STE WILLIAMS

You’ve got to be kitten: Vet recruiter told to pay £1k after pinching info from ex-employer

A vet recruitment consultant that squirrelled away the personal details of almost 300 people from his former employer was today slapped on the wrists by the UK’s information watchdog.

Daniel Short, a recruiter from Devon, left VetPro Recruitment in October 2017, but set up a new company called VetSelect shortly afterwards.

bear

Zookeepers charged after Kodiak bear rides shotgun to Dairy Queen

READ MORE

VetPro was barking mad on seeing the new company emerge amid concerns about the integrity of its database, which contains the details of more than 16,000 people.

When VetPro asked Short if he had slurped any of that info, the rogue recruiter admitted he had but claimed this was merely for his own “record of achievement”.

The incident was reported to the Information Commissioner’s Office, which found Short had pinched the details of 272 people from the database for his own commercial gain.

The recruiter, no doubt feeling rather sheepish, this week pleaded guilty at Exeter Magistrates’ Court to unlawfully obtaining personal data, which is in contravention of the Data Protection Act 1998.

He was fined £355 and made to pay costs of £700 and a victim surcharge of £35.

Mike Shaw, criminal investigations manager at the ICO, said: “Short thought he could get away with stealing from his old employer to launch his own company.

“Data protection laws are there for a reason and the ICO will continue to take action against those who abuse their position.” ®

Sponsored:
Minds Mastering Machines – Call for papers now open

Article source: http://go.theregister.com/feed/www.theregister.co.uk/2018/05/22/vet_recruiter_told_to_pay_out_1000_after_pinching_info_from_former_employer/

UK water firms, power plants with crap cyber security will pay up to £17m, peers told

Plans to fine national utilities and infrastructure providers £17m for shoddy cyber security will be at the forefront of industry’s mind once everyone “gets over” GDPR, peers heard at a House of Lords committee.

Speaking on a panel on cyber security for critical national infrastructure (CNI) yesterday, Elliot Rose, cyber security head at PA consulting, warned: “We’ve all been preoccupied with GDPR, but the [EU Network and Information Systems] directive [will carry] significant fines.”

Rose added that a lot of these organisations – including water, electric and telecoms organisations – are facing challenges, as their legacy systems increasingly interface with and are exposed to the internet. He said that was “a particular area of concern” – citing one example of airports introducing remote control towers to manage traffic.

Critical infrastructure firms will be required to show they have a strategy to cover power outages, hardware failures and environmental hazards

He added: “I do think that will play out more once we get over GDPR.”

Digital minister Margot James said earlier this year the measures would come into force next May. They will also cover other threats affecting IT such as power outages, hardware failures and environmental hazards. Critical infrastructure firms will be required to show they have a strategy to cover such incidents.

Britain’s CNI appears to be an increasingly attractive target for hostile state actors. Last year Ciaran Martin, chief exec of the National Cyber Security Centre, revealed hackers acting on behalf of Russia had targeted the UK’s telecommunications, media and energy sectors.

waterworks

Now that’s taking the p… Sewage plant ‘hacked’ to craft crypto-coins

READ MORE

Alastair MacWillson, chair of the Institute of Information Security Professionals, said CNI companies faced problems attracting talent against higher-paying organisations.

“Because of difference in margins, in my experience it is more difficult for a water company, say, to hire a top cyber security team than it is for a bank. There is that industry challenge.”

On the subject of a lack of skills, Rob Crook, managing director of cyber security and Intelligence at Raytheon, noted 30 per cent shortfall in the number of vacancies it would like to fill, a proportion he said was representative across industry.

“The Initiative to introduce coding into primary schools, which we welcomed in principle, may have fallen into some difficulties in practice,” he said. “For one, it not obvious that initiative has included cyber security into its curriculum. Secondly, I’m not sure it’s inspiring people into the profession.”

MacWillson noted that currently just 7 per cent of of cyber security staffers are women, making up just 4 per cent of his own institute’s ranks.

Part of the problem is the approach to targeting schoolchildren to come into the profession. By focusing on skills from computer science and STEM, the government and industry are narrowing their pool for general diversity. Attempts should be made to broaden the net, he said. ®

Sponsored:
Minds Mastering Machines – Call for papers now open

Article source: http://go.theregister.com/feed/www.theregister.co.uk/2018/05/22/gdpr_puh_thats_so_last_season_try_new_cyber_security_regulations_hears_house_of_lords/

Summoners of web tsunamis have moved to layer 7, says Cloudflare

Attackers have noticed that the world is getting better at fending off massive distributed denial-of-service attacks, and are trying to overwhelm application processes instead.

So says DDoS-deflector Cloudflare, which reckons it’s seen a spike in cyber-assaults trying to exhaust high-level server resources, such as per-process CPU time, disk space, and memory allocations, as opposed to overwhelming lower parts of the networking stack.

As a result, the cloud provider’s security product manager Alex Cruz Farmer opined on Monday that OSI layer 7 attacks that usually appear at a rate of around 160 per day are now sprouting at rates of up to 1,000 a day.

Compared to floods of hundreds of gigabytes of junk network traffic per second, that seems trivial, but that’s not so if you’re the sysadmin on the receiving end: a well-constructed application-level attack that overworks a server process with a relative handful of complex requests per second can cripple its target without huge volumes of packets.

The cloud company already had a rate-limiting product on offer, to handle bot attacks and application DDoS, but Farmer wrote that after a year of experience other capabilities are needed.

Rather than simply blocking a traffic source (the Block and Simulate actions in the Rate Limiting product), users can choose to present challenges either from Cloudflare (a JavaScript challenge) or Google (reCaptcha) as UI and API mitigations.

As an example of usage, he wrote that while it’s simple to set a rule like “block after five login attempts in five minutes”, that could punish legitimate users.

“Logging in four times in one minute is hard – I type fast, but couldn’t even do this”, Cruz Farmer wrote, making it easy to identify a potential bot and apply rate limiting and raise a challenge a human will pass, but a bot will not.

More complex series of rate limiting rules can be set up that escalate from raising the Cloudflare JavaScript challenge all the way up to a 24-hour block on an account.

The challenges can be tested in Cloudflare’s Simulate tool at no charge prior to deployment.

The other change is extra scalability in Rate Limiting. For business and enterprise customers, the system can now count traffic by origin response headers “by matching attributes which are returned by the Origin to Cloudflare.”

This feature is designed to relieve sysadmins of the burden of maintaining ever-expanding lists of troublesome IP addresses.

The “Rate Limiting Origin Headers” feature lets the administrator trigger rate limits based on a header, as Cruz Farmer explained:

To make this happen, we need to generate a Header at the Origin, which is then added to the response to Cloudflare. As we are matching on a static header, we can set a severity level based on the content of the Header. For example, if it was a repeat offender, you could respond with High as the Header value, which could Block for a longer period.

Third, there’s a defence designed to protect databases from enumeration attacks – attacks that try to step through a database record-by-record, at a speed that makes it hard for the process to keep up: “attackers will send a random set of characters to that endpoint in quick succession, causing the database to ground to a halt.”

He wrote that one customer was hit by an enumeration attack that sent more than 100 million requests in six hours.

Since the attacker in this example is sending random character strings, any “misses” are going to generate an HTTP 404 error code, so the rate limit can be applied to that; or the rate limit can be on a combination of HTTP 404 and HTTP 200 (a success code, because the random request got a hit in the database).

Similar rules, Cruz Farmer wrote, can apply to scrapers trying to download image databases (including HTTP 403, “Forbidden”), so a bot trying to scrape images (either to overload the server or for redistribution) will get blocked either by a challenge or a block.

Under Cloudflare’s Pro plans, the number of rules allowed is lifted from three rules to ten; and under Business plans, you can now setup 15 rules instead of three. ®

Sponsored:
Minds Mastering Machines – Call for papers now open

Article source: http://go.theregister.com/feed/www.theregister.co.uk/2018/05/22/layer_7_ddos_attacks_increasing/

Microsoft, Google: We’ve found a fourth data-leaking Meltdown-Spectre CPU hole

A fourth variant of the data-leaking Meltdown-Spectre security flaws in modern processors has been found by Microsoft and Google researchers.

These speculative-execution design blunders can be potentially exploited by malicious software running on a vulnerable device or computer, or a miscreant logged into the system, to slowly extract secrets, such as passwords, from protected kernel or application memory, depending on the circumstances.

Variants 1 and 2 are known as Spectre (CVE-2017-5753, CVE-2017-5715), and variant 3 is Meltdown (CVE-2017-5754). Today, variant 4 (CVE-2018-3639) was disclosed by Microsoft and Google researchers.

It affects modern out-of-order execution processor cores from Intel, AMD, and Arm, as well as IBM’s Power 8, Power 9, and System z CPUs. Bear in mind, Arm cores are used the world over in smartphones, tablets, and embedded electronics.

Meltdown graphic

Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flaw forces Linux, Windows redesign

READ MORE

The fourth variant can be potentially exploited by script files running within a program – such as JavaScript on a webpage in a browser tab – to lift sensitive information out of other parts of the application – such as personal details from another tab.

According to Intel, mitigations already released to the public for variant 1, which is the hardest vulnerability to tackle, should make attacks leveraging variant 4 much more difficult. In other words, web browsers, and similar programs with just-in-time execution of scripts and other languages, patched to thwart variant 1 attacks should also derail variant 4 exploits.

So far, no known exploit code is circulating in the wild targeting the fourth variant.

Another bug, CVE-2018-3640, was also disclosed: this is a rogue system register read, allowing normal programs to peek at hardware status flags and the like in registers that should only really be accessible by the operating system kernel, drivers, and hypervisors.

How the fourth variant works

Variant 4 is referred to as a speculative store bypass. It is yet another “wait, why didn’t I think of that?” design oversight in modern out-of-order-execution engineering. And it was found by Google Project Zero’s Jann Horn, who helped uncover the earlier Spectre and Meltdown bugs.

It hinges on the fact that when faced with a bunch of software instructions that store data to memory, the CPU will look far ahead to see if it can execute any other instructions out of order while the stores complete. Writing to memory is generally slow compared to other instructions. A modern fast CPU won’t want to be held up by store operations, so it looks ahead to find other things to do in the meantime.

If the processor core, while looking ahead in a program, finds an instruction that loads data from memory, it will predict whether or not this load operation is affected by any of the preceding stores. For example, if a store is writing to memory that a later load fetches back from memory, you’ll want the store to complete first. If a load is predicted to be safe to run, the processor executes it speculatively while other parts of the chip are busy with store operations and other code.

That speculative act involves pulling data from memory into the level-one data cache. If it turns out the program should not have run the load before a store, it’s too late to unwind the instruction flow and restart it: part of the cache was touched based on the contents of the fetched data, leaving enough evidence for a malicious program to figure out that fetched data. Repeat this over and over, and gradually you can copy data from other parts of the application. It allows, say, JavaScript running in one browser tab to potentially snoop on webpages in other tabs, for instance.

The name Spectre was chosen deliberately: it is like observing a ghost in the machine. Private data can be discerned by watching the cache being updated by the processor’s speculative execution engine. This speculation is crucial to running chips as fast as possible, by leaving as few processing units as idle as possible, but the downside is that the CPU can be tricked into revealing the contents of memory to applications and scripts that should be off limits.

A video lightly outlining the flaw, produced by Linux distro giant Red Hat, can be found below…

Youtube Video

Intel, Arm, et al response

“Variant 4 uses speculative execution, a feature common to most modern processor architectures, to potentially expose certain kinds of data through a side channel,” said Leslie Culbertson, Intel’s executive veep of product security.

“In this case, the researchers demonstrated Variant 4 in a language-based runtime environment. While we are not aware of a successful browser exploit, the most common use of runtimes, like JavaScript, is in web browsers.

“Starting in January, most leading browser providers deployed mitigations for Variant 1 in their managed runtimes – mitigations that substantially increase the difficulty of exploiting side channels in a web browser. These mitigations are also applicable to Variant 4 and available for consumers to use today.”

According to Culbertson, Intel and others will issue new microcode and software tweaks to more fully counter malware exploiting the fourth variant. These patches are being tested right now by computer and device manufacturers, we’re told. Interestingly, they will be disabled by default when distributed to folks, presumably because the risk of a successful attack is so low. It’s a tricky hole to fix, but also rather tricky to exploit. Another reason for the off-by-default state could be that Intel has struggled to put out stable Spectre updates in the past.

inception_screengrab_648

We need to go deeper: Meltdown and Spectre flaws will force security further down the stack

READ MORE

“To ensure we offer the option for full mitigation and to prevent this method from being used in other ways, we and our industry partners are offering an additional mitigation for Variant 4, which is a combination of microcode and software updates,” the exec said.

“We’ve already delivered the microcode update for Variant 4 in beta form to OEM system manufacturers and system software vendors, and we expect it will be released into production BIOS and software updates over the coming weeks.

“This mitigation will be set to off-by-default, providing customers the choice of whether to enable it or not. We expect most industry software partners will likewise use the default-off option. In this configuration, we have observed no performance impact. If enabled, we’ve observed a performance impact of approximately 2-8 per cent based on overall scores for benchmarks like SYSmark 2014 SE and SPEC integer rate on client and server test systems.”

