235
Malicious VSCode extensions with millions of installs discovered (www.bleepingcomputer.com)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/programming@programming.dev
53 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 48 points 2 years ago (5 children)

Fake news headline. There is no virus installed on millions of computer.
An extension typosquatting an extension with million of install managed to be installed a few hundred of times.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 39 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I believe they're referring to lower down in the article, where the researchers analyzed existing extensions on the marketplace:

    After the successful experiment, the researchers decided to dive into the threat landscape of the VSCode Marketplace, using a custom tool they developed named 'ExtensionTotal' to find high-risk extensions, unpack them, and scrutinize suspicious code snippets.

    Through this process, they have found the following:

    • 1,283 with known malicious code (229 million installs).
    • 8,161 communicating with hardcoded IP addresses.
    • 1,452 running unknown executables.
    • 2,304 that are using another publisher's Github repo, indicating they are a copycat.
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    If you look at the code of one of the "malicious code", it hit a ... local IP, not a remote one.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 19 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Does that mean the hacker is in my room??

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 21 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    I wouldn't be so quick to write it off.

    It's a proof of concept showing the weaknesses in Microsoft's vetting process for extensions published on the store. They then used the process to get pseudo-malicious code inside hundreds of organisations (not hundred of installs) some of which are high profile.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Microsoft doesn't have a vetting process for publishing extensions in the store. Maybe the failure is that people assume they do?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Surely you mean "that Microsoft does not make it clear that they don't"?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago*

    Maybe, but I think the only app store that does vet apps is the Apple one, so that should be the default expectation.

    And I think even they wouldn't manually look for something like this. They're mainly concerned about people breaking the commercial rules.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -4 points 2 years ago*

    inside hundreds of organisations (not hundred of installs)

    At the time of the article, the extension listed around 300 hundred installation on the VS marketplace. There is a lot of bots downloading packages, one extension i contribute to, and nobody use it except 3 peoples, have been indicated to be downloaded 238 times.

    If you look at the number of extensions available on the vscode marketplace, and the false positive they listed as "malicious code" (read the code attentively), I'm sure my own extension will show up in their "malicious code" (it isn't)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Their findings included an extension that opens an obvious reverse shell.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    They made themselves the extensions.
    If you are talking about the other reverse shell, it hit a local IP address.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    True, it’s a private (not local) IP. It could easily have connected to a remote system, as their proof-of-concept did.

    This code execs cmd.exe and pipes output to and from a hardcoded IP. That’s pretty weird. What’s running on that IP? How does the extension know something is there?

    It looks like VS Code has no review — human or automated — or enforced entitlement system that would have stopped this or at least had someone verify it was legit.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Thing is, tons of code extensions have an RCE in one form or another, but they always hit a localhost, or configurable IP. How do there automated analysis did any difference ?
    Tons of extensions summon the cmd to summon the language devtools, their automated analysis flagged tons of package and they infer millions of infeections from that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    infeections

    Since I read this I can't stop picturing you as Peter Lorre lmao.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Thx for saving the click

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 12 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Except their summary is wrong. The researchers went on to search other extensions for known malicious code, and found it in thousands of extensions with tens of millions of total installs.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I hopped people here would notice that their "malicious code" detection is totally bogus when the malicious code highlighted hit a local IP address.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Good point. That was in the "static IP" category and not counted in the 200+ million install "malicious code" category, though. It could be a warning sign of false positives, but the example was such a small snippet it could also be opening after a VPN is established. That example was supposedly part of code that opens a connection for shell access from the other end, but without more details it's not really possible to say.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago

    Tons of devtools summons cmd.exe and do networks. Their claim is that more than 10% of the vscode marketplate is malicious package (i just divided the number of extensions they says is malicious, by the number of extensions)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent