LinkedIn, a professional social networking platform having 20,000 employees serving about 874 million members, has bolstered its IT Infrastructure to protect against the prevailing sophistication driven cybersecurity threats.

The world’s largest professional network is following a new program dubbed ‘Moonbase’ that improved the company’s threat detection and incident response, thus helping security analysts and engineers achieve 100% success in automating response in detecting threats and server logs.

LinkedIn’s Moonbase program success was achieved in 6-months between March and Sept’2022 after reevaluating the firm’s current cyber posture and then proactively outlining and implementing on what was required to transform into a foolproof solution.

From what is available to our Cybersecurity Insiders, manual detection of threats has been replaced with automation software and so threat hunting and mitigation happens within no-time.

Now the big news; from February 2023, LinkedIn is planning to follow the steps of Twitter by offering a verified tick mark that can help in boosting profile credibility. As social media platforms are filled with scammers, under-qualified people and deceits, such profile verification is being suggested by some board members.

The member who likes to get a credibility check should keep their profile updated with their latest pic, add background photo reflecting their interests and write what describes you to the world. Confirming a phone number and email ID will make complete sense, as it makes the business firm affirm the profile as trustworthy.

It is unclear whether the company is seeking any monetary benefits by endorsing profiles. However, there is no surprise if it charges a fee to prove a profile’s credibility.

 

The post LinkedIn bolsters its cyber threat detection with Moonbase appeared first on Cybersecurity Insiders.

LinkedIn is a professional social media platform where learnt people interact to take their businesses to next level. But there are N number of instances where the platform has/is serving as a medium for criminals to create fake profiles to lure C-level employees with malicious intentions, sell fake counterfeit products, and act as a medium to conduct monetary scams.

However, all this is going to change soon as the social networking platform has induced new security features that will help in curbing crime to a major extent.

The foremost will be the ‘ About Profile’ feature that will help users to check when a user profile was created and updated. If it was created fresh and is seen with a beautify women’s photo, you better stay out of it and never connect with them. This feature will also show whether the profile has a verified phone number and an associated email address with the account that shows its authenticity.

Second feature will be backed up with AI powered intelligence where fake accounts can be red-flagged with the help of profile photos. It is actually a developed form of LinkedIn’s 2019 automated anti-abuse defense that helps in tracking down and removing fake profiles before then start interacting with other members with malevolent intentions.

Third new security feature will be related to high-risk profiles that can put the entire platform in jeopardy. It will ban all those profiles that invite users to join on other platforms and that too without the knowledge of the sender.

NOTE- In the first week of October this year, Check Point released a report stating DHL replacing LinkedIn in the top spot as the leading brand that is being emulated in phishing attempts between July and September.

 

The post LinkedIn added new security features to weed out fraud and fake profiles appeared first on Cybersecurity Insiders.

On October 10, 2022, there were 576,562 LinkedIn accounts that listed their current employer as Apple Inc. The next day, half of those profiles no longer existed. A similarly dramatic drop in the number of LinkedIn profiles claiming employment at Amazon comes as LinkedIn is struggling to combat a significant uptick in the creation of fake employee accounts that pair AI-generated profile photos with text lifted from legitimate users.

Jay Pinho is a developer who is working on a product that tracks company data, including hiring. Pinho has been using LinkedIn to monitor daily employee headcounts at several dozen large organizations, and last week he noticed that two of them had far fewer people claiming to work for them than they did just 24 hours previously.

Pinho’s screenshot below shows the daily count of employees as displayed on Amazon’s LinkedIn homepage. Pinho said his scraper shows that the number of LinkedIn profiles claiming current roles at Amazon fell from roughly 1.25 million to 838,601 in just one day, a 33 percent drop:

The number of LinkedIn profiles claiming current positions at Amazon fell 33 percent overnight. Image: twitter.com/jaypinho

As stated above, the number of LinkedIn profiles that claimed to work at Apple fell by approximately 50 percent on Oct. 10, according to Pinho’s analysis:

Image: twitter.com/jaypinho

Neither Amazon or Apple responded to requests for comment. LinkedIn declined to answer questions about the account purges, saying only that the company is constantly working to keep the platform free of fake accounts. In June, LinkedIn acknowledged it was seeing a rise in fraudulent activity happening on the platform.