In a statement, a spokesperson for Arm told us:

This latest Spectre variant impacts a small number of Arm Cortex-A cores and is mitigated with an Arm-developed firmware update, which can be found at www.arm.com/security-update. As with previous published Spectre variants, this latest can only be executed if a specific type of malware is running on a user’s device. Arm strongly recommends that individual users follow good security practices that protect against malware and ensure their software is up-to-date.

We’re also told that by July this year, Arm will make available to system-on-chip designers updated blueprints for Cortex-A72, Cortex-A73, and Cortex-A75 cores that are resistant to Spectre variant 2, and the Cortex-A75 will be updated to resist Meltdown, aka variant 3.

A spokesperson for AMD told us:

AMD recommended mitigations for SSB [the speculative store bypass] are being provided by operating system updates back to the Family 15 processors (“Bulldozer” products). For technical details, please see the AMD whitepaper. Microsoft is completing final testing and validation of AMD-specific updates for Windows client and server operating systems, which are expected to be released through their standard update process. Similarly, Linux distributors are developing operating system updates for SSB. AMD recommends checking with your OS provider for specific guidance on schedules.

Based on the difficulty to exploit the vulnerability, AMD and our ecosystem partners currently recommend using the default setting that maintains support for memory disambiguation.

Red Hat today published a substantial guide to the fourth variant, its impact, and how it works. VMware also has an advisory and updates, here, and the Xen Project explains itself and offers a fix, here. A spokesperson for IBM could not be reached for comment.

Context switch

We note that, so far, no malware has been seen attacking any of the Spectre and Meltdown holes in today’s chips, let alone this latest variant, either because mitigations are widely installed making it largely fruitless, or it isn’t worth the effort seeing as there are plenty of privilege-escalation bugs to exploit to get into a kernel and other applications.

This is despite various techniques emerging to exploit the Spectre family of design flaws, such as the ones revealed earlier this month, and twice in March.

Also, to exploit these flaws, malware has to be running on a device, which isn’t always an easy task, unless you can trick a user into installing some bad code. Intel has proposed using graphics processors to scan physical memory for software nasties, such as Spectre-exploiting malware, during idle moments.

For us, these chip-level security bugs are a fascinating insight into the world of semiconductor engineering, where an intense focus on speed left memory protection mechanisms behind in the dust. And into the world of operating system and compiler design, where programmers are scrambling to secure kernels and user-mode code for years to come. ®

Sponsored:
Minds Mastering Machines – Call for papers now open

Article source: http://go.theregister.com/feed/www.theregister.co.uk/2018/05/21/spectre_meltdown_v4_microsoft_google/

Victoria’s educational apps-for-students let creeps contact kids

Google and the Victorian Department of Education have set parents, students, teachers, and the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner a poser: at what point does a feature become a vulnerability? Or just too creepy to put in front of kids?

Victoria’s teachers and students have adopted a system based on Google Apps for Education, accessed through a portal on the department’s EduSTAR system.

As people become more familiar with the setup, however, parents have identified system behaviours which are reasonable for business tools used by adults, but look out-of-place in the hands of primary school students.

The two brought to Vulture South’s attention by a concerned parent appear to be normal Google Apps features, but we can understand how they could be worrying to a parent: easy access to around 170,000 EduSTAR profiles of teachers and students via Google Contacts; and the ability for anybody with a Google account – for example, Google Drive – to contact a student as an “outsider” with no connection whatsoever to education.

These are features – but, as one parent told The Register, in the sensitive setting of school education, they’re prone to abuse.

In short: first, someone willing to abuse a legitimate EduSTAR login could easily scrape all the profiles; and second, those profiles would let a malicious outsider identify students and abuse other Google features to (as an example) chat with and groom students via shared editing of a Google document.

Profiles

The concerned parent who contacted The Register arrive at their estimate of 170,000 profiles simply enough: they multiplied the number of pages (nearly 700) in EduSTAR’s Google Contacts database with the number of entries per page.

EduSTAR contacts screenshot

The URL tells all: navigation to the last page of contacts in EduSTAR. Image supplied. Click to embiggen

The profile fields offered to students to complete are, if all fields are filled, very detailed, including name, nickname, title and company*, a “file as” field, notes, e-mail, phone, address, birthday, URL, “relationship”, instant messaging contact, and Internet call contact.

E-mail, the parent told us, is disabled for primary children.

