Thursday 24 December 2009

Escaped prisoner taunts police on Facebook

An escaped prisoner, Craig Lynch, has set up a Facebook page and is using it to taunt police by posting messages about his whereabouts.

Craig "Lazie" Lynch vanished from Hollesley Bay Prison in Suffolk in September this year close to the end of a seven-year sentence for aggravated burglary.

Instead of hiding away from police Lynch has set up a Facebook account complete with a photograph sticking his middle finger up and boasts about eating 12lb steaks and his home being so warm it feels like the Caribbean.

The burglar has become prolific Facebooker with 199 friends and has even posted when he is going round to friend's homes and attending parties and events.

In a status update via mobile phone on Monday, Lynch said: "Craig 'Lazie' Lynch just had bundles of fun on the ice in me motor. Pure a--- out action, but well controlled."

In another at the weekend he said: "Craig 'Lazie' Lynch just nearly wrote my motor off again. Ice everywhere I went round the corner and ended up halfway on someone's driveway!!"

While Lynch should be doing porridge he boasted about tucking into extravagant meals: "Craig 'Lazie' Lynch mmm I just had a 12lb venison steak. Roasted veg and chips, bangin meal."

And instead of languishing in a prison cell he taunted police by saying his home is so warm it is tropical.

He said: "That's on already if it gets any colder durin xmas we'll have to stick the sun bed on as an extra heater we did it the other night it felt like the Caribbean in the bedroom ha ha."

The 28-year-old, who has links to Edgware and north east London, escaped from the open prison on September 23 and has not been seen since although, according to his Facebook page, police could find him at a New Year's Eve party in Lowestoft or another event in Norwich in February.

In a section with information about him Lynch states: "Life is what you make it, live fast, die young!!!" The criminal is also thought to have posted messages on local newspaper websites asking if there is a reward for his recapture.

John Gummer, MP for Suffolk Coastal, criticised the Government for using the open prison as a dumping ground.

He added: "I think it's very dangerous to assume the police could easily locate someone through a social networking site. We all know that one of the problems of a virtual world is that people can be very difficult to track down in the real world.

"However once again it does show that Hollesley Bay is being used for detaining people who should not be in an open prison because of a shortness of prison places that the Government seems unwilling to admit."

A Prison Service spokesman said the search for Lynch is a police matter and added that only prisoners who are assessed to be a low risk to the public are given places in an open prison. He added that 96 per cent of prisoners who escape are recaptured.

The Metropolitan Police refused to comment about Lynch's Facebook account but a spokeswoman for Suffolk Constabulary said routine checks are carried out on addresses he is linked to and his details have been circulated on the Police National Computer.

She added: "Because he has no links to Suffolk, other than the fact that he was in prison here, then these checks may be carried out by colleagues in other parts of the country."

Anyone with information about Lynch's whereabouts can contact Suffolk Police on 01473 613500.

found on http://www.telegraph.co.uk/

Kid uses facebook to blackmail classmates into sex.


From a purely depraved perspective, Anthony R. Stancl's plot was simple and effective. He went on Facebook posing as a girl named "Kayla," then chatted up his male classmates at Eisenhower High School in New Berlin, Wisconsin. The fictitious "Kayla" had a way with the boys, convincing 31 to send Stancl pictures of themselves naked...

​But that's when "Kayla" would turn on her Facebook lovers. Once they sent the photos, she would threaten to send them to the rest of the school unless they had sex with fellow student Anthony R. Stancl.

It didn't work on all 31, but police believe at least seven boys fell for the ruse. They would meet for sex with Stancl in the high school bathroom, the school parking lot, the men's room at the public library, and various parks around town. The victims ranged in age from 13-19.

The scam might have continued if Stancl hadn't overplayed his cards. One 15-year-old boy repeatedly had sex with Stancl to avoid having his naked photos sent around the school. Stancl would then photograph the encounters to add to his leverage.

Then Stancl tried to push the envelope, asking for naked pictures of the boy's brother. The kid didn't want his brother involved, so he told his parents, who in turn called the cops. When detectives grabbed Stancl's computer, they found it loaded with evidence, containing more than 300 nude photos of classmates at Eisenhower High School.

Stancl originally faced 12 felonies that could have landed him nearly 300 years in prison. But yesterday, he pleaded no contest to lesser charges of sexual assault and repeated sexual assault of a minor. The 19-year-old still faces up to 50 years in the slam.

Detectives say the victims were more than happy with the plea, since it kept them from having to out themselves in court.

"I've never had a case where the victims and their families were more apprehensive about testifying," Waukesha County district attorney Brad Schimel told the Associated Press. "From the victims' perspective, they're relieved we're doing this."

By Pete Kotz

Tuesday 15 December 2009

Hackers Brew Self-Destruct Code to Counter Police Forensics

Hackers have released an application designed to thwart a Microsoft-packaged forensic toolkit used by law enforcement agencies to examine a suspect’s hard drive during a raid.

The hacker tool, dubbed DECAF, is designed to counteract the Computer Online Forensic Evidence Extractor, aka COFEE. The latter is a suite of 150 bundled, off-the-shelf forensic tools that run from a script. Microsoft combined the programs into a portable tool that can be used by law enforcement agents in the field before they bring a computer back to their forensic lab. The script runs on a USB stick that agents plug into the machine.

The tools scan files and gather information about activities performed on the machine, such as where the user surfed on the internet or what files were downloaded.

Someone submitted the COFEE suite to the whistleblower site Cryptome last month, prompting Microsoft lawyers to issue a take-down notice to the site. The tool was also being distributed through the Bit Torrent file sharing network.

This week two unnamed hackers released DECAF, an application that monitors a computer for any signs that COFEE is operating on the machine.
According to the Register, the program deletes temporary files or processes associated with COFEE, erases all COFEE logs, disables USB drives, and contaminates or spoofs a variety of MAC addresses to muddy forensic tracks.

The hackers say that later releases of the program will allow computer owners to remotely lock down their machine once they detect that it has fallen into law enforcement hands. The hackers, however, have not released source code for the program, which would make it easy for anyone to see if the program contains malware that might also harm a computer or allow the attackers to take control of it.

By Kim Zetter

Friday 4 December 2009

H1N1 malware epidemic is more contagious than real deal


Malware authors are impersonating the CDC in a new scheme to propagate a trojan horse. Fraudulent e-mails sent by a botnet claim that the recipient must register for a fake state vaccination program but really link to a malware-infested phishing website.

The Center for Disease Control (CDC) issued a statement this week to warn citizens about a recent wave of phishing e-mails that deceptively claim to be from the government organization. The e-mails refer to a state vaccination program and tell recipients that they have to create a personal H1N1 vaccination profile.

No such vaccination program exists. A link in the e-mail directs users to a fraudulent website that attempts to infect their computer with malware. Specifically, the fake H1N1 messages are being used to propagate ZBot (also known as Zeus), a trojan horse that powers one of the most active botnets. The program serves as a spam relay and also surreptitiously collects private data about the user to funnel back to the botnet operator.

E-mail security company AppRiver detected the malware campaign earlier this week when it seemingly exploded in volume. The company's researchers wrote about it in a blog entry.

"We are seeing these messages at the extremely high rate of nearly 18,000 messages per minute netting over 1 million of these messages in the first hour alone," they wrote. "It is now officially flu season and considering the recent concerns over the H1N1 vaccine, I expect this to be a highly effective campaign against those who are not protected from this cyber-threat."

Security company Sunbelt Software, which publishes monthly reports on the prevalence of malware threats, says that ZBot held the top spot for seven months but declined sharply last month. Its November report, which was published today, lists ZBot as the second most prevalent malware threat and says that it represents 6 percent of all malware infections. The new H1N1 phishing scheme could potentially give it a boost.

ZBot's authors have used similar tactics in the past. A report at the CA Security Advisor Research Blog describes how previous iterations of have used fake e-mails claiming to come from the IRS, FDIC, and Microsoft. The websites linked in the e-mails attempt to get users to download the malware. They also have embedded iframes with PDF or Flash content that attempts to take advantage of security vulnerabilities in Adobe's software. Although Adobe has patched known vulnerabilities, users who have not updated to the latest versions are at risk.

Malware propagation is largely an exercise in social engineering. These fraudulent e-mails expand the botnet pool by preying on the ignorance and fear of recipients.

By Ryan Paul

Wednesday 2 December 2009

Viagra spam gang fined $15.2m in US court

A US district court has ordered the largest "spam gang" in the world to pay nearly $15.2 million (£9.4 million) for sending unsolicited email messages marketing male-enhancement pills, prescription drugs and weight-loss supplements, the US Federal Trade Commission said Monday.

Spamhaus, the antispam organisation, called the email marketing network the "No. 1 worst spam gang" on the Internet for much of 2007 and 2008.

Australian resident Lance Atkinson, the spam ring's leader, has paid more than $80,000 to New Zealand authorities after confirming his involvement in the spam network, and accomplice Jody Smith, a US resident, has agreed to an order that he turn over nearly all his assets to the FTC, the agency said.

In October 2008, a judge in the US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, ordered an asset freeze and a halt to the network's operation, which generated more than 3 million complaints to law enforcement authorities, the FTC said.

Earlier this month, the court issued a default judgment against Atkinson, his company, and three companies affiliated with Smith. In addition to the $15.2 million that Atkinson and his company have been ordered to pay, the three companies affiliated with Smith are liable for nearly $3.8 million.

