No Gaming or Social Media during Work Hours Kerala HC to ban employees from using their phones for non-official purposes during working hours

Introduction

In the multifaceted world of international trade and finance, cross-border transactions constitute the heart of economic relationships that span the globe. The threads that intertwine forming the fabric of global commerce are ceaselessly dynamic and exhibit an intricate pattern of complexity especially when it comes to the regulated movement of capital. It's a domain where economies connect, where businesses engage in sublime commerce, and where technology and regulation intersect at critical juncture. These guidelines will play a critical role in the regulation of capital, fortification of financial integrity, and transparency of regulatory and cross-border payments. The key highlights of this regulation include strict pre-authorization for non-bank entities, mandating specific accounts for import and export PA-CBs and a transaction ceiling of 25,00,000 Rupees.

The Vigilance of RBI 

The Reserve Bank of India (RBI), ever vigilant in its shepherding role over the nation's financial stability and integrity, has taken decisive strides to dispel the haze that once clouded this critical sector. With the issuance of a revelatory circular dated October 31, 2023, the RBI has unveiled a groundbreaking framework that redefines the terrain for these pivotal financial entities, aptly christened as Payment Aggregators – Cross Border (PA-CB). In deploying this comprehensive array of regulations, the RBI demonstrates a robust commitment to harmonizing and synchronizing the oversight of payments within the country's financial fabric, extending its meticulous regulatory weave from domestic Payment Aggregators (PAs) to the PA-CBs, a sector previously undistinguished in formal oversight.

The prescriptive measures announced by the RBI are nothing short of a regulatory beacon that cuts through the fog of uncertainty, illuminating a clear path forward for entities dedicated to facilitating cross-border payment transactions pertaining to the import and export of permissible goods and services in India through online modes. Inclusiveness is a hallmark of the RBI’s directive, encompassing a diverse cadre of financial actors, ranging from Authorized Dealer (AD) banks and conventional Payment Aggregators (PAs), to the emergent breed of PA-CBs actively engaged in processing these critical international payment transactions.

Key Aspects of Regulation

One of the most striking aspects of this new regulatory regime is the RBI's insistence on pre-authorization. All non-bank entities providing PA-CB services are impelled to apply to the apex bank for authorisation by April 30, 2024. This is far from a perfunctory gesture; it represents a profound departure from the bygone era when these entities functioned under a patchwork of provisional guidelines and ad-hoc circulars. Indeed, with this resolute move, the RBI signals its intention to embrace these entities within its direct regulatory gambit, an acknowledgement of the shifting tides and progressive intricacies characteristic of cross-border payments.

The tapestry of new rules is complex, setting forth an array of prerequisites for entities aspiring for authorization. For instance, non-bank PA-CBs are obliged to register with the Financial Intelligence Unit-India (FIU-IND) as a preliminary step before commencing the application process. Moreover, the financial benchmarks set are notably rigorous. Non-banks must boast a minimum net worth of ₹15 crores at the time of the application—a figure that escalates to a robust ₹25 crores by the fiscal deadline of March 31, 2026.

Way Forward

As if these requirements weren't indicative enough of the RBI’s penchant for detail and precision, the guidelines become yet more granular when addressing specific types of PA-CBs. Import-only PA-CBs are mandatorily obliged to maintain an Import Collection Account (ICA) with an AD Category-I scheduled commercial bank, while export-only PA-CBs are instructed to maintain an Export Collection Account (ECA), which can be maintained in Indian Rupees (INR) or any permissible foreign currency. The nuance here is palpable; payments for import transactions must be received in a meticulously managed escrow account of the PA, prior to being funneled into the ICA for smooth settlement with overseas merchants.

Conversely, export-only PA-CBs' proceeds from international sales must be swiftly credited to the relevant currency ECA. This meticulous accounting ensures that the flow of funds is both transparent and traceable, adhering to the utmost standards of financial probity.

Yet, perhaps the most emphatic of the RBI's pronouncements is the establishment of a transaction ceiling. PA-CBs have their per-transaction limit capped at ₹25,00,000 for each unit of goods or services exchanged. This calculated move is transparent in its objective to mitigate risk—a crucial aspect when one considers the potential implications of these transactions on the country’s fiscal health and the integrity of its financial systems.

It is no exaggeration to declare that with these guidelines, the RBI is effectuating a seismic shift in the regulation of cross-border payment transactions. There's a fundamental transformation taking place—a metamorphosis—from a loosely defined existence of PA-CBs to one of distinct clarity, under the direct and unswerving supervisory gaze of the regulator. The compliance burden, indeed, has become heavier, yet the return is a compass that points decisively towards secure harbours.

