Archive for the ‘Web Security’ Category

Validating validation

Wednesday, August 10th, 2011

by Daniel Peck, research scientist

Coders get a bum rap about code quality with regard to security.  Some of the berating is deserved, like when they try to roll their own crypto algorithms (these people should get the 21st century equivalent of stocks in the public square and rotten fruit pelted at them), but other times it is much more subtle and things that an “end user” coder shouldn’t have to worry about at all.

Success in increasing code quality comes from making it very difficult for a developer to do the wrong thing, making sure that the path of least resistance is also the most correct path.  Unfortunately as some programming languages have come to be used as much by designers and artists than the more mathematically included coder of old, a mindset of working around the coder and giving them results that they expect rather than what they’ve asked for has become common.  This leads the developers to think they’re doing the right thing, while actually shooting themselves in the foot.  A friend of mine (hat tip to @suburbsec) pointed me to a very good example of this the other day on one of spotthevuln.com’s latest entries.

if ( (int) $_REQUEST['w'] && (int) $_REQUEST['h'] ) {
 $choice = array(
 'type'   => "Custom size ({$_REQUEST['w']}x{$_REQUEST['h']})",
 'width'  => $_REQUEST['w'],
 'height' => $_REQUEST['h']
 );
}
...
<iframe src="../../../wp-login.php"
        width="<?php echo $choice['width']; ?>"
        height="<?php echo $choice['height']; ?>"
>your browser does not support iframes.</iframe>

Anyone with a bit of programming knowledge can see that the developer is writing this bit of code with security in mind, testing to make sure that the parameters w and h are indeed string representations of integers before displaying them.  Otherwise they wouldn’t cast to an int, right?  Wrong.  Perfectly valid assumption, but it doesn’t hold true in the land of PHP (a place where black is white, cats and dogs live together, and notions of computational science have no place).

$_REQUEST['w'] and $_REQUEST['h'] still retain the same values as before the int cast, as they should, but if they contain values like “11<bad juju here>” the cast would still return an integer value, 11, and the script is now a funhouse for, admittedly lame, reflected xss.  Another interesting side effect of this function is that either of the variables is “0″ – which last time I checked is still an integer. The test fails as a side effect of the test being done in a boolean context and not a type context.  In this case, the result is a trivial xss bug but similar snippets can be pulled from many codebases that lead to all sorts of problems with the developers honestly believing they’ve performed all the reasonable steps to ensure input validation.  For this particular problem, a much better approach would be to use the is_numeric function for testing or to assign the value of the cast to the variable you’ll be using later, but you’d have a tough time figuring that out by searching for “php string to int”.

It needs to be difficult for the coder to deliver a working product while holding onto false assumptions, and it is up to the languages, frameworks, and development tools to make that more of a reality. Less “more than one way to do it” and more “this is the right way to do it” would go a long way to towards making web security less of a trainwreck than it currently is.

Share

Google+ Gets a “+1″ for Browser Security

Thursday, July 21st, 2011

by Ray Kelly, Manager of Client Side Technologies

 

+1Launching a new Web app today comes with a few certainties, and one of them is, “I will be a target for hackers” for sure.  So when an app as large and as high profile as Google+ launches, it will surely be one of the top targets for malicious activity.  This happened to Facebook the more popular it grew and it still is a favorite platform for malicious activity.  I did some analysis of the HTTP traffic between Google+ and the browser and found that Google is off to a good start in regards to browser security. Below are several take-aways:

Only SSL!
All Google+ traffic is sent over SSL and non SSL is not even an option.  This protects users’ traffic from getting sniffed and their sessions from being hijacked.  It is good to know that Google understands that sensitive information is being shared and SSL is really the only option for transmitting data.

Secure Headers
Here is what a typical response looks like from Google+:

HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Length: 184942
Set-Cookie: ULS=somehash; Path=/; Secure; HttpOnly
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 14:29:05 GMT
Expires: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 14:29:05 GMT
Cache-Control: private, max-age=0
X-Content-Type-Options: nosniff
X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN
X-XSS-Protection: 1; mode=block
Server: GSE

There are a few headers in this response that are specific to browser security, for example:

Set-Cookie Secure – This tells the browser to only send cookies over a secure (SSL) connection.  So if the site happens to hit a page that is not SSL, then the cookie will not be sent.

