them from the internet much more quickly . That does n't mean that phishing Attack.Phishing -- one of the most common means of performing cyber-attacks -- is any less dangerous , but a faster approach to dealing with the issue is starting to hinder attacks . Deceptive domain names look like Attack.Phishing those of authentic services , so that somebody who clicks on a malicious link may not realise they are n't visiting the real website of the organisation being spoofed Attack.Phishing . One of the most common agencies to be imitated Attack.Phishing by cyber-attackers around the world is that of government tax collectors . The idea behind such attacks Attack.Phishing is that people will be tricked Attack.Phishing into believing they are owed money by emails claiming to be Attack.Phishing from the taxman . However , no payment ever comes , and if a victim falls for such an attack , they 're only going to lose money when their bank details are stolen Attack.Databreach , and they can even have their personal information compromised Attack.Databreach . In order to combat phishing Attack.Phishing and other forms of cyber-attack , the UK 's National Cyber Crime Centre -- the internet security arm of GCHQ -- launched what it called the Active Cyber Defence programme a year ago . It appears to have some success in its first 12 months because , despite a rise in registered fraudulent domains , the lifespan of a phishing URL has been reduced and the number of global phishing attacks Attack.Phishing being carried out by UK-hosted sites has declined from five percent to three percent . The figures are laid out in a new NCSC report : Active Cyber Defence - One Year On . During that time , 121,479 phishing sites hosted in the UK , and 18,067 worldwide spoofing Attack.Phishing UK government , were taken down , with many of them purporting to be Attack.Phishing HMRC and linked to phishing emails in the form of tax refund scams . An active approach to dealing with phishing domains has also led to a reduction in the amount of time these sites are active , potentially limiting cybercriminal campaigns before they can gain any real traction . Prior to the launch of the program , the average time a phishing website spoofing Attack.Phishing a UK government website remained active was for 42 hours -- or almost two days . Now , with an approach designed around looking for domains and taking them down , that 's dropped to ten hours , leaving a much smaller window for attacks to be effective . However , while this does mean there 's less time for the attackers to steal Attack.Databreach information or finances , it does n't mean that they 're not successful in carrying out attacks . The increased number of registered domains for carrying out phishing attacks Attack.Phishing shows that crooks are happy to work a little bit harder in order to reap the rewards of campaigns -- and the NCSC is n't under any illusion that the job of protecting internet users is anywhere near complete . `` The ACD programme intends to increase our cyber adversaries ' risk and reduces their return on investment to protect the majority of people in the UK from cyber attacks , '' said Dr Ian Levy , technical director of the NCSC . `` The results we have published today are positive , but there is a lot more work to be done . The successes we have had in our first year will cause attackers to change their behaviour and we will need to adapt . '' A focus on taking down HMRC and other government-related domains has helped UK internet users , but cyber-attacks are n't limited by borders , with many malicious IPs hosted in practically every country used to carry out cyber-attacks around the world -- meaning every country should be playing a part . `` Obviously , phishing Attack.Phishing and web-inject attacks are not connected to the UK 's IP space and most campaigns of these types are hosted elsewhere . There needs to be concerted international effort to have a real effect on the security of users , '' says the report .