As we embark upon the fresh horizons that these rules bring into view, it is imperative to acknowledge that the RBI's regulatory innovations represent far more than a mere codification of dos and don'ts. They embody a visionary stride towards safeguarding and fortifying the architecture of international payments, a critical component of India's burgeoning presence on the world economic stage.

Conclusion 

The journey ahead, as we navigate these newly charted waters with the RBI's guidelines as our steadfast North Star, will no doubt be replete with challenges, adaptations and learning curves for the array of operational entities. But it is with confidence we can say, the path is set; the map is clear. The complex labyrinth of cross-border financial transactions is now demystified, and the RBI's clarion call beckons us towards a future marked by regulation, security, and above all else, reliability in the cosmopolitan tapestry of global trade. RBI’s guidelines provide a comprehensive framework for standardizing cross-border financial transactions in India. This decision is a monumental step towards maintaining cyber peace in cyberspace. 

References:

• https://www.rbi.org.in/Scripts/NotificationUser.aspx?Id=12561&Mode=0
• https://www2.deloitte.com/in/en/pages/tax/articles/tax-alert-Regulation-of-payment-aggregator-cross-border-pa-cb.html
• https://www.jsalaw.com/newsletters-and-updates/rbis-new-guidelines-to-govern-payment-aggregators-in-cross-border-transactions/ 

‍

Digitisation in Agriculture

The traditional way of doing agriculture has undergone massive digitization in recent years, whereby several agricultural processes have been linked to the Internet. This globally prevalent transformation, driven by smart technology, encompasses the use of sensors, IoT devices, and data analytics to optimize and automate labour-intensive farming practices. Smart farmers in the country and abroad now leverage real-time data to monitor soil conditions, weather patterns, and crop health, enabling precise resource management and improved yields. The integration of smart technology in agriculture not only enhances productivity but also promotes sustainable practices by reducing waste and conserving resources. As a result, the agricultural sector is becoming more efficient, resilient, and capable of meeting the growing global demand for food.

Digitisation of Food Supply Chains

There has also been an increase in the digitisation of food supply chains across the globe since it enables both suppliers and consumers to keep track of the stage of food processing from farm to table and ensures the authenticity of the food product. The latest generation of agricultural robots is being tested to minimise human intervention. It is thought that AI-run processes can mitigate labour shortage, improve warehousing and storage and make transportation more efficient by running continuous evaluations and adjusting the conditions real-time while increasing yield. The company Muddy Machines is currently trialling an autonomous asparagus-harvesting robot called Sprout that not only addresses labour shortages but also selectively harvests green asparagus, which traditionally requires careful picking. However, Chris Chavasse, co-founder of Muddy Machines, highlights that hackers and malicious actors could potentially hack into the robot's servers and prevent it from operating by driving it into a ditch or a hedge, thereby impending core crop activities like seeding and harvesting. Hacking agricultural pieces of machinery also implies damaging a farmer’s produce and in turn profitability for the season.

Case Study: Muddy Machines and Cybersecurity Risks

A cyber attack on digitised agricultural processes has a cascading impact on online food supply chains. Risks are non-exhaustive and spill over to poor protection of cargo in transit, increased manufacturing of counterfeit products, manipulation of data, poor warehousing facilities and product-specific fraud, amongst others. Additional impacts on suppliers are also seen, whereby suppliers have supplied the food products but fail to receive their payments. These cyber-threats may include malware(primarily ransomware) that accounts for 38% of attacks, Internet of Things (IoT) attacks that comprise 29%, Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks, SQL Injections, phishing attacks etc. 

Prominent Cyber Attacks and Their Impacts

Ransomware attacks are the most popular form of cyber threats to food supply chains and may include malicious contaminations, deliberate damage and destruction of tangible assets (like infrastructure) or intangible assets (like reputation and brand). In 2017, NotPetya malware disrupted the world’s largest logistics giant Maersk and destroyed all end-user devices in more than 60 countries. Interestingly, NotPetya was also linked to the malfunction of freezers connected to control systems. The attack led to these control systems being compromised, resulting in freezer failures and potential spoilage of food, highlighting the vulnerability of industrial control systems to cyber threats.

Further Case Studies

NotPetya also impacted Mondelez, the maker of Oreos but disrupting its email systems, file access and logistics for weeks. Mondelez’s insurance claim was also denied since NotPetya malware was described as a “war-like” action, falling outside the purview of the insurance coverage. In April 2021, over the Easter weekend, Bakker Logistiek, a logistics company based in the Netherlands that offers air-conditioned warehousing and food transportation for Dutch supermarkets, experienced a ransomware attack. This incident disrupted their supply chain for several days, resulting in empty shelves at Albert Heijn supermarkets, particularly for products such as packed and grated cheese. Despite the severity of the attack, the company successfully restored their operations within a week by utilizing backups. JBS, one of the world’s biggest meat processing companies, also had to pay $11 million in ransom via Bitcoin to resolve a cyber attack in the same year, whereby computer networks at JBS were hacked, temporarily shutting down their operations and endangering consumer data. The disruption threatened food supplies and risked higher food prices for consumers. Additional cascading impacts also include low food security and hindrances in processing payments at retail stores. 

Credible Threat Agents and Their Targets

Any cyber-attack is usually carried out by credible threat agents that can be classified as either internal or external threat agents. Internal threat agents may include contractors, visitors to business sites, former/current employees, and individuals who work for suppliers. External threat agents may include activists, cyber-criminals, terror cells etc. These threat agents target large organisations owing to their larger ransom-paying capacity, but may also target small companies due to their vulnerability and low experience, especially when such companies are migrating from analogous methods to digitised processes.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation warns that the food and agricultural systems are most vulnerable to cyber-security threats during critical planting and harvesting seasons. It noted an increase in cyber-attacks against six agricultural co-operatives in 2021, with ancillary core functions such as food supply and distribution being impacted. Resultantly, cyber-attacks may lead to a mass shortage of food not only meant for human consumption but also for animals.

Policy Recommendations

To safeguard against digital food supply chains, Food defence emerges as one of the top countermeasures to prevent and mitigate the effects of intentional incidents and threats to the food chain. While earlier, food defence vulnerability assessments focused on product adulteration and food fraud, including vulnerability assessments of agriculture technology now be more relevant.  

Food supply organisations must prioritise regular backups of data using air-gapped and password-protected offline copies, and ensure critical data copies are not modifiable or deletable from the main system.  For this, blockchain-based food supply chain solutions may be deployed, which are not only resilient to hacking, but also allow suppliers and even consumers to track produce. Companies like Ripe.io, Walmart Global Tech, Nestle and Wholechain deploy blockchain for food supply management since it provides overall process transparency, improves trust issues in the transactions, enables traceable and tamper-resistant records and allows accessibility and visibility of data provenance. Extensive recovery plans with multiple copies of essential data and servers in secure, physically separated locations, such as hard drives, storage devices, cloud or distributed ledgers should be adopted in addition to deploying operations plans for critical functions in case of system outages. For core processes which are not labour-intensive,  including manual operation methods may be used to reduce digital dependence. Network segmentation, updates or patches for operating systems, software, and firmware are additional steps which can be taken to secure smart agricultural technologies. 

References

1. Muddy Machines website, Accessed 26 July 2024.  https://www.muddymachines.com/ 
2. “Meat giant JBS pays $11m in ransom to resolve cyber-attack”, BBC, 10 June 2021. https://www.bbc.com/news/business-57423008 
3. Marshall, Claire & Prior, Malcolm, “Cyber security: Global food supply chain at risk from malicious hackers.”, BBC, 20 May 2022. https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-61336659 
4. “Ransomware Attacks on Agricultural Cooperatives Potentially Timed to Critical Seasons.”, Private Industry Notification, Federal Bureau of Investigation, 20 April  https://www.ic3.gov/Media/News/2022/220420-2.pdf. 
5. Manning, Louise & Kowalska, Aleksandra. (2023). “The threat of ransomware in the food supply chain: a challenge for food defence”, Trends in Organized Crime. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12117-023-09516-y 
6. “NotPetya: the cyberattack that shook the world”, Economic Times, 5 March 2022. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tech/newsletters/ettech-unwrapped/notpetya-the-cyberattack-that-shook-the-world/articleshow/89997076.cms?from=mdr 
7. Abrams, Lawrence, “Dutch supermarkets run out of cheese after ransomware attack.”, Bleeping Computer, 12 April 2021. https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/dutch-supermarkets-run-out-of-cheese-after-ransomware-attack/ 
8. Pandey, Shipra; Gunasekaran, Angappa; Kumar Singh, Rajesh & Kaushik, Anjali, “Cyber security risks in globalised supply chains: conceptual framework”, Journal of Global Operations and Strategic Sourcing, January 2020. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Shipra-Pandey/publication/338668641_Cyber_security_risks_in_globalized_supply_chains_conceptual_framework/links/5e2678ae92851c89c9b5ac66/Cyber-security-risks-in-globalized-supply-chains-conceptual-framework.pdf 
9. Daley, Sam, “Blockchain for Food: 10 examples to know”, Builin, 22 March 2023 https://builtin.com/blockchain/food-safety-supply-chain 

‍

Overview:

A recent addition to the  list of cybercrime  is SharpRhino, a RAT (Remote Access Trojan) actively used by Hunters International ransomware group. SharpRhino is highly developed and penetrates into the network mask of IT specialists, primarily due to the belief in the tools’ legitimacy. Going under the genuine software installer, SharpRhino started functioning in mid-June 2024. However, Quorum Cyber discovered it in early August 2024 while investigating ransomware.

