![]() The short answer is to evade detection by bank risk engines. ![]() Injected malware message to the online banking website Bank Risk Engines and Credentials Theft Why would a fraudster go to such lengths rather than simply using the compromised credentials to initiate a new user session? Because the login request never reached the online banking server, the bank had no record of the legitimate user attempting to log in. Instead, it injected a page notifying the user that the bank’s website was temporarily down (see below). Interestingly, the malware requested the user’s one-time password (OTP) at login, even though the user logged in from his or her regular device.Īt the same time, the malware blocked the user’s credentials from being submitted to the bank. In this case, the malware on the user’s device captured the user’s credentials at login and immediately communicated them to the fraudster’s command-and-control (C&C) center. The bank discovered that the user in question had not logged in to his or her bank account around the time the malware was identified, and therefore, it did not understand how malware could have been detected on the user’s device or how credential theft could have taken place. The malware was identified using a server-based malware-detection tool that identifies the presence of malware on all devices that can initiate an online banking session. bank client of IBM received a notification that malware was identified on one of its client’s devices. “Trusteer Mobile Risk Engine combines a web-based service and dedicated mobile client components with real-time account risk data from Trusteer Pinpoint Malware Detection and Trusteer Rapport to prevent sophisticated mobile and cross channel fraud.Recently, a large U.S. It is also being exploited to circumvent strong authentication systems that use mobile text messages to validate high risk transactions,” said Yishay Yovel, vice president of marketing for Trusteer. “Mobile banking is an attractive target for criminal account takeover due to the rapidly growing number of users and limited fraud detection and prevention capabilities. The FFIEC guidance for electronic banking requires layered security, continuous risk assessment and complex device fingerprinting to reduce the risk of fraud, and clearly includes the mobile channel. This steady increase in adoption is putting the mobile channel in the crosshairs of account takeover attacks that are launched using credentials stolen from customers via phishing and malware attacks. Of the top 25 US financial institutions, about half are offering mobile person-to-person transfers and mobile remote deposit capabilities, a figure that has more than doubled since 2011. ![]() Mobile malware is commonly used to bypass strong authentication methods such as SMS One-Time Passwords (SMS OTP).Īccording to a recent report by Javelin Research, mobile banking is now used by 33% of mobile consumers, up from 24% in 2011. It also identifies devices that are vulnerable to compromise by malware and those that have been infected. ![]() ![]() Trusteer Mobile Risk Engine detects and stops account takeover from mobile devices by conclusively identifying criminal access attempts. LONDON (UK): Trusteer, the leading provider of endpoint cybercrime prevention, has announced the Trusteer Mobile Risk Engine to protect financial institutions against mobile and PC-to-mobile (cross-channel) attacks. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |