StatusCake

5 times domains have been hijacked

ssl monitoring

It’s a common belief that once we purchase a domain, it’ll be ours for as long as we like. Big mistake. Mainly because there are genuine threats to your domain online that mostly go unthought of. For example, hackers can gain access to your system and take your domain for ransom or cause malicious damage to you and your business. Surprised? Well, we have 5 examples of exactly when this has happened, and how hackers have managed to gain access to domains and cause mass disruption. 

1. Google.com.vn (Vietnam) – Lizard Squad

It may seem shocking to you but even Google, the world’s most dominant search engine, had its Vietnam region domain hijacked in 2015. The hackers used a hacking method known as DDoS (distributed denial-of-service) which is ultimately used to take down websites. They redirected users to a website that sold hacking tools to the general public. As you can expect, Google acted quickly to minimise the damage from this hack and swiftly managed to get their domain back. 

2. Lenovo – (Vietnam) – Lizard Squad

The same team who caused Google’s issues also hacked Lenovo using the same method. It’s reported that the reason behind the hack was connected to “Superfish” which is a digital marketing tool for online ads. Lenovo was linked to this marketing company as it provided devices with pre-installed software towards the end of 2014 which turned out to be a security risk to the users. The software did not only collect data on the images on your browser but also other traffic that you viewed as it was acting as a proxy on the device. It seems like the hack was only carried out to cause problems for Lenovo and bring the issue to light.

A Lenovo spokesperson said “we did not do a thorough enough job understanding how Superfish would find and provide their info. That’s on us. That’s a mistake that we made.” 

3. GoDaddy – Spammy Bear

This attack occurred in 2018 when many domains that we are all accustomed to, noticed that highly suspicious emails were sent out to institutions around the US asking for $20000 ransom. It became apparent that the reason this was happening was due to a group hacking into the DNS provider and taking over the domain name. The group was after dormant domains that were linked to large corporations such as Mozilla, Yelp, and Mastercard to name a few. Godaddy soon fixed the issue and announced that the group had taken advantage of a weakness in its system which was quickly rectified.

4. Microsoft Outlook Web access portal for the government of Cyprus – Sea Turtle 

In this hack which occurred in January 2017, it is believed that the hackers used the old-fashioned “phishing email” to gain access to credentials that would allow them to access the domain and gain control of the system. Phishing techniques are still one of the most-used and easiest ways to gain access to any system. The issue was quickly identified and resolved but the question is – how long did they have access to this and how many emails did they redirect to gain access to confidential information?

5. Cafax – sponsored Black Hats

It might sound strange that a sponsored hack might target a consulting firm but there does seem to be a reason for this. Cafax has a consultant working for them who is employed by netnod a Swedish DNS provider and one of the 13 foundational DNS providers that control the i.root in the global distribution system. It seems the hackers were trying to gain access to netnod through the credentials of this consultant. Previously the hackers had succeeded in accessing netnod but luckily, it seemed this time they didn’t manage to.

What we can see from these 5 domain hacking examples is that it doesn’t matter how big your organisation is, there are threats out there that will do whatever they can to gain access to your information either to sell it back to you or to someone who is interested in it. 

Sign up to StatusCake for free today to monitor your domain.

Share this

More from StatusCake

Buy vs Build in the Age of AI (Part 3)

5 min read Autonomous Code, Trust Boundaries, and Why Governance Now Matters More Than Ever In Part 1, we looked at how AI has reduced the cost of building monitoring tools. Then in Part 2, we explored the operational and economic burden of owning them. Now we need to talk about something deeper. Because the real shift isn’t

Buy vs Build in the Age of AI (Part 2)

6 min read The Real Cost of Owning Monitoring Isn’t Code — It’s Everything Else In Part 1, we explored how AI has dramatically reduced the cost of building monitoring tooling. That much is clear. You can scaffold uptime checks quickly, generate alert logic in minutes, and set-up dashboards faster than most teams used to schedule the kickoff

Buy vs Build in the Age of AI (Part 1)

5 min read AI Has Made Building Monitoring Easy. It Hasn’t Made Owning It Any Easier. A few months ago, I spoke to an engineering manager who proudly told me they had rebuilt their monitoring stack over a long weekend. They’d used AI to scaffold synthetic checks. They’d generated alert logic with dynamic thresholds. They’d then wired everything

Alerting Is a Socio-Technical System

3 min read In the previous posts, we’ve looked at how alert noise emerges from design decisions, why notification lists fail to create accountability, and why alerts only work when they’re designed around a clear outcome. Taken together, these ideas point to a broader conclusion. That alerting is not just a technical system, it’s a socio-technical one. Alerting

Designing Alerts for Action

3 min read In the first two posts of this series, we explored how alert noise emerges from design decisions, and why notification lists fail to create accountability when responsibility is unclear. There’s a deeper issue underneath both of those problems. Many alerting systems are designed without being clear about the outcome they’re meant to produce. When teams

A Notification List Is Not a Team

3 min read In the previous post, we looked at how alert noise is rarely accidental. It’s usually the result of sensible decisions layered over time, until responsibility becomes diffuse and response slows. One of the most persistent assumptions behind this pattern is simple. If enough people are notified, someone will take responsibility. After more than fourteen years

Want to know how much website downtime costs, and the impact it can have on your business?

Find out everything you need to know in our new uptime monitoring whitepaper 2021

*By providing your email address, you agree to our privacy policy and to receive marketing communications from StatusCake.