Whoever is responsible for the implementation, The Register feels it’s arguable that a system-wide open directory is a de facto bad idea and probably privacy breach: nobody should be able to see what school your kids attend.

We asked the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) for an opinion on this, and were told the office is investigating.

Kids contactable by World+Dog

The second, more serious issue the parent pointed out to Vulture South is that any of these profiles can be contacted by other people with Google accounts – contact to or from EduSTAR accounts is not limited to people with EduSTAR logins.

The parent provided us with the following image as an example – an exchange created in a Google Drive shared image between parent (without an EduSTAR account) and their child (with an EduSTAR account). The back-and-forth is possible thanks to EduSTAR and Google’s collaborative features.

EduSTAR shared chat via Google Drive

The parent created this chat with their child in Google Drive. Image supplied

The parent worried that such chats offer opportunities for grooming by outsiders – most easily if someone had scraped and then shared the Google Contacts profiles, since that would let the malicious try to target their approaches.

The parent commented: “Effectively [Google Docs] is a low-grade instant messaging app, shared unsolicited and unflagged to a seven year old child.”

Nor does it seem that such a contact would be flagged to system administrators or parents.

It’s also feasible that an outsider who knows how identities are created could try to brute-force their way into getting a student to respond. And not much force would be required because EduSTAR IDs are formulaic.

We included this aspect of the system in our inquiries to the OAIC.

As the parent pointed out, other attack vectors also exist.

It’s easy to imagine account IDs becoming part of a phishing campaign, for example: getting students or teachers to open an “official-looking” document that happens to include malicious links.

Even if a malicious outsider had not accessed EduSTAR, an unrelated privacy breach could yield student identities – the education application Mathletics was in 2016 criticised for weak client-side security, and later, because its competition leaderboard seemed to contain enough information to identify individual students (first name, surname initial, and school).

“Two semi-innocuous breaches with personally identifiable information are then combined to create a much greater pedophile risk, where the would-be offender now knows where the child is at school, has a photo, a name, and now can instant message them (via Google Drive)”, the parent told us.

Aren’t these features?

Vulture South considered whether or not to publish this story, because after all, accessing Google Contacts or sharing in Drive or Docs are features of G Suite.

Our contact argued that these features might be suitable for adults who log in to G Suite either because their employer uses it or because they want the features for themselves.

But kids can’t consent in the same way as adults, so surely an application suite intended for school students must be built to the particular requirements of its intended audience. Students also need and deserve more than generic click-to-accept privacy and safety.

The Register raised the parent’s concerns with Victoria’s Department of Education. We do not yet have a definitive response from the Department.

We have also asked Google for comment. ®

*What’s “title and company” doing in a contacts database for teachers and students? Could it be that either the Department of Education, Google, or both, have rolled out Google Apps into schools with unmodified defaults?

Sponsored:
Minds Mastering Machines – Call for papers now open

Article source: http://go.theregister.com/feed/www.theregister.co.uk/2018/05/22/has_google_built_a_haven_for_creeps_in_victorias_education_apps/

New BIND Vulnerabilities Threaten DNS Availability

A pair of vulnerabilities in BIND could leave some organizations without DNS.

One of the most common pieces of software for implementing a Domain Name System (DNS) server — BIND — has just become the subject of security advisories from the Internet Systems Consortium and a related notice from DHS.

The advisories cite two new vulnerabilities in BIND. Both describe a scenario in which one of the components of BIND, rbtdb.c, can be driven to a failure state and effective denial-of-service for name resolution. In one vulnerability, rapidly changing zones can lead to a miscount of the zones with a resulting failure of the component. 

In the other vulnerability, a poor implementation of a feature known as serve-stale can lead to a similar failure, with identical results — no access to domain name resolution.

Neither of the vulnerabilities have been exploited in the wild and only specific versions of BIND are susceptible. All organizations running BIND are urged to read the CVEs to determine whether they are at risk and should begin remediation. 

For more, read here, here, and here.

Dark Reading’s Quick Hits delivers a brief synopsis and summary of the significance of breaking news events. For more information from the original source of the news item, please follow the link provided in this article. View Full Bio

Article source: https://www.darkreading.com/threat-intelligence/new-bind-vulnerabilities-threaten-dns-availability/d/d-id/1331855?_mc=rss_x_drr_edt_aud_dr_x_x-rss-simple

North Korean Defectors Targeted with Malicious Apps on Google Play

Sun Team hacking group is behind RedDawn, which steals victims’ photos and data and passes them to threat actors.

