Social Engineering

What Is Social Engineering?

In a broader context, social engineering is a discipline. However, within the scope of this document, social engineering predominantly refers to exploits within network security technologies. Social engineering entails deceiving or manipulating victims into making errors to acquire vital personal information, system access, crucial data, and virtual assets, among other targets. Attackers leverage information obtained through social engineering to execute subsequent attacks or directly sell the information for profit.

Technically, social engineering isn't a form of attack technology; rather, it resembles a "trick" adapted for the digital age. Social engineering scams often exploit human psychology and behavior, making them effective tools for manipulating user actions. By understanding users' behavioral tendencies, attackers can tailor scams to deceive and manipulate them effectively.

Why Is Social Engineering So Dangerous?

Due to its focus on human psychology and behavior, social engineering boasts a remarkably high success rate. After all, everyone is prone to making mistakes, rendering individuals the most vulnerable aspect of a security system. Despite harboring doubts regarding the authenticity of emails or phone calls, victims frequently err in judgment and inadvertently take wrong actions if the attack process is skillfully crafted.

In reality, many security incidents stem not from failures in network protection, but rather from social engineering attacks targeting individuals. Attackers often find exploiting people through social engineering far easier than breaching sophisticated network security systems. Consequently, it's imperative to prioritize people-centric network security awareness training. By ensuring individuals are fully informed and vigilant regarding social engineering techniques, we can thwart attempts to compromise security systems from within.

How Is Social Engineering Implemented?

In order to establish trust with their victims, attackers typically devise their social engineering attacks by adhering to a structured process.

• Preparation phase: Attackers meticulously gather background information about their victims. During this phase, the focus lies on identifying potential targets and strategizing the most effective approach for launching social engineering attacks.

• Penetration phase: Attackers initiate contact with their victims and cultivate trust through information exchange, all while aiming to breach the victims' defenses.

• Attack phase: Once trust is established, attackers commence gathering the target data from their victims using various tools. They may subsequently employ the obtained information to perpetrate further attacks.

• Withdrawal phase: After achieving their objectives, attackers endeavor to eradicate all traces of their illicit activities. In certain instances, victims may remain unaware that an attack has transpired.

Common Types of Social Engineering

Phishing

Phishing is the most prevalent form of social engineering attack, wherein attackers pilfer confidential personal or company information through various channels such as emails, voice calls, instant messages, online advertisements, or counterfeit websites.

Phishing often succeeds due to the remarkable authenticity of the deceptive information, making it easy for victims to overlook associated risks and significantly boosting the success rate of social engineering attacks. Moreover, phishing frequently induces a sense of urgency, fear, or curiosity in victims, diverting their attention to the fabricated information momentarily and hindering their ability to verify its authenticity.

Consider the following example: A victim receives an email purportedly from their bank, warning of an account risk and requesting sensitive information such as their name, ID card number, mobile phone number, bank card number, and bank card password under the guise of enhancing account security. However, this email is not from the bank; rather, it's a phishing attempt orchestrated by an attacker. To further deceive the victim, the attacker may create a counterfeit bank website that closely resembles the genuine site, compelling the victim to log in and unwittingly divulge crucial personal information. Driven by fear of financial loss, the victim fails to diligently authenticate the email or website, ultimately falling prey to the trap.

Spear Phishing

Spear phishing represents a more targeted form of phishing compared to its common counterpart. While common phishing involves casting a wide net without specific victims, spear phishing concentrates on particular targets, such as enterprise executives or network administrators. Attackers tailor highly effective phishing schemes based on the characteristics, positions, contacts, and other relevant information of these specific victims. Such precision significantly enhances the success rate of social engineering attacks.

Consider the following example: A victim frequently visits websites related to automobiles. One day, the victim receives an email seemingly from one of the most popular automobile websites. The email promises a review article on the latest car model and provides a link to the website for further details. Given the relevance of the topic, the victim is highly inclined to click on the link, inadvertently falling into the attacker's trap.

Baiting

As the term implies, baiting as a social engineering tactic exploits individuals' desire for rewards to ensnare them in a trap. While akin to phishing in several aspects, baiting focuses on enticing victims with promised benefits.

Baiting can take on physical or virtual forms, particularly in the digital age we live in.

Physical baits are often conveyed through storage media. For instance, a USB flash drive may serve as a bait. Many individuals assume that a free USB flash drive is devoid of content. Capitalizing on this assumption, attackers implant malicious programs that infect the system when the drive is inserted into a computer. In a more audacious deception, the USB flash drive may be strategically left in a conspicuous location, such as a company lobby or restroom, accompanied by attention-grabbing labels like "salary details." Driven by curiosity, individuals are lured into accessing the drive, unwittingly exposing themselves to attackers.