Business Email Compromise (BEC) attacks Attack.Phishing jumped 45 % in the final quarter of 2016 , compared to the previous three months , according to new stats from Proofpoint . The security vendor claimed such attacks have grown both in volume and sophistication . Also known as “ CEO fraud ” and “ whaling ” , these attacks Attack.Phishing typically involve fraudsters spoofing Attack.Phishing the email addresses of company CEOs to trick Attack.Phishing staff members into transferring funds outside the company . However , Proofpoint also includes attempts to target HR teams for confidential tax information and sensitive employee data , as well as engineering departments which may have access to a wealth of lucrative corporate IP . In its analysis of over 5000 global enterprise customers , it claimed that in two-thirds of cases the attacker spoofed Attack.Phishing the “ from ” email domain to display the same as that of the targeted company . These attacks Attack.Phishing can thwart some systems , because they don ’ t feature malware as such – just a combination of this domain spoofing Attack.Phishing and social engineering of the victim to force them to pay up . Part of the trick is to harry the target , rushing them so they have less time to think about what they ’ re doing . That ’ s why over 70 % of the most common BEC Attack.Phishing subject line families appraised by Proofpoint featured the words “ Urgent ” , “ Payment ” and “ Request ” . The vendor claimed that firms in the manufacturing , retail and technology sectors are especially at risk , as cyber-criminals repeatedly look to take advantage of more complex supply chains and SaaS infrastructures . Vice-president of products , Robert Holmes , argued that although employee education was important , it needs to be complemented by the right set of tools to weed out fraudulent emails . “ When it comes to BEC attacks Attack.Phishing , employees should never be an organization ’ s first line of defense . It is the organization ’ s responsibility to ensure that security technologies are in place , so that BEC attacks are stopped before they can reach their intended target , ” he told Infosecurity Magazine . BEC Attack.Phishing has become so popular among the black hats that the FBI warned organizations last year the scams had cost billions since 2013 . Trend Micro predicted that 2017 would see more and more cyber-criminals turn to BEC Attack.Phishing given the potential rich pickings – claiming the average pay-out is $ 140,000 , versus just $ 722 for a typical ransomware attack Attack.Ransom . However , Holmes argued that ransomware and BEC actors are likely “ two distinct types of criminal ” . “ While ransomware attacks Attack.Ransom require technical infrastructure to launch campaigns at scale , BEC attacks Attack.Phishing are socially engineered and highly targeted in nature , conducted by a single actor rather than teams , and generally launched from shared email platforms , ” he explained . “ While cyber-criminals will always go where the money is , we do not envision a drastic change in tactics such as traditional purveyors of ransomware transitioning to BEC Attack.Phishing . As long as ransomware and trojans continue to pay , cyber-criminals with technical skillsets are unlikely to down tools and pivot towards such a fundamentally different type of attack vector . ”

Business Email Compromise (BEC) attacks Attack.Phishing jumped 45 % in the final quarter of 2016 , compared to the previous three months , according to new stats from Proofpoint . The security vendor claimed such attacks have grown both in volume and sophistication . Also known as “ CEO fraud ” and “ whaling ” , these attacks Attack.Phishing typically involve fraudsters spoofing Attack.Phishing the email addresses of company CEOs to trick Attack.Phishing staff members into transferring funds outside the company . However , Proofpoint also includes attempts to target HR teams for confidential tax information and sensitive employee data , as well as engineering departments which may have access to a wealth of lucrative corporate IP . In its analysis of over 5000 global enterprise customers , it claimed that in two-thirds of cases the attacker spoofed Attack.Phishing the “ from ” email domain to display the same as that of the targeted company . These attacks Attack.Phishing can thwart some systems , because they don ’ t feature malware as such – just a combination of this domain spoofing Attack.Phishing and social engineering of the victim to force them to pay up . Part of the trick is to harry the target , rushing them so they have less time to think about what they ’ re doing . That ’ s why over 70 % of the most common BEC Attack.Phishing subject line families appraised by Proofpoint featured the words “ Urgent ” , “ Payment ” and “ Request ” . The vendor claimed that firms in the manufacturing , retail and technology sectors are especially at risk , as cyber-criminals repeatedly look to take advantage of more complex supply chains and SaaS infrastructures . Vice-president of products , Robert Holmes , argued that although employee education was important , it needs to be complemented by the right set of tools to weed out fraudulent emails . “ When it comes to BEC attacks Attack.Phishing , employees should never be an organization ’ s first line of defense . It is the organization ’ s responsibility to ensure that security technologies are in place , so that BEC attacks are stopped before they can reach their intended target , ” he told Infosecurity Magazine . BEC Attack.Phishing has become so popular among the black hats that the FBI warned organizations last year the scams had cost billions since 2013 . Trend Micro predicted that 2017 would see more and more cyber-criminals turn to BEC Attack.Phishing given the potential rich pickings – claiming the average pay-out is $ 140,000 , versus just $ 722 for a typical ransomware attack Attack.Ransom . However , Holmes argued that ransomware and BEC actors are likely “ two distinct types of criminal ” . “ While ransomware attacks Attack.Ransom require technical infrastructure to launch campaigns at scale , BEC attacks Attack.Phishing are socially engineered and highly targeted in nature , conducted by a single actor rather than teams , and generally launched from shared email platforms , ” he explained . “ While cyber-criminals will always go where the money is , we do not envision a drastic change in tactics such as traditional purveyors of ransomware transitioning to BEC Attack.Phishing . As long as ransomware and trojans continue to pay , cyber-criminals with technical skillsets are unlikely to down tools and pivot towards such a fundamentally different type of attack vector . ”

A massive phishing campaign Attack.Phishing targeting Google accounts ripped through the internet on Wednesday afternoon . Several people online across a range of industries said they received Attack.Phishing emails containing what looked like Attack.Phishing a link to a Google Doc that appeared to come from Attack.Phishing someone they know . These , however , were malicious emails designed to hijack their accounts . It 's unclear exactly how the attack works at the moment , but it does appear to be highly sophisticated . A Reddit user has a good breakdown of what happens exactly when you click on the Google Doc button . In a few words , when you click on the link , the login screen takes you to a genuine Google domain , but that domain asks you to grant access to an app called Google Docs that is not the real Google Docs . And the `` Google Docs '' app reads all your email and contacts , and then self-propagates by sending more emails . We 've also heard reports that Google Drive was down , and experienced the outage ourselves , but can not yet confirm if that is related to the attack . ( It 'd be a hell of a coincidence , although Drive appears to be working again . ) `` We have taken action to protect users against an email impersonating Google Docs , and have disabled offending accounts , '' Google said in a statement sent to Motherboard . `` We 've removed the fake pages , pushed Vulnerability-related.PatchVulnerability updates through Safe Browsing , and our abuse team is working to prevent this kind of spoofing Attack.Phishing from happening again . We encourage users to report phishing emails in Gmail . '' In a subsequent statement , Google said that the phishing campaign Attack.Phishing was halted `` within approximately an hour '' and that it `` affected fewer than 0.1 % of Gmail users . '' While that sounds low , considering that Gmail has around 1 billion users , that 's still around one million victims .

Google Docs was pulled into a sneaky email phishing attack Attack.Phishing on Tuesday that was designed to trick Attack.Phishing users into giving up access to their Gmail accounts . The phishing emails , which circulated Attack.Phishing for about three hours before Google stopped them , invited Attack.Phishing the recipient to open what appeared to be Attack.Phishing a Google Doc . The teaser was a blue box that said , “ Open in Docs. ” In reality , the link led to a dummy app that asked users for permission to access their Gmail account . An example of the phishing email that circulated Attack.Phishing on Tuesday . Users might easily have been fooled Attack.Phishing , because the dummy app was actually named “ Google Docs. ” It also asked for access to Gmail through Google ’ s actual login service . The hackers were able to pull off the attack