Set-Cookie HttpOnly – This prevents the cookie from being accessed by client side script.

Both of these cookie attributes help to prevent  session hijacking by only sending cookies when appropriate.

X-Content-Type-Options: nosniff – This prevents “mime” based attacks. The header instructs the browser not to override the response content type.  For example, some browsers try to be smart by deciding for themselves if the content is really is text/html or an image.  So with the nosniff option, if the server says the content is text/html, then the browser needs to render it as text/html.

X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN – This tells the browser to only render frame pages from the URL hosting the main page.  This prevents Clickjacking attacks against the user.  Clickjacking is a browser-based attack that tricks the user into clicking on one thing but then performs a different action, such as following a user on Twitter.

X-XSS-Protection: 1; mode=block – This allows the browser to detect a cross site reflection attack.  If the browser sees a potential reflection attack, it will prevent the page from rendering in the browser.  Instead, you will see something similar to this depending on the browser:

 

What about Facebook?
While these preventions are by no means ground breaking or new, the fact that Google is thinking about and using them is a good step.  In contrast, let’s look at a typical Facebook response:

HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Cache-Control: public, max-age=604800
Content-Type: application/x-javascript; charset=utf-8
Expires: Fri, 22 Jul 2011 14:46:37 GMT
P3P: CP="Facebook does not have a P3P policy. Learn why here: http://fb.me/p3p"
X-Frame-Options: DENY
Set-Cookie: _e_syaN_0=deleted; expires=Thu, 01-Jan-1970 00:00:01 GMT; path=/; domain=.facebook.com; httponly
X-FB-Server: 10.52.238.45
X-Cnection: close
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 14:46:37 GMT
Content-Length: 24032

It is surprising that Facebook has not taken the same simple precautions that Google+ has taken. Here, we can see the differences:

Secure Cookie Nosniff XSS Protection X-Frame HttpOnly Cookie SSL
Google+ Yes Yes Yes Sameorigin Yes Yes
Facebook No No No Deny Yes Optional and not default

In fact, just yesterday Microsoft’s Vulnerability Research team released advisory MSVR11-007: “Clickjacking Vulnerability in Facebook.com Could Allow Account Compromise”.   According to the advisory, Facebook has resolved the issue.  I did another check of the headers and still did not see any change to the response.  It is possible that Facebook closed the hole on the server side with input validation in order to prevent the malicious data from entering their database, but they still did not implement the simple browser precautions that Google+ has.   Here is the link to the official MSVR advisory:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/advisory/msvr11-007.mspx

The folks from SecTheory/WhiteHat Security have an excellent write-up on Clickjacking.  For detailed information on this vulnerability visit:
http://www.sectheory.com/clickjacking.htm

 

Conclusion
Unfortunately, not all of these headers are supported in all browsers, meaning any of you still using IE6 won’t be able to take advantage of these headers.  What’s this mean for you? Make sure you are using an up-to-date browser to take full advantage of these protections.

Do these security measures make Google+ impervious to malicious activities?  Absolutely not.  Is it a good start?  Yes, it is. And further, it is good to see an app make its debut with security in mind.  It actually gives us Infosec folks a bit of hope that developers are listening and doing the right thing.

 

 

 

 

Share

Fake Google+ invites used to harvest Facebook profiles

Wednesday, July 13th, 2011

by David Michmerhuizen – Security Researcher

A common denominator of Facebook scams is that they offer you something you can’t resist.  Whether it be free Farmville coins, a ‘Dislike’ button, or just a girl in a short plaid skirt, if it’s desirable then you’ll eventually see it offered on Facebook as part of a scam.

And so it is with the latest must-have digital chotchka, an invitation to the new social networking offering from Google, Google+.  Since Google’s new project is aimed squarely at Facebook you would hardly expect to see such invitations offered on Facebook, but that’s where they’re showing up

Google Plus invite in Facebook news feed

Google Plus invite in Facebook news feed

Clicking on one of these news feed items brings up an actual Facebook application page.    These app pages are being taken down by Facebook and scammers are creating new ones, as seen here:

Facebook fake Google plus invite application

Facebook fake Google plus invite application

The reason for selecting an application for this scam is that applications can, if allowed, access otherwise private information from your Facebook profile.   That’s just what this app does.  Clicking on any of these links takes you to a page where the application requests permission to access your Facebook data, and it really does ask for quite a bit

Permissions request

Permissions request

This appears to be the entire point of this scam – email and account data harvesting.  The only other thing the application does is to spread to your friends.   First you are asked to ‘Like’ the app, which will cause it to appear in your friends’ news feeds.

"Like" step

"Like" step

Then, just in case items from you don’t appear in your friends’ news feeds, there is one more step: you are asked to explicitly send “invites” to your friends.

Fake "invite" step

Fake "invite" step

Instead of actually sending invites, you’re sending Facebook requests that will appear in the notification queue of each friend you select.

Once you are past this point you wind up on the Google+ home page, and when you try to log in – surprise – you haven’t been invited.

 

As always, we at Barracuda Networks recommend that you approach any wall post that appears in your news feed with great caution.   If they seem to be too good to be true, double-check with the person whose name appears on the post.  Additionally,  Barracuda Web Filters give IT departments the ability to selectively block Facebook within the organization.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share

Fake AntiVirus Scams Add MacOS Support

Thursday, May 19th, 2011

by Luis Chapetti & Dave Michmerhuizen – Security Researchers

Fake antivirus scams are designed to scare innocent computer users with exaggerated displays of virus activity in the hope that they will hand over their credit card numbers to make it go away.   They’ve been around for years and the most prevalent ones use a freely available JavaScript design that mimics the Windows user interface, as seen here:

Fake Antivirus that mimics Windows

Fake Antivirus that mimics Windows

 

When these pages pop up on Macintosh computers, it’s immediately obvious that something isn’t right.

Last quarter, Apple set a new record (3.47 million sold in the quarter) with a growth rate of 33% over the prior year’s quarter.  Apple has about 10% of the computer market in the United States, and that doesn’t even include iPads.

That market share has been noticed by the fake antivirus scammers, and this week they have added a new JavaScript design that mimics the Macintosh interface, as seen here:

Fake antivirus that mimics Macintosh

Fake antivirus that mimics Macintosh

 

Drive-by download sites now serve up this page if they detect access from a MacOS computer while Windows users still see a Windows style page.   The example above is called “Apple Security Center” but similar templates have been seen named MacDefender.

Since this is just JavaScript, the correct move at this point is to refuse the download and browse elsewhere.  Accepting the download and running it installs “Mac Protector” which displays pornographic images and promises to remove them for a credit card payment.

The initial infection vector is poisoned entries in Google search results.  We’ve talked extensively about poisoned search results and this represents another example of where otherwise normal Web sites are compromised and made to serve up bogus pages that are well ranked by Google. When one of these links is clicked, the compromised Web site detects a visit from Google search results and sends the visitor to a server that presents the fake antivirus. The recent change in Google content ranking has not stymied these attacks – the malicious link we tested was on page 1 of our search results:

Malicious link in Google results

Malicious link in Google results

 

Past Search Engine Optimization campaigns targeted very popular search terms such as celebrity sightings or breaking news events.  The poisoned links mentioned in this post are more likely to show up in the results for more mundane search terms so as to attract less attention, but they’re still getting plenty of traffic.

This is turning out to be a big problem for Apple. It has been conventional wisdom for years that one of the simplest Internet security solutions is to “just buy a Mac” and stop worrying.  Now that the most common drive-by attack vectors are serving up malware, unwary Mac users are being exposed to the harsh world that Windows users have dealt with for years, and are going to have to learn the same lessons.  Don’t believe everything that pops up on your screen, and don’t run any software unless you know where it came from and what it will do.

Barracuda Networks Barracuda Web Filters and the Barracuda Web Security Flex stop the download of this threat.

Share

Facebook Videos Now Leading to Fake YouTube CAPTCHAs

Tuesday, May 17th, 2011

by David Michmerhuizen – Security Researcher

Facebook survey scams continue to mutate, and the latest development is pretty sneaky. Scammers have designed an offsite page that displays a very convincing YouTube CAPTCHA screen which is completely fake. Similar to fake video pages that we’ve written about before, this fake CAPTCHA test page uses the Facebook OpenGraph API to spread to your friends’ walls and then serve up several survey links.

