STE WILLIAMS

Nominum Launches Vantio ThreatAvert To Protect Fixed And Mobile Networks

Redwood City, USA, October 24, 2013 ̶ NominumTM, the provider of integrated subscriber, network, and security solutions for service providers, today announced the launch of Vantio TM ThreatAvert, a unique product for averting threats in fixed and mobile networks. A key element of this new product is the Nominum Global Intelligence Xchange (GIX), which provides a foundational security layer with continuous real-time threat updates. This combination delivers far greater security than a DNS firewall by neutralizing threats that originate from within the network itself.

Service providers have seen huge growth in attacks originated inside their networks. These attacks take two forms – Inside/In, where attacks are launched inside the network on internal resources such as routers, DNS servers, gateways and mobile EPC (evolved packet core) resources – and Inside/Out, also launched inside the network, but against external resources such as websites, network assets, enterprises and other end-users.

Network security architecture is predominantly focused on defending networks against external threats. As cyber-attacks become more sophisticated network security needs to evolve to match emerging threats. By addressing attacks planted inside the network service providers will be able to maintain network integrity and ensure an optimal level of performance for the end user.

Vantio ThreatAvert leverages Nominum’s precision policy capabilities that can segment, identify and enforce policies by users or traffic types. It provides a level of policy granularity that is unmatched by any other security competitor and is capable of throttling attacks with configurable rate limiting capabilities. Leveraging these unique features, Vantio ThreatAvert delivers two primary benefits:

Proactively stopping attacks before they start

Preventative throttling of new attacks to instantly curtail their impact

The GIX network, with a ‘best in class’ list of malicious domains and URLs, shares information amongst carriers to provide an early warning system and offer better protection globally. Together, Vantio ThreatAvert and GIX protect both internal and external networks from malicious traffic.

Simple to deploy and lightweight, Vantio ThreatAvert is built on leading Vantio CacheServe DNS software with a proven track record of detecting and preventing bots and bot-related activity. It defends against multiple attacks including botnet related activities, malware exploits, DNS amplification, DoS / DDoS, and outbound spam.

Gary Messiana, Nominum CEO, says: “Service Providers drive revenue growth by providing the quality of experience customers demand. Vantio ThreatAvert is a next step innovation that deters attacks against network assets to ensure ‘always on’ availability and increase subscriber engagement and retention. Service providers have a suite of solutions in place to defend their networks from external threats but a whole new level of security is required to deal with the threats now emanating from within the network.”

“Service Providers face more complex threats every day, which leads to a poor customer experience such as slow Internet connections, outages, data exfiltration and more. This diminishes a provider’s reputation, making it harder to add new customers or keep existing ones,” said Sanjay Kapoor, Senior Vice President, Marketing and Business Strategy for Nominum. “The DNS can and should do more than ‘just DNS’ and Vantio ThreatAvert does exactly that.”

Vantio ThreatAvert will be available as software and as an appliance in the first quarter of 2014. A range of communications service providers around the world, including Codetel, Telstra, LINKdotNET, EnergiMidt and Cablevision Argentina, have already invested in the solution

About Nominum

Nominum provides innovative software that leverages DNS data to deliver a reliable, safe and personalized Internet experience for Communication Service Providers and their subscribers. The company’s Vantiotrade DNS Software and N2 applications arm CSPs to avert insider threats that could impact network availability and reputation. Nominum enables CSPs to engage with customers to deliver unique services and revenue opportunities and to build brand loyalty. Today, Nominum’s carrier-grade software processes over 1.3 trillion queries daily and is deployed by the largest fixed and mobile operators worldwide. Nominum is a global organization headquartered in Redwood City, CA.

Article source: http://www.darkreading.com/mobile/nominum-launches-vantio-threatavert-to-p/240163135

Researchers Flag Security Flaws In New LinkedIn Offering

A new LinkedIn feature designed to familiarize users with their email partners could introduce a slew of security problems to enterprises and individuals who use it, researchers said this week.

The new feature, LinkedIn Intro, enables iPhone users to route their email through LinkedIn so that they can get background on an email sender or receiver before they write. The feature helps the user become more familiar with their email partners, LinkedIn says.

But security experts say the new feature is deeply flawed and potentially dangerous to the user’s personal privacy — and, by extension, to any enterprise that allows employees to use LinkedIn via the corporate network.

“Intro reconfigures your iOS device (e.g. iPhone, iPad) so that all of your emails go through LinkedIn’s servers. You read that right,” states the security consulting firm Bishop Fox in a blog about the new LinkedIn feature. “Once you install the Intro app, all of your emails, both sent and received, are transmitted via LinkedIn’s servers. LinkedIn is forcing all your IMAP and SMTP data through their own servers and then analyzing and scraping your emails for data pertaining to…whatever they feel like.