A new form of mobile malware in the Google Play app store was found targeting North Korean defectors and journalists.

McAfee researchers believe the Sun Team hacking group is responsible for the attacks, which McAfee has dubbed RedDawn. This is the second attack McAfee has seen from Sun Team this year. Back in January, McAfee’s Mobile Research Team covered another form of Android malware targeting North Korean defectors and journalists, uploaded on Google Play as “unreleased” app versions. Researchers pinged the Korea Internet Security Agency and Google, which took the malware off its app store.

More than 30,000 people defected from North Korea to South Korea in 2016, Radio Free Asia reports, and McAfee found Sun Team is still trying to plant spyware onto their devices. Because the malware was detected and removed by Google at an early stage, the number of infections on Google Play is still at less than 100. There have been no publicly reported incidents.

Researchers found three apps on Google Play uploaded by Sun Team, an attribution they made based on email accounts and Android devices from the January campaign. The attackers used cloud services to store information logs from the same test Android devices used in the January campaign, and these logs shared formatting and abbreviations with other Sun Team logs. The email address for the new malware author is also identical to other emails linked to the group.

One of the apps used in this campaign is called Food Ingredients Info; the other two are security-related. Fast AppLock steals device data and receives commands and executables from a cloud control server. AppLockFree is part of the reconnaissance stage and sets a foundation for the rest of the attack. All apps are multi-staged with several components, McAfee believes.

The apps spread to victims’ friends, who are prompted to install them by a fake Facebook user and offer feedback. Once on a device, the malware uses Dropbox and Yandex to upload data and send commands, another characteristic previously seen in earlier Sun Team attacks.

Intel on the test devices and attempted exploits uncovered more. The phones used were manufactured in different countries and held Korean apps. Exploit codes discovered in the group’s cloud storage include sandbox escape, code execution, and privilege escalation exploits, with modifications showing the actors aren’t advanced enough to find zero-days and write their own. But it’s likely just a matter of time until they are able to do so, according to the researchers.

What experts find most concerning about this attack is the group used photos found on social media, and identities of South Koreans, to create the fake accounts that spread malware. Evidence shows people have had their identities stolen and they expect more could follow.

Who is Sun Team?

Researchers analyzed the hacking group’s operations and found different versions of their malware, which started to become active in 2017 and stayed online for about two months after being removed from Google Play, they report in a blog post on their newest finding. All of their malware is spyware, built with the intention of lifting data from victims’ devices.

It seems the Sun Team actors may be poorly trying to disguise themselves as South Korean. A few Korean words lifted from the malware’s control server are not in South Korean vocabulary, and Dropbox account names in both campaigns were from South Korean drama or celebrities. The app descriptions in the new campaign also includes awkward Korean writing.

“These features are strong evidence that the actors behind these campaigns are not native South Koreans but are familiar with the culture and language,” researchers say. While they haven’t confirmed the actors’ nationalities, an exposed IP address points to North Korea.

Related Content:

Kelly Sheridan is the Staff Editor at Dark Reading, where she focuses on cybersecurity news and analysis. She is a business technology journalist who previously reported for InformationWeek, where she covered Microsoft, and Insurance Technology, where she covered financial … View Full Bio

Article source: https://www.darkreading.com/threat-intelligence/north-korean-defectors-targeted-with-malicious-apps-on-google-play/d/d-id/1331856?_mc=rss_x_drr_edt_aud_dr_x_x-rss-simple

Facebook conspiracy theories after Android app tries to “get root”

Thanks to Jagadeesh Chandraiah of SophosLabs for his help with this article.

Facebook popped up in a slew of new cybersecurity conspiracy theories over the weekend.

Apparently, the company’s Android app suddenly started grabbing superuser rights – also known as “root access” in the Linux world. (Android is based on the Linux operating system.)

Apps with root access can pretty much do anything, rather like users with Administrator powers on Windows.

Notably, root-level apps can fiddle with protected system settings, spy on other apps as they run, peek at data from other apps, and more.

So the news that Facebook was “getting root” quickly caused alarm, given the privacy crises in which the company has been embroiled lately.

The obvious questions were: HOW was Facebook able to get root in the first place, WHY did it need root anyway, WHAT on earth has it been doing with this unwarranted privilege, and WHAT possible excuse will it come up with this time?

Those are all dramatic questions when asked LOUDLY with capital letters, but the answers, fortunately, seem to be fairly mundane, and nowhere near as scary as you might at first think.

Simply put, apps can’t get superuser power on Android just because they want it.