It starts with something unremarkable, a video link on a friend’s wall:

Video post on friends wall

Video post on friends wall

The “Dad walks in on daughter” is very familiar to those of us who monitor Facebook scams on a daily basis.  In previous incarnations it would lead to a fake video preview page.  Instead, today it leads to this:

Fake CAPTCHA page

Fake CAPTCHA page

which looks enough like a real CAPTCHA to fool many people. Pressing the ‘submit’ button executes code that posts the malicious video link to all of your friends’ walls.  Once done, the user is sent to some scammy surveys:

Surveys

Surveys

Barracuda Networks recommends users take particular care when on Facebook.  If friends post links, make sure you trust the destination domain before following the link.  Barracuda Web Filters also allow the selective blocking of Facebook within the organization.

Share

Learning the Importance of WAF Technology – the Hard Way

Monday, April 11th, 2011

Posted by:  Michael Perone, EVP & CMO

Wow.  What a weekend.  In case you haven’t heard, Barracuda Networks was the latest victim of a SQL injection attack on our corporate Web site that compromised lead and partner contact information.  The good news is the information compromised was essentially just names and email addresses, and no financial information is even stored in those databases. Further, we have confirmed that some of the affected databases contained one-way cryptographic hashes of salted passwords.  However, all active passwords for applications in use remain secure.

So, the bad news is that we made a mistake.  The Barracuda Web Application Firewall in front of the Barracuda Networks Web site was unintentionally placed in passive monitoring mode and was offline through a maintenance window that started Friday night (April 8 ) after close of business Pacific time.  Starting Saturday night at approximately 5pm Pacific time, an automated script began crawling our Web site in search of unvalidated parameters.  After approximately two hours of nonstop attempts, the script discovered a SQL injection vulnerability in a simple PHP script that serves up customer reference case studies by vertical market.  As with many ancillary scripts common to Web sites, this customer case study database shared the SQL database used for marketing programs which contained names and email addresses of leads, channel partners and some Barracuda Networks employees.  The attack utilized one IP address initially to do reconnaissance and was joined by another IP address about three hours later.  We have logs of all the attack activity, and we believe we now fully understand the scope of the attack.

This latest incident brings home some key reminders for us, including that:

  • You can’t leave a Web site exposed nowadays for even a day (or less)
  • Code vulnerabilities can happen in places far away from the data you’re trying to protect
  • You can’t be complacent about coding practices, operations or even the lack of private data on your site – even when you have WAF technology deployed

Before responding prematurely to the press or to anyone else, we wanted to make sure we had time to sift through our logs and do a bit of communication.  We’re glad that the impact will be very minimal, but we’re not happy about the amount of bandwidth we’ve spent assessing what happened, responding to affected parties and putting in place the steps to prevent it in the future.

We are working to notify everyone whose email addresses were exposed, and we apologize for the inconvenience.

 

Share

Facebook like-jacking trades in celebrities for T&A

Monday, March 28th, 2011

by David Michmerhuizen – Security Researcher

Two weeks ago Facebook saw a wave of celebrity like-jacking attacks which Barracuda Labs detailed in a post describing their Open Graph underpinnings.  Those attacks used teen celebrities as their bait – Justin Bieber and Miley Cyrus were prominent themes.

After a slight hiatus, the scammers are back with the same software but a different approach.  They’re targeting a tried and true Internet meme – T & A.

like-jack posts in friends feed

like-jack posts in friends feed

Clicking on one of these links in a friend feed takes you away from Facebook to another site.  In the previous campaign, these throw-away sites were registered with names like girl-gets-caught.info or daddy-bustedonline.info, and the scam pages were formatted to look like YouTube videos.

Now that they’ve added more salacious come-ons, at least some of the pages are formatted to look like gossip sites.

Like-jack attack page

Just as before, this Web page uses the Open Graph API to construct a large ‘like’ button that appears to be a movie preview pane.   Clicking on the preview pane does two things: it posts a ‘like’ message to your own news feed and then serves up a set of scammy surveys and questionable product offerings under the guise of a ‘security check’.