by abusing the OAuth protocol , a way for internet accounts at Google , Twitter , Facebook and other services to connect with third-party apps . The OAuth protocol doesn ’ t transfer any password information , but instead uses special access tokens that can open account access . However , OAuth can be dangerous in the wrong hands . The hackers behind Tuesday’s attack Attack.Phishing appear to have built Attack.Phishing an actual third-party app that leveraged Google processes to gain account access . The dummy app will try to ask for account permission . Last month , Trend Micro said a Russian hacking group known as Fancy Bear was using a similar email attack method that abused the OAuth protocol to phish Attack.Phishing victims . However , security experts said Tuesday's phishing attack Attack.Phishing probably was n't from Fancy Bear , a shadowy group that many experts suspect works for the Russian government . `` I do n't believe they are behind this ... because this is way too widespread , '' Jaime Blasco , chief scientist at security provider AlienVault , said in an email . On Tuesday , many users on Twitter , including journalists , posted screen shots of the phishing emails , prompting speculation that the hackers were harvesting Attack.Databreach victims ' contact lists to target more users . The attack Attack.Phishing was also sent Attack.Phishing through an email address at `` hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh @ mailinator.com . '' Mailinator , a provider of a free email service , denied any involvement . Fortunately , Google moved quickly to stop the phishing attacks Attack.Phishing , after a user on Reddit posted about them . “ We ’ ve removed the fake pages , pushed Vulnerability-related.PatchVulnerability updates through Safe Browsing , and our abuse team is working to prevent this kind of spoofing Attack.Phishing from happening again , ” Google said in a statement . Security experts and Google recommend affected users check what third-party apps have permission to access their account and revoke any suspicious access . Users can do so by visiting this address , or performing a Google security check-up . Tuesday's phishing scheme Attack.Phishing will probably push Google to adopt an even stricter stance on apps that use OAuth , said Robert Graham , CEO of research company Errata Security . However , the internet giant has to strike a balance between ensuring security and fostering a flourishing app ecosystem . `` The more vetting you do , the more you stop innovation , '' Graham said . `` It 's a trade-off . ''

Google users today were hit Attack.Phishing with an extremely convincing phishing spree Attack.Phishing launched by attackers who manipulated Google Docs ' legitimate third-party sharing mechanism . Targets received Attack.Phishing messages with the subject like `` [ Sender ] has shared a document on Google Docs with you '' often from senders they knew . The messages contained links , which led to a page that clearly requested access to the user 's Gmail account . If the target user provides access , the attack Attack.Phishing begins sending Attack.Phishing spam to all the user 's contacts . Theoretically , the attacker could also access Attack.Databreach the victim 's messages and steal Attack.Databreach sensitive data , but thus far there have been no reports of such activity . Because it takes advantage of Google 's legitimate third-party sharing mechanism , the phishing message is much more difficult to identify as malicious . The icons and messaging are familiar to Google users . Gmail itself did not filter the messages as phishing Attack.Phishing or flag them as spam , but rather sent them to Gmail users ' `` Primary '' inbox mail folders . The senders were familiar enough to have the target in their contact lists . One way to spot the attack : some targets report that the message includes a recipient with an address that begins `` hhhhhhhhhhhhhh '' and ends with the domain `` mailinator.com . '' Google responded with a fix and issued a statement : `` We have taken action to protect users against an email impersonating Attack.Phishing Google Docs , and have disabled offending accounts . We ’ ve removed the fake pages , pushed Vulnerability-related.PatchVulnerability updates through Safe Browsing , and our abuse team is working to prevent this kind of spoofing Attack.Phishing from happening again . We encourage users to report phishing emails in Gmail . If you think you were affected , visit http : //g.co/SecurityCheckup '' Those who have already fallen victim to this attack should also go to their Google account permissions settings and revoke access to the false `` Google Docs '' application . They 're also advised to set up two-factor authentication .