KrebsOnSecurity hired Menlo Park, Calif.-based SignalHire to check Pinho’s numbers. SignalHire keeps track of active and former profiles on LinkedIn, and during the Oct 9-11 timeframe SignalHire said it saw somewhat smaller but still unprecedented drops in active profiles tied to Amazon and Apple.

“The drop in the percentage of 7-10 percent [of all profiles], as it happened [during] this time, is not something that happened before,” SignalHire’s Anastacia Brown told KrebsOnSecurity.

Brown said the normal daily variation in profile numbers for these companies is plus or minus one percent.

“That’s definitely the first huge drop that happened throughout the time we’ve collected the profiles,” she said.

In late September 2022, KrebsOnSecurity warned about the proliferation of fake LinkedIn profiles for Chief Information Security Officer (CISO) roles at some of the world’s largest corporations. A follow-up story on Oct. 5 showed how the phony profile problem has affected virtually all executive roles at corporations, and how these fake profiles are creating an identity crisis for the businesses networking site and the companies that rely on it to hire and screen prospective employees.

A day after that second story ran, KrebsOnSecurity heard from a recruiter who noticed the number of LinkedIn profiles that claimed virtually any role in network security had dropped seven percent overnight. LinkedIn declined to comment about that earlier account purge, saying only that, “We’re constantly working at taking down fake accounts.”

A “swarm” of LinkedIn AI-generated bot accounts flagged by a LinkedIn group administrator recently.

It’s unclear whether LinkedIn is responsible for this latest account purge, or if individually affected companies are starting to take action on their own. The timing, however, argues for the former, as the account purges for Apple and Amazon employees tracked by Pinho appeared to happen within the same 24 hour period. Continue reading "Battle with Bots Prompts Mass Purge of Amazon, Apple Employee Accounts on LinkedIn"

LinkedIn has publicly announced that for some reasons, its servers are being targeted by fake CISO Profiles that disclose vacant positions at large multinational companies. However, the profiles when probed are found to be fake and being targeted from Asian & African countries that have nothing to do with the company operations or vacancies.

Krebs On Security received this update from the professional social media giant and initiated an inquiry along with the public disclosure.

A LinkedIn source based on the condition of anonymity is viewing this activity as a part of a larger cyber attack campaign. And is seeing this ongoing campaign as a threat to distribute espionage or malware related tools into the network.

To curtail such profile attacks, the networking website is apparently taking the help of Artificial Intelligence to neutralize such campaigns. It produced in the press update that the monitoring tools block over 15 million fake accounts between July 1st and December 31st of 2021 and over 19 million so far in this year.

NOTE- In September 2022, Facebook’s Parent company META released an update that it is witnessing the rise of fake accounts from Russia and China, possibly aiming to derail the Mid-term elections of US 2022 polls to be held in November. The Mark Zuckerberg’s company has also revealed that it is taking the help of AI technology to weed out such profiles that are aimed at circulating disinformation and bias amongst the US Populace.

 

The post LinkedIn being targeted by fake CISO Profile Positions in Large Companies appeared first on Cybersecurity Insiders.

Someone has recently created a large number of fake LinkedIn profiles for Chief Information Security Officer (CISO) roles at some of the world’s largest corporations. It’s not clear who’s behind this network of fake CISOs or what their intentions may be. But the fabricated LinkedIn identities are confusing search engine results for CISO roles at major companies, and they are being indexed as gospel by various downstream data-scraping sources.

If one searches LinkedIn for the CISO of the energy giant Chevron, one might find the profile for a Victor Sites, who says he’s from Westerville, Ohio and is a graduate of Texas A&M University.

The LinkedIn profile for Victor Sites, who is most certainly NOT the CISO of Chevron.

Of course, Sites is not the real CISO of Chevron. That role is currently occupied by Christopher Lukas of Danville, Calif. If you were confused at this point, you might ask Google who it thinks is the current Chief Information Security Officer of Chevron. When KrebsOnSecurity did that earlier this morning, the fake CISO profile was the very first search result returned (followed by the LinkedIn profile for the real Chevron CISO).

Helpfully, LinkedIn seems to be able to detect something in common about all these fake CISO profiles, because it suggested I view a number of them in the “People Also Viewed” column seen in the image above. There are two fake CISO profiles suggested there, including one for a Maryann Robles, who claims to be the CISO of another energy giant — ExxonMobil.

Maryann’s profile says she’s from Tupelo, Miss., and includes a quaint description of how she became a self-described “old-school geek.”

“Since playing Tradewars on my Tandy 1000 with a 300 baud modem in the early ’90s, I’ve had a lifelong passion for technology, which I’ve carried with me as Deputy CISO of the world’s largest health plan,” her profile reads.

However, this description appears to have been lifted from the profile for the real CISO at the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services in Baltimore, Md.

Interestingly, Maryann’s LinkedIn profile was accepted as truth by Cybercrime Magazine’s CISO 500 listing, which claims to maintain a list of the current CISOs at America’s largest companies:

The fake CISO for ExxOnMobil was indexed in Cybercrime Magazine’s CISO 500.

Rich Mason, the former CISO at Fortune 500 firm Honeywell, began warning his colleagues on LinkedIn about the phony profiles earlier this week.

“It’s interesting the downstream sources that repeat LinkedIn bogus content as truth,” Mason said. “This is dangerous, Apollo.io, Signalhire, and Cybersecurity Ventures.”

Google wasn’t fooled by the phony LinkedIn profile for Jennie Biller, who claims to be CISO at biotechnology giant Biogen (the real Biogen CISO is Russell Koste). But Biller’s profile is worth mentioning because it shows how some of these phony profiles appear to be quite hastily assembled. Case in point: Biller’s name and profile photo suggest she is female, however the “About” description of her accomplishments uses male pronouns. Also, it might help that Jennie only has 18 connections on LinkedIn.

Again, we don’t know much about who or what is behind these profiles, but in August the security firm Mandiant (recently acquired by Google) told Bloomberg that hackers working for the North Korean government have been copying resumes and profiles from leading job listing platforms LinkedIn and Indeed, as part of an elaborate scheme to land jobs at cryptocurrency firms.

None of the profiles listed here responded to requests for comment (or to become a connection).

In a statement provided to KrebsOnSecurity, LinkedIn said its teams were actively working to take these fake accounts down.

“We do have strong human and automated systems in place, and we’re continually improving, as fake account activity becomes more sophisticated,” the statement reads. “In our transparency report we share how our teams plus automated systems are stopping the vast majority of fraudulent activity we detect in our community – around 96% of fake accounts and around 99.1% of spam and scam.”

LinkedIn could take one simple step that would make it far easier for people to make informed decisions about whether to trust a given profile: Add a “created on” date for every profile. Twitter does this, and it’s enormously helpful for filtering out a great deal of noise and unwanted communications.

The former CISO Mason said LinkedIn also could experiment with offering something akin to Twitter’s verified mark to users who chose to validate that they can respond to email at the domain associated with their stated current employer.

“If I saw that a LinkedIn profile had been domain-validated, then my confidence in that profile would go way up,” Mason said, noting that many of the fake profiles had hundreds of followers, including dozens of real CISOs. Maryann’s profile grew by a hundred connections in just the past few days, he said.

“If we have CISOs that are falling for this, what hopes do the masses have?” Mason said.

Mason said LinkedIn also needs a more streamlined process for allowing employers to remove phony employee accounts. He recently tried to get a phony profile removed from LinkedIn for someone who falsely claimed to have worked for his company.

“I shot a note to LinkedIn and said please remove this, and they said, well, we have to contact that person and arbitrate this,” he said. “They gave the guy two weeks and he didn’t respond, so they took it down. But that doesn’t scale, and there needs to be a mechanism where an employer can contact LinkedIn and have these fake profiles taken down in less than two weeks.”

LinkedIn, a professional social networking website, has become a part of our daily lives as it not only allows us to promote a business but also allows to network, job hunt and recruit new talent. However, not all seems to be well with the said online business, as it has disturbed the lives of many professionals in the year 2021-2022.

