Sometimes you just want to cry… This writeup is an example of the “soft underbelly” of every network’s security plan… the users. Basically, you have a group that was hired to do a computer security audit of a credit union. They were told that some of the main concerns were social engineering (easy sharing of passwords among/from employees) and they were concerned about removable usb drives being used to copy data out of the credit union. So, they hatched an idea to try and make use of what they’d learned were the concerns. They prepared 20 usb keys with pictures and some “specially designed software” and scattered them in places where employees would find them… smoking areas, parking lot, etc.
Category: Security-Vulnerabilities
-
Cross browser javascript vulnerability
It sounds like this vulnerability would take a great deal of user interaction, but cio-today is reporting on a browser vulnerability that affects pretty much every javascript enabled browser. According to Symantec …. “This issue is triggered by utilizing JavaScript ‘OnKeyDown’ events to capture and duplicate keystrokes from users,” and is a way that the attacker could scrape/log things that are typed in (bank information, passwords, etc.) Also, they say “In one scenario, a crafty programmer might be able to trick users into entering personal data into a seemingly secure field on an online payment form, giving the hacker access to anything typed within the field.”
-
Zero-day ( 0-day) Microsoft Word exploit
There was some news on this last night at Incidents.org, today F-secure has some details as well on the trojan that’s dropped in this circulating, exploit. It seems as though the initial attack was very targetted against a specific organization. Antivirus packages did not recognize the trojan that the exploit file dropped as of yesterday, although it’s looking like f-secure now has detection and I would suspect other AV vendors.
Essentially, one organization reported in to incidents that they were receiving emails with MS Word attachments. One user noticed that a domain name in the email wasn’t exactly correct…
-
I’ve NEVER liked UPNP…. now I have another reason….
I remember the first Windows XP vulnerability was a Upnp vulnerability. I have made one of my first visits on any new XP system a visit to grc.com to disable it on an XP workstation. But, it’s the great thing – makes life so much easier for setting up network devices. “You just don’t like it cause it puts you out of business….” It looks like Upnp is a really “malicious hacker friendly” kind of thing, especially when it’s installed and running on a gateway router… let’s say you have a hardware firewall with Upnp. Normally, you plug in an IP camera and maybe the IP camera uses Upnp to open a port so it’s accessible from the outside world. Nice, simple right? Well… what if you download a “browsing experience enhancement toolbar” that opens up another port on the firewall so you can act as a mail relay?
-
RealVNC 4.1.1 and prior exploits on the loose
As reported over the last several days, there is a critical problem with RealVNC 4.1.1, there is NOW an exploit in the wild for RealVNC 4.1.1, that SANS is looking for more information on. There are updates from RealVNC for all affected product lines. Other VNC implementations have not been reported to be affected. Only (as far as I know), RealVNC 4.1.1 on Windows (prior versions may be, but the initial report didn’t indicate 4.1.0 to be vulnerable.) Don’t take the last sentence to give an excuse NOT to check, check if you have updates for your vnc product.
-
Exploit Prevention in software
There’s been a lot of talk about hardware enforced DEP as a mitigating factor in some of the exploits in the last six months. There’s also a new software product that can limit the impact of zero-day exploits. The software is for windows and is called SocketShield. Suzi at Spyware Confidential has taken it for a testdrive on an unpatched XP system through some nasty exploit sites….
-
Real VNC 4.1.1 vulnerability – Remote Access without password
This is one worth checking out anybody using vnc for remote administration. It looks as though intelliadmin has come across a vulnerability in Real VNC 4 (the slashdot post I saw suggested “any machine running VNC 4.1”) I haven’t tested yet, so I don’t know if this ONLY affects REALVNC’s implementation or is broader. They have a proof of concept page which attempts to connect to the ip of the browser at the vnc port and display a screenshot. The site is getting slashdotted at the moment, so revisit this page and link until you get a chance to test out your VNC serving machines.