The blog continues: “‘But that sounds like a man-in-the-middle attack!’ I hear you cry. Yes. Yes it does. Because it is. That’s exactly what it is. And this is a bad thing. If your employees are checking their company email, it’s an especially bad thing.”

Other security experts also flagged the potential security vulnerabilities in the new LinkedIn feature.

“To give them credit, from the engineering point of view it is pretty nifty. But from the security and privacy point of view it sends a shiver down my spine,” said Graham Cluley, an independent security researcher, in a blog post. “LinkedIn also scooped up the contents of users’ iOS calendars, including sensitive information such as confidential meeting notes and call-in numbers — which they then transmitted in plain text, not encrypted.”

In fact, Intro could create problems for encrypted email, the Bishop Fox blog says. “Cryptographic signatures will break because LinkedIn is rewriting your outgoing emails by appending a signature on the end,” Bishop Fox states. “This means email signatures can no longer be verified. Encrypted emails are likely to break because of the same reason – extra data being appended to your messages.”

The approach of the new feature could also create legal problems for email users, because it changes the content of the email and interferes with confidentiality rules, Bishop Fox states.

“[LinkedIn] calls it ‘doing the impossible,’ but some might call it ‘hijacking email,'” the blog says.

Have a comment on this story? Please click “Add a Comment” below. If you’d like to contact Dark Reading’s editors directly, send us a message.

Article source: http://www.darkreading.com/applications/researchers-flag-security-flaws-in-new-l/240163123

Not Your Father’s IPS: SANS Releases Results On Its Network Security Survey

BETHESDA, Md., Oct. 25, 2013 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — SANS announces the results of a new survey sponsored by Hewlett-Packard on network security. In it,

439 survey responses show that IPS is still mainly deployed at the perimeter and is doing a fairly good job at detection, yet only 11% of respondents are turning on IPS to block automatically for 100% of their traffic.

However, 80% are using some automated blocking – a large group (28%) set automatic blocking only for those events they can block with great assurance.

Why aren’t organizations using their IPS automated blocking features more?

Results indicate that respondents want and need more information than their traditional IPS will give them before they can confidently turn on automatic blocking.

Indeed, when respondents laid out their wish lists for a next-generation IPS, 79% say their next-generation IPSs must include more application awareness, 67% want more context awareness, 57% say they need more content awareness, and 56% would like full stack inspection included in their IPS capabilities. This question allowed multiple responses, and this ranking indicates that, above all, respondents want smarter IPS devices that work with a variety of needs.

“Given the industry trend toward simpler and easier interfaces, I was surprised that the overwhelming need expressed in our survey results was for more data,”

says SANS Analyst, Rob Vandenbrink, who authored the report. “They’re also looking for better tools to integrate and process that data.”

To expand their IPS capabilities, respondents are planning to or are already connecting their IPS devices to other security inputs for a next-gen IPS “fabric-oriented” architecture so that their tools, working together, result in better visibility and analytics. This, in turn, not only results in more accurate decisions made on behalf of the IPS, but also offers the ability to feed information back and forth between different security systems for more thorough protection and remediation.

“This survey represents a true ‘slice-of-life’ from real IT shops trying to enhance their IPS capabilities to prevent threats,” adds Vandenbrink.

These and other results will be released during an October 29 webcast at 1 PM EDT hosted by SANS. This webcast is open to the IT community by registering at

http://www.sans.org/info/141795

The SANS Analyst Program, www.sans.org/reading_room/analysts_program, is part of the SANS Institute.

About SANS Institute

The SANS Institute was established in 1989 as a cooperative research and education organization. SANS is the most trusted and, by far, the largest source for world-class information security training and security certification in the world, offering over 50 training courses each year. GIAC, an affiliate of the SANS Institute, is a certification body featuring over 25 hands-on, technical certifications in information security. SANS offers a myriad of free resources to the InfoSec community including consensus projects, research reports, and newsletters; it also operates the Internet’s early warning system–the Internet Storm Center. At the heart of SANS are the many security practitioners, representing varied global organizations from corporations to universities, working together to help the entire information security community.

(www.SANS.org)

Article source: http://www.darkreading.com/intrusion-prevention/not-your-fathers-ips-sans-releases-resul/240163127

Is your smartphone broadcasting your movements when you shop?

RadarNext time you’re in a public place, have a good look around you and see if you’re being followed.

You (probably) won’t see anyone actually tailing you, but if you have your smartphone with you it’s possible that your movements are being keenly observed.

A couple of months ago we reported on the sinister and faintly Dr Whoish tale of London’s spying rubbish bins. These uncannily observant, space-age trash cans were part of a trial by advertisers that monitored peoples’ movements by tracking the unique IDs of their mobile phones.

All WiFi-capable devices broadcast a unique ID, a Media Access Control (MAC) address, when they’re looking for networks (and so long as WiFi is enabled they are always looking for networks).

Which means that if you walk around carrying a smartphone with WiFi enabled then you are broadcasting your own unique radio beacon and it’s easy to track your movements.