About Hunters International Group:

Hunters International emerged as one of the most notorious groups focused on ransomware attacks, having compromised over 134 targets worldwide in the first seven months of 2024. It is believed that the group is the rebranding of Hive ransomware group that was previously active, and there are considerable similarities in the code. Its focus on IT employees in particular demonstrates the fact that they move tactically in gaining access to the organizations’ networks.

Modus Operandi:

1. Typosquatting Technique 

SharpRhino is mainly distributed by a domain that looks like the genuine Angry IP Scanner, which is a popular network discovery tool. The malware installer, labeled as ipscan-3.9.1-setup. It is a 32-bit Nullsoft installer which embeds a password protected 7z archive in it. 

2. Installation Process 

• Execution of Installer: When the victim downloads and executes the installer and changes the windows registry in order to attain persistence. This is done by generating a registry entry that starts a harmful file, Microsoft. AnyKey. exe, are fakes originating from fake versions of true legitimate Microsoft Visual Studio tools. 

• Creation of Batch File: This drops a batch file qualified as LogUpdate at the installer.bat, that runs the PowerShell scripts on the device. These scripts are to compile C# code into memory to serve as a means of making the malware covert in its operation. 

• Directory Creation: The installer establishes two directories that allow the C2 communication – C:\ProgramData\Microsoft: WindowsUpdater24 and LogUpdateWindows. 

3. Execution and Functionality: 

• Command Execution: The malware can execute PowerShell commands on the infected system, these actions may involve privilege escalation and other extended actions such as lateral movement. 

• C2 Communication: SharpRhino interacts with command and control servers located on domains from platforms such as Cloudflare. This communication is necessary for receiving commands from the attackers and for returning any data of interest to the attackers. 

• Data Exfiltration and Ransomware Deployment: Once SharpRhino has gained control, it can steal information and then proceed to encrypt it with a .locked extension. The procedure generally concludes with a ransom message, which informs users on how to purchase the decryption key. 

4. Propagation Techniques: 

Also, SharpRhino can spread through the self-copying method, this is the virus may copy itself to other computers using the network account of the victim and pretending to be trustworthy senders such as emails or network-shared files. Moreover, the victim’s machine may then proceed to propagate the malware to other systems like sharing in the company with other employees.

Indicators of Compromise (IOCs):

• LogUpdate.bat
• Wiaphoh7um.t
• ipscan-3.9.1-setup.exe
• kautix2aeX.t
• WindowsUpdate.bat

Command and Control Servers:

• cdn-server-1.xiren77418.workers.dev
• cdn-server-2.wesoc40288.workers.dev
• Angryipo.org
• Angryipsca.com

Analysis:

‍

‍

Graph:

Precautionary measures to be taken:

To mitigate the risks posed by SharpRhino and similar malware, organizations should implement the following measures:

• Implement Security Best Practices: It is important only to download software from official sites and avoid similar sites to confuse the user by changing a few letters.

• Enhance Detection Capabilities: Use technology in detection that can detect the IOCs linked to Sharp Rhino.

• Educate Employees: Educate IT people and employees on phishing scams and the requirement to check the origin of the application.

• Regular Backups: It is also important to back up important files from systems and networks in order to minimize the effects of ransomware attacks on a business.

Conclusion:

SharpRhino could be deemed as the evolution of the strategies used by organizations like Hunters International and others involved in the distribution of ransomware. SharpRhino primarily focuses on the audience of IT professionals and employs complex delivery and execution schemes, which makes it an extremely serious threat for corporate networks. To do so it is imperative that organizations have an understanding of its inner workings in order to fortify their security measures against this relatively new threat. Through the enforcement of proper security measures and constant enlightenment of organizations on the importance of cybersecurity, firms can prevent the various risks associated with SharpRhino and related malware. Be safe, be knowledgeable, and most importantly, be secure when it comes to cyber security for your investments.

Reference: 

https://cybersecuritynews.com/sharprhino-ransomware-alert/

https://cybersecsentinel.com/sharprhino-explained-key-facts-and-how-to-protect-your-data/

https://www.dataprivacyandsecurityinsider.com/2024/08/sharprhino-malware-targeting-it-professionals/

‍