Posted by Chris Wysopal in RESEARCH, July 30, 2008 |
Last week, Ben Worthen of the Wall Street Journal had a conversation with Howard Schmidt about the vulnerabilities in purchased software while Howard was waiting on line to have his iPhone upgraded.
Howard Schmidt, who was once the CSO of Microsoft, knows a thing or two about vendors shipping insecure software. He offers this advice relating to his iPhone, “Just because a piece of software was distributed through Apple’s App Store, don’t assume that it is vulnerability free.” I think that sums up the problem pretty well. Customers assume the software they are getting is vulnerability free …
Posted by Chris Eng in RESEARCH, July 28, 2008 |
Well, it’s almost BlackHat time. Here are my picks so far for Day 1. As you can see, I still haven’t narrowed it down completely.
11:15-12:30 Option 1: Dan Kaminsky, “DNS Goodness”. On one hand, the DNS vulnerability is already public; on the other hand, the talk will probably still be interesting even if the 0day hype is missing. Option 2: Nate Lawson, “Highway to Hell: Hacking Toll Systems”. My formal education and early work was in Electrical Engineering, so I’m always interested in hardware talks. I haven’t touched a soldering iron in years …
Posted by Chris Eng in RESEARCH, July 21, 2008 |
By now, you probably know that details of the DNS vulnerability have leaked. Halvar Flake speculated on DailyDave and the momentum built from there, despite the fact that his guess was short on a few key details. I don’t need to rehash the full technical details here; by now, they are easy enough to find with a couple Google searches. When Slashdot picks up the story, it’s hardly a secret any more.
What’s more interesting to me, now that I’ve digested the big secret, is how this whole situation has played out in the security community.
The …
Posted by Chris Eng in RESEARCH, July 21, 2008 |
A co-worker passed along this snapshot taken at the Karsten Nohl, Jake Appelbaum, and Dino Dai Zovi talk at HOPE this past weekend. The context, of course, is that the overzealous Debian developer who accidentally crippled OpenSSL back in 2006 said he did so because valgrind reported uninitialized memory use. Click through for the full-size version.

So automated software review is dangerous now? Perhaps that bullet should read “modifying code you don’t understand is dangerous.”
Posted by Chris Eng in RESEARCH, July 10, 2008 |
Despite what various commenters around the blogosphere think (I’ve read a few but can’t find the links now), Dan Kaminsky’s online “Check My Dns” utility doesn’t:
Poison anybody’s DNS cache
Expose how the actual exploit works
What it does is check whether your ISP’s DNS server is patched. Plain and simple. It looks for one thing — source port randomization. This does not give away the exploit, it checks for the existence of the sledgehammer fix that prevents the exploit from working.
More specifically, there’s some Javascript code that generates a random hex string which is used to create …
Posted by Chris Eng in RESEARCH, July 9, 2008 |
The security community is cynical. So much so, that most of the chatter that’s taken place over the past 24-36 hours has suggested that Kaminsky’s DNS vulnerability was little more than a publicity stunt and that his BlackHat presentation would be an over-hyped rehash of prior art. Granted, one has to suspend disbelief to even consider that something monumental would be discovered in DNS — that’s the protocol itself — but hell, it’s always nice to give a guy the benefit of the doubt.
Faced with nearly a month of criticism and questioning, and understanding the persuasive power …
Posted by Chris Eng in RESEARCH, July 9, 2008 |
Rich Mogull’s executive overview of Dan Kaminsky’s latest DNS vulnerability fluffed a few feathers yesterday:
The good news is that due to the nature of this problem, it is extremely difficult to determine the vulnerability merely by analyzing the patches; a common technique malicious individuals use to figure out security weaknesses.
The typical response I heard was “what do you mean, it can’t be reverse engineered? I’ll just look at the diffs!”
In hindsight, after examining the BIND diffs (yes, I did it too) and discussing with colleagues, all most people saw was UDP source port randomization and a …
Posted by Chris Eng in RESEARCH, July 7, 2008 |
I’m finally getting around to finishing my post on minimizing attack surfaces. Here’s Part 1, in case you missed it.
First, a quick clarification. I noticed that some of the readers who commented on that first post wanted to talk about improving security through the use of various development methodologies or coding frameworks. Those are interesting tangents (and ones that I may write about in the future), but my intention with this post is to discuss a very specific problem related to how people integrate third-party code — that is, the stuff you import or link in …
Posted by Chris Eng in RESEARCH, July 1, 2008 |
Popular Mechanics recently published an article about the NSA Red Team, which caught my interest, having been a part of that organization for a short stint back in early 2000. The article does a decent job of describing the Red Team’s charter, which is essentially to attack DOD targets in an attempt to simulate real adversaries, not unlike a consultant running a pen test against a corporation. The rules of engagement are similar to most pen tests: don’t DoS the target, don’t install malware, generally be non-destructive.
Disappointingly, the author sprinkles the usual super-secret uber-hacker spin …