Guess your password? Crack your password? Steal your password? What if the crooks have already got one in all your passwords, and might use it to determine all of your others as nicely?
DOUG. LifeLock woes, distant code execution, and an enormous rip-off meets large hassle.
All that, and extra, on the Bare Safety podcast.
[MUSICAL MODEM]
Welcome to the podcast, everyone.
I’m Doug Aamoth; he’s Paul Ducklin.
And Paul, I’m so sorry… however let me want you a belated Completely satisfied ’23!
DUCK. Versus Completely satisfied ’99, Doug?
DOUG. How do you know? [LAUGHS]
We dovetail instantly into our Tech Historical past phase.
This week, on 20 January 1999, the world was launched to the HAPPY99 worm, often known as “Ska”.
Paul, you have been there, man!
Inform us about your expertise with HAPPY99, in the event you please.
DUCK. Doug. I feel essentially the most fascinating factor for me – then and now – is what you name the B-word…
…the [COUGHS APOLOGETICALLY] “good” half, and I don’t know whether or not this was all the way down to laziness or supreme cleverness on the a part of the programmer.
Firstly, it didn’t use a pre-generated checklist of electronic mail addresses.
It waited until *you* despatched an electronic mail, scraped the e-mail tackle out of it, and used that, with the consequence that the emails solely went to folks that you simply’d already simply communicated with, giving them a larger believability.
And the opposite intelligent factor it had: it didn’t hassle with issues like topic line and message physique.
It simply had an attachment, HAPPY99.EXE, that while you ran it within the foreground, confirmed fireworks.
And then you definately closed it; appeared like no hurt achieved.
So there have been no linguistic clues, reminiscent of, “Hey, I simply received an electronic mail in Italian from my Italian buddy wishing me Completely satisfied Christmas, instantly adopted by an electronic mail in English wishing me a Completely satisfied 1999.”
And we don’t know whether or not the programmer foresaw that or, as I stated, whether or not it was simply, “Couldn’t be bothered to work out all of the operate calls I want so as to add this to the e-mail…
…I do know to create an electronic mail; I do know so as to add an attachment to it; I’m not going to hassle with the remainder.”
And, because of this, this factor simply unfold and unfold and unfold and unfold.
A reminder that in malware programming, as in lots of issues in life, typically… much less is much more.
DOUG. Alright!
Nicely, let’s transfer on to a happier topic, a kind-of sort-of distant code execution gap in a preferred cloud safety library.
Wait, that’s not happier… however what occurred right here?
Widespread JWT cloud safety library patches “distant” code execution gap
DUCK. Nicely, it’s happier in that the bug was not revealed within the wild with a proof-of-concept.
It was solely documented some weeks after it had been patched.
And fortuitously, though technically it counts as a distant code execution [RCE] bug, which brought on lots of drama when it was first reported…
…it did require that the crooks primarily broke into your house first, after which latched the door open from the within for the subsequent wave of crooks who had come alongside.
So it wasn’t as if they may simply present up on the entrance door and get prompt admission.
The irony, after all, is that it includes a preferred open supply toolkit referred to as jsonwebtoken, or JWT for brief.
A JWT is principally like a session cookie on your browser, however that’s extra geared in the direction of a zero-trust strategy to authorising packages to do one thing for some time.
For instance, you would possibly wish to authorise a program you’re about to run to go and do value lookups in a value database.
So, you could authenticate first.
Perhaps it’s a must to put in a username, possibly to place a password… and then you definately get this entry token that your program can use, and possibly it’s legitimate for the subsequent 100 requests, or the subsequent 20 minutes or one thing, which implies that you don’t have to completely reauthenticate each time.
However that token solely authorises your program to do one particular factor that you simply arrange prematurely.
It’s a terrific thought – it’s an ordinary manner of doing web-based coding as of late.
Now, the concept of the JWT, versus different session cookies, is that in a “zero-trusty” form of manner, it consists of: who the token is for; what issues it’s allowed to do; and, in addition to that, it has a cryptographic keyed hash of the info that claims what it’s for.
And the concept is that that hash is calculated by the server when it points the token, utilizing a secret key that’s buried in some super-secure database someplace.
Sadly, if the crooks might break into your house prematurely by jimmying the lock…
…and if they may get into the key database, and if they may implant a modified secret key for a specific person account, after which sneak out, apparently leaving nothing behind?
Nicely, you’d think about that in the event you mess up the key key, then the system simply isn’t going to work, since you’re not going to have the ability to create dependable tokens anymore.
So that you’d *assume* it could fail protected.
Besides it seems that, in the event you might change the key key in a particular manner, then subsequent time the authentication occurred (to see whether or not the token was right or not), fetching the key key might trigger code to execute.
This might theoretically both learn any file, or completely implant malware, on the authentication server itself…
…which clearly could be a really dangerous factor certainly!
And on condition that these JSON net tokens are very extensively used, and on condition that this jsonwebtoken toolkit is without doubt one of the standard ones on the market, clearly there was an crucial to go and patch if have been utilizing the buggy model.
The good factor about that is that patch truly got here out final yr, earlier than Christmas 2022, and (presumably by association with the jsonwebtoken crew) the corporate that discovered this and wrote it up solely disclosed lately, a few week in the past.
In order that they gave loads of time for folks to patch earlier than they defined what the issue was in any element.
So this *ought to* finish nicely.
DOUG. Alright, allow us to keep with reference to issues ending nicely… if you’re on the facet of the great guys!
We’ve received 4 nations, hundreds of thousands of {dollars}, a number of searches, and several other arrested, in a fairly large funding rip-off:
Multi-million funding scammers busted in four-country Europol raid
DUCK. This was , old school, “Hey, have I received an funding for you!”.
Apparently, there have been 4 name centres, a whole lot of individuals questioned, and 15 already arrested…
… this rip-off was “cold-calling folks for investing in a non-existing cryptocurrency.”
So, OneCoin another time… we’ve spoken about that OneCoin rip-off, the place there was one thing like $4 billion invested in a cryptocurrency that didn’t even exist.
OneCoin scammer Sebastian Greenwood pleads responsible, “Cryptoqueen” nonetheless lacking
On this case, Europol talked about cryptocurrency *schemes*.
So I feel we are able to assume that the crooks would run one till folks realised it was a rip-off, after which they’d pull the rug out from beneath them, run off with the cash, begin up a brand new one.
The concept was: begin actually small, saying to the the particular person, “Look, you solely have to speculate slightly bit, put in €100 possibly, as your first funding.”
The concept was that folks would assume, “I can nearly afford this; if this works out, *I* could possibly be the subsequent Bitcoin-style billionaire.”
They put within the cash… and naturally, you understand how the story goes.
There’s a incredible trying web site, and your funding principally simply retains inching up some days, leaping up on different days.
Principally, “Nicely achieved!”
So, that’s the issue with these scams – they simply *look* nice.
And you’ll get all of the love and a focus you want from the (large air quotes right here) “funding advisors”, till the purpose that you simply realise it’s a rip-off.
After which, nicely… you’ll be able to complain to the authorities.
I like to recommend you do go to the police in the event you can.
However then, after all, legislation enforcement have the tough job of attempting to determine who it was, the place they have been primarily based, and getting them earlier than they simply begin the subsequent rip-off.
DOUG. OK, we’ve got some recommendation right here.
Now we have given this recommendation earlier than – it applies to this story, in addition to others.
If it sounds too good to be true, guess what?
DUCK. It IS too good to be true, Doug.
Not “it could be”.
It IS too good to be true – simply make it so simple as that.
That manner, you don’t should do any extra analysis.
Should you’ve received your doubts, promote these doubts to the equal of a full-blown reality.
You might save your self lots of heartache.
DOUG. We’ve received: Take your time when on-line speak turns from friendship to cash.
And we talked about this: Don’t be fooled as a result of a rip-off web site appears to be like well-branded {and professional}.
As a reformed net designer, I can inform you it’s unimaginable to make a foul trying web site these days.
And another excuse I’m not an internet designer anymore is: nobody wants me.
Who wants an internet designer when you are able to do all of it your self?
DUCK. You imply you click on the button, select the theme, rip off some JavaScript from an actual funding website…
DOUG. …drop a few logos in there.
Yep!
DUCK. It’s a surprisingly straightforward job, and also you don’t must be a very skilled programmer to do it nicely.
DOUG. And final, however definitely by no means least: Don’t let scammers drive a wedge between you and your loved ones…
…see Level 1 one about one thing being too good to be true.
DUCK. Sure.
There are two ways in which you might inadvertently get into a very nasty state of affairs together with your family and friends due to how the scammers behave.
The primary is that, fairly often, in the event that they realise that you simply’re about to surrender on the rip-off as a result of family and friends have virtually satisfied you that you simply’ve been scammed, then they are going to exit of their technique to poison your opinion of your loved ones with a view to attempt to extend the rip-off.
In order that they’ll intentionally drive that wedge in.
And, virtually worse, if it’s a rip-off the place it appears to be like such as you’re doing nicely, they are going to give you “bonuses” for drawing in members of your loved ones or shut associates.
Should you handle to persuade them… sadly, they’re happening with you, and so they’re most likely going to carry you in charge since you talked them into it within the first place.
So bear that in thoughts.
DOUG. OK, our final story of the day.
Widespread id safety service LifeLock has been breached, kind-of, nevertheless it’s difficult… it’s not fairly as easy as a *breach* breach:
Severe Safety: Unravelling the LifeLock “hacked passwords” story
DUCK. Sure, that’s an attention-grabbing manner of placing it, Doug!
DOUG. [LAUGHS]
DUCK. The explanation that I assumed it was vital to put in writing this up on Bare Safety is that I noticed the notification from Norton LifeLock, about unauthorised login makes an attempt en masse into their service, that they despatched out to some customers who had been affected.
And I assumed, “Uh-oh, right here we go – folks have had their passwords stolen at a while previously, and now a brand new load of crooks are coming alongside, and so they’re knocking on the door, and a few doorways are nonetheless open.”
That’s how I learn it, and I feel that I learn it accurately.
However I abruptly began seeing headlines at the least, and in some case tales, within the media that invited folks to assume that, “Oh, golly, they’ve received into Norton LifeLock; they’ve received in behind the scenes; they’ve dug round within the databases; they’ve truly recovered my passwords – oh, expensive!”
I assume, within the mild of latest disclosures by LastPass the place password databases have been stolen however the passwords have been encrypted…
…this, in the event you simply observe the “Oh, it was a breach, and so they’ve received the passwords” line, sounds even worse.
However it appears that evidently that is an outdated checklist of potential username/password mixtures that some bunch of crooks acquired in some way.
Let’s assume they purchased it in a lump from the darkish net, after which they set about seeing which of these passwords would work on which accounts.
That’s referred to as credential stuffing, as a result of they take credentials which might be thought to work on at the least one account, and stuff them into the login kinds on different websites.
So, ultimately the Norton LifeLock crew despatched out a warning to clients saying, “We expect you’re one of many folks affected by this,” most likely simply to folks the place a login had truly succeeded that they assumed had come from the unsuitable form of place, to warn them.
“Someone’s received your password, however we’re not fairly certain the place they received it, as a result of they most likely purchased it off the Darkish Net… and due to this fact, if that occurred, there could also be different bunches of crooks who’ve received it as nicely.”
So I feel that’s what the story provides as much as.
DOUG. And we’ve received some methods right here how these passwords find yourself on the darkish net within the first place, together with: Phishing assaults.
DUCK. Sure, that’s fairly apparent…
…if any person does a mass phishing try towards a specific service, and N folks fall for it.
DOUG. And we’ve received: Keylogger spyware and adware.
DUCK. That’s the place you get contaminated by malware in your laptop, like a zombie or a bot, that has every kind of remote-control triggers that the crooks can fireplace off each time they need:
And clearly, the issues that bots and zombies are likely to have pre-programmed into them embody: monitor community visitors; ship spam to a large checklist of electronic mail addresses; and activate the keylogger each time they assume you’re at an attention-grabbing web site.
In different phrases, as a substitute of attempting to phish your passwords by decrypting otherwise-secure net transactions, they’re principally what you’re typing *as you hit the keys on the keyboard*.
DOUG. Alright, beautiful.
We’ve received: Poor server-side logging hygiene.
DUCK. Usually, you’d wish to log issues just like the particular person’s IP quantity, and the particular person’s username, and the time at which they did the login try.
