Showing posts with label breach. Show all posts
Showing posts with label breach. Show all posts

Thursday, 25 July 2013

Once more into the breach: How hackers compromise websites like Apple's

Unless you happen to call the proverbial rock home, you’ve probably heard that Apple’s developer websites were recently hit by a hacking attack. Though the developer site has been inaccessible since last week, the company didn’t announce the intrusion until Sunday; as of this writing, the site remains down. That outage has resulted in considerable inconvenience for app developers, not to mention the poor IT people in Cupertino who have been working around the clock to deal with the breach.

According to the company, the attackers didn’t manage to get their hands on any sensitive information, but the fact remains that security hacks like this one happen with alarming frequency all over the Web, and one cannot help but wonder why websites seem to be so easy to break into.

Computers can be hacked using a variety of techniques, which typically fall into three categories: social engineering, software exploits, and hardware cracks.

Social engineering is the least technological member of this trio, although it’s by no means the least sophisticated. It works by extracting access credentials from an unsuspecting user, or acquiring them from an unscrupulous operator, such as a disgruntled employee. If you’ve been on the Internet for more than a day, you’ve probably been on the receiving end of a “phishing” email, which invites you to log on to a site that looks and feels like, say, your bank’s, but is in reality controlled by hackers who capture your username and password and then use it to help themselves to the money in your account.

These types of attacks, while very common against the general public, are hard to pull off against a website owner—particularly one as large and sophisticated as Apple. For one thing, IT personnel tend to be well acquainted with phishing attempts, and are usually on the lookout for them. In addition, the private nature of the internal systems that are used to manage a company’s network makes them hard to spoof, unlike a banking website, which is open to the public and can be easily replicated.

In practical terms, most successful attacks against websites tend to be software-based, and are often caused by the site’s developers making the wrong set of assumptions. For example, a very common class of attacks called code injections is caused by code that “trusts” data coming from the outside world, and thus doesn’t attempt to filter out any potentially malicious commands embedded in that data. Unchecked, this kind of bug can have catastrophic repercussions, allowing a third party to gain access and even delete information stored in the site’s database—such as username, emails, or passwords.

A more sophisticated vulnerability, known as cross-site request forgery, can be used to force a browser to surreptitiously navigate a target website without human intervention. If the user happens to be logged into a password-protected website, an attacker could perform unauthorized operations, including locking the real user out of his or her own account.

These are but two examples of dozens of possible vulnerabilities that can be caused by weak programming. And even when the website’s code itself is perfect—and we know how often software is perfect—there is still plenty that can go wrong: Regardless of the operating system on which a Web server runs, it typically also makes use of hundreds of different software components that take care of everything from delivering documents to keeping the system’s time. Since many of these programs have a network component, any defect in their code has the potential to become a possible entry point for a would-be hacker.

If this appears to paint a bleak picture of Web security, keep in mind that practically every potential attack can be mitigated—and almost always prevented—by using the right security measures.

In many organizations, for example, Web servers are usually kept behind firewalls—systems that are designed to be connected to the open Internet, and whose software is hardened in such a way as to prevent intrusion while simultaneously letting legitimate traffic through. In addition, larger companies employ sophisticated intrusion-detection software that can “sniff” network traffic and detect illicit activity before it becomes a problem; they also implement policies that that promote the development of secure software, for example by placing significant emphasis on data encryption and good programming practices.

Thus, while the occasional slip-up may still occur, it’s a safe bet that, the more important a Web-based system is, the more sophisticated the level of control over its operations. What happened at Apple appears to have been a lapse in network administration that allowed outdated software on a server to leak information about developers. While serious, this bug is unlikely to affect Apple’s consumer-facing services, like iTunes or iCloud, which are probably under much greater scrutiny from the company.

This is not to say that any website is absolutely secure. An old dictum in the security community is that the only computer that cannot be broken into is one that is unplugged from the Internet and turned off.

Indeed, hardware hacks have been used to pull off some rather remarkable stunts against systems that were thought to be hack-proof because they weren’t connected to any network, such as crippling Iran’s nuclear program with a USB key and even reading a computer screen through a wall by detecting its radio emissions.

Spy stories aside, this goes to show that the potential for intrusion is a byproduct of the very functionality that makes running a website possible. While the risk can never be completely eliminated, the right combination of expertise and care, mixed with a hint of paranoia, can greatly reduce its potential impact—and nowhere is this combination of skills more likely to come into play than in a company’s most important properties.

Site break-ins are serious threats that tend to get lots of publicity, but not all breaches are created equal. The kind of issue that afflicted Apple last week only involved a relatively small and obscure section of its operations, and appears to have left everyone’s really important data, like credit card numbers, uncompromised. If anything, in fact, it’s likely that what happened gave Apple’s IT department a reason to tighten its internal policies, which may well result in better security for its end users in the long term.

Tuesday, 23 July 2013

Canonical takes Ubuntu forums offline in wake of password breach

Canonical, makers of the Ubuntu Linux distribution, recently announced that its Ubuntu help forums suffered a security breach over the weekend. Attackers were able to harvest an estimated 1.82 million user names, email addresses, and passwords from the site. Canonical says it isn’t sure how hackers were able to breach its systems and the company has taken the forums at Ubuntuforums.org offline as a precaution.

Canonical is warning anyone with an Ubuntu Forums account about the hack via email. The company is also advising users to change their security credentials on other sites, especially email, if they used the same password and username/email for other online services.

Ubuntu.com services such as Ubuntu One are not believed to be affected by the hack since they do not share the same login account as the Ubuntu forums.

Fans of the Ubuntu forums began reporting that the site had been defaced on Saturday. The hacker or group of hackers who breached the site posted an image of a penguin (the Linux mascot is a penguin) holding an AK-47.

The message underneath the image suggested the hackers were more interested in exposing a poorly secured site than anything else. “None of this ‘[you got hacked] by albani4 c3bir 4rmy’ stuff,” the message on Ubuntu’s forums site said. “Straight up, you dun goofed. It's as simple as that.”

It’s not clear if the hackers plan on exposing the database of user names and passwords online. Nevertheless, there is a definite possibility these account credentials could begin circulating around the less reputable areas of the Internet.


For now, the hack doesn't appear malicious, but users should take caution.
Canonical says forum user passwords were not stored in plain text and were hashed and salted. A hash uses a mathematical algorithm to convert plain text passwords into a series of numbers and letters. A specific hash will create the same string of letters and numbers each time for the same input (in this case a password). To make hashes more secure they are further obscured by “salting,” a process that inserts random bits into the hash making it harder to guess the original password.

Canonical had not returned our request for comment at this writing, so it’s not clear which hashing algorithm the company was using. However, a report from Ars Technica says Canonical was using the md5 hash. MD5 is a popular hashing algorithm that is often used by software companies as a security check to let users ensure downloaded executable files were not tampered with or corrupted. But md5 is not considered to be a secure choice for hashing passwords.

Reports of password breaches are always a good time to reevaluate your own online security practices. Always make sure you are using unique passwords for every site you visit online. For tips on generating your own passwords check out PCWorld’s “Learn to use strong passwords” or “Passwords: You're doing it wrong. Here's how to make them uncrackable.”

Use a password manager such as LastPass or Password Safe to store all your various passwords for different online sites. These programs can also create new passwords for you and can automatically fill out login forms for you.

Finally, activate two-factor authentication for any services that support this security measure such as Battle.net, Dropbox, Evernote, Facebook, Gmail, Twitter, and Outlook.com. Two-factor authentication requires you to enter a second, shorter temporary password that is usually generated by a smartphone application or small key fob.

Many services that offer two-factor authentication allow you to set trusted PCs so that you only have to enter your credentials once on new PCs or browsers.

Canonical has not said when Ubuntu forums will be back up. In the meantime, any Ubuntu user looking for support can check out sites such as Stack Exchange’s Ask Ubuntu or Ubuntu Discourse.

Sunday, 21 July 2013

Hackers breach Nasdaq community forum website

Hackers have breached part of Nasdaq's website, with the stock exchange group warning members of its community forum that email and password details have been compromised.

Nasdaq sent an email to users explaining that it had been made aware of the breach following "standard security monitoring", warning that account information could have been stolen following the breach on Tuesday.
However the firm said that its trading and commerce platforms had not been affected.

Security expert Graham Cluley said on his blog that it is likely that hackers had capitalised on a deficiencies in Nasdaq's security infrastructure.

"My guess is that the servers running the NASDAQ community message board software had not been properly configured or not kept updated against vulnerabilities, and this allowed hackers an open window to access sensitive information," he said.

The website is still unavailable, though an onsite message states that the forum is offline due to upgrades being made.

Cluley added that the stock exchange group should be more clear about the security risk posed, and warned over potential phishing attacks as a result of the breach.

"What also irks me is how NASDAQ is describing the issue on the (currently shut-down) community forum itself.

"Any member of the online NASDAQ community who has missed the email advisory, won't be any the wiser from that message that the site has been hacked, and their usernames, email addresses and passwords have been compromised."

It is not the first time that the stock exchange's security has come under the spotlight following a breach. In 2011 an FBI investigation pointed to Nasdaq's ageing software and out of date security patches as part of the reason for servers being hacked.

Investigators found some PCs and servers with out of date software and uninstalled security patches, including Microsoft Windows Server 2003, while some of its firewalls ahd been incorrectly configured.

Friday, 19 July 2013

Lawmakers push for federal data breach notification law

U.S. lawmakers plan to resurrect national data breach notification legislation that has failed to pass in past sessions of Congress, but some advocates don’t agree on what should be included in a bill.

Six witnesses at a U.S. House of Representatives hearing Thursday called for a national law requiring businesses that lose data in hacker attacks to notify affected customers, but there were differences about whether the bill should preempt 48 existing state laws or should set a minimum standard that state laws can build on.

“Any federal law should not weaken strong state laws,” Representative Jan Schakowsky, an Illinois Democrat, said during a hearing of the Energy and Commerce Committee’s trade subcommittee. “Any federal response should establish a baseline so that every American can be assured some level of data protection, not just notification after the fact.”

Others disagreed, saying a new federal law that doesn’t preempt state laws would create a 49th data breach regulation for businesses to comply with. A national standard would be “particularly helpful to small business, many of whom cannot afford teams of lawyers to navigate 48 breach standards, should something bad actually happen,” said Kevin Richards, senior vice president for federal government affairs at trade group TechAmerica.

The debate over whether a national law should preempt state laws—along with debates over what types of information should be subject to breach notification rules and how long companies have before reporting the breaches—has held up a national breach notification bill in Congress for years, with early bills introduced in the middle of the last debate. But committee members said Thursday they will renew their push for a national law.
Some witnesses and lawmakers also called on Congress to pass comprehensive cybersecurity legislation focused on preventing data breaches along with breach notification. Others suggested that Congress needs a longer debate on comprehensive legislation, while a breach notification bill could be ironed out sooner.
Congress needs to act to prevent the huge number of data breaches happening every year, said Representative Joe Barton, a Texas Republican. In the 1930s, when there was a rash of kidnapping, Congress didn’t just pass a “kidnapping notification law,” but it gave the Federal Bureau of Investigation authority to track kidnappers, he said.

David Thaw, a law professor focused on cybersecurity at the University of Connecticut, agreed, saying comprehensive data security regulation, combined with data breach notification rules, would be more effective in protecting consumers and businesses.

“I analogize the effects of breach notification alone to locking the bank or vault door while leaving a back window wide open,” he said.

Richards called on the committee to move forward on data breach notification, saying there’s some consensus developing around that legislation, but more work to do on a comprehensive bill. 

Thursday, 27 June 2013

Facebook breach highlights data security's "weakest link" syndrome

Facebook recently disclosed that a system glitch resulted in the exposure of sensitive personal data from as many as six million users. The impact from this particular breach seems relatively inconsequential, but it’s a sign of a larger problem when it comes to protecting personal data on the Web.

 

Let’s start with a little about the incident itself. The Facebook data breach is related to the Download Your Information feature. When someone downloads their Facebook contact data, the glitch exposed email addresses and personal phone numbers for contacts even if that data was not visible on Facebook itself.

A glitch exposed data on six million Facebook accounts.

Facebook resolved the issue within 24 hours of being notified, and publicly disclosed the incident on its blog last Friday. There was a delay between the incident response and disclosure to give Facebook time to inform regulators and affected customers of the breach.

 

Six million is a big number in some contexts; but to be fair to Facebook, it represents only one half of one percent of the 1.1 billion Facebook users. When you consider how big the breach could have been, or the recent revelations alleging that the NSA has access to virtually all data from everywhere, the Facebook breach almost seems trivial.

 

Government monitoring aside, people still value privacy, and they have a reasonable expectation that if they configure their Facebook account not to disclose specific sensitive details, then that data will be protected. In this case—at least for the six million affected users—it was not.

 

Tripwire CTO Dwayne Melancon explains: “The Facebook breach highlights the 'weakest link' syndrome with information security. As the number of indirect connections and relationships between applications and data proliferate, it becomes easier for unintended disclosure of data to occur.”

internet dataWhen data is shared between parties, there will always be a "weakest link."

The Facebook glitch, according to Melancon, highlights the need for greater end-to-end awareness and validation of data security controls. Facebook—and companies trusted with sensitive data in general—should have strong security configuration management all the way from the servers through the applications and the user permissions assigned to the data.

 

While it’s only peripherally related, do you know how many apps have permission to access or interact with your Facebook account? Go to the Privacy Settings and Tools in Facebook, and click Apps in the left pane. I think you’ll be shocked.

 

I found that there are 207 apps connected to or associated with my Facebook account in some way. Each one has unique settings to control who can see information from it and what information the app has access to. That’s 207 opportunities for me to miss something or somehow screw up the privacy controls and expose data I would rather not share with the general public.

 

It’s a good idea to review the apps associated with your Facebook account. Remove the ones you don’t use or don’t even remember giving access to in the first place, and then check the permissions granted to the apps that are left to make sure they reflect the way you want your data to be treated.

 

There will always be a “weakest link.” You can reduce the risk, though, by minimizing the number of companies and apps that have access to your personal information in the first place, and spending a little time to understand the associated privacy controls and make sure you’ve configured your data protection to the best of your ability.