Shall we say… Good bye, phishing queue? Part 2

In my older piece I argued that we should stop caring about phishing alerts. Of course, it was a bit of a parable…

Still, there is a lot of quick wins I described there that can be implemented/incorporated into phishing workflows easily – as long as you have some sort of automation/SOAR in place…

As I mentioned back then, any emails marked as phish that come from all these ‘noreply’, ‘no-reply’, ‘donotreply’ mailboxes coming from well known domains can be (most of the time) auto-closed w/o any investigation…

Easy to say, but what are these really…?

While I have personally collected a long list of these nothingburger email senders before, I got curious how many of these generic ‘do not reply’ type of email accounts are really out there, and not within a single company’s scope, but in general (that is, just email account names hosted on popular domains that belong to the ‘do nothing’ category).

If asked about listing these passive account names from the top of your head I bet you would start with ‘noreply’, ‘no-reply’, and all the variants of ‘donotreply’, then you would perhaps follow with ‘contact’, ‘info’, ‘abuse’, ‘webmaster’, and so on and so forth, but … this is just a guesswork. I thought this approach was too speculative and that we can build a more more comprehensive list of these w/o guessing. And mind you, this IS a very difficult request to fulfill. Unless you work for a company working in the mail security business, that is…

And since I don’t, let’s get creative…

I wrote a quick & dirty script that goes through a batch of files containing email addresses extracted from various public e-mail dumps. It reads them one by one and it tries to extract some basic stats about them. A lot of results are quite boring and non-actionable, many are discarded ‘on the fly’, but after running it for a few days, adjusting it here and there, my goal of building an _inaccurate_ histogram of the most commonly used do-not-reply account names started to bring fruits. And while I am writing this, my script is still running, but there are a lot of juicy results already, so I am going to share them below…

Before I do so, let me help you with an interpretation.

For every account name I am listing, try to find out if any of these come from the domains that are generally trustworthy. And the good news is — chances are, many of them contribute to your phishing alert volumes!

For example, a noreply@facebook.com is trustworthy, but noreply@skdjfhskdjfgj.com is not.

Now that we have all these pieces of information in place, let’s look at the actual list of email accounts of ‘no interest’:

  • info@
  • mail@
  • admin@
  • net@
  • office@
  • sales@
  • contact@
  • master@
  • life@
  • best@
  • webmaster@
  • email@
  • home@
  • support@
  • purchase@
  • myspace@
  • boss@
  • sample@
  • style@
  • smile@
  • av@
  • online@
  • accounts@
  • design@
  • box@
  • test@
  • web@
  • service@
  • www@
  • world@
  • null@
  • bill@
  • live@
  • no@
  • post@
  • game@
  • hot@
  • off@
  • new@
  • marketing@
  • all@
  • spam@
  • shop@
  • club@
  • demon@
  • sex@
  • org@
  • hi@
  • team@
  • kontakt@
  • student@
  • house@
  • games@
  • here@
  • work@
  • city@
  • job@
  • fly@
  • free@
  • hello@
  • weber@
  • top@
  • fun@
  • user@
  • money@
  • player@
  • auto@
  • personal@
  • price@
  • link@
  • time@
  • beauty@
  • manager@
  • geo@
  • manu@
  • seo@
  • jenkins@
  • project@
  • dummy@
  • photo@
  • business@
  • company@
  • records@
  • show@
  • productions@
  • foto@
  • legend@
  • dev@
  • space@
  • cash@
  • miles@
  • first@
  • bot@
  • help@
  • core@
  • facebook@
  • beer@
  • blog@
  • unit@
  • agent@
  • song@
  • flash@
  • opt@
  • list@
  • noemail@
  • gaming@
  • secret@
  • ads@
  • travel@
  • market@
  • football@
  • speed@
  • trade@
  • mini@
  • freedom@
  • services@
  • postmaster@
  • ebay@
  • corp@
  • staff@
  • unknown@
  • lost@
  • bug@
  • login@
  • moto@
  • editor@
  • sound@
  • force@
  • vkontakte@
  • wizard@
  • english@
  • people@
  • party@
  • abuse@
  • dhl@
  • fedex@
  • ups@
  • studio@
  • play@
  • submit@
  • biuro@
  • yahoo@
  • soft@
  • account@
  • booking@
  • kids@
  • adidas@
  • system@
  • expert@
  • freelife@
  • forum@
  • mailbox@
  • photography@
  • fantasy@
  • production@
  • administrator@
  • designer@
  • chef@
  • inbox@
  • official@
  • social@
  • minecraft@
  • shopping@
  • paypal@
  • united@
  • entertainment@
  • customerservice@
  • creative@
  • consulting@
  • reception@
  • invitado@
  • consult@
  • vision@
  • away@
  • network@
  • education@
  • robot@
  • nomail@
  • nothing@
  • digital@
  • solutions@
  • taxi@
  • training@
  • noreply@
  • today@
  • agency@
  • purchasing@
  • security@
  • commerciale@
  • community@
  • studios@
  • connect@
  • newsletter@
  • nobody@
  • food@
  • youth@
  • oops@
  • construction@
  • society@
  • registrar@
  • transport@
  • audio@
  • nospam@
  • member@
  • junkmail@
  • secretary@
  • enquiry@
  • surveys@
  • articles@
  • enterprise@
  • bookings@
  • segreteria@
  • information@
  • communication@
  • commercial@
  • event@
  • photos@
  • yourmail@
  • central@
  • inform@
  • tours@
  • operator@
  • factory@
  • direct@
  • import@
  • realtor@
  • misc@
  • xpress@
  • virtual@
  • premium@
  • amazon@
  • capital@
  • research@
  • exclusive@
  • biznes@
  • oracle@
  • corporation@
  • summit@
  • inquiry@
  • daemon@
  • massage@
  • officiel@
  • associates@
  • culture@
  • cartoon@
  • navigator@
  • platinum@
  • poczta@
  • sazonova@
  • redaktion@
  • local@
  • website@
  • partners@
  • johncena@
  • realestate@
  • firefox@
  • resident@
  • advertising@
  • anonim@
  • source@
  • technik@
  • response@
  • mobility@
  • traffic@
  • custom@

There are many more and I recommend that you look at your phishing queue and analyze senders, and people who are too trigger-happy to submit phish reports to your SOC. Stats like this can give you plenty of opportunities to both automate auto-closures, and educate trigger-happy users.

The Future of SOC

Over last few years we moved away from a SOC that used to be almost solely focused on Network and Windows events and artifacts (probably a strong fintech bias here) towards the one that is a Frankenstein’s monster we see today – very fractured, multi-dimensional, multi-platform, multi-architectural, multi-device and multi-everything-centric, plus certainly multi-regional (regulated markets, data across borders)/privacy-savvy, on- and off-prem, covering *aaS and endpoints/servers/mobile/virtualization/containers/CI/CD pipelines, and did I mention multi-cloud, public and private environments, vendor vs. proprietary, with a bonus of over-eager employees who keep sending ‘dangerous’ stuff to SOC because they have been trained well to report <insert any suspicious events here>’ ? And finally, one where NO ONE knows anymore at least the basics of all the existing, rapidly emerging, and more and more confusing technologies, let alone the gamut of ideas and solutions that help to address (or, at least detect) many of these security problems.

I think we moved away from a fairly understood model known between … let’s say 2000-2018 /COMFORTABLE/ towards the one that is (as of today at least) 2018-+ full of unknown unknowns /VERY UNCOMFORTABLE/…

How do we deal with it today?

Usually a bridge, a Slack or Teams channel with 100-200 people on it.

I think divide and conquer is the only way to deal with it. Also, more and more work has to focus on building bridges with internal owners of technologies / architects than ever before. This includes for instance, a lot of DevSecOps work, shifting left, early involvement in app development improvement and their release cycles, security-oriented feature and LOG requests, heavy red-team footprint on breaking it all, and in opposition to the previous decade – lots of very hands-off work. Lots of commanding and coordination.

