NotPetya and BadRabbit. Almost a year after the infamous WannaCry ransomware attack, leaked NSA Exploit ‘EternalBlue’ continues to be a popular threat actor for cybercriminals to infiltrate into systems and make financial gains. The report highlights data sourced from Quick Heal Security Labs and gives insights into the exploit’s timeline, analysis and recent observations made around its existence till date. Seqrite observed the first impression of EternalBlue in May 2017 with the outbreak of WannaCry ransomware.a NotPetya ransomware and BadRabbit Ransomware." (source).a. This is largely due to the rapid rise in the valuation of cryptocurrencies and the fact that cryptomining allows attackers to illegally and discreetly mine cryptocurrencies on infected endpoints.Sanjay Katkar, Joint Managing Director and Chief Technology Officer, Quick Heal Technologies Limited, "Exploits leaked by Shadowbrokers especially EternalBlue have helped hackers to launch some of the biggest cyberattacks in the form of WannaCry, Petya a. The detection count gradually started increasing as WannaCry started spreading to other systems making it the biggest ransomware attack in history that affected more than 150 countries.Following a detailed investigation, Seqrite further discovered that ‘EternalBlue’ which was mostly utilised in ransomware attacks is now Gear reducer Manufacturers also being increasingly deployed by hackers to distribute cryptomining campaigns like Adylkuzz, Zealot and WannaMine. With this easy availability of ‘EternalBlue’, hackers were observed using the exploit in the ensuing attacks like EternalRocks worm, Petya a. While hackers using EternalBlue to launch ransomware attacks is widely known, it is interesting to note that cybercriminals are now leveraging this tool to distribute cryptomining campaigns. What is worrisome is that a large number of endpoints continue to be unprotected and vulnerabilities remain unpatched. It’s about time we realize that prevention is an important remedy that can help businesses to stay a step ahead of the attackers.k.k.In a recent research report, Seqrite, has revealed that it has detected more than 18 million hits of the exploit in advanced cyberattacks like ransomware and distributed cryptomining campaigns. After the success of WannaCry, several new Proof of Concept or POC exploit was discovered on the internet for ‘EternalBlue. According to the report, there has been a healthy increase in detection statistics from December with March recording the highest detection count of over 70 lakh hits.‘EternalBlue’ is the deadliest exploit leaked by the hacking group known as Shadow Brokers in April last year
SMOKESCREENUkraines cyber police said in a statement on Thursday morning that it had received 1,500 requests for help from individuals and .John Hultquist, a cyber intelligence analyst with FireEye, said the failed ransomware attack disguises an as yet unseen destructive motive.Ukrainian politicians were quick on Tuesday to blame Russia, but a Kremlin spokesman dismissed "unfounded blanket accusations"."Petya is proving to be more sophisticated than WannaCry in terms of scope, ability to be neutralized, and apparently, the motivation behind its launch," corporate security consulting firm Kroll has advised its clients."Since the virus was modified to encrypt all data and make decryption impossible, the likelihood of it being done to install new malware is high," the official, who declined to https://www.reducerfactory.net/product/swl-series-screw-lifter/ be identified, wrote in a phone text message to Reuters.Cyber security firms are trying to piece together who was behind the computer worm, dubbed NotPetya by some experts, which has paralyzed thousands of machines worldwide, shutting down ports, factories and offices as it spread through internal organizational networks to an estimated 60 countries."Its highly likely that during this attack new attacks were set up," said ISSP chairman Oleg Derevianko. "Why didnt they all go offline? We are trying to understand what they might have left on those machines that werent hit. companies in connection with the virus.So far, NotPetya appears only to have been distributed inside Ukraine via a handful of so-called "watering-hole attacks" - by piggy-backing on the software updating feature of a popular national tax accounting program known as MEDoc.International firms appear to have been hit through their operations in the country.A top Ukrainian police official told Reuters that the extortion demands were likely a smokescreen, echoing working hypotheses from top cyber security firms, who consider NotPetya a "wiper", or tool for destroying data and wiping hard disks clean, that is disguised as ransomware.Some cyber security researchers have said the fact that the Kremlins two flagship energy companies are victims of the attack could suggest Moscow was not behind it.By contrast, NotPetya does not randomly scan the Internet to find new computers to infect.DESTRUCTIVE INTENTTechnical experts familiar with the recent history of the cyber escalation between Russia and Ukraine, say these latest attacks are part of the wider political and military conflict, although no "smoking gun" has been found to identify the culprits. "If it were an attack