Survey delivery dialog

Survey delivery dialog

If you click all the way through any of these offerings, the like-jack page creators are paid a fee.   Entering personal information into any of these ‘surveys’ is a great way to get on spam lists.   Many of them solicit your cell phone number and then sign you up for unwanted premium SMS services which are placed on your cell phone bill each month.

Barracuda Networks recommends you exercise special care when visiting links posted in your friends’ news feeds.    Barracuda Web Filters and the Barracuda Web Filtering Service block access to these sites.


Share

Email Spam Drops by Half While Search Engine Malware Increases 50 Percent and Twitter Crime Rate Rises 20 Percent During 2010

Thursday, March 3rd, 2011

From: Barracuda Labs [PRESS RELEASE]

Barracuda Labs Issues 2010 Annual Security Report; Launches New, Free Profile Protector to Protect Users against Malicious Threats on Facebook and Twitter

Campbell, Calif., March 3, 2011 – Barracuda Networks Inc., a leading provider of content security, data protection and application delivery solutions, today released findings from its 2010 Annual Security Report which indicates attackers are making a shift from using email spam to more aggressively targeting the Internet. Email spam dropped by half during 2010, while search engine malware doubled and the Twitter Crime Rate increased 20 percent, signifying a concentrated focus on the more lucrative social networks and search engines as attack vectors. To help combat this, Barracuda Networks today announced the availability of its new Profile Protector, a free service that protects social networking users against malicious threats on Facebook and Twitter. Profile Protector is available at http://profileprotector.com/.

“Attackers focus on where they can get the most eyeballs and profit, and today that means social networks and search engines,” said Dr. Paul Judge, chief research officer at Barracuda Networks. “As a community we often point to the need for user education as the missing component; however, the levels of social engineering involved in today’s attacks suggest that we must continue to elevate our technological approaches. The research community must continue to build innovative defenses and the industry must make efforts to increase the deployment rates of those defenses.”

Searching for Malware
Barracuda Labs conducts periodic studies across Bing, Google, Twitter and Yahoo!, analyzing trending topics on popular search engines in order to understand the scope of the problem and to identify the types of topics used by malware distributors. The most recent study was conducted over 153 days. The analysis reviews more than 157,000 trending topics and nearly 37 million search results. Overall, the research found that attackers have increased the amount of search engine malware as well as expanded targeted efforts beyond Google.

Key highlights from the search result analysis include:

  • In June 2010, Google was crowned as “King” of malware, turning up more than twice the amount of malware as Bing, Twitter and Yahoo! combined when searches on popular trending topics were performed. As malware spread across the other search engines, the ratios were distributed more evenly by December 2010, with Google producing 38 percent of overall malware; Yahoo! at 30 percent; Bing at 24 percent and Twitter at eight percent.
  • The amount of malware found daily across the search engines increased 55 percent from 145.7 in June 2010 to 226.3 in December 2010.
  • One in five search topics lead to malware, while one in 1,000 search results lead to malware.
  • The top 10 terms used by malware distributors include the name of a Jersey Shore actress, the president, the NFL and credit score.

The Dark Side of Twitter
Barracuda Labs analyzed more than 26 million Twitter accounts in order to measure and analyze account behavior. The analysis enabled researchers to model normal user behavior and identify features that are strong indicators of illegitimate account use. The study reviews several key areas including True Twitter Users1, Twitter Crime Rate2, and Tweet Number3.

Key highlights from the Twitter research include:

  • In general, activity continues to increase on Twitter: more users are coming online; True Twitter Users are tweeting more often, and even casual users are becoming more active. As users become more active, the malicious activity also increases.
  • The number of True Twitter Users increased to 43 percent, up from only 29 percent in June 2010.
  • For every 100 Twitter users, 39 have between one and nine followers, while 50 percent of Twitter users have more than 10 followers.
  • Approximately 79 percent of Twitter users tweet less than once per day.
  • After decreasing at the end of 2009, the Twitter Crime Rate increased 20 percent from the first half of 2010 to the second half of 2010, going from 1.6 percent to 2 percent.
  • Attackers are distributing malware and exploiting vulnerabilities to achieve their malicious goals.