However in the event you’re in a programming hurry, and also you by chance logged *every part* that was within the net type…
…what in the event you by chance recorded the password within the log file in plaintext?
DOUG. All proper, then we’ve received: RAM-scraping malware.
That’s an attention-grabbing one.
DUCK. Sure, as a result of if the crooks can sneak some malware into the background that may peek into reminiscence whereas your server is operating, they can sniff out, “Whoa”! That appears like a bank card quantity; that appears just like the password area!”
Clearly, that form of assault requires, as within the case we spoke of earlier… it requires the crooks to interrupt into your house first to latch the door open.
But it surely does imply that, as soon as that’s occurred, they will have a program that doesn’t actually need to undergo something on disk; it doesn’t want to look by means of outdated logs; it doesn’t have to navigate the community.
It merely wants to look at specific areas of reminiscence in actual time ,within the hope of getting fortunate when there’s stuff that’s attention-grabbing and vital.
DOUG. We’ve received some recommendation.
Should you’re within the behavior of reusing passwords, don’t do it!
I feel that’s the longest operating piece of recommendation I can keep in mind on file within the historical past of computing.
We’ve received: Don’t use associated passwords on completely different websites.
DUCK. Sure, I assumed I’d sneak that tip in, as a result of lots of people assume:
“Oh, I do know what I’ll do, I’ll select a very difficult password, and I’ll sit down and I’ll memorize X38/=?..., so I’ve received a sophisticated password – the crooks won’t ever guess it, so I solely should keep in mind that one.
As a substitute of remembering it because the grasp password for a password supervisor, which is a problem I don’t want, I’ll simply add -fb for Fb, -tt for Tik Tok, -tw for Twitter, and that manner, actually, I’ll have a unique password for each web site.”
The issue is, in an assault like this, the crooks have *already received the plaintext of one in all your passwords.*
In case your password has complicated-bit sprint two-letters, they will most likely then guess your different passwords…
…as a result of they solely should guess the spare letters.
DOUG. Alright, and: Think about turning on 2FA for any accounts you’ll be able to.
DUCK. Sure.
As all the time, it’s slightly little bit of an inconvenience, nevertheless it does imply that if I’m going on the darkish net and I purchase a password of yours, and I then come steaming in and attempt to use it from some unknown a part of the world…
…it doesn’t “simply work”, as a result of abruptly I want the additional one-time code as nicely.
DOUG. Alright, and on the LifeLock story, we’ve received a reader remark.
Pete says:
“Good article with good ideas and a really factual strategy (smileyface emoticon).”
DUCK. I agree with the remark already, Doug! [LAUGHS]
However do go on…
DOUG. “I assume folks wish to blame corporations like Norton LifeLock […], as a result of it’s so straightforward to simply blame everybody else as a substitute of telling folks how one can do it accurately.”
DUCK. Sure.
You might say these are barely harsh phrases.
However, as I stated on the finish of that specific article, we’ve had passwords for greater than 50 years already within the IT world, despite the fact that there are many providers which might be attempting to maneuver in the direction of the so-called passwordless future – whether or not that depends on {hardware} tokens, biometric measurements, or no matter.
However I feel we’re nonetheless going to have passwords for a few years but, whether or not we prefer it or not, at the least for some (or maybe even many) of our accounts.
So we actually do should chew the bullet, and simply attempt to do it in addition to we are able to.
And in 20 years time, when passwords are behind us, then we are able to change the recommendation, and we are able to give you recommendation on the way you defend your biometric data as a substitute.
However in the interim, this is only one in numerous reminders that when crucial private information like passwords get stolen, they will find yourself having an extended lifetime, and getting extensively circulated among the many cybercrime group.
DOUG. Nice.
Thanks, Pete, for sending that in.
You probably have an attention-grabbing story, remark or query you’d wish to submit, we’d like to learn it on the podcast.
You’ll be able to electronic mail ideas@sophos.com, you’ll be able to touch upon any one in all our articles, or you’ll be able to hit us up on social: @NakedSecurity.
That’s our present for right this moment – thanks very a lot for listening.
For Paul Ducklin, I’m Doug Aamoth reminding you, till subsequent time, to…
BOTH. Keep safe!
[MUSICAL MODEM]