Atkinson and Smith recruited spammers from around the world, according to the FTC’s complaint, filed last year. Those spammers sent billions of e-mail messages directing consumers to websites operated by an affiliate program called Affking, according to the complaint. The spammers used false header information to hide the origin of the messages and failed to provide an opt-out link or list a physical postal address, violations of the US CAN-SPAM Act, the FTC said.

The spam network, using the Canadian Healthcare brand name and other labels, marketed a male-enhancement pill, prescription drugs and a weight-loss pill, the FTC said. The e-mail messages falsely claimed that the medications came from a US-licensed pharmacy that dispenses US Federal Food and Drug Administration-approved generic drugs.

The defendants did not operate a pharmacy licensed in the US, the FTC said. The drugs they sold were shipped from India and had not been approved by the FDA, the agency.

The FTC alleged that Atkinson and Smith made false claims about the security of consumers’ credit card information and other personal data consumers provided when they bought goods. The defendants’ Web site assured potential consumers that the pharmacy "treats your personal information (including credit card data) with the highest level of security.”

The website went on to describe its encryption process, which supposedly involved “Secure Socket Layer (SSL) technology.” However, there was no indication that consumers’ information was encrypted using SSL technology.

To settle FTC charges that he helped send spam e-mails to millions of consumers, Smith will turn over nearly all his assets. Under the terms of the settlement, Smith will pay approximately $212,000. He also will assign any rights he has to $91,000 frozen in the name of one of his co-defendants, and $547,000 that may be held for his benefit in an Israeli bank.

Smith pled guilty in August to the criminal charge of conspiracy to traffic counterfeit goods, and faces up to five years in prison. He is scheduled to be sentenced in December in US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri.

By Grant Gross
http://news.techworld.com

Wednesday 25 November 2009

Εναντίον του Google Analytics στρέφονται οι γερμανικές υπηρεσίες προστασίας δεδομένων

Associated Press

Βερολίνο

Παράνομη θεωρούν οι γερμανικές υπηρεσίες προστασίας προσωπικών δεδομένων τη χρήση του Google Analytics, της υπηρεσίας που παρουσιάζει τα «δημογραφικά χαρακτηριστικά» των επισκεπτών ιστοσελίδων.

Το Google Analytics χρησιμοποιείται για τη δημιουργία «προφίλ» των επισκεπτών συγκεκριμένων ιστοσελίδων, εξακριβώνοντας όχι μόνο το πόσοι και από πού είναι οι επισκέπτες τους, αλλά και το «διαδικτυακό» ιστορικό τους. Έτσι, ο ιδιοκτήτης της ιστοσελίδας ή ο όποιος ενδιαφερόμενος μπορεί να σχηματίσει μία εικόνα των επισκεπτών της και των προτιμήσεών τους.

Οι γερμανικές υπηρεσίες προστασίας προσωπικών δεδομένων όμως, τόσο σε ομοσπονδιακό επίπεδο όσο και σε διάφορα κρατίδια, θεωρούν ότι η χρήση του Google Analytics αντιτίθεται στο γερμανικό δίκαιο.

Σύμφωνα με την εφημερίδα Zeit, περίπου το 13% των γερμανικών ιστοσελίδων χρησιμοποιούν την υπηρεσία -ανάμεσά τους φαρμακευτικές εταιρείες, πολιτικά κόμματα και ΜΜΕ. Μεταξύ άλλων, το νομικό πρόβλημα δημιουργείται από το κατά πόσον η διεύθυνση IP, η «προσωπική υπογραφή» του κάθε υπολογιστή στο διαδίκτυο, αποτελεί δεδομένο «προσωπικώς συσχετίσιμο». Οι γερμανικές υπηρεσίες θεωρούν πως αυτό συμβαίνει ενώ η Google το βλέπει διαφορετικά, αλλά φαίνεται ότι και η γερμανική νομολογία παρουσιάζεται εξίσου αμφίσημη.

Οι υπηρεσίες φοβούνται ότι η Google θα μπορούσε να δημιουργήσει «προφίλ» εκατομμυρίων χρηστών του διαδικτύου, τα οποία θα συμπεριλαμβάνουν τα ενδιαφέροντά τους, τις συνήθειες ζωής τους, την καταναλωτική τους συμπεριφορά και τις πολιτικές ή ακόμη και σεξουαλικές προτιμήσεις τους.

Οι χρήστες, τονίζουν σύμφωνα με το δημοσίευμα οι γερμανικές υπηρεσίες, δεν έχουν τη δυνατότητα να επιλέξουν ενεργητικά τη μη υπαγωγή τους στο λογισμικό (opt-out), χωρίς το οποίο «δεν στέκει τίποτα». Εξίσου ενοχλημένες παρουσιάζονται οι υπηρεσίες με το γεγονός ότι τα προσωπικά δεδομένα μπορούν να γίνουν αντικείμενο επεξεργασίας από εταιρείες ή φορείες επί αμερικανικού εδάφους.

Η Google υποστηρίζει ότι η επεξεργασία των δεδομένων στις ΗΠΑ καλύπτεται απολύτως από τη συμφωνία «Safe Harbour» μεταξύ Ευρώπης και Ουάσιγκτον, ενώ θεωρεί περιττό το «opt-out» καθώς οι χρήστες μπορούν «να απενεργοποιήσουν τα cookies».

Thursday 19 November 2009

Ethics leaks spur House bill banning P2P apps on .gov PCs


Over the past year, there have been several embarrassing incidents where private government documents have leaked because employees didn't know how to properly configure P2P client software. For the US House of Representatives, the last straw came when ethics documents were leaked. A bill has been introduced to ban the use of P2P apps by federal employees.

Peer-to-peer filesharing applications have been wildly popular, especially among those interested in accessing pirated software, music, and media. But not everyone who operates a P2P client knows how to properly configure the software, and some clients may share entire directories unless explicitly directed not to. Apparently, some government employees have exhibited this sort of carelessness, as private and secret government documents have shown up on P2P networks. Now, at least one Congressman has had enough, and has introduced a bill that would ban the use of P2P software by government employees.

The Congressman in question is Edolphus Towns of New York, who chairs the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. In a statement announcing the bill's introduction, Towns highlights a number of embarrassing incidents in which sensitive government files showed up on P2P networks. These include schematics for the Presidential helicopter and the location of a first-family safe house, as well as the financial records of a Supreme Court Justice.

But the cynic would suggest that the real spur to action was the leak of a whole series of documents related to ethics investigations of Towns' fellow House members, which he also cited in the announcement. This included a full list of ongoing investigations and details on a number of them. The committee that suffered the leak issued a statement (PDF) at the end of October which indicated that P2P software was involved in the leak, so this appears to involve a relatively quick response.

The bill itself, termed the Secure Federal File Sharing Act, calls on the Director of the Office of Management and Budget to issue guidance on the use of P2P software, and provides the Director some guidance on what it should be: P2P software will be banned on government-owned computers. The OMB Director will have 90 days to come up with rules for government workers and contractors that have access to documents at home. Procedures will also be put in place for government agencies that have legitimate need for P2P software, in order to grant them exceptions.

By 180 days after the bill's passage, the OMB will have to specify procedures to detect and purge P2P use from within the government's networks. After the procedures are in place, the OMB will need to provide Congress with an annual report detailing all the exemptions that are in place.

Although it's tempting to snicker at the ethics leaks being the primary event that spurred Congress to action, it wouldn't be at all surprising if some of the complaints that leaked are the result of misunderstandings or political disagreements; all of them will almost certainly be used (and abused) in future political campaigns. In any case, the other leaks are certainly more severe, and there's no reason to think that the average government employee is ever going to be more technically savvy or security-literate than the general computer using population, so the law addresses a real issue.

Given that P2P software does have a number of legitimate uses, however, blanket restrictions and a formal approval process may turn out to be a hindrance. Assuming the bill passes, the real challenge is likely to be crafting a quick and effective exemption process.

By John Timmer

Tuesday 17 November 2009

In Venezuela criminals use Facebook to research targets. Cops use it too — but not always for scrupulous purposes.

In Venezuela criminals use Facebook to research targets. Cops use it too — but not always for scrupulous purposes.

CARACAS, Venezuela — It has taken Venezuela by storm, but it seems that Facebook and other social networking sites also come with their perils.

Police here revealed that a pair of students at a private university in Caracas had been robbing their virtual friends’ homes using information they had compiled using Facebook.

Police raided the apartment of one of two students who, working in tandem with another couple, had been using Facebook to befriend classmates. They then used the information their new “friends” posted on their profiles to find out where they lived, what they owned and when they were not at home.

"They observe the families’ movements, they study the residencies — the comings and goings, the security measures," said Wilmer Flores Trosel, director of the CICPC, Venezuela’s eqivalent of the FBI.

Security analysts in Venezuela say it is becoming increasingly frequent for criminals to use social networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter, Sonico and Hi5 as a source of information for house robberies, fraud and kidnappings.

And it's not just the criminals capitalizing on this online data source, the police too are using it, to go after both hard-core criminals and political protesters. In a country with little tolerance for dissent, many fear the government has designs on controlling these sites. And the crimes aided by Facebook, might give them cause to do just that.

“There's a certain amount of intelligence work involved in kidnapping that Facebook makes easier,” said Roberto Briceno Leon, director of the Venezuelan Observatory of Violence. “Before, what did kidnappers do? They could spend months checking accounts, studying a person's daily movements in order to be able to plan the kidnapping. That implies an investment. Now, Facebook makes that easier.”