MAC address tracking, also known as Mobile Location Analytics (MLA), is of serious interest to companies trying to sell you things.

MLA in the wild

It’s early days but according to the Washington Post there are as many as 40 MLA companies in the USA, some with sizable venture capital funding, and they’re already logging thousands of customer interactions every day on behalf of retailers.

And it’s going on in the UK too. After we published the spying bins story our editor mentioned in passing that The Oracle, a large but not especially remarkable shopping mall in the UK town of Reading, had signs saying it was tracking customers’ mobile phones.

A few days later she took a photo of one of the mall’s signs.

Photo of the MLS message at the Oracle Shopping Centre, Reading, UKThe text reads:

To provide a better shopping experience for our customers we anonymously survey the movement of mobile phones to help show us how the centre is used.

No personal data is recorded at any time.

The Oracle, like the London bins, is apparently only surveying anonymous data. However turning e4:ce:8f:1f:f7:ba into Mark Stockley by cross referencing existing personal data would be trivial in a retail environment.

Some retailers already use purchase data from store cards to produce detailed personal profiles and highly targeted, personal advertising.

Their pockets are deep and their appetite for knowing all about you is well established so if retailers aren’t already combining MLA data with the personal information they have on you it’s just a matter of time – the analytics industry certainly thinks so.

MLA code of conduct

On October 22 a group of the leading MLA companies announced they had agreed an industry code of conduct. The code, which may be an attempt to head off more draconian FTC regulation, is light on detail but it sets out a number of important principles:

  1. Users of MLA technology will have to provide clear signage, with an industry standard symbol, in a conspicuous location.
  2. Data will be de-identified and de-personalised unless a consumer has provided affirmative consent.
  3. Affirmative consent is required for:
    • linking personal information to a MAC address.
    • contacting a consumer based on MLA data.
  4. Users will be able to opt-out of MLA by adding their MAC addresses to a central registry of devices that shouldn’t be tracked.

The MLA industry should be congratulated for proactive self-regulation like this and for avoiding the quagmire that has engulfed the Tracking Protection Working Group tasked with drafting similar Do Not Track rules for the web.

Particularly noteworthy is their approach to combining MLA data with personal information; it will require consumers to explicitly opt-in.

Unfortunately when it comes to basic, anonymous, tracking the code says you’re fair game until you opt out.

Using your phone’s MAC address broadcasting to track your movements is a serious subversion of the purpose of that broadcast. Even if it shortens the waiting time at your favourite store, it should, in my opinion, require your permission rather than your forgiveness.

We should also be very cautious when it comes to claims of data anonymisation. As AOL famously demonstrated, anonymous data can turn out to be a lot less anonymous than you think.

Luckily there is an easy way for smartphone users to defeat the anonymous tracking; simply turn off WiFi and Bluetooth on your mobile phone.

Please tell us what you think about this in our comments below. I’m very curious to know if any of you have encountered this kind of tracking already or if there are MLA signs in public places you visit. If you see one and you have a camera handy take a photo and share it with us on Twitter.

Finally, since it’s National Cyber Security Awareness Month and you’re reading about smartphones why not take a few minutes to check that you’re following our 10 tips for securing your smartphone too.


Article source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/nakedsecurity/~3/HYhN6UyBuVs/

Developer’s computer seized because he called himself a hacker

Hard drive, image courtesy of ShutterstockThe US government is a little spooked by hacking.

That was evidenced last week when a US government contractor asked for, and was given, an order that allowed it to knock on an ex-employee’s door and seize his hard drive without warning, largely because the ex-employee started a new software company whose site said “We like hacking things and we don’t want to stop.”

The court said that it ordered Corey Thuen’s computer to be seized without warning because his background as a self-professed hacker made it likely that he would delete evidence in an intellectual property case.

From the court order, published 15 October:

The Court has struggled over the issue of allowing the copying of the hard drive. This is a serious invasion of privacy and is certainly not a standard remedy…

The tipping point for the Court comes from evidence that the defendants – in their own words – are hackers. By labeling themselves this way, they have essentially announced that they have the necessary computer skills and intent to simultaneously release the code publicly and conceal their role in that act.

The history of the seizure starts at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL), a federal governmental facility owned by the US Department of Energy.

Battelle Energy Alliance, the management and operating contractor for INL, brought suit against ex-INL employee Thuen and Southfork Security, the company that he created after leaving Battelle.

The US Department of Energy had funded INL in order to develop “a computer program aimed at protecting the United States’ critical energy infrastructure (oil, gas, chemical and electrical companies) from cyber attacks.”

Thuen was one of the developers of this software program, which came to be known as “Sophia” – a reference to the Greek goddess of wisdom.

After Battelle tested Sophia in 2012, the company learned that electric utility companies were interested in getting their hands on a commercial version, but they wanted that version to come in open-source form.

