Leaked “malware” OutlawCountry review

This week there was a reported leak coming “supposedly” from some security agency , It’s called OC (OutLawCountry) , and i don’t know if it should be called malware because it really doesn’t need to exploit anything to be fair .

OC , It’s supposed to route some or all your traffic to a specific endpoint , but the catch is that this “malware” comes prepackaged in a kernel object (.ko) , a kernel module!!

oc kernel module

This is a bit mind boggling , so they can certainly do everything you would wanna do from a kernel module , routes, iptables rules , etc etc … But why a kernel module ?

Well i feel it’s a neat way to prepackage and drop it but also i feel that it woud be something that might failt depending on the kernel version and compilation flags etc.

So I’ve decided to “re-create” what the “malware” might be doing.

OC details:

As we’ve mentioned this comes a kernel module and in theory it creates a new iptables “table”. Now this isn’t a new chain or a new rule or anything similar , this is a new “table” such as filter,nat or mangle:

That’s the name of the table “dpxvke8h18” , so to see the rules you would need to do something like:

iptables -nvL  -t dpxvke8h18 // iptables -S -t dpxvke8h18

So part of me is thinking by putting it in a different table it’s kind of “harder” for an admin to know that the table exists and might not look up the rules attached to the table.


Kernel iptables tables are created at compile time and normall come as modules, if we pick “mangle” for example:

The file iptable_mangle.c , it’s a kernel module itself:


Moduled have an init and an exit function , these two are called on insmod/modprobe and rmmod for exmaple.

iptable_mangle is loaded in most system so if you do:

Creating a new table:

So I don’t really know if there’s a way to do this from userland , but in an intent to replicate what OC is doing I’ve literally copied most of the data from iptable_mangle and change a few names:


So the code is kind of self explanatory , even if you don’t have a clue about kernel development , here’s the most important functions:

repl = ipt_alloc_initial_table(&packet_mangler);                               ret = ipt_register_table(net, &packet_mangler, repl);

We alloc the table and then register , remember struct net is the “network namespace/stack” we’re we attaching this rule (init_net).

You can go ahead and extend this and add rules to it etc , but i won’t do it in this article.

Compiling nf_foobar:

I’m gisting a makefile , that allow to compile into a .o and .ko , of course when they’re dropping this into powned servers they’re not compiling them in place the probably just drop the .ko and load it as you load drivers for your winmodem :)

Loading and testing it:

So this is what happens without the mod:

Makes perfect sense , it also suggests that tables are .ko , let’s compile and insmod:

compiling my specific table

Some warnings , are expected :)

insmod nf_foobar.ko

Alright so good stuff now we need to see with iptables if the table exists:

foobar table

Nice , so now we have a new iptables “table” where you can add rules , just like nat,mangle or filter.

Now when you remove the module you can avoid unregistering the table so the table remains there after the module is unloaded ;)

Last Notes:

So that’s it , i guess questions for my humble 200 followers is why do you think they’ve decided to use this transport (.ko) and not nft , or not adding rules to the table mangle or soemthing like that , I will think about it too.

Thank you!

Hacker Noon is how hackers start their afternoons. We’re a part of the @AMI family. We are now accepting submissions and happy to discuss advertising & sponsorship opportunities.
If you enjoyed this story, we recommend reading our latest tech stories and trending tech stories. Until next time, don’t take the realities of the world for granted!