Briceno Leon said that even an innocent photograph of a user’s home could reveal valuable information about security systems that could be used to plan robberies or kidnappings.

Leon's Venezuelan Observatory of Violence did a survey and they estimate that there were between 8,000 and 9,000 kidnappings in Venezuela in 2008. The official figure for last year was 554 but most kidnappings go unreported because victims' families prefer not to involve the police as they are often involved in the kidnappings.

Venezuelans are no strangers to crime. Murder rates have reached record highs in recent years and they have been a part of daily life since the late 1980s. Banks take elaborate precautions to avoid fraud. Making a simple withdrawal can involve heavy scrutiny and a customer often has to be photographed and fingerprinted before the money is released.

But Venezuelans are not similarly cautious when it comes to the personal details they publicize on social networks. There are 435,992 users signed up to three "Venezuela" pages on Facebook, and Facebook is used widely in the country for party invitations and political protests.

Briceno Leon said that social networking sites offer the illusion of safety but what may seem like an innocent confession often opens up a window into the private life of an individual.

“People feel intimate and safe, they don't feel like they are on the street,” he said. “That's why people cease to take precautions.”

Facebook is also a tool used by Venezuelan police — though not always effectively. Carlos Graffe, a student from Valencia, a city 75 miles west of Caracas, said the prosecutor’s office put out a warrant for his arrest after he was identified through a photo on Facebook as one of several protesters who are accused of inciting violence during a protest march in Caracas in August.

Graffe and his lawyer claim it’s a case of mistaken identity: The television footage that shows protesters dismantling police barriers during the march shows a different person than the one identified in the Facebook photograph. What’s more, the person in the Facebook photograph is in fact his cousin, also called Carlos Graffe.

Opposition figures claim the Venezuelan government ultimately wants to control social networking sites, which have become an important tool for organizing protests and marches.

Thousands of Venezuelans protested the closing down of local radio station CNB by posting messages on the Twitter account #freemediave. An editorial piece in the state-run Bolivarian News Agency then accused Twitter of becoming a “new channel for creating terror” by spreading disinformation in a campaign orchestrated by the Venezuelan ultra-right.

Government critics claim the government is pushing its own forms of disinformation. In July, Diosdado Cabello, the minister for public works, aired the idea of passing all of Venezuela’s internet traffic through the servers of Cantv, the state-run telecommunications company. Critics say the move would allow the government to control communication on social networking sites during protests.

Social networking sites are a threat to the government that fears that it cannot control the partisanship of sites such as Facebook, said Carlos Delgado, a media analyst at the Andres Bello Catholic University in Caracas. He said the government’s move to control Venezuela’s servers is an attempt to “consolidate its communicational hegemony.”

Criminal Charges


This is Rodney Bradford. A few days ago, Facebook saved his 19-yo life. Facebook, and his status plea demanding the immediate consumption of one of the basic food groups every human being needs to properly function in the morning: Pancakes. [via gizmodo]

Rodney was arrested on October 18 as a suspect in two crimes. He declared himself innocent and Robert Reuland—his defense lawyer—found the key to free him: "Where's my pancakes?"

That seemingly inconsequential Facebook status update proved crucial when the Californian company confirmed that someone wrote it from his father's Harlem apartment computer, using Rodney's user and password at around the time of the alleged crime: Saturday October 17, 11:49am.

Of course, you can argue that anyone with Rodney's password could have written the status update, while the 19-yo went on to commit two crimes, but his defense lawyer and the district attorney disagree:

A spokesman for Brooklyn's District Attorney said the Facebook update served as the confirmation of the other alibis, namely Rodney's father and stepmother, who declared he was at their Harlem home at the time.
The most interesting thing in this case, however, is that this seems to be the first time in which social networking has been used to save the ass of someone, rather than nailing a really stupid thief.

Tuesday 10 November 2009

Pirates get a taste of Microsoft COFEE



Microsoft's Computer Online Forensic Evidence Extractor (COFEE) software, which helps law enforcement officials grab data from password protected or encrypted sources, has leaked.

Microsoft's Computer Online Forensic Evidence Extractor (COFEE) has made it into the hands of pirates, and their virtual ships are distributing it quickly for everyone to get a taste. The COFEE application uses common digital forensics tools to help law enforcement officials at the scene of a crime gather volatile evidence of live computer activity that would otherwise be lost in a traditional offline forensic analysis. In other words, it lets officers grab data from password-protected or encrypted sources. That means you can now break the law twice over: download the software and then use it to steal information from other people's computers.

Chances are you won't have any use for the tool, but pirates get a thrill from having something they shouldn't, and a forensics tool only distributed to police departments around the world is pretty high up on the list of things you shouldn't have on your computer. The forensics tool is approximately 15MB in size and works best with Windows XP. Microsoft is working on a new version of COFEE for next year that fully supports Windows Vista and Windows 7. Here's the official description of COFEE:

With COFEE, law enforcement agencies without on-the-scene computer forensics capabilities can now more easily, reliably, and cost-effectively collect volatile live evidence. An officer with even minimal computer experience can be tutored—in less than 10 minutes—to use a pre-configured COFEE device. This enables the officer to take advantage of the same common digital forensics tools used by experts to gather important volatile evidence, while doing little more than simply inserting a USB device into the computer.

The fully customizable tool allows your on-the-scene agents to run more than 150 commands on a live computer system. It also provides reports in a simple format for later interpretation by experts or as supportive evidence for subsequent investigation and prosecution. And the COFEE framework can be tailored to effectively meet the needs of your particular investigation.

Microsoft first revealed the tool back in April 2008, so we have to say that the software giant did quite a good job keeping it away from pirates for over two years (that has to be some kind of record for Redmond). In April 2009, Microsoft announced that it will aid global law enforcement in fighting cybercrime by providing its COFEE tool free of charge to International Criminal Police Organization's (Interpol) Global Security Initiative (GSI), a project that addresses international security challenges, and the participating 187 countries. Now though, the valuable tool is available to more than just government crime fighting bodies, and we can't say we're comfortable with the possible implications.

Wednesday 4 November 2009

Secure computers aren’t so secure


Even well-defended computers can leak shocking amounts of private data. MIT researchers seek out exotic attacks in order to shut them down

You may update your antivirus software religiously, immediately download all new Windows security patches, and refuse to click any e-mail links ostensibly sent by your bank, but even if your computer is running exactly the way it’s supposed to, a motivated attacker can still glean a shocking amount of private information from it. The time it takes to store data in memory, fluctuations in power consumption, even the sounds your computer makes can betray its secrets. MIT researchers centered at the Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Lab’s Cryptography and Information Security Group (CIS) study such subtle security holes and how to close them.

In 2005, Eran Tromer, now a postdoc at CIS, and colleagues at the Weizmann Institute in Rehovot, Israel, showed that without any breach of security in the ordinary sense, a seemingly harmless computer program could eavesdrop on other programs and steal the type of secret cryptographic key used by one of the most common Internet encryption schemes. Armed with the key, an attacker could steal a computer user’s credit card number, bank account password — whatever the encryption scheme was invoked to protect.

Computer operating systems are supposed to prevent any given program from looking at the data stored by another. But when two programs are running at the same time, they sometimes end up sharing the same cache — a small allotment of high-speed memory where the operating system stores frequently used information. Tromer and his colleagues showed that simply by measuring how long it took to store data at a number of different cache locations, a malicious program could determine how frequently a cryptographic system was using those same locations. “The memory access patterns — that is, which memory addresses are accessed — are heavily influenced by the specific secret key being used in that operation,” Tromer says. “We demonstrated a concise and efficient procedure for learning the secret keys given just this crude information about the memory access patterns.” Complete extraction of the private key, Tromer says, “takes merely seconds, and the measurements that are needed, of the actual cryptographic process being attacked, can be carried out in milliseconds.”

The encryption system that Tromer was attacking, called AES, was particularly vulnerable because it used tables of precalculated values as a computational short cut, so that encoding and decoding messages wouldn’t be prohibitively time consuming. Since Tromer and his colleagues published their results, Intel has added hardware support for AES to its chips, so that Internet encryption software won’t have to rely on such “lookup tables.”

In a statement, Intel told the MIT News Office that its decision “was mainly motivated by the performance/efficiency benefits achieved,” but that “in addition, there is a potential security benefit since these new instructions can mitigate the possibility of software side channel attacks on AES that have been described in research papers, including those discovered by Tromer, Percival, and Bernstein.”

“I think it’s fair to say that it’s a direct response to the cache-timing attacks against AES,” Pankaj Rohatgi, director of hardware security at the data security firm Cryptography Research, says of Intel’s move.

Together with CIS cofounder Ron Rivest and CSAIL’s Saman Amarasinghe, Tromer is trying to develop further techniques for thwarting cache attacks by disrupting the correlations between encryption keys and memory access patterns. A couple weeks ago, at the Association for Computing Machinery’s Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, the researchers announced that they had a “proof-of-concept prototype” of a defense system, but they plan to continue testing and refining it before publishing any papers.

Tromer has also been investigating whether cloud computing — the subcontracting of computational tasks to networked servers maintained by companies like Amazon and Google — is susceptible to cache attacks. Many web sites rely on cloud computing to handle sudden surges in their popularity: renting added server space for a few hours at a time can be much cheaper than maintaining large banks of proprietary servers that frequently stand idle.