Borrowing the quote from dreBlue Teaming is 90 percent social capital today.

Times have definitely changed…

And in parallel:
– stronger than ever reliance on vendors
– real (as in ‘old school’) cyber skills are in a strong decline — what took years to acquire and master is now gamified by vendor offerings that dumbify a lot of problems and requirements; I am not against it, because we need help and while sometimes it comes in a form of a b/s and extrapolations, we must admit that many non-technical analysts today, even w/o reading a single RFC in their life can easily handle many incidents by just… talking and via vendor consoles – this would be impossible 10 years ago
– seriously, tools of today are fantastic: advanced sandboxes, threat intel portals, bug bounty portals, and the whole social media sharing makes it far easier to find and share information that used to be available only to a few in the past
– the environments get more complicated — we need to work towards universal playbooks that cover heavily regulated regional markets
– portability is the key (work in one place -> work everywhere w/o many changes) — affects multiple instances of systems of records, SOPs, detections, metrics (again, regional/regulated markets, plus ability to quickly recover in case of a breach)
– follow the Sun is now more complicated as it includes Follow the Regulated Market
– from log deprivation to log over-saturation — time for some log governance, at source? common models for field naming? not only naming conventions, but also … and I really mean it… one, common, universal, … TIMESTAMP FORMAT?
– optimization efforts should be a norm — most of detection engineering, threat hunting teams add to the workload, we need an opposite force that asks — hmm is it really necessary? the same goes for a ruthless approach towards an email fatigue — convert to tickets or kill at source, disable, decommission
– how many emails your workflow and automation is sending today? can you trim it down?

The above is what scares me. It’s currently hardly manageable, and it’s not sustainable. It’s a whack-a-mole on steroids. We were meant to stop the whack-a-mole. And it not only happens now, it has intensified a lot in recent years and imho this trend will continue. When we all started to really like the idea of having EDRs at our disposal… the *aaS happened and there is no way back. Suddenly all our incident response playbooks, SOPs need to focus on a completely different type of threats. Lots of this work is actually more focused on a proper access management than infiltration by APT actors via well-known TTPs. A lot of work is also focused on shared responsibility — when you deal with alerts on-prem, on endpoints, it’s all nice and cozy, but when you are *aaS, there is a moment where an external password spray hitting the client application ran on the server you host, one has to decide when the transfer of security responsibility occurs. Is it a threat to the hosting environment? The instance of the app? Both? It’s… complicated.

What is the SOC of the future?

I think there is no SOC in the future. There is a cross-organizational incident response committee (you don’t wanna know how much I hate this word!) that actively engages in tackling issues at hand, and ‘incident commands’ respective teams leading the issues to a closure. Security becomes part of the day to day operations. Representatives from many functions actually are talking to each other, often, and the ‘old security’ in isolation is no longer a topic of any conversations. What is though, is addressing the ‘are we affected’ question on VERY REGULAR BASIS? To help with that, advanced Asset inventories covering hardware, software, *aaS, SBOMs, packages, all aiming at exposure assessment and potential containment & closing communication loops are a MUST. It’s no longer a strictly speaking, a technical problem. It’s a problem that has a stage, that stage is not only political, but also visionary. Whoever does the minimum effort to collect and maintain the best asset inventory, then predict, plan to contain, and finally close, will be the winner of the many brownie points to be distributed in this area in the future.

And that’s why the future belongs to TRIAGE function.

That Omelas child, the punchbag, the scapegoat. The first line of defense, and the most important. Yet so often neglected.

Clear SOPs for Triage will help to handle most of incoming ‘requests’. You want that Triage team to be supported as hell. Their procedures must be simple, to the point, and with clear paths of both closure and escalation. Such triage function will train the best IR practitioners of the future. Jacks of all trades, outspoken, cooperative, and assertive.

The game is changing and we need to adapt. It’s time you take your Triage team out for a good dinner.