Battelle wasn’t up for making the source code available, so instead it began a bidding process to let commercial software and network security firms compete for the right to exclusively license Sophia.

Southfork Security was one of eight companies that showed interest.

Thuen, who, the suit says, was pushing for Sophia to be open source, had created Southfork for the purpose of bidding on the software. Southfork submitted a licensing proposal for the software in February 2013.

A few months later, Southfork withdrew from the bidding.

Thuen wound up creating his own program, called Visdom.

The suit alleges that Thuen stole the code for Sophia in order to cook his own program.

TechDirt reports that Andreas Schou, who describes Thuen as a friend and former client, shed light on this case in a Google+ post.

In the post, Schou said that on 16 October, Thuen got a panicked call from his wife, who was being held out on the lawn by Battelle’s lawyers as they tried to call the sheriff in to, presumably, break down Thuen’s door.

Schou’s first thought, he writes, is that it was a mistake, given that Thuen has worked for the government his entire career, at the FBI and as a security researcher specializing in SCADA systems, cyberterrorism, and critical infrastructure, and that he’s accused of open-sourcing a harmless software program:

He’s a straight-laced, church-attending guy with three kids and an admittedly strange job.

And here’s what he’s been accused of: threatening national security by open-sourcing a network visualization and whitelisting tool.

TechDirt’s Tim Cushing writes that Judge B. Lynn Winmill apparently swallowed Battelle’s arguments “almost in their entirety”.

Those arguments, from Battelle’s original complaint, claim copyright infringement, citing Thuen’s software, Visdom, as resembling Sophia.

What Battelle put forth as evidence:

  • Thuen worked on Sophia and had access to the code.
  • Visdom’s name is remarkably similar to Sophia (which, again, derives from the Greek goddess of wisdom).
  • Thuen couldn’t have created his own program so fast without copying substantial amounts of Sophia’s code.

If Battelle had done their due diligence, Schou writes, they’d have checked GitHub, found that Thuen’s open-source project is built in a different language than Sophia, with the use of open libraries, would have been able to check to see when the code had been written, and thus “wouldn’t have sued to begin with.”

(Note that Schou includes a disclaimer: he’s “represented Southfork in the past, and with respect to some peripherally related matters, but do not represent them with respect to this matter.” Nor does he hold equitable interest in the company, and nor is he a creditor.)

The media has been playing up this case as it pertains to rights against unreasonable search, as described in the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution, but some have disputed that aspect.

Copyright, image courtesy of ShutterstockOne commenter on DigitalBond’s coverage, Paul E. “Marbux” Merrell, J.D., maintains that copyright law is more relevant:

I agree that the 4th Amendment is not in play here. The relevant law is the copyright statute and Fed.R.Civ.P. 65.

A temporary restraining order (“TRO”) in a civil case between private parties where no government search or seizure is involved does not present 4th Amendment issues.

I’ll observe as a retired lawyer with lots of years spent in federal court cases that the judge’s order is staggeringly weak, with the reliance on the “hacker” admission by the defendants on their web site only one facet of a very weak argument by the Court.

Most glaringly, the judge’s order prohibits the defendants from publishing their program, which raises an enormous “prior restraint” 1st Amendment issue that the Court does not address (and that the plaintiff’s lawyers apparently did not address as well).

Beyond Fourth vs. First Amendment issues, at the heart of the matter, of course, is the definition of the term “hacker”.

As Wikipedia notes, others have pointed out and technically-minded people are quick to explain, the term has multiple meanings:

As many have pointed out, it seems that the court has interpreted the term, as the media often does, using only its criminal meaning.

Perhaps, on appeal, it will be made clear that having the skills necessary to commit computer crime and copyright infringement does not mean that a programmer is destined to destroy evidence in some preordained, genetically mapped-out path to malfeasance.

Image of hacker, hard drive and Copyright courtesy of Shutterstock.

Article source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/nakedsecurity/~3/6m8VrL8q-AE/

Norks seed online games with malware in fiendish DDoS plot

Free Regcast : Managing Multi-Vendor Devices with System Centre 2012

South Korea’s National Police Agency (NPA) is warning users not to download unofficial online games as they may contain malware designed by the North to compromise machines which can then be used to launch DDoS attacks on the country.

The malware in question collects the location data and IP address and sends them to overseas servers, according to local Arirang news site.


The infected machines can then be used to DDoS targets in the south.

It remains unclear exactly why police suspect NORKS this time around, although the hermit nation has done something similar in the past.

Last June the NPA discovered a plot in which a South Korean businessman purchased online gaming software at a knock down price from alleged Pyongyang agents.

These games were subsequently used to infect users whose PCs were then put to work DDoS-ing the web site of Incheon airport.

Tensions on the peninsula have been mounting in recent months, with claims by Seoul that Pyongyang has an army of 3,000 highly trained operatives bent on wreaking cyber destruction on the south.

Just last week, lawmaker Chung Hee-soo told parliament that attacks since 2009 had caused the country financial damage in excess of £500 million.

As if that wasn’t enough to keep information security professionals in the region busy, reports have emerged of a new Android banking Trojan aimed at Korean users.

Dubbed Android/Trojan.Bank.Wroba, the malware disguises itself as the Google Play Store app, stealing log-ins and other information when users access their online banking accounts, according to The Hacker News.

5 ways to prepare your advertising infrastructure for disaster

Article source: http://go.theregister.com/feed/www.theregister.co.uk/2013/10/25/norks_malware_ddos_south_korea/

Biz bods, politicos, beware: ‘BOTS are on the loose, and they’re coming for YOU

Free Regcast : Managing Multi-Vendor Devices with System Centre 2012

Businesses and governments in the US, UK, Canada, and India are under assault from a malware-based cybercrime campaign using the Tor anonymizing relay network to hide its authors, say infosec researchers.

A strain of malware called Mevade, previously blamed for a massive Tor traffic spike is being used to compromise systems at business services, government, manufacturing, and transport organisations in multiple countries on at least three continents, they say.


The unknown miscreants behind the campaign are stealing data from compromised organisations. However the exact motives and purpose of the campaign – much less who might be behind the cyber-assaults – remains unclear.

The players behind the attacks are using Tor to anonymise traffic and encrypted communications to disguise their activities. Jason Hill, lead security researcher at IT security firm Websense, said: “The malware associated with this particular campaign has been linked to a large spike in TOR traffic indicating that the nefarious parties behind this attack are taking steps in order to secure the anonymity of their command and control (C2) infrastructure as well as themselves.”

“In addition,” Hill added, “the malware also uses a reverse proxy and communicates over SSL which requires the right technology with the ability to decrypt such encrypted traffic in order to inspect and detect a compromise.”

Websense has put together a blog post, complete with maps and charts, documenting the threat in greater depth here.

The Mevade botnet has been making a nuisance of itself for several months, especially after it called attention to itself by leading to a rise in traffic on the Tor anonymisation network.

Previous research by Trend Micro, for example, has shown how adware spread alongside evade variants, infecting systems in both Japan and the US.

Researchers from Damballa Lab were the first to warn of MeVADE, in mid-September, explaining that the malware was slurping enterprise data from compromised systems. ®

5 ways to prepare your advertising infrastructure for disaster

Article source: http://go.theregister.com/feed/www.theregister.co.uk/2013/10/25/mevade_apt_spreading_like_weeds_across_3_continents/

Why Bletchley Park could never happen today

Email delivery: Hate phishing emails? You’ll love DMARC

Feature Following the torrent of revelations about US and British government surveillance unleashed by whistle-blower Edward Snowden, we now know what many had previously guessed: with a few exceptions*, the spies have the electronic world pretty much wired.

Some spied-upon countries – such as Brazil and Germany – have reacted furiously, and the articles published by the Guardian and others have started a debate in the United States which might lead to some changes.


The reaction in Britain, though, has been muted. We love our spooks, both fictional, like James Bond, and semi-legendary, like those who worked at Bletchley Park. Britain’s World War II code-breaking centre remained a secret for three decades after the end of the war – a war which some historians believe those at the centre shortened by two years. It now hosts a wonderful set of preserved buildings and exhibits, including The National Museum of Computing.

Rebuilt Bombe Bletchley Park, photo copyrighted mubsta.com

A rebuilt Bombe, Bletchley’s first code-breaking machine – an electro-mechanical device designed by Alan Turing and fellow mathematician Gordon Welchman. Photo by: mubsta.com

But while Bletchley’s heroes are rightly venerated, the Snowden affair suggests that the model it pioneered – still used by its successor GCHQ and its American big brother the NSA – may be heading towards obsolescence.

The end of spying as we know it?

Bletchley Park relied on total, long-term secrecy over its methods. If the Nazi regime had realised that the Allies were breaking its “unbreakable” Enigma machines on a routine basis, the game would have been up. But that secret was kept for the entire war and for three decades beyond.

The expiry period for such secrets is a bit shorter these days: it has taken less than two years for GCHQ’s Tempora project’s access to undersea cables to become common global knowledge. So what has changed?

Firstly, whistle-blowers have become much more efficient, even in the last decade. In 2003, GCHQ translator Katherine Gun leaked an email on the NSA’s bugging of the United Nations in the run-up to Iraq War. (She was cleared of charges under the Official Secrets Act when the prosecution offered no evidence in her trial.) In 2013, Edward Snowden’s material has blown the gaff on everything from numerous NSA and GCHQ capabilities and methods to their dodgy taste in PowerPoint graphics.

As Chelsea (formerly Bradley) Manning and WikiLeaks demonstrated, the combination of networked secret agencies and high-capacity storage devices can allow one person to do an enormous amount of leaking, and with the actual documents rather than deniable claims.