The word “cloud” is supposed to suggest that this vast agglomeration of computing power is amorphous and constantly shifting, but Tromer and colleagues at the University of California, San Diego, were able to load their eavesdropping software onto precisely the same servers that were hosting websites they’d targeted in advance. In part, their approach involved spreading their software across a number of servers, then assailing a targeted website with traffic. By spying on the caches of the servers hosting their software, they could determine which were also trying to keep pace with their fake traffic spikes. Once they’d identified the target site’s servers, they could use cache monitoring to try to steal secrets.

“Imagine a stock broker that specializes in a specific company,” Tromer says. “If you observe that his virtual machine is particularly active, that could be valuable information. Or you may want to know how popular your competitors’ website is. We’ve actually demonstrated that we can very robustly estimate web server popularity.”

“This has sparked the imagination of both the research community and industry,” Rohatgi says. “I interact with a lot of people in industry, and when they say, ‘Give me the technical basis for this,’ I point to [Tromer and colleagues’] papers.”

Finally, Tromer is continuing work he began as a graduate student, on the use of a “hundred-dollar commodity microphone” to record the very sounds emitted by a computer and analyze them for information about cryptographic keys. So far, Tromer hasn’t been able to demonstrate complete key extraction, but he believes he’s getting close.

Any information at all about a computer’s internal workings “is actually fairly damaging,” Rohatgi says. “In some sense, some of these cryptographic algorithms are fairly brittle, and with a little extra information, you can break them.”

Larry Hardesty, MIT News Office

Phishing

Wednesday 28 October 2009

10 Ways to Spot an E-Mail Scam



The increasing flood of e-mail hitting your inbox can lower the guard of even the most cautious person. In the rush to keep up with important notes, it's easier than ever to fall prey to the scam artists and identity thieves who lurk online.

E-mail scams and phishing attempts evolve constantly, hoping to take advantage of the latest trends and current events. Although the e-mails change, the people behind them inadvertently send up the same warning signs again and again. We dug through mountains of spam to find the most prevailing trends. We've collected some actual scam e-mails and highlighted the warning signs to help you spot a hustle the next time one lands in your inbox.


1. Requests for personal information


No legitimate organization will ask for your social security, bank account or PIN number via e-mail – and none will include a link, sending you to a form to enter it. No matter how authentic these emails may look, ignore 'em.


2. Watch for typos or spelling mistakes


Scam artists are street smart, but many flunked basic grammar (or barely speak English). Look for mistakes like inappropriate hyphens or confusing "your" and "you're." If the note has multiple typos or grammatical errors, odds are it's not legitimate.


3. Clickable Web links in e-mails


Don't trust links to Web sites in e-mails. What might look like a legitimate address is often linked to a third-party site that looks official, but is actually run by thieves and scammers. These are the fast track to identity and financial theft.


4. 'Market research' or surveys that ask you for personal information.


Disguising scam e-mails as marketing is a classic ploy. You'll be asked to fill out a survey or enter a contest – requiring you to give personal information or "log on" to your account. Once you've done so, the scammers can use it themselves.


5. Stock tips from random people or companies

Got a "hot stock tip" via e-mail? It's probably a "pump and dump" scheme. The sender already owns shares – and when you and others act on the "tip," the stock price soars and he sells fast – leaving you with virtually worthless shares.


6. Attachments in e-mails from anyone you don't know

It should be common sense, but just in case, we'll remind you again: Don't open an attachment from someone you don't know – even if it appears to be your bank or credit card company. It's almost always a virus or spyware meant to steal your personal information.


7. Wordless e-mails

Some legitimate looking "e-mails" are actually just images. The danger with these is that clicking anywhere in the body takes you to a suspect Web site – where you may be fooled into entering personal information, or the scammer may slip spyware onto your machine.


8. Outdated information

Some scammers like to pose as technical- or customer support from a company you associate with – but fail to keep up with current events. For example, in the example above, the senders forgot that Earthlink bought Mindspring in 2000.


9. Red-flag phrases

If you see the phrases "verify your account," "you have won the lottery" or "if you don't respond within XX hours, your account will be closed," it's a scam – every time. Hit the delete button and don't look back.


10. Generic greetings

While you can't trust every e-mail that knows your name, you can definitely ignore the ones that start "Dear member" or "Hello friend." If your bank or credit card company is writing you, it knows who you are. So do your friends.

by Chris Morris

Monday 26 October 2009

Nigeria actually arrests, shuts down online scammers


Nigerian officials have launched a new initiative called "Project Eagle Claw" that will target Internet scams coming out of the country. The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission has already made a number of arrests and shut down 800 websites, with many more to come.

It turns out Nigeria is taking measures to fight Internet scams—law enforcement there has shut down close to a thousand websites and made 18 arrests as part of a new initiative to save the nation's reputation and crack down on Internet scammers. The program, called "Project Eagle Claw," has only just begun, but Nigerian officials expect it to be fully operational in 2010.

Nigeria's Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) described the initiative as "a renewed bid to clap down" (*clap clap*?) on Internet fraudsters. So far, the agency claims to have shut down 800 scam sites in addition to making the arrests, with many more apparently to come.

EFCC Chairman Farida Waziri said Wednesday during a US address to the National Conference of Black Mayors that Nigeria was working with Microsoft to fully deploy Project Eagle Claw, and that it will soon be able to take down up to 5,000 fraudulent e-mails per month. She also expects the system to send up to 230,000 advisory e-mails to victims every month.

Waziri explained that the EFCC's previous strategy for fighting cybercrime involved "cyber raids" and petitions—slow and ineffective in today's fast-moving Internet world—and that Eagle Claw would be much more proactive. "We expect that Eagle Claw as conceived will be 100 percent operational within six months and at full capacity, it will take Nigeria out of the top 10 list of countries with the highest incidence of fraudulent e-mails," Waziri said.

Indeed, if you live outside of Africa, Nigeria is practically synonymous with various scams, some of which predate the Internet. Thanks to the explosion of online connectivity in the last several decades, however, so-called "Nigerian scams" have taken on a new life of their own—fraudsters have managed to grift millions of dollars out of unsuspecting victims in recent years, with even major banks coming dangerously close to wiring their own cash halfway around the world.

This has caused an entire culture of scam baiters to spring up in order to troll scammers and distract them from the real victims (something that we here at Ars briefly dabbled in ourselves), showing that scams out of Nigeria are indeed more than a minor law enforcement annoyance. At this point, it's just nice to see Nigerian officials trying a more realistic strategy towards curbing cybercrime than merely blaming the victim, even if it may take years worth of enforcement before we see any tangible results.

By Jacqui Cheng

Sunday 4 October 2009

Malware worldwide grows 15 percent in September

A rise in malware has caused the number of infected PCs worldwide to increase 15 percent just from August to September, says a report released Tuesday from antivirus vendor Panda Security.

Across the globe, the average number of PCs hit by malware now stands around 59 percent, an all-time high for the year. Among 29 countries tracked, the U.S. ranked ninth with slightly more than 58 percent of its PCs infected. Taiwan hit first place with an infection ratio of 69 percent, while Norway came in lowest with only 39 percent of its PCs attacked by malware.


(Credit: Panda Security)

The study found that in the U.S., Trojans and Adware were the two most pernicious types of malware, followed by worms and viruses.

(Credit: Panda Security)

"This is a clear sign that hackers are becoming more and more sophisticated," said PandaLabs Technical Director Luis Corrons. "Cybercriminals have found news ways to spread their creations, frequently exploiting the latest news stories to launch attacks through social networks, videos, and e-mail. The huge amount of Trojans in circulation is due to the spectacular increase in the number of banker Trojans aimed at stealing user data."

The company based its results on data taken from users who scanned their PCs with the free Panda ActiveScan online tool. The results for September were gathered from August 28 to September 28 and compared with the results from July 28 to August 27.

by Lance Whitney
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-10363373-83.html

Red Hat asks US Supreme Court to bar software patents

Red Hat asks US Supreme Court to bar software patents.

Check Here

Tuesday 22 September 2009

Facebook Beacon shines for last time as part of settlement


Facebook's Beacon has been nothing but trouble since it launched in 2007, spurring numerous user complaints and a class-action privacy suit. The company has apparently learned its lesson, as it has now proposed a lawsuit settlement that involves shutting down Beacon and paying out $9.5 million to a settlement fund.

As quickly as it swooped into Facebook users' lives and revealed their secret purchasing habits to the world, Beacon has now been shut down as part of a lawsuit settlement. Facebook revealed late Friday that its controversial "advertising" feature would be shuttered, saying that the company had "learned a great deal from the experience." Facebook also plans to donate $9.5 million to an organization that fights for online privacy, though the settlement proposal still awaits approval by a judge.

Facebook's Director of Policy Communications Barry Schnitt said in a statement that the whole Beacon ordeal "underscored how critical it is to provide extensive user control over how information is shared." He said the company also learned how to communicate changes to users (you know, instead of just dumping things like Beacon on them without a peep), and that the introduction of Facebook Connect allows for much greater user control over how their Web antics get shared back to friends on Facebook.

"We look forward to the creation of the foundation and its work to educate Internet users on how best to control their privacy; engage in safe social networking practices; and, generally, enjoy themselves more online by having knowledge that gives them a greater sense of control," Schnitt said. "We fully expect the foundation to team with other leading online safety and privacy experts and organizations that have been working diligently in these fields."

