MorphAES is the world's first polymorphic shellcode/malware engine, with metamorphic properties and capability to bypass sandboxes, which makes it undetectable for an IDPS, it's cross-platform as well and library-independent.
Properties:
- Polymorphism (AES encryption)
- Metamorphism (logic and constants changing)
- Platform independent (Linux/BSD/Windows)
- IDPS stealthing (the total number of possible signatures is more the number of atoms in the universe for one given code)
- Sandbox evasion (special assembly instructions)
- Realism (no null bytes)
- Can produce executables (malwares)
- Input code can have arbitrary length
- Python 2.7 - main engine
- Python Crypto 2.6 - for encryption
- 64-bit Intel AES-NI - for decryption
- Metamorphism is not very robust and can be detected using regular expressions (but can be improved pretty easily)
- Unicode null bytes might still work (but who cares?)
- It will only work on 64-bit Intel processors with AES-NI support, but since all the user's PCs (like Pentium, Celeron, i3, i5, i7) and the industry's servers (like Xeon) have it, it's more a specification, rather than a limitation, thus a 32-bit implementation is unpractical
- Almost any shellcode is guarantee to work however, an arbitrary code (malware) doesn't
- Windows/BSD PoC and executables are in progress...
How it works
- Shellcode padding with NOPs (since AES is a block cipher)
- Shellcode encryption with a random key using AES-128-ECB (not the best, but the simplest) - polymorphism
- Constants randomization, logic changes, instructions modification and rewriting - metamorphism
HowTo
For Linux:
sudo apt-get install python python-cryptoIt is possible to build and execute on Windows/BSD/Mac as well, but I'm still testing it.
You can also use the Linux PoC in assembly:
as shellcode.s -o shellcode.o
ld shellcode.o -o shellcode
./shellcodeTests
At this point, it should be pretty obvious that, the hashes would be different every time, but let's compare SSDEEPes of 2 Linux executables of the same shellcode:
- 96:GztTHyKGQh3lo6Olv4W4zS/2WnDf74i4a4B7UEoB46keWJl09:Gzty6VOlvqSTDflmNroh,
- 96:GQtT23yKmFUh3lo6OlOnIrFS4rkoPPf74i4a4B7UEoB46keWJ5:GQtCGWVOlOWFSsPflmNroh,
- 48:eip2bR2LRNtRPORDGRopRBXR3cRzER2vRU9BnH6ksr:Srn+,
- 48:6RjNeR2IRN7RPWRDeRokRB5R3xRz3R28RUxFT2+75eFK9iKMAdXAJKo:O9Tdwoo,
At the publication date, the executable was detected as a shellcode only by 2 out of 53 antiviruses (AVG and Ikarus) on virustotal , but now, it just fails to analyze.
malwr's with cuckoo2 doesn't see anything suspicious.
On the reverser's perspective, IDA won't see anything either.
Radare2 would show the real instructions only if assembled by the assembler it-self however, it doesn't detects any crypto or suspicious activity for the executable.
Althrough, I didn't test it personally, I think that FortiSandbox, Sophos Sandstorm, Blue Coat, GateWatcher and their derivatives might fail badly...
To put it in the nutshell
Basically, it can transform a script-kid's code (or a known-one ) into a zero-day.
IDPS will fail because, it's almost impossible to make a signature and difficult to make a regular expression or heuristic analysis.
Most of the sandboxes doesn't use Intel's AES-NI instructions directly, so they will not execute the code, so "everything is fine" for them, whereas it's not.
The only way to defeat this type of shellcode/malware is to use an appropriate sandboxing or/and an AI.
Notice that, the whole execution is done by a pure assembly, no Python (or shitty OpenSSL) is needed for the shellcode's/malware's execution since, I use built-in assembly instructions only, thus it's system-independent (surely, you will have to assemble it for each-one by adapting the instructions/opcodes, but they are still same).
Notes
This is still a work in progress, I will implement Windows and BSD/Mac engines and PoCs ASAP.
IDPSes and sanboxes suck.
"Tradition becomes our security, and when the mind is secure it is in decay."Jiddu Krishnamurti