No doubt such agencies are currently working on how they might prevent this in future. The problem is that the obvious answer – stopping flows of information by heavily compartmentalising such agencies – would presumably greatly hamper their efficacy. Otherwise why let an NSA contractor in Hawaii slurp GCHQ’s wiki?

The enemy of my enemy… hang on, who IS the enemy?

Secondly, the type of enemy the secret agencies were built to fight is no longer their main target (unless they are taking a greater interest in China than they let on).

This may be the only example of Nazis being an enemy you would choose: they were highly organised, operated in known areas and used Enigma machines for nearly everything, making it both worthwhile and possible to read all their communications.

Terrorists – a definition which is itself sometimes a matter of opinion – comprise a wide range of groups and individuals, who use whatever they can and may operate anywhere and infiltrate any group – or indeed, become aligned to the cause while in a group which first appears at odds with it. In spy logic, that makes it desirable to be able to spy on everyone, using everything, everywhere.

And that leads to the question of loyalty. During World War II and the Cold War, it wasn’t hard for most people to decide which side they were on – although even then, the likes of Anthony Blunt chose differently. Since 1989, the threats to the countries of the free world have been from terrorists who certainly wish to commit mass murder, but do not pose an existential national threat.

However, the way such terrorists have operated has convinced many politicians to reduce the freedoms of their own people, particularly to personal privacy – a contentious choice, given it means secret agencies carrying out mass surveillance on their own people and allies. A whistle-blower exposing how this works will probably commit career suicide and may end up in exile or prison, but will also be treated as a hero by many.

5 ways to reduce advertising network latency

Article source: http://go.theregister.com/feed/www.theregister.co.uk/2013/10/25/feature_bletchley_could_not_happen_today/

Anatomy of an exploit – inside the CVE-2013-3893 Internet Explorer zero-day – Part 2

GO TO PART:   ←Prev   1   2   

In Part One of this article, we looked at how the Internet Explorer (IE) exploit known as CVE-2013-3893 got its foot in the door of Windows, if you will pardon the pun.

In Part Two, we are going to follow the exploit as it takes over IE, suppresses Data Execution Prevention (DEP), and reaches a point where it can run pretty much any program code it likes just as if you had downloaded it yourself.

We think this exploit makes a good example for study, because:

  • It can theoretically be used against IE from version 6 to 11.
  • It works despite DEP and ASLR (Address Space Layout Randomisation).
  • It is already widely circulated, so we aren’t giving away secrets.
  • The vulnerability on which it relies is already patched.

If you haven’t yet read Part One, we suggest that you do so now, as it explains where we will be starting this time, and how we got here.

The story so far

Our test system is running IE 9 on Windows 7 32-bit, and at the end of Part One, our attackers had:

  • [1] Used malicious Javascript to fill known memory addresses with chosen binary data.
  • [2] Loaded a known DLL at a fixed memory address, despite ASLR.
  • [3] Crashed IE in such a way as to cause it to jump to a memory location of their choice from [1].

Visually, our attackers are here:

Controllable knowns

As we explained in Part One, the attackers used JavaScript to allocate and free up a series of text strings to provoke a use-after-free bug in IE.

The bug caused Microsoft’s HTML renderer to use untrusted text string data from the malicious JavaScript to tell IE where to jump in memory, leaving the crooks with three “controllable knowns”:

  • Execution is about to jump to the memory address stored in location 0x121212D6, shown in yellow.
  • The addresses shown in grey, from 0x12121212 onwards, are precisely controlled by a text string in the untrusted JavaScript.
  • The DLL hxds.dll, part of Office, is loaded into executable memory at the unrandomised address 0x51BD0000.

Deciding where to go next

The attackers are about to jump to the address specified in 0x121212D6, and they control that value directly from their JavaScript.

With the memory layout shown above, where 0x12121212 has been written repeatedly, the attackers can’t actually get control of IE.

That’s because the address stored in 0x121212D6 (shown in yellow above) is in heap memory that is protected by DEP, and provokes an access violation if it executed:

But if the crooks choose an address inside hxds.dll, they will reach memory marked a executable, and they will know what code is going to execute next, because the address space of that DLL isn’t randomised.

In the actual exploit, the address stored at location 0x121212D6 (the yellow bytes below) is 0x51BD28D4, as shown here:

→ Don’t forget that the x86 and x64 Intel CPUs used in Windows computers are little endian. That means that the least significant byte of a multi-byte value is stored at the lowest memory address, and so on. So the 32-bit value 0xC001D00D would actually appear in memory as the bytes 0D D0 01 0C), just as 0x51BD28D4 appears above as D4 28 BD 51.

If we disassemble the code at the address chosen by the criminals, we get this:

MOV  EAX, [ECX] ; Fetch the contents of the 
                ; memory address in ECX,
                ; where ECX is controlled
                ; by the attackers
CALL [EAX+8]    ; Call the location specified 
                ; in the address 8 bytes past that.