Facebook first launched Beacon in November of 2007 as part of a new marketing strategy intended to benefit both advertisers and and Facebook users (more of the former than the latter). A number of companies signed up to be part of the program, meaning that any user activity that took place on their respective websites would be reported back to Facebook and published to users' timelines. Because Beacon was originally set up as an opt-out service instead of opt-in, many users were horrified to find their off-Facebook activities being published to their profiles automatically. Not only did users feel that their privacy was being violated, a number of users complained loudly that Beacon had ruined numerous surprise holiday gifts.

A few weeks after the initial backlash, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg posted an apology. He admitted that the company should have handled Beacon differently and said that the default settings had been changed so that publishing off-Facebook activities to users' news feeds would now be off. Instead, users could now opt in on a per-incident or per-site basis.

That didn't stop a class-action lawsuit from being filed in April 2008, alleging that Beacon and Blockbuster (one of Facebook's marketing partners) were in violation of numerous privacy laws by reporting user activity back to Facebook. The complaint said that off-Facebook activities were still being reported back to Facebook (even if users choose not to publish the info), and that Blockbuster's participation constituted a violation of the Video Privacy Protection Act—a law that prohibits video providers from allowing third parties to access identifiable information about someone's renting or buying habits without their express, written consent.

That lawsuit has been making its way through the court system for more than a year and Facebook apparently realized that it wasn't going to win anytime soon. As a result, the company decided to settle, proposing the $9.5 million settlement fund go towards the creation of an independent foundation that would "fund projects and initiatives that promote the cause of online privacy, safety, and security."

Despite Facebook's positively spun PR speak, it's clear that the company has learned a lesson from the calamity that was the Beacon experience. Everything about Beacon's rollout was done poorly, which then tainted the service forever despite Facebook's desperate attempt to right its wrongs. It took a major class-action lawsuit and the launch of an entirely new service (Facebook Connect) for the company to pull the plug on Beacon, but Facebook has learned the hard way that it earned its users by being conscious of privacy (at least compared to MySpace), and that it needs to continue giving users control if it wants to continue growing.

By Jacqui Cheng

Monday 21 September 2009

Saturday 19 September 2009

Why virus writers are turning to open source


Malware developers are going open source in an effort to make their malicious software more useful to fraudsters.

By giving criminal coders free access to malware that steals financial and personal details, the malicious software developers are hoping to expand the capabilities of old Trojans.

According to Candid W?est, threat researcher with security firm Symantec, around 10 percent of the Trojan market is now open source.

The move to an open source business model is allowing criminals to add extra features to their malware.

"The advantages are that you have more people involved in developing it, so someone who is into cryptography could add a cryptographic plug-in or somebody who does video streaming could add remote streaming of the desktop," W?est said.

Releasing Trojans as open source dates back to 1999, when the Cult of the Dead Cow group released the source code for its Trojan called Back Orifice.

More recently, the developers of the Limbo Trojan published its source code in an effort to boost take-up following a slump in its use by fraudsters.

Following its release in 2007, the Limbo Trojan became the most widely used Trojan in the world but fell from favor in 2008 after the more sophisticated Zeus Trojan was released, according to security company RSA.

There is a big cash incentive to be the dominant Trojan, with infected machines and the financial and personal details they capture worth millions of dollars on the black market. The Limbo Trojan kit was previously sold to fraudsters for $350 per time before it went open source, while the Zeus Trojan today sells for between $1,000 to $3,000.

"It is a move to the same business model as that behind any open source project--to give away a basic version and sell more advanced versions, professional services or customizations."
--Uri Rivner, RSA


However, head of new technologies at RSA, Uri Rivner, said the move to become open source had not reversed Limbo's decline in fortunes.

"It is a move to the same business model as that behind any open source project--to give away a basic version and sell more advanced versions, professional services or customizations.

"At the beginning of it going open source it was big news but people have since stopped investing in it.

"It is not the best Trojan any more but because it's open source you can try it as your first Trojan and it is still used in some places," he said.

Limbo's popularity continues to slump, despite numerous features in the basic version that allow criminals to add extra fields for PIN numbers into fake banking websites and capture the keystrokes and the files saved on an infected computer.

And while open source may not have boosted Limbo's fortunes, it also brings with it separate problems for the fraudsters: open sourcing code also places it in the hands of security professionals.

"If you make (the Trojan) open source, that means that a security company can find the source code and it is easier to make a general heuristic detection for it, as they know what could be in it," Symantec's W?est said.

The majority of Trojan infections occur via drive-by downloads, where the malware is automatically downloaded after browsing an infected website, or messages sent via social networking sites that encourage people to download a Trojan masquerading as a legitimate security update, according to RSA's Rivner.

These infection methods are proving far more effective at getting Trojans onto machines than earlier techniques such as sending an e-mail with a link to an infected file or attachment.

RSA analysts say these new methods have fuelled an exponential growth in the rate of infection, with the security firm detecting 613 Trojan infections in August 2008 compared to 19,102 in August 2009.

Nick Heath of Silicon.com reports from London.

Internet firms help Canadian courts ID authors of controversial email


Think you can be anonymous online? Most people simply have no idea how easy it is for law enforcement officials -- and other litigants, like someone suing you -- to gain access to personal email, Google searches, and other online information users think is "theirs."

The latest ominous evidence of this fact comes from our friends to the north. A Canadian court has ordered Google (GOOG) to turn over the identities of anonymous Gmail users who had accused York University faculty members of fraud and dishonesty. Like similar cases in the U.S., the York incident shows just how easy it is for courts to allow authorities to gain access to "our" personal information.

"People need to know that very little information that they give or make available to third parties [like Google] is unavailable to the government or private litigants," says Eric Goldman, director of the High Tech Law Institute at Santa Clara University School of Law. "I think most people are surprised at how relatively easy it is for the government and private litigants to obtain 'their' information."

When York announced its hiring of Martin Singer in January as the first dean of its new Faculty of Liberal Arts and Professional Studies, the university called the professor a "renowned scholar of Chinese history" and quoted university president Mamdouh Shoukri as saying: "York University is fortunate to have attracted such a strong scholar and administrator."

Shortly thereafter, someone circulated an email from an account belonging to a group called "York Faculty Concerned About the Future of York University" among members of the community accusing Singer of "lying about scholarly credentials" and accusing Shoukri of perpetrating "an outrageous fraud." The anonymous group called for the president's resignation and a new search for a dean, according to Canada's National Post.

University authorities were not amused, and won a court order in May compelling Google to turn over the IP addresses linked to the Gmail account. Google, in turn, identified Bell Canada and Rogers Communications as the internet service providers from which the email originated.

Last month, neither of the ISPs opposed a court order requiring them to turn over the contact information of the persons who used the Gmail account. This past week, Justice George R. Strathy of Ontario Superior Court called the orders a reasonable balance between protecting freedom of speech and protection from libel, according to the paper.

David Noble, whom the Post refers to as "an outspoken professor at York," was outed as one person linked to the account. On Friday, he told the paper that York's legal action was "a fishing expedition" and accused the university of "trying to create a chill among faculty."

Noble maintained that the allegations raised about Singer were legitimate. "They are spending enormous sums, for what?" the Post quotes him as saying. "I think they are just desperate to find out who is involved," adding that his colleagues wanted to remain anonymous because they were "afraid of reprisals."

In response, Will McDowell, York's lawyer, defended the action, saying, "Academics enjoy quite extensive latitude in what they say and what they write and what they research at Canadian universities, but I would say this about any of us: The right of free speech is not unlimited."

"Like all law-abiding companies, we comply with local laws and valid legal process, such as court orders and subpoenas," a Google spokesperson said in a statement to DailyFinance. "At the same time, we have a legal team whose job is to scrutinize these requests and make sure they meet not only the letter but the spirit of the law."

York now has the identities of half a dozen people who allegedly had access to the Gmail account.

American laws governing similar situations differ somewhat from Canadian statutes, but the York case is reminiscent of the recent "Skank blogger" ruling, in which a Manhattan Supreme Court judge ordered Google to turn over the e-mail and IP address of an anonymous blogger who called model Liskula Cohen "the skankiest in NYC."

Writing about the case, my colleague Jeff Bercovici noted that the ruling could force anonymous internet cranks to go to greater lengths to shield their identity. "In trying to make people accountable for the vicious things they write online, that judge is only going to force them to cloak their identities ever more effectively," Bercovici wrote.

Google search queries -- obtained by court-ordered warrants -- have been used in numerous criminal cases, including the recent case of a Florida man who was convicted of murder based on evidence that included his own Google research, which included searching on terms like "trauma, cases, gunshot, right chest."

No matter how many precautions we take to remain private or cloak our identity, the authorities and other potential litigants usually have little difficulty obtaining this content. And they do it not by nefarious mean like hacking, but through our very own court system.

Internet users everywhere would do well to take heed. Your emails -- and maybe even your Google searches -- could be one subpoena away from the prying eyes of federal authorities, not to mention private litigants.

by Sam Gustin
Sep 12th 2009

Learn how to protect yourself from identity theft


Did you know that there are numerous steps you can take to protect yourself against identity theft besides just checking your credit report? Here, we talk with an expert and offer tips on what regular people can do to ensure their identities stick with them instead of other shady characters.

