Forget Solutions for a While, Let’s Think Differently About Security

As many of you may know, this has been my mantra for the last couple of years. It was the perspective that gave birth to HoneyPoint and many of our service offerings that we have launched in the last couple of years.

I was very pleased when SANS ran this article a few days ago and when they made their initial call for ideas.

Many of the ideas that they uncovered were excellent! I especially think that there might be a future in organized education of young people around cyber-ethics, security behaviors and deeper understandings of privacy in the physical and online world. I am an obvious believer in new technical frameworks and thought processes that dynamically change the nature of the game from responsive to proactive. Further, I am a stronger and stronger believer in Honey-based technologies and in adapting attacker techniques and strategies for use against attackers. The last two years have incredibly strengthened my belief that a true key to future security is to manipulate the ability for threat agents to tell the real assets from the pseudo-assets and the true exposures from the ones that only lead to capture. I am a true evangelist of the idea that active manipulation of threat agents is a both a productive mechanism for defense and an effective control for differentiating between real, dangerous risks and non-persistent “noise” risks. While these solutions do not apply to every situation, their leverage and power do apply to a number of them and provide both excellent feedback and education as well as an intense level of engagement.

The ideas of adopting principles of genetic engineering are excellent and should be a basis for research in the future. I think the cyber world could learn a lot about data analysis, correlation and visualization by looking at the physical and medical worlds as a baseline for exploration. The data sets of the cyber world are large, but nearly as large, complex or dynamic as some human and physiological systems that scientists are tackling.

I think that if we step back from the day to day security problems we face and spend some time considering and researching “game changing” ideas, we might just find some amazing ways to change the very essence of what we do. I know attackers will always have a say in how the game is played. I know how history shines and enumerates the role of the defender. But, I also know that true evolutionary leaps are possible. True change is powerful, violent and often obvious once it has been discovered, branded and explained to us. Maybe what we need now is more discovery, more exploration and more application of free flowing thought.

As always, let me know what you think about it. You can send email responses to me or comment through the blog. The more brains thinking about the problem – the better!

Web Proxy Scanning – Attack or Desperate Search for Free Information Flow

I remember when I was coming up in the infosec world, there used to be a rallying cry among “hackers” that “information wants to be free”. Certainly, we know from history and the present that information freedom has a high value to democratic society. The fact that unrestrained communications can be used to cause social, economic and political change is a given.

I often encounter hundreds of web proxy probes against our HoneyPoints every day. As I look through the logs, research the various traffic and analyze any new events, I am in the habit of largely ignoring these simple probes. Today, however, it occurred to me that many, likely not all (but many), of these probes were folks in less open countries trying to find access mechanisms to get unrestricted access to the web. They may well be searching for an SSL wrapped pipe to retrieve current news, conversations, applications and other data from sources that the “powers that be” in their country would rather not have them see.

Of course, I know that not all proxy scans are for the purpose of escaping political oppression. I know that there are attackers, cyber-stalkers, pr0n fanatics and criminals all looking for proxies too. I also know, first hand, from our HoneyPoints that when they think they find them, many of these probes turn out to be less “CNN” and more attempts to break into the organization offering the proxy. I have seen more than my share of proxied, “internal” probes when attackers believe that their new “proxy” is real and useful.

But, even with the idea that some folks use these tools for illicit purpose, I think, some folks must be dependent on them for free access to uncensored information. Of course, the big question is, how can we help the folks that would like to use the proxy for legitimate public access to free information while refusing illicit access through our system. This is very very difficult without resorting to blacklisting, if we want to offer access to the net as a whole.

However, one of my engineer friends chimed in that perhaps access to the entire web is not really needed. What if you somehow created a system that had proper controls in place to prevent most attacks, but had a white list of sites that traffic could be proxied to. You would still be acting as a sort of “information moderator” in that you could control the sources, but what if the default page listed the sites that were allowed, and you allowed the most common news sites or other commonly sought sources for information that somehow had been vetted beforehand. Not a totally optimal situation, I understand, but better than the current scenario for some folks.

The question is, how could such a solution be created? How could it be established and managed? How would sites get vetted and could existing software be used to create these mechanisms or would new tools require development cycles?

If you have thoughts on this idea, please drop us a line. I would be very interested in your feedback!

WordPress Exploit

An exploit to hijack the administrator account has been released for WordPress. The exploit takes advantage of some flaws in both MySQL and the web application, and this vulnerability most likely affects other web applications. More information on the MySQL vulnerability can be found here. As such, we have disabled registration temporarily for this site, until WordPress has mitigated the vulnerability. We recommend that you do the same, for WordPress or anyother web application affected by this issue.

Changes to the State Of Security Blog

I just wanted to take a moment and update folks on some changes that we are making beginning next week on this blog.

We have decided, after much consideration, to discontinue the routine process of vulnerability announcements on the blog. This was changed over to the blog platform when we shifted from WatchDog, our vulnerability intelligence product. The time for those announcement services has passed. Today, thousands of sites give up to the moment vulnerability announcements and RSS feeds make this an all to easy source of information. As such, we feel that other folks do a fine job of that work and we can focus on other things.

Beginning Monday, the blog will transition to a more thoughtful platform and be used by our team of Security Mentors to add to the security conversation and education, instead of the flat process of announcing new significant vulnerabilities. Our team will blog several times per week, with each member contributing content – but the content will be more open, deeper in context and much more opinion based than just parroting simple announcements of XSS in XYZ product.

Thanks to all of the readers who enjoy the blog and we hope you will continue to read and even learn to love it more. We look forward to less noise and much more content with context in the coming months. Please, feel free to join in the conversation. We love hearing from you.

Changes to the look and feel of the blog are coming soon and the entire blog process is in flux. Let us know what you like and what you want us to scrap. Spread the word about us and we look forward to a whole new set of eyes!

See you next week and have a GREAT weekend!

Broadband Caps Could Mean Consumers Pay for Bot-Net Traffic

The broadband caps proposed by Comcast and other home ISPs would mean that consumers would now be paying for excessive traffic from their networks, even when malware or bot-nets caused the traffic. Much media attention has been paid to the effect of traffic from spam and video ads used in normal web pages, but little has been said about the effect on consumers that malware infection could now have.

Imagine a simple malware infection that sends email. That infected machine could send millions of emails a month, easily breaching the modest bandwidth limits that some are proposing. How will the average consumer respond when they get warnings and then large bills from their network ISP for traffic that they did not cause? Imagine the help desk calls, irate customers and the increased costs of handling such incidents. How will the average help desk technician handle claims that infected systems caused the excess traffic?How will courts handle the cases when the consumer refuses to pay these charges and the ISP pursues their clients for the money?

Attackers are the real winners here, at least those interested in causing chaos. Effective attacks to cause financial damages and ISP cutoff against a known/focused target become all that much easier to perform. If you hate your neighbor and her barking dog, then you get her machine infected with malware and cause her to get a huge bill from her cable company. Do this enough and you can damage her credit, get her cut off from the Internet and maybe even interfere with her ability to earn a living (especially if she is a web worker). Heck, malware isn’t the only way – break into her wireless network or find it open to start with – and you have the perfect entry point for making her “iLife” a true nightmare.

Sure, some folks say these risks already exist without the added pressures of ISP bandwidth caps. They are right, they do. Some folks also say that these threats may make average consumers pay more attention to security. I think they are wrong, this will be just another item on a long list of ignored and forgotten “bad things” that happen to “other people”. However, I do think that these attacks should be a serious concern for the ISPs implementing the caps. The ISPs seem to be sharing a primary of claim that they are adding these caps due to bandwidth issues and the costs required to handle the current and future traffic. Yet, I would suggest that bandwidth caps are very likely to raise their support and account management costs exponentially – which could mean that they are shooting themselves in the foot.

Bandwidth caps are a bad idea for a variety of reasons (including stifling innovation), but they play directly into attacker hands and lend attackers a new spin on how to cause damage and chaos. In the last few weeks, much has been made of the recent growth in bot-net infected systems. Experts point to a nearly 400% increase over the summer months alone. Imagine the chaos and issues that could stem from calculated campaigns that wrangle those bot-net infected machines into breaking the boundaries of their ISP. Maybe bot herders would even change from holding end users hostage to targeting ISPs with bandwidth cap breaking storms that would trigger massive client notifications, calls to technical support and account management systems. Maybe attackers could figure out a way to use bot-net infected systems to cause “human customer denial-of-service” attacks against cable companies. I am certainly not rooting for such a thing, but it seems plausible given the current state of infected systems.

I just don’t see a positive for anyone coming from these ideas. I don’t see how they aid the consumer. I see how they could be used to harm both the consumer and the ISP. I see how attackers could leverage the change in multiple ways – given than many are extensions of existing issues. Generally, I just fail to see an upside. I find it hard to believe that consumers will be thrilled about paying for illicit traffic that they will argue they did not create and I can’t see the courts doing much to force them to pay for that traffic. I guess only time will tell – but it seems to me that in this game – everyone loses…

VMware Multiple Vulnerabilities

Multiple vulnerabilities were released for what looks like most versions of VMware. VMware Workstation, Server, Player, and ESX Server contain two vulnerabilities. The first of these is an unspecified error in the “OpenProcess”. This can be exploited by local users to escalate their privilege. From some limited Google searches I found that “OpenProcess” is an API function that must be being used by VMware’s core application.

The next vulnerabilities isn’t actually a VMware vulnerability as it is a freetype font vulnerability. CVE-2008-1806, CVE-2008-1807, and CVE-2008-1808 describe vulnerabilities in the font that can lead to the exploitation of systems (applications) using them. The same is true in VMware, if an application is using these fonts, then it’s possible to compromise the system via exploitation of the vulnerable application.

There appears to be an updated build for all version except ESX, which has an update pending.

CERT Warns of SSH Attacks

Earlier this week US-CERT warned of attacks using stolen SSH keys. After access is gained to the machine, a rootkit (Phalanx2), is installed on the system. Once installed, the rootkit steals other keys from the system and sends them back to the attacker, allowing them to compromise other machines. The rootkit seems to create a directory, existance of the directory /etc/khubd.p2/ indicates a compromise. However, it should not be assumed because it’s not there that the machine is not compromised. It’s believed at least some of these machines were compromised by the Debian SSL Key bug from the summer.

US-CERT has provided some mitigation strategies to ensure that machines do not get compromised by this exploit. First, identify and examine systems where SSH keys are used as part of automated process. Any instance where keys are used without passphrases, a  passphrase should be used to reduce the risk of a compromise. Finally, ensure that internet facing systems are fully patched.

Bank Data Sold On Ebay

A few banks had a wake up surprise when they found that one of their servers had been sold on Ebay. The system was bought for about $150, and was acquired by an IT manager. Upon booting the machine he noticed that there were several cd ISOs on the disk array in the server. In each of these cd images were backups of customer credit card applications. The banks were notified by the buyer, but it is unknown where the machine was between the time it was at the bank and when it showed up on Ebay. I’m sure the banks are scrambling to implement encryption on their backups as we speak.

Trend Micro Auth Bypass

An issue has been discovered some Trend Micro products, which can be exploited by attackers to bypass authentication. Version affected are OfficeScan 7.0, 7.3, and 8.0; Worry-Free Business Security 5.0; and Trend Micro Client/Server/Messaging Suite versions 3.5, and 3.6. Currently there are fixes for OfficeScan 8.0, and Worry-Free Business Security 5.0. It’s expected that patches for other versions will follow shortly.