Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Security Crime The Almighty Buck

Infected ATMs Give Away Millions of Dollars Without Credit Cards 83

An anonymous reader writes: Kaspersky Lab performed a forensic investigation into cybercriminal attacks targeting multiple ATMs around the world. During the course of this investigation, researchers discovered the Tyupkin malware used to infect ATMs and allow attackers to remove money via direct manipulation, stealing millions of dollars. The criminals work in two stages. First, they gain physical access to the ATMs and insert a bootable CD to install the Tyupkin malware. After they reboot the system, the infected ATM is now under their control and the malware runs in an infinite loop waiting for a command. To make the scam harder to spot, the Tyupkin malware only accepts commands at specific times on Sunday and Monday nights. During those hours, the attackers are able to steal money from the infected machine.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Infected ATMs Give Away Millions of Dollars Without Credit Cards

Comments Filter:
  • This doesn't add up (Score:5, Interesting)

    by drsquare ( 530038 ) on Tuesday October 07, 2014 @05:07PM (#48087315)

    If you have access to the ATM physically, why not just take the cash there and then?

    • by BitterOak ( 537666 ) on Tuesday October 07, 2014 @05:10PM (#48087343)

      If you have access to the ATM physically, why not just take the cash there and then?

      Because there would only be a finite amount of cash in the machine. By installing this software, you can steal a little bit at a time, and the cash would be reloaded periodically.

      • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 07, 2014 @05:27PM (#48087507)

        It's also easier to tie cash loss to an event where a bad actor had special physical access. I'd be willing to bet the cash box itself has monitors/procedors/audit trails to prevent theft/tampering from people who normally service it.

        The trojan bypasses all that, hiding cash loss in an event that does not require special physical access (Normal walk-up transactions carried out by customers) The trojan also cleans up all the auditing logs so you less sure about when the loss occurred.

        If, say, the bad actor is a crooked service man the gang of crooks can bribe him to slip their CD in and install the trojan. That way the cash gets taken when he's nowhere near the machine, and he has nothing to do with taking the cash all together. Or if, say, you're picking locks and breaking in to the machine to slip in your CD there's nothing suspicious (like an empty cash box) to point to the time where you could have broken in to the machine. You put the risk of the actual cash theft (Taking money from trojan compromised machines) on low rent thugs and suckers in your gang.

        • I don't know, imagine the bank discovers that someone installed the malware, and only one man serviced the machine recently... He would not be so safe.
          • They rotate all servicing of the machines, George the serviceman does not have a fixed route, it would be too easy to set up an ambush if the routines were fixed. They do log everything of course, but there is nothing stopping George from going to the ATM six months later to withdraw some money when he will never be suspected. This kind of hack requires a lot of collaboration between parties.
            a) The programmer(s) working for the bank
            b) The people servicing the ATM's
            Unless of course the ATM's in questi
      • I doubt that is it. You can bet that they continually audit these machine, and if missing several thousand dollars or even 10 dollars between filings, they find out what went wrong.
    • Going back repeatedly is much more profitable.
    • by Anonymous Coward

      Because the money is physically protected and will get sprayed with paint if you try to physically remove them.

    • If you have access to the ATM physically, why not just take the cash there and then?

      Because there would be a high level of accountability. If you have physical access, and were the guy working on the machine the night before money was missing, you'd be busted. This way, I can be the guy that works on the machine, and you can be the guy that steals all of the money. We meet up and half the cash.

      At least this is how I assume it works.

    • by sg_oneill ( 159032 ) on Tuesday October 07, 2014 @06:25PM (#48087835)

      If you have access to the ATM physically, why not just take the cash there and then?

      Not as easy as you think. A guy who used to live in the apartments across from me was a retired burglar. Found god in prison, went straight, yada yada. One of his old tricks was burglaring ATM machines. Apparently his trick was he'd tie a chain to the ATM and the other side to stolen truck and take off down the road with the ATM in tow. He'd then get out with a few men and lift the ATM into the truck and make a run for it.