Identity theft is big business, and it keeps getting bigger as more and more information about us floats around in an ever data-obsessed society. From every swipe of your credit card to every time you go to the doctor, doors are opened for thieves to snatch information and use it to their advantage. And, as the name implies, it's not just about fraudulent charges showing up on your bank account, either. At worst, you could find that someone has been using your social security number for years to work various jobs or, as in one Chicago student's recent experience, you could even get thrown in jail because a thief using your identity has a warrant out for his arrest. "Oops" doesn't even begin to describe it.

Most Americans know the basic principle of checking their credit reports once a year. Every US citizen can now get a free report from the three major credit bureaus every year to ensure everything is right on their accounts. However, that's the extent of most of our knowledge, and only addresses one facet of identity theft (financial institutions). It turns out there are a number of other preventative measures that can be taken, especially if you're the paranoid type.
Protect against spyware and malware. Seriously.

Electronic theft may not be the most common, but it's the fastest growing, as noted by TrustedID CEO Scott Mitic. (The most common form of ID theft is still via people in your life who have physical access to your stuff—family, friends, your cleaning lady, your waiter, etc.) Still, theft via computer is one of the fastest growing areas and protecting against it is extremely simple. "Go online and find one of the many different companies that provide anti-spyware protection, which everyone should have," Mitic told Ars.

Indeed, many companies even offer free software to do so, such as McAfee's free SiteAdvisor plugin that aims to prevent users from being phished or forced to download malicious software. And, as always, practice safe file and link opening practices from your e-mail: only open files that you are expecting from people you trust, and if you're ever suspicious of a link from somewhere like PayPal or your bank, it's always safest to go to your browser and type in the URL yourself to log in instead of clicking from an e-mail.
Fraud alerts are your friend

People are often advised to place fraud alerts on their files with the credit bureaus after someone has stolen their information, but how often are you told to do it before? As it turns out, paranoid types do it all the time, and it's not such a bad idea either. There are two steps to this: putting a fraud alert on your credit reports, and putting a freeze on your credit. "These two mechanisms work in similar ways—someone cannot simply get your name and address and apply for credit in your name, because lenders must check with consumer first when these freezes are in place," Mitic said. "These are highly effective ways of reducing most of the most dangerous forms of identity theft."

Of course, if you're the type who regularly applies for those department store credit lines to get a discount on your purchase, or you're about to apply for a time-sensitive loan (such as a mortgage on a house), this may be something you'll want to hold off on. However, if you don't usually open up many new credit accounts or if you have had a close call with ID theft, it may be a good idea.
Check for your kids

Children's identities are currently going for a premium, it turns out. And, because most people don't think to check up on their kids' credit reports, the use of their IDs can go on for years (or sometimes even decades) before it ever comes to light. "Consumers and parents should be checking their children's info by going to the three credit bureaus once per year and inquiring as to whether or not there is a credit report," Mitic said. In this case, no news is good news, but if your kid is only 5 and has a report, there could be a problem.

Another way to check on your kid's identity is to request a yearly summary of his or her earnings from the Social Security Administration. Obviously, if your child is too young to work, there shouldn't be any earnings. But, as Mitic pointed out, undocumented workers might get a job with a stolen social security number and, if it's a child's, might be able to use it for many years. If that happens, though, the earnings will be reported on the yearly summary, so it's a good way to make sure things are clean for your child (and you, as well).
Think about your medical identity, too

"What many people don't realize is that their medical insurance is valuable to those who don't have insurance," Mitic said. Your name, address, and insurance information can easily be used by fraudsters to get medical treatments in your name. This is the most serious if someone has used your insurance already for treatment in a life or death situation. "If you end up in the hospital with a split appendix and doctors look at your medical charts, they might think it's not an appendix problem because you've already had yours removed."

Okay, so that's an extreme case, but it could still happen. "Half a million to a million people per year are paying for medical procedures that are not theirs," Mitic warned. (Ouch.) A good idea in this case would be to contact your insurance company once per year to ask for an annual disclosure of benefits processed in your name. This document will show every claim processed for you and you can examine it to make sure every item is legit.
Oh social networking, you minx

We already know that social networking sites can pose a threat to people's machines and networks thanks to the proliferation of malware, but it's also a good medium to steal people's identities and scam "friends." According to Mitic, there have been repeated incidents of people getting messages from friends describing extreme circumstances like a car accident and asking for money.

"Employ a reasonable level of suspicion when someone who is not standing immediately in front of you is asking you for anything," he said. "That's especially true in this era of social networking. The message that seems to be coming from your friend may not be coming from your friend."

Similarly, ensure that your own accounts don't get hacked or stolen by employing best practices when determining your passwords, and of course, don't share your password information (or your secret questions!) with anyone.
Conclusion

The rabbit hole is pretty deep when it comes to little things you could do to protect yourself from identity theft, but these basic steps will help mitigate the large majority of situations. If there's one thing that could be improved upon, it's the fact that each individual entity must be dealt with if you end up finding something fishy—if you find something on your credit report, you must deal directly with the credit agencies and financial institutions. If you find something on your insurance, you must deal with your insurance company and hospitals involved. If it's a case of social security fraud, you have to deal with the Social Security Administration to sort it out. Aside from this inconvenience, though, it's not hard to keep regular checks going on various parts of your life to make sure someone else isn't pretending to be you.

Thursday 27 August 2009

Court’s Steroid Ruling Pumps Up Computer Privacy


A divided 11-judge federal appeals court panel has dramatically narrowed the government’s search-and-seizure powers in the digital age, ruling Wednesday that federal prosecutors went too far when seizing 104 professional baseball players’ drug results when they had a warrant for just 10.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals’ 9-2 decision offered Miranda-style guidelines to prosecutors and judges on how to protect Fourth Amendment privacy rights while conducting computer searches.

Ideally, when searching a computer’s hard drive, the government should cull the specific data described in the search warrant, rather than copy the entire drive, the San Francisco-based appeals court ruled. When that’s not possible, the feds must use an independent third party under the court’s supervision, whose job it would be to comb through the files for the specific information, and provide it, and nothing else, to the government.

Judges, the appellate court added, should be wary of prosecutors and perhaps “deny the warrant altogether” if the government does not consent to such a plan in data-search cases.

The government said it was weighing its options, including whether to appeal to the Supreme Court.

The ruling came in a case that dates to 2004, when federal prosecutors probing a Northern California steroid ring obtained warrants to seize the results of urine samples of 10 pro baseball players at a Long Beach, California drug-testing facility. The players had been tested as part of a voluntary drug-deterrence program implemented by Major League Baseball.

Federal agents serving the search warrant on the Comprehensive Drug Testing lab wound up making a copy of a directory containing a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet with results of every player that was tested in the program. Then, back in the office, they scrolled freely through the spreadsheet, ultimately noting the names of all 104 players who tested positive.

The government argued that the information was lawfully found in “plain site,” just like marijuana being discovered on a dining room table during a court-authorized weapons search of a home. But the court noted that the agents actively scrolled to the right side of the spreadsheet to peek at all the players test results, when they could easily have selected, copied and pasted only the rows listing the players named in the search warrant.

Chief Judge Alex Kozinski, writing for the 9-2 majority, (.pdf) said the government “must maintain the privacy of materials that are intermingled with seizable materials, and … avoid turning a limited search for particular information into a general search of office file systems and computer databases.”

George Washington University law professor and former federal cybercrime prosecutor Orin Kerr called the decision “truly astonishing.”

“The majority opinion … announces a laundry list of brand-new rules, introduced with no citations to any authority, that henceforth the government must follow when executing warrants for digital information,” Kerr wrote in a post to the Volokh Conspiracy blog. “I can’t recall having read anything quite like it, although it does bring to mind Miranda v. Arizona.”

Four players whose names were seized, and who were not linked to the BALCO investigation, have been leaked to The New York Times. They are Alex Rodriguez, David Ortiz, Manny Ramirez and Sammie Sosa.

That privacy breach was not lost on Kozinski, who said those players suffered “harm as a result of the government’s seizure.”

In dissent, Judges Consuelo Callahan and Sandra Ikuta wrote that the majority was sidestepping its own precedent in which the circuit court had denied the suppression of child pornography evidence found on a computer during a search for the production of false identification cards pursuant to a valid warrant.

“There is no rule … that evidence turned up while officers are rightfully searching a location under properly issued warrant must be excluded simply because the evidence found may support charges for a related crime,” the dissenting judges wrote.

By David Kravets

Wednesday 26 August 2009

New Rootkit Found


The tale of discovering a library preloading rootkit that made itself nearly invisible and recorded incoming and outgoing connections out of the box.

Read the full story at : http://www.void.gr/kargig/blog/2009/08/21/theres-a-rootkit-in-the-closet/

Thursday 20 August 2009

Spotlight finds deleted e-mails on iPhone



Spotlight finds deleted e-mails on iPhone, but don't panic (Updated)

Spotlight on the iPhone can find your deleted e-mails—oh no! The problem has been blown way out of proportion, though, and Apple has reportedly "fixed" the issue for iPhone OS 3.1.


The Mac blog-o-verse has been abuzz recently with the revelation that a Spotlight search can turn up deleted e-mails on an iPhone. While described as a bug or potential security issue, the truth is less scary than that. Additionally, it seems that Apple has already added a fix to the iPhone OS 3.1 update that is currently in beta.

Cult of Mac reader Matt Janssen revealed the bug yesterday morning after he discovered that an e-mail he remembered deleting showed up in a Spotlight search. "Obviously this is could be a major security issue if you think you deleted something from your iPod but it's not really deleted," Janssen told Cult of Mac. "You can still search through messages that are deleted. And this isn't messages that are just recent. I found some messages that are over three or four months old."