Cyber crooks are seen creating fake profiles to perform social engineering attacks on individuals and businesses. And surprising, about 78,000 people fell prey to such attacks that led to a more complex scenario last year.

Often disguised as pretty female faces, such criminals use a technique called phishing to gain information related to email addresses, banking details and login credentials.

According to a survey Google Threat Analysis team, phishing emails are targeting many individuals and organizations each day and most of them are being launched through LinkedIn.

Fake job offers, via email or InMail are being circulated to trap individuals via spear-phishing or whaling. And it is estimated that a 40% increase was witnessed on this note since the beginning of 2022.

What’s amazing about this threat is that some criminal gangs from China, Russia and the United States are using the technology of Artificial Intelligence (AI) to trap professionals from reputed companies.

And once the victim responds by accepting the job offer or desires to know more, the scammer sends them a web link to gain data from the victim.

So, how to stay safe from LinkedIn cyber frauds

1. It’s simple, never-ever reveal any financial info on the LinkedIn platform.

2. Post a question to all job offers and try to connect with the HR of the company on a direct note

3. Reveal no contact info on the LinkedIn profile

4. Connect with professionals, after checking out their profiles and doing a bit of search on Google.

5. Report LinkedIn users who appear suspicious as it helps keep the professional social networking platform safe from frauds

The post LinkedIn fake job offers and emails leading to Cyber Frauds appeared first on Cybersecurity Insiders.

When KrebsOnSecurity recently explored how cybercriminals were using hacked email accounts at police departments worldwide to obtain warrantless Emergency Data Requests (EDRs) from social media firms and technology providers, many security experts called it a fundamentally unfixable problem. But don’t tell that to Matt Donahue, a former FBI agent who recently quit the agency to launch a startup that aims to help tech companies do a better job screening out phony law enforcement data requests — in part by assigning trustworthiness or “credit ratings” to law enforcement authorities worldwide.

A sample Kodex dashboard. Image: Kodex.us.

Donahue is co-founder of Kodex, a company formed in February 2021 that builds security portals designed to help tech companies “manage information requests from government agencies who contact them, and to securely transfer data & collaborate against abuses on their platform.”

The 30-year-old Donahue said he left the FBI in April 2020 to start Kodex because it was clear that social media and technology companies needed help validating the increasingly large number of law enforcement requests domestically and internationally.

“So much of this is such an antiquated, manual process,” Donahue said of his perspective gained at the FBI. “In a lot of cases we’re still sending faxes when more secure and expedient technologies exist.”

Donahue said when he brought the subject up with his superiors at the FBI, they would kind of shrug it off, as if to say, “This is how it’s done and there’s no changing it.”

“My bosses told me I was committing career suicide doing this, but I genuinely believe fixing this process will do more for national security than a 20-year career at the FBI,” he said. “This is such a bigger problem than people give it credit for, and that’s why I left the bureau to start this company.”

One of the stated goals of Kodex is to build a scoring or reputation system for law enforcement personnel who make these data requests. After all, there are tens of thousands of police jurisdictions around the world — including roughly 18,000 in the United States alone — and all it takes for hackers to abuse the EDR process is illicit access to a single police email account.

Kodex is trying to tackle the problem of fake EDRs by working directly with the data providers to pool information about police or government officials submitting these requests, and hopefully making it easier for all customers to spot an unauthorized EDR.

Kodex’s first big client was cryptocurrency giant Coinbase, which confirmed their partnership but otherwise declined to comment for this story. Twilio confirmed it uses Kodex’s technology for law enforcement requests destined for any of its business units, but likewise declined to comment further.

Within their own separate Kodex portals, Twilio can’t see requests submitted to Coinbase, or vice versa. But each can see if a law enforcement entity or individual tied to one of their own requests has ever submitted a request to a different Kodex client, and then drill down further into other data about the submitter, such as Internet address(es) used, and the age of the requestor’s email address.

Donahue said in Kodex’s system, each law enforcement entity is assigned a credit rating, wherein officials who have a long history of sending valid legal requests will have a higher rating than someone sending an EDR for the first time.

