![]() ![]() On the bright side, several new free ransomware decryptors were introduced in Q2/2022. ![]() Conti finally stopped its operations, but like with the mythical hydra – when you cut off a hydra’s head, two more will grow back, so we have many more ransomware groups and strains to track now. This was partially connected to the usual ransomware suspects, but also to sudden changes happening with the Conti ransomware syndicate. We also discovered a zero-day that Candiru exploited to get into the Windows kernel.Īfter months of decline, we’ve seen a significant ( +24%) uptick of ransomware attacks in Q2/2022. Our researchers also discovered and reported multiple serious zero-day exploits used by malware authors – CVE-2022-2294 affecting browsers from Google, Microsoft, and Apple. For example, the Follina zero-day vulnerability in Office and Windows was widely exploited by all kinds of attackers. It’s likely you’ve already witnessed these in your inboxes.Įxploits spreading in-the-wild also made Q2/2022 interesting. For example, IcedID and Emotet have already started using LNK files, ISO or IMG images, and other tricks supported on the Windows platform as an alternative to maldocs to spread their campaigns. Threat actors have already started preparing various alternative infection vectors, now that their beloved vector they had been using for decades is being blocked by default. They backpedaled on that promise, but promised it again shortly after. A few months ago Microsoft announced that it will make it difficult to run VBA macros in Office documents that were downloaded from the Internet. In Q2/2022, we witnessed just how quickly malware authors can adapt to changes. It’s been exactly one year since we’ve started publishing these reports and this last year was everything but boring. However it is all information, and we should never shy away from that.Farewell to Conti, Zloader, and Maldocs Hello Resurrection of Raccoon Stealer, and more Ransomware Attacks ForewordĪnother quarter has passed, which means it’s time for us to share our Avast Q2/2022 Threat Report with the world. The take away is that some tools are certainly worse than others, none of them are perfect, and none of them are consistent from month to month. My problem with them is that people may look at a particular month and form an opinion based on that in isolation. Would love to hear of a better way, but for now the industry seems fairly happy with independent tests. I'm not sure there is a better way to determine the effectiveness of an AV solution than long term, multi faceted tests of each and every solution. What you're demonstrating here is a nonchalant attitude to AV comparison reports that appears to exist in this subreddit, probably due to confirmation bias or something. Only 12 pages, but it doesn't get in to results until page 8, the rest is introduction and test methodology. for example has a performance impact report, it's a short report. That's odd, because just throwing words in to google shows you're wrong on that. $Output | Out-File C:\kworking\Logs\Windows_Cleanup.log -ForceĬomparison sites don't show you their tests or reveal methods, $Output += "`n`n" + ($NewCABSize.Sum / 1GB) + "GB of cabinet files remain.`r`n" $CBSFiles = Get-ChildItem C:\Windows\Logs\CBS | Where-Object | Measure-Object -Property length -Sum ![]() Just in case anyone finds it useful this is the PS script I use to cleanup CBS logs and temporary CAB files. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |