Latest Sneaky Web Attack: Hijacking Your Clipboard To Post Spammy Links

from the now-that's-creative dept

Mon, Aug 18th 2008 5:09pm — Mike Masnick

Spammers and scammers keep upping the game against security researchers, sometimes in creative ways. And, in fact, it would appear that the latest sneaky trick making the rounds is almost admirable in its sneakiness. For example, take a look at this latest hack, which hijacks your clipboard, and repeatedly places a link to a site for fake security software. The hijack takes place through flash advertisements (even those found on legit sites), which is all the more reason to use AdBlock or FlashBlock or NoScript or something to protect you. However, what it's banking on, is the fact that plenty of people quickly cut and paste links they want to send around or post in other blogs and forums. When done quickly, many people won't even notice that they're not pasting the link they thought they cut from elsewhere -- thus getting lots of folks to inadvertently spam links. This must be incredibly annoying for those who get hit with it, but that doesn't take away from the creativeness of the attack itself. Even security researchers, like Mikko Hypponen, are grudgingly tipping their hats on this hack: "It is a pretty clever technique. Our work would be so much easier if our enemy would be stupid."

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: clipboard, links, malware, spam

18 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Nick Stamoulis, 18 Aug 2008 @ 5:11pm

Wow! Thats pretty sneaky...they never fail to think up new ways to spam huh? Speaking of new ways of spamming, our friend Kate Dickman recently found a malware/spam site randomly ranking for her name on the Google SERP

http://katedickman.com/2008/08/17/oh-my-word-a-new-way-to-spam-serp-spam/

... scary how many ways they can get you.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Aug 2008 @ 5:32pm

Another reason to hate flash.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
MAtt, 18 Aug 2008 @ 7:27pm

js vulnerability
Interesting that there is a clipboard "vulnerability" with IE as it allows JavaScript access to the clipboard, whereas FireFox defaults to no clipboard access. If I recall, FF2 simply doesn't allow it; FF3 lets the user turn it on.
So, how did the brains at FF miss this Flash vulnerability?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
KB, 18 Aug 2008 @ 7:49pm

Re: js vulnerability
Probably because they don't have access to the Flash source code and so wouldn't be able to control it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
MAtt, 18 Aug 2008 @ 8:07pm

Re: Re: js vulnerability
Does the browser execute Flash, or is it passing it on to the OS? Does IE suffer this vulnerability? The article didn't say, but I suspect if not I wonder if M$ knew about it but failed to mention it to the Mozilla team?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Dave Barnes, 18 Aug 2008 @ 8:30pm

what are these files everyone seems upset about?
I went to Kate Dickman's site and then went to Google and then went to some "PC analysis" site.
It wanted me to download some .exe files, so, I did.
Now what?
They won't run on my PC when I click on them.
I don't understand.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Kate Dickman, 18 Aug 2008 @ 9:01pm

@Dave Barnes Well what I'm getting and what you're getting must be different. When I click on the link - it starts psychotically scanning the computer with tons of pop ups and porn photos and prompts an .exe file to be executed....you're bold. I DEFINITELY didn't intstall it so whether it infects your computer or not - I'm not wlling to take the chance. It seems to be a spammy site with the opportunity to infect your computer with malware. The fact that a sketchy spammy site like that even RANKS for my name out of nowhere -- is spammy enough and a security risk in my opinion.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Kate Dickman, 18 Aug 2008 @ 9:04pm

@Dave Barnes Well what I'm getting and what you're getting must be different. When I click on the link - it starts psychotically scanning the computer with tons of pop ups and porn photos and prompts an .exe file to be executed....you're bold. I DEFINITELY didn't intstall it so whether it infects your computer or not - I'm not wlling to take the chance. It seems to be a spammy site with the opportunity to infect your computer with malware. The fact that a sketchy spammy site like that even RANKS for my name out of nowhere -- is spammy enough and a security risk in my opinion.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Peter Thomas, 19 Aug 2008 @ 12:44am

Re:
I'm willing to bet that Dave is a smug Linux or Apple Mac user. Basically, he's saying "I'm better than you because you're a pleb using that common operating system which I dare not even name!"

(For the record, I'm a user of Windows, Linux and Apple Mac, even at home. I'm platform-agnostic, I just use whatever is best for the job. I think anyone who gets involved in these OS pissing contests seriously needs to grow a pair.)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Andrew D. Todd, 19 Aug 2008 @ 3:15am

Dysfunctional Relationship
Mozilla needs to recognize that it has a dysfunctional relationship with Adobe. If Mozilla will not recognize this, then forking is in order. Once the dysfunctional relationship is recognized, the remedies are fairly simple.

I'll try not to be smug like Dave, but I've got a Windows Machine and a Linux machine on the same desk, with a KVM switch and so forth to tie them together, and I'm sort of gradually transitioning over to the Linux machine. On the Linux machine, (Gnome) Evince is a basically satisfactory Acrobat document reader. It doesn't do some of the advanced scripting features, but it seems to read essentially any real-world Acrobat document I try it on. Mozilla needs to come up with the funding to get Evince ported to Windows, and to bundle it into the various Windows Mozilla distributions. I understand that GNASH, the Free Software Foundation's replacement for Flash, is not as far along as Evince, and no doubt some additional work would be in order. People may still need to use Adobe products, but let this be reserved for the rare cases of files which will not run on Evince or GNASH, and let people choose to save the files and then run them, as a matter of calculated risk.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Twinrova, 19 Aug 2008 @ 4:00am

Come again?
"...which is all the more reason to use AdBlock or FlashBlock or NoScript or something to protect you."

No, the better solution is for websites to quit carrying useless ads which open the vulnerability in the first place.

Hint.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Thom, 19 Aug 2008 @ 5:04am

No Flash
When I finally got around to installing XP back in 2003 the first thing I did was tweak it and remove all the unnecessary cruft. One of the first pieces of cruft I removed was Flash and it hasn't been back in the five years since.

Is there a rare YouTube video that I'd be inclined to view but can't? Sure. Is there an occassional website I'd like to visit but can't because it's Flash only? Sure. Those cases are rare though and rarer still are the instances where the desire has been more than a fleeting fancy and caused me to sit down at another pc.

What's not so rare are the hundreds of thousands of dollars that Flash only websites have lost because I turned to their competitors. What's not so rare are the security vulnerabilities that I don't have to fret about. What's exhiliratingly exceedingly abundant are all the Flash ads that never load to slow my browsing experience or annoy and distract me.

Flash is the tool of satan, umm marketing but they're one and the same, and no such tool will ever reside on my PC.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chris Hinkle, 19 Aug 2008 @ 6:41am

nerds
People who send their clipboard to people without checking it are a major part of the problem.

This article blows this flaw way out of proportion. Adobe should fix it to make sure the user knows when they are adding something to their clipboard.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
chris (profile), 19 Aug 2008 @ 12:47pm

old news
you can do all that and more with the browser exploit framework (in firefox even):

http://www.bindshell.net/tools/beef
[ link to this | view in thread ]
OldAndBroke, 19 Aug 2008 @ 5:26pm

Re: No Flash
"What's not so rare are the hundreds of thousands of dollars that Flash only websites have lost because I turned to their competitors."

Please come to my non-flash web site! I could use "hundreds of thousands of dollars"!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Aug 2008 @ 5:08am

Re: Re: No Flash
Who knows? An actual working link there and it may have even worked out for you (given people's gullibility)!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
asdf, 20 Aug 2008 @ 12:50pm

Re: what are these files everyone seems upset about?
Wow, you must be a complete moron to just download an .exe based on some random Comment. Enjoy your virus.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Igor, 3 Feb 2010 @ 8:03am

Re:
It is incredibly sneaky and seems to me more like an exercise than anything really practical. I mean, how many people will paste something they know they never copied, and then still allow that alien text to go out to the world? Additionally, it seems that any kidn of quality security software will head this one off, so I can't see it being a threat. Cute little piece of code though, I'll give them that.
[ link to this | view in thread ]