“In those cases, we warn the customer with a flash on the request when it pops up that we’re allowing this to come through because the email was verified [as being sent from a valid police or government domain name], but we’re trying to verify the emergency situation for you, and we will change that rating once we get new information about the emergency,” Donahue said.

“This way, even if one customer gets a fake request, we’re able to prevent it from happening to someone else,” he continued. “In a lot of cases with fake EDRs, you can see the same email [address] being used to message different companies for data. And that’s the problem: So many companies are operating in their own silos and are not able to share information about what they’re seeing, which is why we’re seeing scammers exploit this good faith process of EDRs.”

NEEDLES IN THE HAYSTACK

As social media and technology platforms have grown over the years, so have the volumes of requests from law enforcement agencies worldwide for user data. For example, in its latest transparency report mobile giant Verizon reported receiving 114,000 data requests of all types from U.S. law enforcement entities in the second half of 2021.

Verizon said approximately 35,000 of those requests (~30 percent) were EDRs, and that it provided data in roughly 91 percent of those cases. The company doesn’t disclose how many EDRs came from foreign law enforcement entities during that same time period. Verizon currently asks law enforcement officials to send these requests via fax.

Validating legal requests by domain name may be fine for data demands that include documents like subpoenas and search warrants, which can be validated with the courts. But not so for EDRs, which largely bypass any official review and do not require the requestor to submit any court-approved documents.

Police and government authorities can legitimately request EDRs to learn the whereabouts or identities of people who have posted online about plans to harm themselves or others, or in other exigent circumstances such as a child abduction or abuse, or a potential terrorist attack.

But as KrebsOnSecurity reported in March, it is now clear that crooks have figured out there is no quick and easy way for a company that receives one of these EDRs to know whether it is legitimate. Using illicit access to hacked police email accounts, the attackers will send a fake EDR along with an attestation that innocent people will likely suffer greatly or die unless the requested data is provided immediately.

In this scenario, the receiving company finds itself caught between two unsavory outcomes: Failing to immediately comply with an EDR — and potentially having someone’s blood on their hands — or possibly leaking a customer record to the wrong person. That might explain why the compliance rate for EDRs is usually quite high — often upwards of 90 percent.

Fake EDRs have become such a reliable method in the cybercrime underground for obtaining information about account holders that several cybercriminals have started offering services that will submit these fraudulent EDRs on behalf of paying clients to a number of top social media and technology firms.

A fake EDR service advertised on a hacker forum in 2021.

An individual who’s part of the community of crooks that are abusing fake EDR told KrebsOnSecurity the schemes often involve hacking into police department emails by first compromising the agency’s website. From there, they can drop a backdoor “shell” on the server to secure permanent access, and then create new email accounts within the hacked organization.

In other cases, hackers will try to guess the passwords of police department email systems. In these attacks, the hackers will identify email addresses associated with law enforcement personnel, and then attempt to authenticate using passwords those individuals have used at other websites that have been breached previously.

EDR OVERLOAD?

Donahue said depending on the industry, EDRs make up between 5 percent and 30 percent of the total volume of requests. In contrast, he said, EDRs amount to less than three percent of the requests sent through Kodex portals used by customers.

KrebsOnSecurity sought to verify those numbers by compiling EDR statistics based on annual or semi-annual transparency reports from some of the largest technology and social media firms. While there are no available figures on the number of fake EDRs each provider is receiving each year, those phony requests can easily hide amid an increasingly heavy torrent of legitimate demands.

Meta/Facebook says roughly 11 percent of all law enforcement data requests — 21,700 of them — were EDRs in the first half of 2021. Almost 80 percent of the time the company produced at least some data in response. Facebook has long used its own online portal where law enforcement officials must first register before submitting requests.

Government data requests, including EDRs, received by Facebook over the years. Image: Meta Transparency Report.

Apple said it received 1,162 emergency requests for data in the last reporting period it made public — July – December 2020. Apple’s compliance with EDRs was 93 percent worldwide in 2020. Apple’s website says it accepts EDRs via email, after applicants have filled out a supplied PDF form. [As a lifelong Apple user and customer, I was floored to learn that the richest company in the world — which for several years has banked heavily on privacy and security promises to customers — still relies on email for such sensitive requests].