Google said it has disabled offending accounts involved in a widespread spree of phishing emails today impersonating Attack.Phishing Google Docs . The emails , at the outset , targeted journalists primarily and attempted to trick Attack.Phishing victims into granting the malicious application permission to access the user ’ s Google account . It ’ s unknown how many accounts were compromised Attack.Databreach , or whether other applications are also involved . Google advises caution in clicking on links in emails sharing Google Docs . The messages purport to be from Attack.Phishing a contact , including contacts known to the victim , wanting to share a Google Doc file . Once the “ Open in Docs ” button is clicked , the victim is redirected to Google ’ s OAUTH2 service and the user is prompted to allow the attacker ’ s malicious application , called “ Google Docs , ” below , to access their Google account and related services , including contacts , Gmail , Docs and more . “ We have taken action to protect users against an email impersonating Attack.Phishing Google Docs , and have disabled offending accounts , ” a Google spokesperson told Threatpost . “ We ’ ve removed the fake pages , pushed Vulnerability-related.PatchVulnerability updates through Safe Browsing , and our abuse team is working to prevent this kind of spoofing Attack.Phishing from happening again . We encourage users to report phishing emails in Gmail. ” OAUTH is an authentication standard that allows a user to authorize third party applications access to an account . The attempt to steal OAUTH tokens is a departure from traditional phishing attacks Attack.Phishing that target passwords primarily . Once the attacker has access Attack.Databreach to the victim ’ s account , the phishing message is sent Attack.Phishing along to the compromised contact list . While this attack is likely the work of a spammer , nation-state attackers including APT28 , aka Fancy Bear or Sofacy , have made use of this tactic . APT28 has been linked to last summer’s attacks Attack.Phishing attempting to influence the U.S. presidential elections . The group has long been targeting political entities , including NATO , and uses phishing emails , backdoors and data-stealing malware to conduct espionage campaigns against its targets . “ I don ’ t believe they are behind this though because this is way too widespread , ” said Jaime Blasco , chief scientist at AlienVault . “ Many people and organizations have received similar attempts , so this is probably something massive and less targeted . ”

A massive phishing campaign Attack.Phishing took place today , but Google 's security staff was on hand and shut down the attacker 's efforts within an hour after users first reported the problem on Reddit . According to multiple reports on Twitter , the attacks Attack.Phishing first hit Attack.Phishing journalists , businesses , and universities , but later spread to many other users as well . The attack itself was quite clever if we can say so ourselves . Victims received Attack.Phishing a legitimate ( non-spoofed ) email from one of their friends , that asked them to click on a button to receive access to a Google Docs document . If users clicked the button , they were redirected to the real Google account selection screen , where a fake app titled Attack.Phishing `` Google Docs '' ( not the real one ) asked the user 's permission to authorize it to access the shared document . In reality , the app only wanted access to the user 's Gmail inbox and contact list . After gaining access Attack.Databreach to these details , the fake app copied the user 's contact list and sent Attack.Phishing a copy of itself to the new set of targets , spreading itself to more and more targets . The email was actually sent Attack.Phishing to `` hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh @ mailinator.com , '' with the user 's email address added as BCC . Following the incident , Mailinator intervened and blocked any new emails from arriving into that inbox . Because of this self-replicating feature , the phishing attack Attack.Phishing spread like wildfire in a few minutes , just like the old Samy worm that devasted MySpace over a decade ago . Fortunately , one Google staff member was visting the /r/Google Reddit thread , and was able to spot a trending topic detailing the phishing campaign Attack.Phishing . The Google engineer forwarded the Reddit thread to the right person , and within an hour after users first complained about the issue , Google had already disabled the fake app 's ability to access the Google OAuth screen . Later on , as engineers had more time to investigate the issue , Google issued the following statement : We have taken action to protect users against an email impersonating Attack.Phishing Google Docs & have disabled offending accounts . We ’ ve removed the fake pages , pushed Vulnerability-related.PatchVulnerability updates through Safe Browsing , and our abuse team is working to prevent this kind of spoofing Attack.Phishing from happening again . We encourage users to report phishing emails in Gmail . There are no reports that malware was deployed in the phishing attack Attack.Phishing . Cloudflare was also quick to take down all the domains associated with the phishing attack Attack.Phishing . Users that clicked on the button inside the phishing email can go to the https : //myaccount.google.com/permissions page and see if they granted the app permission to access their account . The real Google Docs is n't listed in this section , as it does not need permissions , being an official Google property .

If you get Attack.Phishing a Google Doc link in your inbox today , scrutinize it carefully before you click—even if it looks like Attack.Phishing it comes from Attack.Phishing someone you trust . A nasty phishing scam Attack.Phishing that impersonates Attack.Phishing a Google Docs request has swept the internet today , including a decent chunk of media companies . You 've heard `` think before you click '' a million times , but it really could save you from a whole lot of hassle . Google has taken steps to neutralize this particular phish Attack.Phishing . The company said in a statement that it has `` disabled offending accounts . We ’ ve removed the fake pages , pushed Vulnerability-related.PatchVulnerability updates through Safe Browsing , and our abuse team is working to prevent this kind of spoofing Attack.Phishing from happening again . '' But when it comes to phishing defense Attack.Phishing there 's always an element of cat and mouse . Large-scale phishing attacks Attack.Phishing and those impersonating Attack.Phishing popular services like Google log-in pages regularly stalk the internet . `` The importance of this phish Attack.Phishing is not how it spread , but rather how it didn ’ t use malware or fake websites tricking Attack.Phishing users to give up their passwords , '' says Aaron Higbee , chief technology officer at the phishing research and defense company PhishMe , which analyzed data from the fake Google Docs campaign. `` This phish Attack.Phishing worked because it tricked Attack.Phishing the user into granting permissions to a third-party application . This is the future of phishing Attack.Phishing , and every security technology vendor is ill-equipped to deal with it . '' Similar Google Docs scams Attack.Phishing in particular have been circulating Attack.Phishing since at least 2014 , but that does n't make them any easier to spot , in part because they seem so authentic . Phishers can use real Google accounts and develop third-party plugins that can interact with Google services , so they can lure Attack.Phishing victims in through the most perfect-looking Google web pages of all : Genuine ones .

Researchers from Positive Technologies have unearthed Vulnerability-related.DiscoverVulnerability a critical vulnerability ( CVE-2017-6968 ) in Checker ATM Security by Spanish corporate group GMV Innovating Solutions . Checker ATM Security is a specialized security solution aimed at keeping ATMs safe from logical attacks . It does so by enforcing application whitelisting , full hard disk encryption , providing ACL-based control of process execution and resource access , enforcing security policies , restricting attempts to connect peripheral devices , and so on . The found flaw can be exploited Vulnerability-related.DiscoverVulnerability to remotely run code on a targeted ATM , increase the attacker ’ s privileges in the system , and compromise the machine completely . “ To exploit the vulnerability , a criminal would need to pose as Attack.Phishing the control server , which is possible via ARP spoofing Attack.Phishing , or by simply connecting the ATM to a criminal-controlled network connection , ” researcher Georgy Zaytsev explained . “ During the process of generating the public key for traffic encryption , the rogue server can cause a buffer overflow on the ATM due to failure on the client side to limit the length of response parameters and send a command for remote code execution . This can give an attacker full control over the ATM and allow a variety of manipulations , including unauthorized money withdrawal ” . ” When informed Vulnerability-related.DiscoverVulnerability of the vulnerability and provided with test exploits , GMV confirmed Vulnerability-related.DiscoverVulnerability its existence and that it affects Vulnerability-related.DiscoverVulnerability versions 4.x and 5.x of the software , and ultimately pushed Vulnerability-related.PatchVulnerability out a patch , which users are urged to install Vulnerability-related.PatchVulnerability as soon as possible . Exploitation not detected in the wild A company spokesperson has made sure to point out that there is no indication that the vulnerability has been exploited Vulnerability-related.DiscoverVulnerability in attacks in the wild . Also , that exploitation is not that easy , as the attacker must first gain access to the ATM network and log into the target system . “ Secondly , the attack is difficult to be systematically exploited in an ATM network . In order to exploit it , the attacker needs some memory address that are strongly dependent on Windows kernel version , while in Windows XP systems could be theoretically possible to take advantage of the vulnerability , in Windows 7 is almost impossible because those memory address are different in every windows installation , ” the spokesperson told The Register . Like any software , security software is not immune to vulnerabilities and can open systems to exploitation . While antivirus and other security solutions for personal computers are often scrutinized and tested for flaws by third-party researchers , specialized security software has not , so far , received that amount of attention . So , it ’ s good to hear that some researchers have decided to focus on them , and that vendors are positively responding to vulnerability disclosures Vulnerability-related.DiscoverVulnerability .