      It would take them about 4-5 days to extract the money. Apparently the cash reserves are booby-trapped so that tampering with the mechanism would destroy the cash. As a result removing the money was a complicated procedure involving slow dismantling and a lot of welding.

      After his third attempt at it, they got a newer one, that was battery backed and had some sort of radio thing in it. Cops tracked it and they where done.

    • also unless you have

      1 the cutters needed to rip the vault from the atm

      2 a sizable truck

      Good luck getting the cash out before even Barney Fife could walk up load The Bullet and arrest you.

    • by flyneye ( 84093 )

      Sounds like they would bleed them instead of emptying them. Their are limits to the amount you can withdraw at once. A couple machines a couple times a week would have a single guy living pretty well in a work free existence.

    • by tlhIngan ( 30335 ) <slashdot&worf,net> on Wednesday October 08, 2014 @12:20AM (#48089117)

      If you have access to the ATM physically, why not just take the cash there and then?

      Because it's easier to get to the electronics than the cashbox.

      Inside these little ATMs is a steel box. Get that steel box open and you have full access to the electronics. But to get to the cash requires opening said box, then opening the safe holding the cash, which is vastly more protected.

      The cash is dispensed from within the safe and exits out a slot in the safe (basically the safe carries a number of cash cassettes and the electronics count out the cash, which is why if they mis-load the cassettes, you can be short changed or given more than you expect.

      Oh yeah, and the safe has all sorts of safeguards to destroy the cassettes should they be tampered with, making it even harder to get the cash out.

      Of course, they assumed the electronics were secure, so the other way to get the cash out is via the front door. Bypasses all the safe security systems and everythign else.

    • If you have access to the ATM physically, why not just take the cash there and then?

      I suppose you could trigger the dispenser to start dishing out cash nonstop, but it is not as easy as it sounds. Getting at the cash cassettes is not easy, either, because the lower half of an ATM is, as you might expect when thinking about it, built as a slightly modified safe. Getting at the computer and modifying the software really is the path of least resistance.

      Source: I used to work on these machines.

    • by slapout ( 93640 )

      You've never seen Barber Shop [youtube.com], have you?

  • by cyberjock1980 ( 1131059 ) on Tuesday October 07, 2014 @05:15PM (#48087393)

    I remember back when XP was officially discontinued there was some article that said something like 70% of ATM machines worldwide still ran XP. Anyone able to confirm if this is the case? If so, are they exploiting some vulnerability in XP that is never-to-be-patched?

    • Re:These on XP? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by mythosaz ( 572040 ) on Tuesday October 07, 2014 @05:24PM (#48087477)

      Many, yes.

      Some kiosk versions of XP are still getting patched.

      Windows XP Professional for Embedded Systems. This product is identical to Windows XP, and Extended Support will end on April 8, 2014.
      Windows XP Embedded Service Pack 3 (SP3). This is the original toolkit and componentized version of Windows XP. It was originally released in 2002, and Extended Support will end on Jan. 12, 2016.
      Windows Embedded for Point of Service SP3. This product is for use in Point of Sale devices. It’s built from Windows XP Embedded. It was originally released in 2005, and Extended Support will end on April 12, 2016.
      Windows Embedded Standard 2009. This product is an updated release of the toolkit and componentized version of Windows XP. It was originally released in 2008; and Extended Support will end on Jan. 8, 2019.
      Windows Embedded POSReady 2009. This product for point-of-sale devices reflects the updates available in Windows Embedded Standard 2009. It was originally released in 2009, and extended support will end on April 9, 2019.

    • Most ATMs I have ever seen are Windows, no idea what version.
      But it is clearly to diagnose on the blue screen they show so often.
      I guess many of them are NT and not even XP ...
      What is bejond me is: why do they even have a CD drive ... they don't need it, and software updates are usually distributed by bank internal networks, not by technicians running around with a CD.

      • by dfsmith ( 960400 )

        ...and software updates are usually distributed by bank internal networks

        I'm not sure I like the idea of rogue ATMs on the internal bank network.

        • Those networks are for ATMs only, rofl.
          Banks are bad in many regards, but their I?t usually works fine, old fashioned perhaps but nevertheless up to the tasks.

    • Re:These on XP? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Obfuscant ( 592200 ) on Tuesday October 07, 2014 @05:54PM (#48087659)

      If so, are they exploiting some vulnerability in XP that is never-to-be-patched?

      They are exploiting a vulnerability that is found in almost every operating system, and which has yet to be patched by any vendor. It's called "running a program". As the summary says:

      First, they gain physical access to the ATMs and insert a bootable CD to install the Tyupkin malware.

      • Re:These on XP? (Score:4, Informative)

        by MoonlessNights ( 3526789 ) on Tuesday October 07, 2014 @06:15PM (#48087785) Homepage Journal

        That isn't an operating system flaw but a hardware flaw: loads data from device into memory and points the CPU at it.

        What is actually surprising is that they don't use some kind of DRM-esque bootloader (much like you find in many phones) where it only boots an image with a matching signature.

        • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) *

          They won't do anything that might increase their costs, as long as they can blame the owner for failing to secure physical access to the machine.

      • by tqk ( 413719 )

        True. There's also, "Physical access means no security."

  • they aren't worth worrying about. the USD is king.
  • by Anonymous Coward

    Why does an ATM have a cd drive, let alone usb ports or anything else? Why does it boot off of media without altering the BIOS and requiring a password? Why isn't the OS encrypted making modification require more difficult techniques like bootkits which has other protection mechanisms?

    • Cost, ease of deployment, maintenance and updates.

      • Can't they just update it via the internet?

        (Note to ATM vendors: no, stop, that was a joke, do NOT... what? You already did? And you used which OS? No, please...)

  • by Spy Handler ( 822350 ) on Tuesday October 07, 2014 @05:39PM (#48087571) Homepage Journal

    these weren't cybercriminals, just criminals. They physically broke open ATM machines.

  • So long as they aren't accessing working people's bank accounts, I'm surprisingly okay with this and hope they don't get caught. It's not like the banks wouldn't find some other excuse to raise my service charges. Or just plain seize my accounts during times of crisis.

    So, go bank robbers!

    Though...

    Not sure I'd want to risk being destroyed over a bunch of funny money.

    Being a bank robber seems like just another flavor of servitude. You're agreeing to value their make-believe money system by risking

  • by fahrbot-bot ( 874524 ) on Tuesday October 07, 2014 @06:49PM (#48087975)

    If you want to steal BIG, you have to own the bank - just ask those guys on Wall Street.

  • Seems to be an inside job. are the ATM attendants not required to sign in to install software?? Asking because I don't have a clue but common since in this day and age would require some kinda employees key to install anything onto or on any ATM.
  • by dbIII ( 701233 ) on Tuesday October 07, 2014 @09:45PM (#48088567)
    So a dumb terminal has an entire copy of MS Windows instead of WinCE or a cast of thousands of non-MS options, and due to that it has a huge attack surface despite only doing a very limited job. An ATM should be simple and locked down since all it's doing is being an input device to a server and getting instructions from the server to spit out cash. It's obvious. Sleazy deals where one bit of MS cuts into the market of a different bit of MS are the only reason why such stupidity happens and you get a desktop computer doing the job of an embedded device.
  • Don't most people use a bank card / ATM card / debit card to withdraw money, and not a credit card? I know you can get the option of taking out cash on a credit card, but aren't debit cards the norm?
  • it says millions but how long was this going on.what they likely did was take small amounts from many machines over times not to raise flags say if one was missing 1000$ you can bet they would adult it but if its 5 or 10$ not so much.

In the long run, every program becomes rococco, and then rubble. -- Alan Perlis

Working...