Virtual baiting, on the other hand, is relatively straightforward. Attackers simply create enticing content, such as links promising gifts or invitations to appealing activities. Naturally, many individuals are tempted to click on these links, inadvertently allowing malicious programs to infiltrate their systems.

Watering Hole

The term "watering hole" draws its inspiration from nature, where predators lie in wait near water sources to ambush unsuspecting animals that come for a drink, thereby increasing the predators' likelihood of successful hunting.

Drawing on their research, attackers identify websites frequented by their intended victims, often a specific group, and deploy malicious programs on these sites. When victims access these compromised websites, their computers become infected. Notably, many prominent websites prioritize network security to thwart exploitation by attackers. Failure to do so not only risks user distrust but also inflicts severe damage on their reputation. Consequently, attackers often target smaller or medium-sized websites, or those lacking advanced technologies and resources. Users must exercise extreme caution when accessing such sites.

Vishing and Smishing

Vishing and smishing are two distinct variations of phishing, each employing different communication channels. Vishing relies on phone calls, while smishing utilizes SMS messages. These methods specifically target elderly victims who may not be well-versed in internet usage or adept at identifying sophisticated scams, rendering them less susceptible to high-tech attacks.

For these demographics, attackers resort to more conventional tactics, namely phone calls or text messages, to ensnare victims. Many attackers leverage automated bots for their deceit, as advanced bots can convincingly mimic human communication, thus enhancing attackers' efficiency.

Pretexting

Pretexting involves attackers adopting a fabricated identity to manipulate victims. Typically, the attacker assumes a position of authority to coerce victims into divulging sensitive information as directed.

Consider the following example:

An attacker masquerades as a law enforcement officer to establish trust with a victim. Subsequently, the attacker requests the victim to furnish personal information for purported identity verification purposes. Trusting the false authority figure, the victim complies and provides the requested information, unknowingly exposing themselves to potential identity theft or subsequent attacks.

Quid Pro Quo

Quid pro quo entails attackers leveraging the exchange of information or services to coax victims into divulging their vital personal information. Comparable to baiting, quid pro quo promises benefits to victims, often in the form of services, whereas baiting typically involves physical objects.

Consider the following example:

Attackers pose as IT support personnel during phone calls to victims, offering technical assistance or software upgrades. In exchange, they request the victims' account information to purportedly grant temporary permissions. Subsequently, once the victims provide this information, attackers exploit it to initiate attacks or pilfer sensitive data.

Malware

Malware instills a false belief in victims that malicious software has been installed on their computers, and can only be eradicated by complying with the attackers' demands.

Typically, attackers demand a ransom payment from victims before purportedly removing the malware. However, even if victims comply with these demands, attackers may engage in further exploitative actions. For instance, they may exploit this opportunity to extract sensitive personal information or install additional malware onto the compromised systems.

Tailgating and Piggybacking Attacks

Tailgating attacks, also known as piggybacking attacks, occur when an unauthorized individual gains access to a restricted area or system with the approval or assistance of another person.

Several common examples of tailgating attacks include:

• An attacker gains entry to a restricted area by closely trailing behind an authorized individual as they enter.

• An attacker poses as an employee who claims to have forgotten their identity card and persuades another employee or doorkeeper to grant them access by opening the door for them.

• An attacker requests to borrow a victim's computer under pretenses and promptly installs malware on the system while the victim is momentarily distracted.

How to Guard Against Social Engineering Attacks

In order to defend against social engineering attacks, it is essential to initiate a shift in individuals' mindsets and behaviors. Once people grasp the mechanics and severity of social engineering attacks, they will naturally become more vigilant and skeptical when reviewing emails, voicemails, text messages, or browsing small and medium websites.

However, altering ingrained habits and mindsets is not an overnight process; it requires consistent effort and reinforcement. A proactive approach involves continuously promoting awareness of network security and leveraging real-life examples to underscore the importance of remaining cautious. Here are some actionable suggestions to support this endeavor:

• Intensify training on network security awareness to mitigate risks originating from human error. Employ tools and platforms for simulating social engineering attacks, allowing individuals to refine their abilities to identify and combat fraud.

• Disseminate real-world instances to reinforce the gravity of social engineering, particularly highlighting scenarios involving familiar connections like colleagues or friends. This approach fosters a sense of immediacy, making individuals realize the tangible threat posed by such attacks.

• Bolster network security infrastructure and implement multi-factor authentication mechanisms to enhance the security of application accounts. Given that many social engineering ploys aim to compromise account access, robust authentication measures serve as a crucial defense.

• Ensure the timely updating of software and systems, alongside periodic scans to detect potential threats to system integrity.

• Refrain from utilizing easily obtainable personal information such as birthdays, cities of residence, or pet names when creating passwords or configuring account permissions. This practice minimizes vulnerabilities to social engineering tactics exploiting readily available data.