But, as TUAW points out, the problem is that when you hit "delete" on an e-mail, most (if not all) e-mail clients put the message in a special Trash folder. This is just like using the Trash on your desktop—it's a temporary staging area where you can retrieve messages if you deleted them accidentally. And, just like Spotlight on the Mac, Spotlight on the iPhone OS can find e-mails that are in the Trash. (By default it normally will ignore messages trashed in Mail, but you can search the Trash easily in Mail itself.)

Depending on the settings on your server, these messages may be "emptied" from the Trash in seven days, 30 days, or maybe even never. On the iPhone itself, the setting to control when messages are automatically emptied from the Trash is buried several levels deep in the Settings app (Mail, Contacts, Calendars > account > Account Info > Advanced > Remove Deleted Message...). I like TUAW's suggestion that Apple add an "Empty Trash" button in the iPhone version of Mail, but it turns out that is easy to do in iPhone OS 3.0. As Ars reader lloeki points out, just go to an account's Trash folder, press "Edit," then press "Delete All."

There is good news for those who would just assume messages in the Trash wouldn't turn up in a search, though. A tipster for Gizmodo said Apple is aware of the issue, and it appears that the current iPhone OS 3.1 beta doesn't show trashed e-mails in search results. So, it seems the crisis will be averted soon.

Still, even though the messages won't show up in a Spotlight search, that will only thwart casual peepers looking through your mail for potential dirt or other sensitive information. Those e-mails will still be in the Trash folder in your iPhone or iPod touch's flash memory, and will get backed up whenever you sync your device to iTunes. A more skilled hacker could find them if they wanted, so it's still best to manually empty e-mails that you don't want anyone else reading out of the Trash. To be extra safe, you could then zero out the free space on your device.

UPDATE: It appears that even after deleting messages form the Trash, they can still show up in Spotlight searches if the account in question is a POP account. According to TUAW's Mike Jones, whether or not the message can be accessed once it shows up in the Spotlight search is hit or miss as well. Since we use our iPhones with IMAP accounts, which are unaffected by the bug, we didn't notice the problem. Still, a fix from Apple is definitely on its way when iPhone OS 3.1 becomes available.

Monday 20 July 2009

The Anatomy Of The Twitter Attack


The Twitter document leak fiasco started with a simple story that personal accounts of Twitter employees were hacked. Twitter CEO Evan Williams commented on that story, saying that Twitter itself was mostly unaffected. No personal accounts were compromised, and “most of the sensitive information was personal rather than company-related,” he said. The individual behind the attacks, known as Hacker Croll, wasn’t happy with that response. Lots of Twitter corporate information was compromised, and he wanted the world to know about it. So he sent us all of the documents that he obtained, some 310 of them, and the story developed from there.

This post isn’t about the confidential information taken from Twitter. It’s about exactly how Hacker Croll was able to get such deep access to Twitter in the first place.

It’s clear that Twitter was completely unaware of how deeply they were affected as a company - when Williams said that most of the information wasn’t company related he believed it. It wasn’t until later that he realized just how much and what kind of information was taken. It included things like financial projections and executive meeting notes that contained highly confidential information.

We’ve already said a lot about all of this and the related “server password = password” story that was discovered by another individual last week. But we’ve got two more stories to tell. The first, this post, is exactly how the hacks took place, based on information gathered from hours of conversations with Hacker Croll. The second is what was happening behind he scenes with Twitter as the story unfolded. We’ll post that later this week.

When the story first broke the true scope of what had taken place and how it occurred was not understood. Various bloggers speculated about the cause of the attack - with some placing the blame on Google while others blaming the rising trend of hosting documents in the cloud.

We immediately informed Twitter of the information we had in our possession (and forwarded it to them), and at the same time reached out to the attacker. With some convincing, the attacker responsible for the intrusion at Twitter began a dialog with us. I spent days communicating with the attacker in an effort to gain insight into how the attack took place, what the true scope of it was and how we could learn from it.

We’ve waited to post exactly what happened until Twitter had time to close all of these security holes.

Some Background

In the security industry there is a generally accepted philosophy that no system or network is completely secure - a competent attacker with enough time, patience and resources will eventually find a way into a target. Some of the more famous information security breaches have relied on nothing more than elementary issues exploited by an attacker with enough time and patience at hand to see their goal through. A classic example is the case of Gary McKinnon, a self-confessed “bumbling computer nerd” who while usually drunk and high on cannabis would spend days randomly dialing or attempting to login to government servers using default passwords. His efforts led to the compromise of almost 100 servers within a number of government departments. After McKinnon spent a number of years trawling through servers looking for evidence of alien life (long story), somebody within the government finally wised up to his activities which lead to not only the arrest and attempted extradition of McKinnon from the United Kingdom, but a massive re-evaluation of the security methods employed to protect government information.

A more recent example is the case of Kendall Myers, who after being recruited to work for the Cuban government by an anonymous stranger they met while on holiday in that country, set out to obtain a high ranking position within the State Department specifically to obtain access to US government secrets. Kendall dedicated his entire life to obtaining state secrets, and up until he was recently caught by the FBI had successfully passed on secret information and internal documents to the Cuban government for 30 years. He relied only on his memory, his education credentials and sheer dedication.

The Twitter Attack: How The Ecosystem Failed

Like other successful attacks, Hacker Croll used the same combination of patience, sheer determination and somewhat elementary methods to gain access to a frightening number of accounts and services related to Twitter and Twitter employees. The list of services affected either directly, or indirectly, are some of the most popular web applications and services in use today - Gmail, Google Apps, GoDaddy, MobileMe, AT&T, Amazon, Hotmail, Paypal and iTunes . Taken individually, most of these services have reasonable security precautions against intrusion. But there are huge weaknesses when they are looked at together, as an ecosystem. Like dominoes, once one fell (Gmail was the first to go), the others all tumbled as well. The end result was chaos, and raises important questions about how private corporate and personal information is managed and secured in a time when the trend is towards more data, applications and entire user identities being hosted on the web and ‘in the cloud’.

“Hacker Croll” is a Frenchman in his early 20’s. He currently resides in a European country and first discovered his interest in web security over two years ago. Currently in between jobs, he has made use of the additional time he now has, along with his acquired skillset, to break into both corporate and personal accounts across the web. His knowledge of web security has been attained through a combination of materials available to the public and from within a tight-knit group of fellow crackers who exchange details of new, and sometimes unknown, techniques and vulnerabilities. Despite the significance and impact a successful attack has, the cracker claims that his primary motivation is a combination of curiosity, exploration and an interest in web security. There is almost a voyeuristic tendency amongst these individuals, as they revel in the thought of gaining privileged access to information about the inner lives of individuals and corporations. The “high” of access and gaining unauthorized knowledge must be big enough to carry a cracker’s motivation through the long hours, days and months of effort it may take to hit the next pot of gold.

For Hacker Croll, his first port of call in setting out to gain access to a target network is to make use of public search engines and public information to build a profile of a company or individual. In the case of the Twitter attacks, this public information allowed him to create a rich catalog of data that included a list of employee names, their associated email addresses and their roles within the company. Information like birth dates, names of pets and other seemingly innocent pieces of data were also found and logged. This dragnet across the millions of pages on the web picked up both work and personal information on each of the names that were discovered. Public information on the web has no concept of, or ability to, distinguish between the work and personal details of a person’s identity - so from the perspective of a cracker on a research mission, having both the business and personal aspects of a target’s digital life intertwined only serves to provide additional potential entry points.

With his target mapped out, Hacker Croll knew that he likely only needed a single entry point in any one of the business or personal accounts in his list in order to penetrate the network and then spread into other accounts and other parts of the business. This is because the web was designed at a time where there was implicit trust between its participants - requiring no central or formal identification mechanism. In order to keep private data private, modern web applications have built out their own systems and policies that require a user to register and then manage their identities separately with each app. The identifier that most applications use is an email address, and it is this common factor that creates a de facto trust relationship between a user’s applications. The second factor is a password: a random string that only the user knows, is unique to each application, and in theory should take even a computer months or years to figure out if it started guessing. These two elements would work well enough for most cases, were it not for what is often the single weakest factor: human habit.

Look at the front page of almost any web application and you will see hints at just how hopeless and helpless we are in managing our digital lives: “forgot my password”, “forgot my username”, “keep me logged in”, “do not keep me logged in”, “forgot my name”, “who am i?”. Features that were designed and built as a compromise since we are often unable to remember and recall a single four-digit PIN number, let alone a unique password for every application we ever sign up for. Each new service that a user signs up for creates a management overhead that collapses quickly into a common dirty habit of using simple passwords, everywhere. At that point, the security of that user’s entire online identity is only as strong as the weakest application they use - which often is to say, very weak.

Now going back to Hacker Croll and his list of Twitter employees and other information. Twitter just happens to be one of a number of a new breed of companies where almost the entire business exists online. Each of these employees, as part of their work, share data with other employees - be it through a feature of a particular application or simply through email. As these users become interwoven, it adds a whole new attack vector whereby the weak point in the chain is no longer just the weakest application - it is the weakest application used by the weakest user. For an attacker such as Hacker Croll looking to exploit the combination of bad user habit, poorly implemented features and users mixing their personal and business data - his chances of success just got exponentially greater. Companies that are heavily web based rely largely on users being able to manage themselves - the odds are not only stacked against Twitter, they are stacked against most companies adopting this model.