masquerading as crime, that would not be unprecedented at all," Hultquist said. It only spreads itself inside organizational networks, taking advantage of a variety of legitimate network administration tools.reducerfactory."NotPetya .ISSP said that given that few people actually paid the $300 demanded for removing the virus, money was unlikely to be the primary object of the attack.For technical reasons, NotPetya appears to be more targeted than last months global ransomware attack, known as WannaCry.The malicious code in the new virus encrypted data on computers and demanded victims pay a $300 ransom, similar to the extortion tactic used in a global WannaCry ransomware attack in May.The primary target of a crippling computer virus that spread from Ukraine across the world this week is highly likely to have been that countrys computer infrastructure, a top Ukrainian police official told Reuters on Thursday.This makes it far harder for anti-virus software or network security technicians to detect."In all of the known cases, the companies were first infected through a Ukrainian subsidiary," the German official said.Information Systems Security Partners (ISSP), a Kiev-based cyber research firm that has investigated previous cyber attacks against Ukraine, is pursuing the same line of inquiry.Kaspersky, a global cyber security firm based in Russia, also said they found a second distribution point on a local news site in the city of Bakhmut, Ukraine, which infected visitors who clicked on the site with the ransomware-like attack."Ukraines National Security and Defence Council Secretary Oleksandr Turchynov said the virus was first and foremost spread through an update issued by an accounting services and business management software.A growing consensus among security researchers, armed with technical evidence, suggests the main purpose of the attack was to install new malware on computers at government and commercial organizations in Ukraine. It also gives it the capacity to infect other Windows computers, even those with the latest security patches, several security firms warned on Thursday.Russian oil major Rosneft was one of the first companies to reveal it had been compromised by the virus and sources told Reuters on Thursday computers at state gas giant Gazprom had also been infected.Arne Schoenbohm, president of BSI, Germanys federal cyber security agency, told Reuters in an interview on Thursday that most of the damage from the attack had hit Ukraine, and Russia to a lesser extent, with only a few dozen German firms affected.."Our analysis indicates the main purpose of the attack was not financial gain, but widespread destruction," said Costin Raiu, Kaspersky’s global head of research. Rather than extortion, the goal may be to plant the seeds of future sabotage, experts said. Kiev has accused Moscow of two previous cyber strikes on the Ukrainian power grid and other attacks since Russia annexed Crimea in 2014. "At almost all organizations whose network domains were infected, not all computers went offline," he said by phone.combined elements of a targeted watering hole attack we’ve traditionally seen used by nation states with traditional software exploitation to devastate a specific user base," Lesley Carhart, a Chicago-based security researcher, wrote in a blog widely shared online by top security experts..Slovakian security software firm ESET released statistics on Thursday showing 75 percent of the infections detected among its global customer base were in Ukraine, and that all of the top 10 countries hit were located in central, eastern or southern Europe."Also involved was the hosting service of an internet provider, which the SBU (Ukraines state security service) has already questioned about cooperation with Russian intelligence agencies," he said, according to a statement. When first infected by WannaCry, computers scanned the internet globally for other vulnerable machines
On the anniversary of Quit India, August 9, 1998, we launched the "Monsanto Quit India" campaign.The writer is the executive director of the Navdanya Trust. A refund is surely in order. Monsanto’s technology is failing across the world.By the time Monsanto received commercial approval, it had locked 28 Indian seed companies into licensing agreements, restricting their sales to Monsanto’s Bt cotton seeds (marketed as Bollgard) only, stifling "innovation" and "competition" — words the company otherwise loves to throw around..Monsanto has extorted super profits from Indian farmers and seed companies illegally. Early adopters, like Burkina Faso, are abandoning Monsanto’s seeds.For a genetically modified organism (GMO) to be legal in India, its import needs to be approved by the GEAC — Monsanto did not have approval when it imported its Bt cotton seed in 1995. They cannot respect the law or farmers’ rights.On March 8, 2016, the Government of India ordered Monsanto to reduce Bt cotton seed prices by 74 per cent. We’re not scared if Monsanto leaves the country, because our team of scientists are working to develop (an) indigenous variety of (GM) seeds. India can be a world leader by protecting its farmers and food from situations like these by supporting organic agriculture and banning GMOs, which only exist for the extraction of royalties.
