Vulnerability: Spoof any Domain

Problem reported by kevind - 9/22/2017 at 10:46 AM

Resolved

Spammers, hackers, and phishers are exploiting SM15 (probably SM16 also) by spoofing popular domains using a null sender. Here's a message that appears to come from @constantcontact.com. It looks legit, but it's fake when you look at the header (can't expect users to do that).

MIME-Version: 1.0
from: =?UTF-8?q?=54=69=6D=65=54=6F=52=65=66=69?=<eIqp4hLQVtZazhbvcw@ccm202.constantcontact.com>
To: user@smartermail.com
Subject: =?UTF-8?q?=52=65=2D=46=69=20=77=69=6C=6C=20=4A=75=73=74=69=66=79?=
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2017 11:18:00 -0400
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_3ee2f1a39725234a7a5414f8bb61e71a"
Message-ID: <5f5d9b9522db43f2a2d6f057f13a2191@com>

There needs to be some kind of check between the From address inside the envelope (what the user sees) and the from address on the outside of the envelope (sending mail server). The other thing you'll notice is that this message doesn't have any SPF checking, again probably due to the null sender. IMO, this is a serious vulnerability that needs to be addressed ASAP, very similar to these other issues:

Greylisting doesn't work with Null Senders

https://portal.smartertools.com/community/a89621/greylisting-doesnt-work-with-null-senders.aspx

Spam checks don't run for Null Senders

https://portal.smartertools.com/community/a89457/vulnerability-certain-spam-checks-dont-run-for-null-senders.aspx

If there's a checkbox somewhere that stops this, please let me know.

Thanks,

Kevin

5 Replies

Reply to Thread

kevind Replied

10/11/2017 at 6:09 AM

Here's a bump since this post is 3 weeks old with no reply. It's definitely an issue with 8 votes.

Looks like this has been an ongoing issue, here's a post from early 2016:

https://portal.smartertools.com/community/a87739/local-domains-being-spoofed.aspx

This can also occur without using a null sender. To see an example, look at the 3rd reply in this post:
https://portal.smartertools.com/community/a89604/how-do-you-guys-handle-spear-phising.aspx

Just hoping it can be fixed. Thanks.

Matt Petty Replied

10/11/2017 at 7:38 AM

Employee Post

Just an update for anyone who sees this thread, greylisting DOES now work on null senders. I updated 2 other threads with this, I forgot to update Kevin's 3rd post about greylisting and null senders.

Unfortunately SPF/DMARC use the return path as part of its spam checks. Without it they cannot work. I'm not sure where to go with this since, if we don't have this info, we cannot run these checks. It would take some brainstorming to figure out what we would need to do and what other info we could use, then some re-engineering of that area. Greylisting is an exception because we use other pieces of info in the check and greylisting doesn't need all the of pieces to perform the check. My suggestion is use the now working greylisting and some of your other spam checks to help identify these spam messages until we can think of a solution to this.

Matt Petty Senior Software Developer SmarterTools Inc. www.smartertools.com

Merle Wait Replied

10/11/2017 at 10:14 AM

Just thinking outloud.... True SPF/DMARC does use return path as part of spam check. But if is null, couldn't use the default server's MX address - to compare against the MX address sent?
Technically speaking... there should never be a null return path.. so if you force a "known" default against it; wouldn't it fail as desired?

kevind Replied

10/12/2017 at 7:18 AM

Matt, here's a solution that will fix the issue for local domains:

If the From address (what the user sees in webmail or Outlook) is a local domain (i.e. on the SmarterMail server), then it must match the Return-Path. Otherwise, reject it or score it.

This would confirm that either:

The sending email address was authenticated with a password.
The sending IP address was whitelisted.

This would be a great start and would help stop the spear phishing. For example, if you got an email from Derek@SmarterTools giving you a couple extra weeks of paid vacation :) you should be 100% confident that it hasn't been spoofed. With SM15.7, you can't be sure.

After this, the next fix would be to block spoofing of non-local domains.

Thanks,
Kevin

kevind Replied

10/16/2017 at 7:32 AM

Matt, certainly the greylisting for null senders might help and we appreciate the fix. But many servers don't use greylisting and it doesn't solve the problem if the server simply retries after being greylisted.

Also, this can also occur without using a null sender. To see an example, look at the 3rd reply in this post:
https://portal.smartertools.com/community/a89604/how-do-you-guys-handle-spear-phising.aspx

We're not really talking about spam anymore, but fake messages -- when the From address doesn't match the Return-Path. Take a look at the idea below as it would help, especially with spearphishing.

Thanks.

Back to Community Threads

Please leave this box unchecked

5 Replies

Reply to Thread

Tags

Related Knowledge Base Articles