This time, the two lines of code above cause the following chain of execution:

The value of ECX above was forced to the value 0x12121202 by the attacker’s malicious JavaScript, and the contents of the memory block at and around the addresses shown above (from 0x1212111E0 to 0x12121310) were set up by the crooks in the same way.

At the moment, the attackers control the instruction pointer (EIP), but can’t yet aim it at their own machine code because of DEP.

The next best thing, then, is to control the stack pointer (ESP), because the stack lets you set up calls to system functions.

Pivoting the stack

The value chosen for the destination of the CALL [EAX+8], shown in green above, is critical to the rest of the exploit, and gives the attackers control of the stack by means of what is called a stack pivot.

The pivot for this exploit can be seen by disassembling at 0x51BE4A41:

XCHG EAX,ESP  ; Put EAX into ESP, and vice versa
RET

A stack pivot is just a fancy name for any machine code instruction sequence that sets ESP to an attacker-controlled value: it could be a MOV, a PUSH followed by POP, or, as here, an XCHG instruction that swaps the values in EAX and ESP.

The attackers can now use a trick called Return Oriented Programming, or ROP, to control the flow of code execution indirectly.

That’s because the stack now consists of the bytes shown in grey here:

Converted from little endian notation and listed as a vertical stack of 32-bit addresses and their contents, we get this:

12121212:  51C3B376  --ESP points here after pivot
12121216:  51C2046E
1212121A:  51BE4A41
1212121E:  51C2046E
12121222:  51BD10B8
12121226:  51C0E455
1212122A:  51C3B376
1212122E:  51BD71F4
12121232:  121212DA
12121236:  12121212
1212123A:  00001000
1212123E:  00000040
12121242:  12120A0C
12121246:  51C3B376
1212124A:  51C3B376
1212124E:  51C3B376
. . . . 

Thanks to the stack pivot, the attackers are about to execute a RET instruction with the stack pointer aimed at the topmost value in the list above.

Since RET, or “return from subroutine”, pops the value off the top of the stack and jumps to it, the attackers will now leap back into a carefully chosen instruction sequence inside hxds.dll.

In fact, you’ll notice that the topmost eight values on the stack are all addresses inside hxds.dll, so if each of the instruction sequences pointed to by those addresses ends with a RET, the attackers will execute a stitched-together series of instructions of their choice.

That’s not as convenient as simply putting the machine code they want right in their exploit data, but it’s the next best thing, and it’s where ROP gets its name.

→ In exploit literature, each instruction-snippet-plus-RET pointed to by a list of ROP addresses is known as a gadget. A string of ROP gadgets makes a ROP chain or program. ROP programs typically end up following a Byzantine execution sequence, leaping hither and thither in a DLL that hasn’t had its location randomised. This apparent complexity is irrelevant to the CPU, of course, which simply goes where it is told, and does what it is instructed.

The ROP gadget chain

Here’s what we get if we disassemble the gadgets at each of the addresses on the stack:

The chart looks rather complex, but the results are surprisingly straightforward:

  • [1] The first step simply returns to the next ROP gadget, like a NOP (no-operation) instruction.
  • [2] The POP EDI in step [2] serves merely to skip over the next gadget address (the already-used stack pivot); the value stored in EDI is irrelevant.
  • [3] This time the POP instruction loads EDI with the data value 0x51BD10B8 off the stack, and that value is important.
  • [4] Now EAX is loaded with the value stored at 0x51BD10B8. The POP EDI is redundant, but couldn’t be avoided by the attackers, who have to work with the gadget sequences available in hxds.dll.
  • [5] The address loaded into EAX is used as a function pointer, and called by the ROP program by PUSHing it on the stack and then jumping to it with a RET instruction.

Notice that when the final RET in step [5] is processed, the top five values on the stack, denoted [P] in the chart above, are as follows:

12121232:  121212DA
12121236:  12121212
1212123A:  00001000
1212123E:  00000040
12121242:  12120A0C

That leaves three vital questions: what is the memory address stored in location 0x51BD10B8, why did the attackers choose it, and what are the [P] values for?

Neutralising DEP

On our test system, the address stored at location 0x51BD10B8 was 0x759F50AB; when disassembled, it turns out to be the entry point of the function VirtualProtect() in the core system library kernel32.dll:

Even though Windows randomises where this function is loaded, in order to make it hard to find (for reasons which are about to become obvious), the attackers can nevertheless locate it.

That’s because the variable location of the randomised entry point is saved at a fixed location in the unrandomised library hxds.dll.

Understanding system calls

Under 32-bit Windows, system calls are made with the stack set up as follows:

[ESP]    - Return address in calling program
[ESP+04] - Parameter 1 passed to system call
[ESP+08] - Parameter 2
[ESP+0A] - Parameter 3
[ESP+0C] - Parameter 4 
. . . .  etc.