Twitter says it received 1,860 EDRs in the first half of 2021, or roughly 15 percent of the global information requests sent to Twitter. Twitter accepts EDRs via an interactive form on the company’s website. Twitter reports that EDRs decreased by 25% during this reporting period, while the aggregate number of accounts specified in these requests decreased by 15%. The United States submitted the highest volume of global emergency requests (36%), followed by Japan (19%), and India (12%).

Discord reported receiving 378 requests for emergency data disclosure in the first half of 2021. Discord accepts EDRs via a specified email address.

For the six months ending in December 2021, Snapchat said it received 2,085 EDRs from authorities in the United States (with a 59 percent compliance rate), and another 1,448 from international police (64 percent granted). Snapchat has a form for submitting EDRs on its website.

TikTok‘s resources on government data requests currently lead to a “Page not found” error, but a company spokesperson said TikTok received 715 EDRs in the first half of 2021. That’s up from 409 EDRs in the previous six months. Tiktok handles EDRs via a form on its website.

The current transparency reports for both Google and Microsoft do not break out EDRs by category. Microsoft says that in the second half of 2021 it received more than 25,000 government requests, and that it complied at least partly with those requests more than 90 percent of the time.

Microsoft runs its own portal that law enforcement officials must register at to submit legal requests, but that portal doesn’t accept requests for other Microsoft properties, such as LinkedIn or Github.

Google said it received more than 113,000 government requests for user data in the last half of 2020, and that about 76 percent of the requests resulted in the disclosure of some user information. Google doesn’t publish EDR numbers, and it did not respond to requests for those figures. Google also runs its own portal for accepting law enforcement data requests.

Verizon reports (PDF) receiving more than 35,000 EDRs from just U.S. law enforcement in the second half of 2021, out of a total of 114,000 law enforcement requests (Verizon doesn’t disclose how many EDRs came from foreign law enforcement entities). Verizon said it complied with approximately 91 percent of requests. The company accepts law enforcement requests via snail mail or fax.

Image: Verizon.com.

AT&T says (PDF) it received nearly 19,000 EDRs in the second half of 2021; it provided some data roughly 95 percent of the time. AT&T requires EDRs to be faxed.

The most recent transparency report published by T-Mobile says the company received more than 164,000 “emergency/911” requests in 2020 — but it does not specifically call out EDRs. Like its old school telco brethren, T-Mobile requires EDRs to be faxed. T-Mobile did not respond to requests for more information.

Data from T-Mobile’s most recent transparency report in 2020. Image: T-Mobile.

LinkedIn is known as a professional social networking website that helps to connect companies with experienced professionals. But in the past few months, the company’s name is being used by cyber criminals as the most spoofed brand to send phishing emails.

Check Point, a security-based research firm found in its analysis that LinkedIn’s name is being abused by cyber criminals in sending phishing emails to innocent professionals so far in the year 2022.

Last year, LinkedIn was seen at the 5th spot with the count of impersonating attacks lying at 8%.

This year, it has surpassed package delivery company DHL and topped the list of the most used brand in sending impersonating emails.

Next in the list are companies such as DHL and FedEx sharing the same spot and Maersk, Ali Express and Blue Dart.

Meaning, criminals are using the name of these companies and sending malicious emails to victims saying that a parcel on their name is about to be delivered and the company needs to know some personal details from the victim for parcel authentication.

Information such as email ID, contact number and sometimes Dobs are being asked by the hackers for parcel delivery and after they get such details, they vanish without a trace- only to use the details thereafter to launch hacking campaigns.

With LinkedIn, the usage and attack posture are different. The criminals use the company logo and name and first send connection request emails to the victims. And as soon as the victim clicks on the “Accept Button” they take the victim to a phishing website that then harvests their personal info from the infected system or smart phone.

So, all you guys using LinkedIn, please beware of such cyber attack attempts before it is too late.

 

The post LinkedIn tops the Phishing Email list appeared first on Cybersecurity Insiders.