These Indian seed companies have had no "choice" in what they sell and at what price, and our cotton farmers have had no choice in what they pay. On May 10, 2006, the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Commission (MRTPC), following a complaint filed by the government of Andhra Pradesh against MMB for overpricing genetically modified Bt cotton seeds, directed MMB to https://www.reducerfactory.net/product/nmrv-worm-gear-reducers/ reduce the trait value it was unfairly charging the farmers of Andhra Pradesh — nine times more than the farmers in the United States. To sell Bollgard seeds, Monsanto signed contracts with Indian companies that had built a relationship of trust with farmers over decades, and used these Indian companies to collect royalties from small farmers.reducerfactory. Since Bollgard I was already failing, Monsanto used its failure to introduce Bollgard II, side-stepping the price control measures imposed by the MRTPC on Bollgard I, continuing its monopoly unregulated, charging whatever it wanted for seeds that have consistently failed (stagnant yield, increased pesticide use and the boll-worm’s resistance to their patented Bt technology), without any accountability. Monsanto challenged the Andhra Pradesh government and the MRTPC’s decision in the Supreme Court as "illegal and arbitrary".Since 2002, Monsanto has collected royalty from Indian farmers — 80 per cent of the Rs 1,600 price of each 450 gram packet of Bollgard I Bt cotton seed. Monsanto’s current threat of quitting India is based on the assumption that violating India’s laws is their right. On May 29, 2006, Andhra Pradesh’s commissioner for We sued Mahyco Monsanto Biotech (India) Private Limited (MMB), the joint venture company Monsanto created to enter the Indian market, for its illegal trials in the Supreme Court of India and Monsanto was unable to sell Bt cotton seeds commercially until April 2002. Monsanto charged $900 million from Indian farmers for failed technology. Bt cotton was advertised by Monsanto as a crop that would make huge profits for farmers because it would reduce their input costs by slashing their pesticide use and be a boon for the environment.
The royalties were built into high seed prices. The skewed market also provided Monsanto’s PR machinery the opportunity to falsely project its monopoly in the cotton sector as farmers "choosing" Bt cotton, when in fact all alternatives were actively being destroyed. To Monsanto’s dismay, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Gujarat, West Bengal, Madhya Pradesh and now Maharashtra as well followed Andhra Pradesh’s lead and asked MMB to reduce the price of Bt cotton seed. Monsanto had illegally introduced its Bt cotton seeds in the country without approval from the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC) in violation of and with complete disregard for our biosafety laws. The pirated funds need to be returned to India, India’s seed companies and, most importantly, to India’s farmers.
The greed (of charging) a premium has to end. This is the arrangement that fell apart because Bt cotton has failed in controlling pests, and Bt cotton yields are falling every year, increasing the use of fertilisers and pesticides as farmers struggle to maintain output. All corporations and businesses should operate according to the laws of a sovereign nation, not violate, manipulate, twist or subvert them. Open field trials also need to be approved by the GEAC — Monsanto did not have GEAC approval for the trials it carried out in 1998 agriculture fixed the price of Bt cotton seeds at Rs 750 for a 450-gram packet, and directed MMB and its sub-licensees to comply with its order. It is this unjust and illegal collection of royalties from farmers that has been challenged by state governments repeatedly, and now by the Central government. Monsanto’s immediate response was to threaten to quit India, confirming that the company can only operate by exploiting farmers and subverting laws and regulations.Minister of state for agriculture and food processing, Sanjeev Balyan, in response to Monsanto’s threat, stated, "It’s now upon Monsanto to decide whether they want to accept this rate or not If they don’t find it feasible, then they are free to take a call. It could not sign agreements with Indian farmers on royalties due to the lack of intellectual property rights (IPR). In the US, where Monsanto has a patent on biotechnology, it signs contracts directly with farmers. MMB said the royalty it charged (admitting it charged royalty without a patent) reflected its research and development costs for Bt cotton."The main reason corporations like Monsanto push GMOs like Bt cotton on us is to make super profits through the collection of royalties.