→ When preparing for a system call, the parameters are PUSHed onto the stack in reverse order. (The stack grows upwards, towards lower memory addresses, in the diagram above.) That makes it easier to support functions with a variable number of arguments, since the first parameter is always 4 bytes down the stack; the second 8, and so on, regardless of how many arguments there are altogether.

Now the [P] values in the bottom-most section of the ROP chart above can be decoded, because they are the four parameters passed into, and the return address from, the function VirtualProtect():

This means our attackers are on the point of changing the memory protection for their exploit data, like this:

The memory area they will re-protect is the 4KB block starting at 0x12121212, which will end up with the protection permissions PAGE_EXECUTE_READWRITE.

The memory address 0x12120A0C is used to save the previous protection setting; the crooks don’t have any use for this information (the exploit doesn’t tidy up after itself), but the VirtualProtect() function won’t work without it.

And the return address, 0x121212DA, is the beginning of the memory block shown in blue below, immediately following the yellow value at 0x121212D6, where the exploit started off:

Launching the shellcode

When our attackers return from VirtualProtect(), they will effectively have regressed the protections in Internet Explorer to be much like they were under IE 6 on Windows XP2 and earlier.

They will no longer need ROP gadgets to execute code snippets inside hxds.dll: their own shellcode, shown in blue above, will run directly out of heap memory once DEP protection is removed.

And because their malicious executable code will run without triggering any dialog boxes or “are you sure” warnings that would tip off a well-informed user, they’re all set for arbitrary Remote Code Execution.

So please join us next time in Part Three, the final installment of this series, when we’ll take the attackers’ shellcode apart and explain the tricks they’ve use to make it harder to understand.

GO TO PART:   ←Prev   1   2   

Article source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/nakedsecurity/~3/hbS9v1YTZKE/

DARPA slaps $2m on the bar for the ULTIMATE security bug SLAYER

Free Regcast : Managing Multi-Vendor Devices with System Centre 2012

It’s a bad day for the vulnerability scanning industry: DARPA has announced a new multi-million-dollar competition to build a system that will be able to automatically analyze code, find its weak spots, and patch them against attack.

Mike Walker, DARPA program manager, said that the challenge was to start a “revolution for information security” and said that today’s detection software left much room for improvement.


“Today, our time to patch a newly discovered security flaw is measured in days,” he said in a statement. “Through automatic recognition and remediation of software flaws, the term for a new cyber attack may change from zero-day to zero-second.”

Teams have until January 14, 2014, to put themselves forward, then they’ll be expected to come up with tech that can scrutinize and patch a system without any human intervention. Up to $750,000 in funding will be available to teams that have plausible designs for fixing security holes in a basket of commercially available software; early trials will take place this December to weed out weaker applicants.

The competition’s final will be held in early to mid-2016. The submitted vulnerability scanners must automatically find and patch flaws in code in real-world conditions in order to win: a cash prize of $2m is waiting for the best-performing team, $1m for the loser, and $750,000 to console the runner-up.

The agency hopes its Cyber Grand Challenge will encourage the development of systems that mimic the abilities of programmers skilled in reasoning their way to finding code flaws. The security industry is still basing much of its work on reactive signature-spotting tech, DARPA said, rather than building heuristic programs that identify a problem before it becomes one.

“The growth trends we’ve seen in cyber attacks and malware point to a future where automation must be developed to assist IT security analysts,” said Dan Kaufman, director of DARPA’s information innovation office.

DARPA likened the competition to that which spurred the development of automatic vehicles nearly a decade ago. While that has certainly helped spur the automatic car industry, this new challenge may cause some problems for the vulnerability-scanning industry.

For the larger firms that have built a lucrative industry from signature-based scanning the announcement is a warning of tough times ahead. If someone does build a system capable of finding and patching flaws far faster than what’s on the market then their industry is doomed.

On the other hand, for independent security researchers, things could be looking very good indeed. The cash on offer gives a strong incentive for novel approaches, and maybe some good will come of casting bread upon the waters, as Robert Heinlein suggested.

“Automated patching within seconds? Sounds like a great idea, and I can imagine it working well on the Starship Enterprise,” security watcher and former Sophos specialist Graham Cluley told El Reg.

“However, in reality I suspect this would be a very difficult to achieve in a way which would win the confidence and trust of large businesses. Good luck to them – but I’m not holding my breath.”

DARPA is not claiming any control over the technology demonstrated in the challenge, just the right to license it on reasonable terms. Non-US teams are invited to participate, subject to export laws and security controls.

Most of the self-driving car team that won that DARPA challenge ended up at Google on plush salaries, so some seriously talented security savant might face a seriously large payday that makes the agency’s cash prize look paltry in comparison. ®

5 ways to prepare your advertising infrastructure for disaster

Article source: http://go.theregister.com/feed/www.theregister.co.uk/2013/10/22/darpa_sets_2_million_cash_prize_for_the_ultimate_vulnerability_scanner/