COI Report – Part IV Page 119 of 425 to a separate set of logs, and was thus able to identify the various logins to Citrix Server 1 using the LA. account. 20.4 Changing passwords to the LA. accounts on all SGH Citrix servers 344. By the evening of 11 June 2018, Lum was of the view that the password for the LA. account had been stolen, and had been used to access Citrix Server 1 without authorisation on numerous occasions. However, at this stage, Lum did not report the incident to anyone from the SMD (Security Management Department. 345. The password for the LA. account on Citrix Server 1 was changed in the evening of 11 June 2018. Thereafter, there were no subsequent unauthorised logins to Citrix Server 1 using the LA. account. 346. Local administrator accounts named LA also existed in all other Citrix servers in the SGH Citrix server farm and in H-Cloud, and Lum was of the view that it was highly possible that other LA accounts in the SGH Citrix servers used the same password, ‘P@ssw0rd’. As such, later in the night of 11 June 2018, the passwords for the LA. accounts on all the other SGH Citrix servers were changed. 20.5 Discovering that malware was detected earlier on Citrix Server 1 347. On the night of 11 June 2018, Lum was concerned that Citrix Server 1 may have been infected with malware. He checked the antivirus software logs on Citrix Server 1 and found that malware had been deleted from the server on 8 June 2018. At that point, he did not check further as to the details of the malware, but he provided this information to the SMD the next day. 348. Lum has explained that given what he had learned on 11 June 2018, his first thought was that there was “some kind of audit/penetration testing or
COI Report – Part IV Page 120 of 425 scanning of the SCM database to test for vulnerabilities”. However, after checking with the Infrastructure Services and the SMD the next day, he realised that this was not the case.