Generally speaking, you have to root your Android device first, which requires physical access to the device in order to install modified versions of the phone firmware. (Firmware refers the operating system images that load when you turn on the device.)

Why root a device? In a paper at the CARO 2017 conference, SophosLabs researcher Jagadeesh Chandriah lists four common reasons: to customise the look and feel of the phone’s interface; to remove unwanted preinstalled apps (what’s often called as bloatware); to install otherwise unspported apps such as firewalls and network tethering tools; or simply for research purposes.

After rooting their devices, most phone rooters then install a superuser management tool that pops up when apps try to acquire superuser powers, and asks for approval.

Popular superuser access control tools include SuperSU, originally created by an Android researcher who goes by the name Chainfire (this one is mainstream enough to be available from Google Play) and Magisk.

Here’s the Magisk tool popping up on a rooted device to warn about Facebook’s bid to get superuser powers:

If you haven’t rooted your device, you won’t have a superuser access control tool, so you’ll never see a warning dialog like the above – but on an unrooted device, there won’t be any root-level activity to warn you about anyway.

The app will therefore work and behave as usual on unrooted devices.

On rooted phones, the app seems to behave the same whether you chose to deny or grant root privileges.

In other words, the superuser warning only appears if you’ve already set up your phone to permit superuser access with suitable consent, and the app won’t cause any harm even if you do grant it root powers.

Facebook’s app doesn’t try to use any tricks or vulnerabilities to get root on an unpatched phone (and therefore can’t do so without your consent), making the question of “How?” essentially redundant.

What about “Why?”

However, even without a conspiracy theory for “How?”, there isn’t an obvious answer for “Why?”

Was this another Facebook privacy overreach that somehow escaped from the laboratory and got found out?

Was it an attempt to detect and ban users with rooted Android devices from accessing Facebook at all?

Or was it just a new feature that attempted root detection (many apps, including Sophos Mobile Security, do this for security and safety reasons), and, while doing so, triggered a “get root” warning, too?

Android researcher Nikolaos Chrysaidos (@virqdroid) suggested on Twitter that the most likely culprit might be a service called WhiteOps that Facebook apparently integrated recently to help it look out for dodgy postings connected with fake news sites:

Perhaps various unneeded security features in the WhiteOps toolkit, or some other newly included module in the Facebook app, caused the unexpected warning?

Judging by Facebook’s response, that sounds likely:

A coding error in one of our anti-fraud systems caused a small number of people […] to see a request for additional access permissions. We do not need or want these permissions, and we have already fixed this issue. We apologize for any confusion.

What do do?

Make sure your Facebook app is up-to-date.

As we mentioned above, Facebook already reissued the “root grabbing” flavour of the app, so an update will sidestep this issue entirely.

To check your apps, open Google Play, tap the hamburger button (the three horizontal lines at top left) to open the menu and choose My apps games.

That’s it.


Article source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/nakedsecurity/~3/zV28XHidWzg/

Facebook conspiracy theories after Android app tries to “get root”

Thanks to Jagadeesh Chandraiah of SophosLabs for his help with this article.

Facebook popped up in a slew of new cybersecurity conspiracy theories over the weekend.

Apparently, the company’s Android app suddenly started grabbing superuser rights – also known as “root access” in the Linux world. (Android is based on the Linux operating system.)

Apps with root access can pretty much do anything, rather like users with Administrator powers on Windows.

Notably, root-level apps can fiddle with protected system settings, spy on other apps as they run, peek at data from other apps, and more.

So the news that Facebook was “getting root” quickly caused alarm, given the privacy crises in which the company has been embroiled lately.

The obvious questions were: HOW was Facebook able to get root in the first place, WHY did it need root anyway, WHAT on earth has it been doing with this unwarranted privilege, and WHAT possible excuse will it come up with this time?

Those are all dramatic questions when asked LOUDLY with capital letters, but the answers, fortunately, seem to be fairly mundane, and nowhere near as scary as you might at first think.

Simply put, apps can’t get superuser power on Android just because they want it.

Generally speaking, you have to root your Android device first, which requires physical access to the device in order to install modified versions of the phone firmware. (Firmware refers the operating system images that load when you turn on the device.)

Why root a device? In a paper at the CARO 2017 conference, SophosLabs researcher Jagadeesh Chandriah lists four common reasons: to customise the look and feel of the phone’s interface; to remove unwanted preinstalled apps (what’s often called as bloatware); to install otherwise unspported apps such as firewalls and network tethering tools; or simply for research purposes.