To view the complete Barracuda Labs 2010 Annual Security Report and the company’s security portal, please visit http://barracudalabs.com.

Protecting Profiles on Facebook and Twitter
Barracuda Labs also announced the availability of its new Profile Protector, a free service that protects social networking users against malicious threats on Facebook and Twitter and is available at http://profileprotector.com/. The application analyzes user-generated content posted to profiles and is able to block or remove malicious or suspicious content. This includes malicious URLs, embedded photos and/or videos on Facebook and Twitter pages and news feeds.

About Barracuda Networks Inc.
Barracuda Networks Inc. combines premises-based gateways and software, virtual appliances, cloud services, and sophisticated remote support to deliver comprehensive content security, data protection and application delivery solutions.  The company’s expansive product portfolio includes offerings for protection against email, Web and IM threats as well as products that improve application delivery and network access, message archiving, backup and data protection. Coca-Cola, FedEx, Harvard University, IBM, L’Oreal, and Europcar are among the more than 130,000 organizations protecting their IT infrastructures with Barracuda Networks’ range of affordable, easy-to-deploy and manage solutions.  Barracuda Networks is privately held with its International headquarters in Campbell, Calif.  For more information, please visit www.barracudanetworks.com.

Resources:
•    Download the Barracuda Labs 2010 Annual Security Report at http://www.barracudalabs.com/research_resources.html.
•    View the Barracuda Labs security research portal at http://BarracudaLabs.com.
•    Follow Barracuda Labs on Twitter at @barracudalabs.

Footnotes:
1 – ‘True Twitter User’ is defined as a user that has at least (≥) 10 followers, follows at least (≥) 10 people, and has tweeted at least (≥) 10 times.
2 – ‘Twitter Crime Rate’ is defined as the percentage of accounts created per month that were eventually suspended for malicious or suspicious activity, or otherwise misused.
3 – ‘Tweet Number’ is defined as a user’s average number of tweets per day.

#  #  #

Share

73 Percent of Organizations Have Been Hacked At Least Once In The Last 24 Months Through Insecure Web Applications

Tuesday, February 8th, 2011

By: Barracuda Labs

  • Report from Ponemon Institute finds website attacks are the biggest concern for companies, yet 88 percent spend more on coffee than securing Web applications
  • 69 percent of organizations rely on network layer firewalls to protect their websites, leaving Web applications wide open for attack
  • 72 percent of organizations test less than 10 percent of their Web applications for security holes, some knowing they have been hacked in the past

Barracuda Networks Inc., Cenzic Inc. and the Ponemon Institute, today announced the results of the “State of Application Security Survey,” which reveals respondents’ perceptions and experiences protecting Web applications. The survey underscores the lack of adequate protection currently in use and overall insufficient resources and knowledge around Web application security.

According to 74 percent of respondents, Web application security is either more critical or equally critical to other security issues faced by their organizations. Despite this, the study shows there are many misconceptions around the methods used to secure Web applications, primarily Web application firewalls and vulnerability assessment.

“While it is encouraging to see that Web application security is on the minds of most organizations, there still seems to be a real disconnect between the desire and implementation of security countermeasures required for Web application security,” said Dr. Paul Judge, chief research officer and VP for Barracuda Networks. “The fact that 69 percent of respondents are relying upon network firewalls to secure Web applications is like relying upon a cardboard shield for protection in a sword fight – eventually your shield will prove that it’s insufficient and an attack will reach you that can fly past a network firewall.”

“The fact that a quarter of respondents could not provide a range for how many Web applications they have is a huge red flag right off the bat,” said Mandeep Khera, CMO for Cenzic. “Furthermore, that 20 percent of organizations do not test at all and 40 percent test only 5 percent of their Web applications is shocking. And, most of these companies have been hacked multiple times through insecure Web applications. If you know that burglars come through a broken door repeatedly wouldn’t you want to fix that door?”

Other key findings in the study include:

  • Data protection (62 percent) and compliance (51 percent) were the top reasons for securing Web apps. Job protection was also a significant reason cited by 15 percent of respondents.
  • Despite 51 percent listing compliance as a key driver for Web application security, 43 percent are not familiar with or have no knowledge of OWASP, a key component to compliance standards like PCI.
  • With 41 percent reporting they have over 100 Web applications or more, the majority (66 percent) test less than 25 percent of these applications for vulnerabilities.
  • More than half (53 percent) expect their Web hosting provider to secure their Web applications.
  • Of those respondents who own a Web application firewall, nearly 2 times agreed that a reverse proxy is a better and more secure technology than a transparent bridge technology.

“While IT practitioners recognize the criticality of secure Web applications, their organizations do not provide adequate resources and expertise to manage the risk,” said Dr. Larry Ponemon, chairman and founder, Ponemon Institute. “Over half of the respondents we polled believe they do not have resources to detect and remediate insecure Web applications, and 64 percent said they believe that their organization have inadequate governance and usage policies.”

The results of the survey from the Ponemon Institute are based on responses from 637 practitioners in a variety of industries with an average of 11 years of experience in their profession. The full survey analysis can be found at http://www.barracudanetworks.com/ns/downloads/White_Papers/Barracuda_Web_App_Firewall_WP_Cenzic_Exec_Summary.pdf.

Share

Gawker Compromise, Password Lessons

Tuesday, December 14th, 2010

by Daniel Peck, Research Scientist

Today any news/blog site remotely technical most likely has a blurb about about the recent Gawker media compromise.  Most people are making a big deal out of the release of the password files, but honestly, there’s not a lot to that part.  These were clearly very low priority passwords for almost everyone using them. While there was probably some amount of password reuse between Gawker sites and the users’ email addresses, the overlap is still relatively small.

But everyone loves a few stats, so here we go… Out of 188,281 passwords (this is from the parsed_db.txt file in the torrent floating around) the top passwords used are:

3057 – 123456
1955 – password
1119 – 12345678
661 – lifehack
418 – qwerty
333 – abc123
311 – 111111
300 – monkey
273 – consumer
253 – 12345
247 – letmein
241 – trustno1
233 – dragon
213 – baseball
208 – superman
202 – iloveyou
202 – 1234567

Additionally,

~50k of the accounts had a Gmail address, ~45k had a Yahoo address, and ~29k had a Hotmail account.

855 of the passwords contained one of George Carlin’s 7 Dirty Words.

930 contained Love.

And honestly, I’m a bit surprised that that many people who comment on blog sites are into baseball enough to have it as a password.

The bigger story should be about how complete the compromise appears to be.  All of the source code Gawker owns appears to have been released, and that is a very large piece of intellectual property out there for anyone to take apart.  Not only does it allow others to find problems in the source code, but it also allows them to see what Gawker is planning for in the future, what capabilities they have but haven’t unlocked, and of course allows any hacker worth his salt to find vulnerabilities in the code for future attacks.  All around, this is not a good situation for any company to be in and will likely lead to a major code rewrite/audit in order to deal with this effectively.

So in light of recent events, now is as good of a time as any to share some good password advice:

1. Developers – Hash your passwords using salt.  It seems (though, I haven’t verified this yet) that this database was simply DESing the passwords without doing any sort of salt using a username/etc.  This is bad since it means that a simple rainbow table can be looked up, and that collisions are much easier to come by.

2.  Users – Don’t use easy-to-guess passwords (if your password is in the Gawker list, that’s bad.)   An easy way to make a strong password is to start with an easy-to-remember phrase, like “The quick brown Fox jumped over the lazy Dog.”  Then take the first letter from each word, like so – “TqbFjotlD”.   Add in a number such as your age and you have a fairly strong password that’s still easy for you to recall.

3.  Users – Don’t share passwords between sites.  Instead, use the technique in item 2 to create a strong password “root” which you can reuse on sites by appending a special character such as @ and a two or three letter mnemonic for the site.  For example, the above password root could be “TqbFjotlD32@GM”  for Gmail,  “TqbFjotlD32@HM” for a home computer, and even “TqbFjotlD32@GK” for Gawker media.

I’m sure we will be hearing more about the Gawker compromise over the next few days, and will keep you updated if anything interesting pops up.

Share