Unfortunately for Twitter, Hacker Croll found such a weak point. An employee who has online habits that are probably no different than those of 98% of other web users. It began with the personal Gmail account of this employee. As with most other web applications, the personal edition of Gmail has a password recovery feature that presents a user with a number of challenges to prove their identity so that their password can be reset. It likely wasn’t the first account from a Twitter employee that Hacker Croll had attempted to access - but in the case of this particular account he discovered a kink in the armor that gave him the big first step. On requesting to recover the password, Gmail informed him that an email had been sent to the user’s secondary email account. In an effort to balance usability with security, Gmail offered a hint as to which account the email to reset the password was being sent to, in case the user required a gentle reminder. In this case the obfuscated pointer to the location of the secondary email account was ******@h******.com. The natural best guess was that the secondary email account was hosted at hotmail.com.

At Hotmail, Hacker Croll again attempted the password recovery procedure - making an educated guess of what the username would be based on what he already knew. This is the point where the chain of trust broke down, as the attacker discovered that the account specified as a secondary for Gmail, and hosted at Hotmail was no longer active. This is due to a policy at Hotmail where old and dormant accounts are removed and recycled. He registered the account, re-requested the password recovery feature at Gmail and within a few moments had access to the personal Gmail account of a Twitter employee. The first domino had fallen.

Well designed web applications will never just give a user their password if they forget it, they will force the user to pick a new one. Hacker Croll had access to the account, but with a password he had specified. To not alert the account owner that their account had been compromised, he had to somehow find out what the old Gmail password was and to set it back. He now had a bevy of information at his fingertips, a complete mailbox and control of an email account. It wasn’t long before he found an email that would have looked something like this:

To: Lazy User
From: Super Duper Web Service
Subject: Thank you for signing up to Super Duper Web Service

Dear Lazy User,

Thank you for signing up to Super Duper Web Service. For the benefit of our support department (and anybody else who is reading this), please find your account information below:

username: LazyUser
password: funsticks

To reset your password please follow the link to.. ahh forget it, nobody does this anyway.

Regards,

Super Duper Web Service

Bad human habit #1: Using the same passwords everywhere. We are all guilty of it. Search your own inbox for a password of your own. Hacker Croll reset the password of the Gmail account to the password he found associated with some random web service the user had subscribed to and that sent a confirmation with the password in clear text (and he found the same password more than once). He then waited, to check that the user was still able to access their account. Not too long later there was obvious activity in the email account from the account owner - incoming email read, replies sent and new messages drafted. The account owner never would have noticed that a complete stranger was lurking in the background. The second domino falls.

From here it was easy.

Hacker Croll now sifts through the new set of information he has access to - using the emails from this user’s personal Gmail account to further fill in his information map of his target. He extends his access out to all the other services he finds that this user has signed up for. In some instances, the password is again the same - that led Croll into this user’s work email account, hosted on Google Apps for Domains. It turns out that this employee (and in fact most/all Twitter employees and everyone else) used the same password for their Google Apps email (the Twitter email account) as he did with his personal Gmail account. With other sites, where the original password may not work - he takes advantage of a feature many sites have implemented to help users recover passwords: the notorious “secret question”.

Fork the story here for a moment because there is a real issue here with the “secret question” (from here on abbreviated more appropriately as just “secret ?”). For some strange reason, some sites refer to the “secret ?” as an additional layer of security - when it is often the complete opposite. In the story of Hacker Croll and Twitter, the internal documents that we now all know about were only a few steps away from the first account he gained access to. In addition to that, this attacker, and certainly others just like him, have been able to demonstrate that some of the biggest and most popular applications on the web contain fundamental weaknesses that alone might seem harmless, but in combination with other factors can cause an attacker to completely tear through the accounts of users, even those who maintain good password policy.

This is not the first time that the issue of “secret ?” being used in password recovery systems has been raised. Last September, US Republican Vice Presidential candidate and former governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin, had screenshots of her personal Yahoo mail account published to Wikileaks. A hacker or group known only as ‘Anonymous’ claimed credit for the hack, which was carried out by the attacker making an educated guess in response to the security question used to recover passwords. In early 2005, celebrity Paris Hilton suffered a similar incident when her T-Mobile sidekick account was broken into, and the details of her call log, messages (some with private pictures of Hilton) and contact list were leaked to the media. The culprit, again, was “secret ?”.

Giving the user an option to guess the name of a pet in lieu of actually knowing a password is just dramatically shortening the odds for the attacker. The service is essentially telling the attacker: “we understand that guessing passwords is hard, so let us help you narrow it down from potentially millions of combinations to around a dozen, or even better, if you know how to Google, just one”. The problem is not the concept of having an additional authorization token, such as mothers maiden name, that can be used to authenticate in addition to a password, the problem arises when it is relied on alone, when the answer is stored in the clear in account settings, and when users end up using the same question and answer combination on all of their accounts.

From this point, with a single personal account as a starting point, the intrusion spread like a virus - infecting a number of accounts on a number of different services both inside and outside of Twitter. Once Hacker Croll had access to the employee’s Twitter email account hosted by Google, he was able to download attachments to email that included lots of sensitive information, including more passwords and usernames. He quickly took over the accounts of at least three senior execs, including Evan Williams and Biz Stone. Perusing their email attachments led to lots more sensitive data being downloaded.

He then spidered out and accessed AT&T for phone logs, Amazon for purchasing history, MobileMe for more personal emails and iTunes for full credit card information (iTunes has a security hole that shows credit card information in clear text - we’ve notified Apple but have not heard back, so we won’t publish the still-open exploit now).

Basically, when he was done, Hacker Croll had enough personal and work information on key Twitter executives to make their lives a living hell.

Just to summarize the attack:

1. HC accessed Gmail for a Twitter employee by using the password recovery feature that sends a reset link to a secondary email. In this case the secondary email was an expired Hotmail account, he simply registered it, clicked the link and reset the password. Gmail was then owned.
2. HC then read emails to guess what the original Gmail password was successfully and reset the password so the Twitter employee would not notice the account had changed.
3. HC then used the same password to access the employee’s Twitter email on Google Apps for your domain, getting access to a gold mine of sensitive company information from emails and, particularly, email attachments.
4. HC then used this information along with additional password guesses and resets to take control of other Twitter employee personal and work emails.
5. HC then used the same username/password combinations and password reset features to access AT&T, MobileMe, Amazon and iTunes, among other services. A security hole in iTunes gave HC access to full credit card information in clear text. HC now also had control of Twitter’s domain names at GoDaddy.
6. Even at this point, Twitter had absolutely no idea they had been compromised.

What could have happened next is that Hacker Croll could have used or sold this information for profit. He didn’t do that, and says he never intended to. All he wanted to do, he says, was to highlight the weaknesses in Twitter’s data security policies and get them and other startups to consider more robust security measures.

He also says he’s sorry for causing Twitter so much trouble. We asked Hacker Croll if he had any message he wants to deliver to Twitter, and he sent me the following:

Je tiens à présenter toutes mes excuses au personnel de Twitter. Je trouve que cette société a beaucoup d’avenir devant elle.

J’ai fait cela dans un but non lucratif. La sécurité est un domaine qui me passionne depuis de longues années et je voudrais en faire mon métier. Dans mon quotidien, il m’arrive d’aider des gens à se prémunir contre les dangers de l’internet. Je leur apprend les règles de base.. Par exemple : Faire attention où on clique, les fichiers que l’on télécharge et ce que l’on tape au clavier. S’assurer que l’ordinateur est équipé d’une protection efficace contre les virus, attaques extérieures, spam, phishing… Mettre à jour le système d’exploitation, les logiciels fréquemment utilisés… Penser à utiliser des mots de passe sans aucune similitude entre eux. Penser à les changer régulièrement… Ne jamais stocker d’informations confidentielles sur l’ordinateur…

J’espère que mes interventions répétées auront permis de montrer à quel point il peut être facile à une personne mal intentionnée d’accéder à des informations sensibles sans trop de connaissances.

Hacker Croll.

This roughly translates to:

I would like to offer my personal apology to Twitter. I think this company has a great future ahead of it.

I did not do this to profit from the information. Security is an area that fascinated me for many years and I want to do my job. In my everyday life, I help people to guard against the dangers of the Internet. I learned the basic rules .. For example: Be careful where you click the files that you download and what you type on the keyboard. Ensure that the computer is equipped with effective protection against viruses, external attacks, spam, phishing … Upgrading the operating system, software commonly used … Remember to use passwords without any similarity between them. Remember to change them regularly … Never store confidential information on the computer …

I hope that my intervention will be repeated to show how easy it can be for a malicious person to gain access to sensitive information without too much knowledge.

Croll hacker.

What’s the takeaway from all this? Cloud services are convenient and cheap, and can help a company grow more quickly. But security infrastructure is still nascent. And while any single service can be fairly secure, the important thing is that the ecosystem most certainly is not. Combine the fact that so much personal information about individuals is so easily findable on the web with the reality that most people have merged their work and personal identities and you’ve got the seed of a problem. A single Gmail account falls, and soon the security integrity of an entire startup crumbles. So for a start, reset those passwords and don’t use the same passwords for different services. Don’t use password recovery questions that can easily be answered with a simple web search (an easy solution is to answer those questions falsely). And just in general be paranoid about data security. You may be happy you were.

by Nik Cubrilovic on July 19, 2009