Task $3$: Analysis of Anti$-$Forensic Techniques Used by the Attacker

$1.$Introduction:

In the digital era, cybercriminals employ various sophisticated techniques to evade detection and hinder forensic investigations. This report delves into the anti$-$forensic techniques employed by an attacker in the case study of Mr$.$ Myles Davison, highlighting the challenges faced during the forensic examination and the methodologies used to overcome them.

$2.$Findings

Anti$-$Debugging Techniques:

$$ Code Obfuscation: The attacker used code obfuscation techniques such as renaming variables, inserting junk code, and using encoding to obscure the malware's true functionality.

$$ Check for Debuggers: The malware contained checks to detect if it was being executed within a debugging environment. If a debugger was detected, the malware would terminate to avoid

analysis.

Encryption:

$$ File Encryption: The attacker utilized strong encryption algorithms like AES to encrypt sensitive files on the compromised system, making it challenging to access the data without the

decryption key.

$$ Communication Encryption: The malware communicated with its command and control server through encrypted channels, ensuring that the communication remained covert and

undetectable.

Obfuscation Techniques:

$$ String Obfuscation: The attacker employed string obfuscation to conceal malicious strings within the malware code, making it difficult for investigators to decipher the malware's true intent.

$$ Control Flow Obfuscation: The malware utilized control flow obfuscation techniques to alter the execution flow, making the code more convoluted and challenging to analyze.

$3.$Overcoming Anti$-$Forensic Techniques:

Code Deobfuscation:

To decipher the obfuscated code, various deobfuscation techniques, including manual analysis and automated tools, were employed to transform the obfuscated code back to its original form.

Debugging and Analysis:

A debugger with stealth capabilities was utilized to bypass the anti$-$debugging checks implemented by the malware. This allowed for in$-$depth analysis of the malware's behavior without triggering its defensive mechanisms.

Memory Analysis:

Despite the encryption of files, memory analysis techniques, such as memory dumping and volatility analysis, were employed to extract decrypted data from the malware's memory while it was active in the system.

$4.$ Other Measures the Attacker Could Have Used

Fileless Malware: The attacker could have employed fileless malware that operates solely in memory, leaving little to no footprint on the disk, making detection and analysis more challenging.

Anti$-$Reversing Techniques: Advanced anti$-$reversing techniques, such as code packing, code virtualization, and anti$-$disassembly methods, could have been utilized to further obfuscate the malware and impede the analysis process.

Rootkit Installation: The installation of rootkits could have been used to conceal the presence of the malware and its malicious activities from the operating system and security tools, operating at a kernel level to maintain persistence and evade detection.

$5.$ Conclusion

Despite the intricate anti$-$forensic techniques employed by the attacker, the use of advanced forensic tools, debugging, memory analysis techniques, and persistent efforts enabled the identification and analysis of the malware's functionality, communication methods, and data encryption mechanisms.

$6.$ Recommendations

$$ Enhanced Forensic Training: Continuous training and upskilling of forensic investigators in the latest anti$-$forensic techniques and tools to ensure effective detection and analysis of

sophisticated cyber$-$attacks.

$$ Implementation of Advanced Security Measures: Organizations should deploy advanced security solutions, including endpoint detection and response $($EDR$)$ systems, network monitoring tools, and intrusion detection systems $($IDS$),$ to detect and mitigate cyber threats in real$-$time.

$$ Regular System Audits: Conducting regular system audits and vulnerability assessments to identify and address potential security gaps and vulnerabilities that could be exploited by

attackers.

$.$ References

$$ Casey, Eoghan $(2011).$ "Digital Evidence and Computer Crime: Forensic Science, Computers, and the

Internet." Academic Press.

$$ Carrier, Brian D$.,$ and Joe Grand $(2010).$ "Defeating Anti$-$forensics: Methods to defeat computer

forensics." Digital Investigation, vol. $7,$ no$.1,$ pp$.20-27.$

$8.$ Appendix

$$ Screenshots of the obfuscated code before and after deobfuscation.

$$ Memory dump analysis results showing decrypted data extracted from the malware's memory.

$$ Pseudo code$/$programming code snippets used for deobfuscation and analysis.

this is my task i have done but i couldnot take some screenshots of this process can you please send me some of the screensots for this report which would be helpful.