Multi-Factor Authentication Interception

Multi-Factor Authentication Interception [T1111]

Information

• Name: Multi-Factor Authentication Interception

• ID: T1111

• Tactics: TA0006

Introduction

Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA) Interception is identified in the MITRE ATT&CK framework as technique T1111. This technique involves adversaries intercepting or bypassing MFA mechanisms to gain unauthorized access to protected systems or accounts. MFA interception can occur through various methods, such as man-in-the-middle attacks, session hijacking, phishing attacks, and leveraging compromised endpoints. Attackers target MFA systems to circumvent additional security layers, increasing their ability to infiltrate sensitive networks and systems.

Deep Dive Into Technique

MFA interception can be executed through several technical methods and mechanisms:

• Man-in-the-Middle (MitM) Attacks: Attackers position themselves between the legitimate user and the MFA service to intercept authentication tokens or codes.

  • Tools such as Evilginx2 or Modlishka automate phishing and MitM attacks, capturing credentials and MFA tokens in real-time.

  • Attackers set up proxy servers that transparently forward requests and responses between the victim and the legitimate authentication service, intercepting MFA codes.

• SIM Swapping:

  • Attackers socially engineer telecom providers to transfer a victim's phone number to a SIM card they control.

  • Once the attacker controls the victim's phone number, MFA codes sent via SMS can be intercepted.

• Session Hijacking and Cookie Theft:

  • Attackers steal authenticated session cookies from compromised endpoints or through network interception, enabling them to bypass MFA entirely.

  • Malware, browser exploits, or malicious browser extensions can facilitate cookie theft.

• Push Notification Fatigue (MFA Fatigue):

  • Attackers repeatedly trigger MFA push notifications, prompting the victim to inadvertently approve access due to annoyance or confusion.

• Phishing and Social Engineering Attacks:

  • Attackers craft convincing phishing emails or messages that trick users into providing MFA codes or tokens directly.

  • Credential harvesting pages mimic legitimate login portals and request MFA codes from victims.

When this Technique is Usually Used

MFA interception typically emerges in various attack scenarios and stages:

• Initial Access:

  • Attackers use intercepted MFA credentials to gain initial footholds into protected environments.

• Privilege Escalation and Lateral Movement:

  • Attackers intercept MFA tokens to escalate privileges or move laterally within secured systems, bypassing additional authentication requirements.

• Persistence and Account Takeover:

  • Attackers maintain persistent access to compromised accounts by continually intercepting MFA tokens or disabling MFA protections.

• Credential Access and Exfiltration:

  • Attackers intercept MFA to access sensitive data repositories, email accounts, or cloud services, enabling data theft and exfiltration.

• Targeted Attacks and Espionage:

  • Highly targeted attacks, including state-sponsored cyber espionage, frequently utilize MFA interception to breach secured environments.

How this Technique is Usually Detected

Detection methods and tools for MFA interception include:

• Monitoring and Anomaly Detection:

  • Analyzing authentication logs for anomalies, such as unusual login times, locations, or IP addresses.

  • Detecting rapid, repeated MFA requests or push notification spamming.

• User Behavior Analytics (UBA):

  • Tools like Splunk User Behavior Analytics or Microsoft Sentinel detect deviations from normal authentication patterns, signaling potential MFA interception.

• Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR):

  • EDR solutions detect malware or suspicious browser extensions that steal session cookies or tokens.

• Network Traffic Analysis (NTA):

  • Tools such as Zeek, Darktrace, or ExtraHop identify suspicious network traffic indicative of MitM attacks or proxy servers intercepting MFA tokens.

• Indicators of Compromise (IoCs):

  • Unusual login locations or IP addresses inconsistent with user history.

  • Sudden SIM card changes or phone number porting events.

  • Repeated MFA prompts or failed authentication attempts.

  • Presence of known phishing domains or suspicious URLs in logs.

  • Detection of unusual session cookie usage or reuse from different locations simultaneously.

• Security Information and Event Management (SIEM):

  • Centralized log analysis to correlate authentication events and detect suspicious MFA interception activities.

Why it is Important to Detect This Technique

Early detection of MFA interception is crucial due to several significant impacts on systems and networks:

• Unauthorized Access and Data Breaches:

  • Successful MFA interception allows attackers to bypass critical security controls, resulting in unauthorized access to sensitive data, intellectual property, and personal information.

• Account Compromise and Identity Theft:

  • Attackers can take over user accounts, leading to identity theft, financial fraud, or further compromise of organizational resources.

• Operational Disruption:

  • MFA interception events can disrupt operations, degrade user trust in security measures, and necessitate extensive incident response efforts.

• Regulatory and Compliance Risks:

  • Failure to detect and mitigate MFA interception could lead to compliance violations, regulatory penalties, and legal repercussions.

• Reputational Damage:

  • Public disclosure of MFA interception incidents damages organizational reputation, erodes customer trust, and impacts long-term business relationships.

• Increased Attack Surface:

  • Undetected MFA interception enables attackers to establish persistent access, escalate privileges, and conduct further malicious activities within the organization.

Examples

Real-world examples of MFA interception attacks include:

• Uber Data Breach (2022):

  • Attackers used MFA fatigue (push notification spamming) to trick an employee into approving an MFA request, leading to unauthorized access.

  • Impact: Compromise of internal systems, sensitive data exposure, and significant reputational damage.

• Reddit Breach (2018):

  • Attackers intercepted SMS-based MFA codes via SIM swapping, gaining access to Reddit employee accounts.

  • Impact: Exposure of user data, email addresses, hashed passwords, and internal documentation.

• Twilio and Cloudflare Attack (2022):

  • Attackers conducted targeted phishing campaigns, tricking employees into providing MFA codes via fake login portals.

  • Tools Used: Evilginx2 phishing toolkit.

  • Impact: Unauthorized access to internal systems, limited exposure due to rapid detection and response.

• Okta Breach via Lapsus$ Group (2022):

  • Attackers leveraged compromised endpoints and session cookie theft to bypass MFA protections and access Okta's internal systems.

  • Impact: Potential exposure of customer data, significant reputational harm, and extensive incident response efforts.

• Coinbase SIM Swap Attacks (Multiple incidents, 2019-2021):

  • Attackers used SIM swapping to intercept SMS-based MFA codes, compromising user cryptocurrency accounts.

  • Impact: Financial losses, compromised user accounts, and increased scrutiny of SMS-based MFA security.

These examples illustrate the diverse methods attackers use to intercept MFA, highlighting the necessity for robust detection, preventive measures, and user education.