These Indian seed companies have had no "choice" in what they sell and at what price, and our cotton farmers have had no choice in what they pay. On May 10, 2006, the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Commission (MRTPC), following a complaint filed by the government of Andhra Pradesh against MMB for overpricing genetically modified Bt cotton seeds, directed MMB to https://www.reducerfactory.net/product/nmrv-worm-gear-reducers/ reduce the trait value it was unfairly charging the farmers of Andhra Pradesh — nine times more than the farmers in the United States. To sell Bollgard seeds, Monsanto signed contracts with Indian companies that had built a relationship of trust with farmers over decades, and used these Indian companies to collect royalties from small farmers.reducerfactory. Since Bollgard I was already failing, Monsanto used its failure to introduce Bollgard II, side-stepping the price control measures imposed by the MRTPC on Bollgard I, continuing its monopoly unregulated, charging whatever it wanted for seeds that have consistently failed (stagnant yield, increased pesticide use and the boll-worm’s resistance to their patented Bt technology), without any accountability. Monsanto challenged the Andhra Pradesh government and the MRTPC’s decision in the Supreme Court as "illegal and arbitrary".Since 2002, Monsanto has collected royalty from Indian farmers — 80 per cent of the Rs 1,600 price of each 450 gram packet of Bollgard I Bt cotton seed. Monsanto’s current threat of quitting India is based on the assumption that violating India’s laws is their right. On May 29, 2006, Andhra Pradesh’s commissioner for We sued Mahyco Monsanto Biotech (India) Private Limited (MMB), the joint venture company Monsanto created to enter the Indian market, for its illegal trials in the Supreme Court of India and Monsanto was unable to sell Bt cotton seeds commercially until April 2002. Monsanto charged $900 million from Indian farmers for failed technology. Bt cotton was advertised by Monsanto as a crop that would make huge profits for farmers because it would reduce their input costs by slashing their pesticide use and be a boon for the environment.
The royalties were built into high seed prices. The skewed market also provided Monsanto’s PR machinery the opportunity to falsely project its monopoly in the cotton sector as farmers "choosing" Bt cotton, when in fact all alternatives were actively being destroyed. To Monsanto’s dismay, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Gujarat, West Bengal, Madhya Pradesh and now Maharashtra as well followed Andhra Pradesh’s lead and asked MMB to reduce the price of Bt cotton seed. Monsanto had illegally introduced its Bt cotton seeds in the country without approval from the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC) in violation of and with complete disregard for our biosafety laws. The pirated funds need to be returned to India, India’s seed companies and, most importantly, to India’s farmers.
The greed (of charging) a premium has to end. This is the arrangement that fell apart because Bt cotton has failed in controlling pests, and Bt cotton yields are falling every year, increasing the use of fertilisers and pesticides as farmers struggle to maintain output. All corporations and businesses should operate according to the laws of a sovereign nation, not violate, manipulate, twist or subvert them. Open field trials also need to be approved by the GEAC — Monsanto did not have GEAC approval for the trials it carried out in 1998 agriculture fixed the price of Bt cotton seeds at Rs 750 for a 450-gram packet, and directed MMB and its sub-licensees to comply with its order. It is this unjust and illegal collection of royalties from farmers that has been challenged by state governments repeatedly, and now by the Central government. Monsanto’s immediate response was to threaten to quit India, confirming that the company can only operate by exploiting farmers and subverting laws and regulations.Minister of state for agriculture and food processing, Sanjeev Balyan, in response to Monsanto’s threat, stated, "It’s now upon Monsanto to decide whether they want to accept this rate or not If they don’t find it feasible, then they are free to take a call. It could not sign agreements with Indian farmers on royalties due to the lack of intellectual property rights (IPR). In the US, where Monsanto has a patent on biotechnology, it signs contracts directly with farmers. MMB said the royalty it charged (admitting it charged royalty without a patent) reflected its research and development costs for Bt cotton."The main reason corporations like Monsanto push GMOs like Bt cotton on us is to make super profits through the collection of royalties.