After rooting their devices, most phone rooters then install a superuser management tool that pops up when apps try to acquire superuser powers, and asks for approval.

Popular superuser access control tools include SuperSU, originally created by an Android researcher who goes by the name Chainfire (this one is mainstream enough to be available from Google Play) and Magisk.

Here’s the Magisk tool popping up on a rooted device to warn about Facebook’s bid to get superuser powers:

If you haven’t rooted your device, you won’t have a superuser access control tool, so you’ll never see a warning dialog like the above – but on an unrooted device, there won’t be any root-level activity to warn you about anyway.

The app will therefore work and behave as usual on unrooted devices.

On rooted phones, the app seems to behave the same whether you chose to deny or grant root privileges.

In other words, the superuser warning only appears if you’ve already set up your phone to permit superuser access with suitable consent, and the app won’t cause any harm even if you do grant it root powers.

Facebook’s app doesn’t try to use any tricks or vulnerabilities to get root on an unpatched phone (and therefore can’t do so without your consent), making the question of “How?” essentially redundant.

What about “Why?”

However, even without a conspiracy theory for “How?”, there isn’t an obvious answer for “Why?”

Was this another Facebook privacy overreach that somehow escaped from the laboratory and got found out?

Was it an attempt to detect and ban users with rooted Android devices from accessing Facebook at all?

Or was it just a new feature that attempted root detection (many apps, including Sophos Mobile Security, do this for security and safety reasons), and, while doing so, triggered a “get root” warning, too?

Android researcher Nikolaos Chrysaidos (@virqdroid) suggested on Twitter that the most likely culprit might be a service called WhiteOps that Facebook apparently integrated recently to help it look out for dodgy postings connected with fake news sites:

Perhaps various unneeded security features in the WhiteOps toolkit, or some other newly included module in the Facebook app, caused the unexpected warning?

Judging by Facebook’s response, that sounds likely:

A coding error in one of our anti-fraud systems caused a small number of people […] to see a request for additional access permissions. We do not need or want these permissions, and we have already fixed this issue. We apologize for any confusion.

What do do?

Make sure your Facebook app is up-to-date.

As we mentioned above, Facebook already reissued the “root grabbing” flavour of the app, so an update will sidestep this issue entirely.

To check your apps, open Google Play, tap the hamburger button (the three horizontal lines at top left) to open the menu and choose My apps games.

That’s it.


Article source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/nakedsecurity/~3/zV28XHidWzg/

High-end router flinger DrayTek admits to zero day in bunch of Vigor kit

Taiwanese network kit maker DrayTek has ‘fessed up to a vulnerability in a large number of its routers which could allow miscreants to hijack internet traffic or steal personal data.

The flaw means attackers could remotely alter DNS settings on 28 Vigor model routers. DrayTek has released a series of firmware updates addressing the issue.

Users have complained about the problem for the last week on the AbuseIPDB forum. One noted the zero-day attack had infiltrated their servers, CRM and workstations.

“We now cannot log in as it is obvious this zero-day attack has changed our passwords including our VPN accounts [that] our remote users use to log in to the environment.”

DrayTek routers are considered high end in the UK – retailing at around £200, more than twice the price of garden-variety alternatives – and are mostly used by businesses. In 2015, BT’s Openreach accredited DrayTek for use of its very-high-bit-rate digital subscriber line 2 (VDSL2) fibre-to-the-cabinet products.

One business customer, who discovered his router was open to the vulnerability, told El Reg: “DrayTek routers are really expensive compared with other makes, they have an awful lot of features on them and this is the first known exploit I’ve come across.”

In a statement, the company said:

We have become aware of security reports with DrayTek routers related to the security of web administration when managing DrayTek routers.

In some circumstances, it may be possible for an attacker to intercept or create an administration session and change settings on your router.

The reports appear to show that DNS settings are being altered. Specific improvements have been identified as necessary to combat this and we are in the process of producing and issuing new firmware. You should install that as soon as possible.

Until you have the new firmware installed, you should check your router’s DNS settings on your router and correct them if changed (or restore from a config backup).

A survey by Broadband Genie recently found the vast majority of punters are potentially leaving themselves exposed by failing to change the password and security setting on their routers. ®

Sponsored:
Minds Mastering Machines – Call for papers now open

Article source: http://go.theregister.com/feed/www.theregister.co.uk/2018/05/21/draytek_fesses_up_to_security_vuln_in_large_number_of_routers/