Veracrypt.Codeplex.Com
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
GPU-Based Password Cracking on the Security of Password Hashing Schemes Regarding Advances in Graphics Processing Units
Radboud University Nijmegen Faculty of Science Kerckhoffs Institute Master of Science Thesis GPU-based Password Cracking On the Security of Password Hashing Schemes regarding Advances in Graphics Processing Units by Martijn Sprengers [email protected] Supervisors: Dr. L. Batina (Radboud University Nijmegen) Ir. S. Hegt (KPMG IT Advisory) Ir. P. Ceelen (KPMG IT Advisory) Thesis number: 646 Final Version Abstract Since users rely on passwords to authenticate themselves to computer systems, ad- versaries attempt to recover those passwords. To prevent such a recovery, various password hashing schemes can be used to store passwords securely. However, recent advances in the graphics processing unit (GPU) hardware challenge the way we have to look at secure password storage. GPU's have proven to be suitable for crypto- graphic operations and provide a significant speedup in performance compared to traditional central processing units (CPU's). This research focuses on the security requirements and properties of prevalent pass- word hashing schemes. Moreover, we present a proof of concept that launches an exhaustive search attack on the MD5-crypt password hashing scheme using modern GPU's. We show that it is possible to achieve a performance of 880 000 hashes per second, using different optimization techniques. Therefore our implementation, executed on a typical GPU, is more than 30 times faster than equally priced CPU hardware. With this performance increase, `complex' passwords with a length of 8 characters are now becoming feasible to crack. In addition, we show that between 50% and 80% of the passwords in a leaked database could be recovered within 2 months of computation time on one Nvidia GeForce 295 GTX. -
Public-Key Cryptography
Public Key Cryptography EJ Jung Basic Public Key Cryptography public key public key ? private key Alice Bob Given: Everybody knows Bob’s public key - How is this achieved in practice? Only Bob knows the corresponding private key Goals: 1. Alice wants to send a secret message to Bob 2. Bob wants to authenticate himself Requirements for Public-Key Crypto ! Key generation: computationally easy to generate a pair (public key PK, private key SK) • Computationally infeasible to determine private key PK given only public key PK ! Encryption: given plaintext M and public key PK, easy to compute ciphertext C=EPK(M) ! Decryption: given ciphertext C=EPK(M) and private key SK, easy to compute plaintext M • Infeasible to compute M from C without SK • Decrypt(SK,Encrypt(PK,M))=M Requirements for Public-Key Cryptography 1. Computationally easy for a party B to generate a pair (public key KUb, private key KRb) 2. Easy for sender to generate ciphertext: C = EKUb (M ) 3. Easy for the receiver to decrypt ciphertect using private key: M = DKRb (C) = DKRb[EKUb (M )] Henric Johnson 4 Requirements for Public-Key Cryptography 4. Computationally infeasible to determine private key (KRb) knowing public key (KUb) 5. Computationally infeasible to recover message M, knowing KUb and ciphertext C 6. Either of the two keys can be used for encryption, with the other used for decryption: M = DKRb[EKUb (M )] = DKUb[EKRb (M )] Henric Johnson 5 Public-Key Cryptographic Algorithms ! RSA and Diffie-Hellman ! RSA - Ron Rives, Adi Shamir and Len Adleman at MIT, in 1977. • RSA -
Copy — Copy file from Disk Or URL
Title stata.com copy — Copy file from disk or URL Syntax Description Options Remarks and examples Also see Syntax copy filename1 filename2 , options filename1 may be a filename or a URL. filename2 may be the name of a file or a directory. If filename2 is a directory name, filename1 will be copied to that directory. filename2 may not be a URL. Note: Double quotes may be used to enclose the filenames, and the quotes must be used if the filename contains embedded blanks. options Description public make filename2 readable by all text interpret filename1 as text file and translate to native text format replace may overwrite filename2 replace does not appear in the dialog box. Description copy copies filename1 to filename2. Options public specifies that filename2 be readable by everyone; otherwise, the file will be created according to the default permissions of your operating system. text specifies that filename1 be interpreted as a text file and be translated to the native form of text files on your computer. Computers differ on how end-of-line is recorded: Unix systems record one line-feed character, Windows computers record a carriage-return/line-feed combination, and Mac computers record just a carriage return. text specifies that filename1 be examined to determine how it has end-of-line recorded and that the line-end characters be switched to whatever is appropriate for your computer when the copy is made. There is no reason to specify text when copying a file already on your computer to a different location because the file would already be in your computer’s format. -
Operating System Boot from Fully Encrypted Device
Masaryk University Faculty of Informatics Operating system boot from fully encrypted device Bachelor’s Thesis Daniel Chromik Brno, Fall 2016 Replace this page with a copy of the official signed thesis assignment and the copy of the Statement of an Author. Declaration Hereby I declare that this paper is my original authorial work, which I have worked out by my own. All sources, references and literature used or excerpted during elaboration of this work are properly cited and listed in complete reference to the due source. Daniel Chromik Advisor: ing. Milan Brož i Acknowledgement I would like to thank my advisor, Ing. Milan Brož, for his guidance and his patience of a saint. Another round of thanks I would like to send towards my family and friends for their support. ii Abstract The goal of this work is description of existing solutions for boot- ing Linux and Windows from fully encrypted devices with Secure Boot. Before that, though, early boot process and bootloaders are de- scribed. A simple Linux distribution is then set up to boot from a fully encrypted device. And lastly, existing Windows encryption solutions are described. iii Keywords boot process, Linux, Windows, disk encryption, GRUB 2, LUKS iv Contents 1 Introduction ............................1 1.1 Thesis goals ..........................1 1.2 Thesis structure ........................2 2 Boot Process Description ....................3 2.1 Early Boot Process ......................3 2.2 Firmware interfaces ......................4 2.2.1 BIOS – Basic Input/Output System . .4 2.2.2 UEFI – Unified Extended Firmware Interface .5 2.3 Partitioning tables ......................5 2.3.1 MBR – Master Boot Record . -
Mobiceal: Towards Secure and Practical Plausibly Deniable Encryption on Mobile Devices
2018 48th Annual IEEE/IFIP International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks MobiCeal: Towards Secure and Practical Plausibly Deniable Encryption on Mobile Devices Bing Chang∗, Fengwei Zhang†, Bo Chen‡, Yingjiu Li∗, Wen-Tao Zhu§, Yangguang Tian∗, Zhan Wang¶ and Albert Ching ∗School of Information Systems, Singapore Management University, {bingchang, yjli, ygtian}@smu.edu.sg †Department of Computer Science, Wayne State University, [email protected] ‡Department of Computer Science, Michigan Technological University, [email protected] §Data Assurance and Communications Security Research Center, Chinese Academy of Sciences, [email protected] ¶RealTime Invent, Inc. i-Sprint Innovations Abstract—We introduce MobiCeal, the first practical Plausibly searched and copied when he was crossing a border, and he Deniable Encryption (PDE) system for mobile devices that can was inspected for seven times during five years [26]. defend against strong coercive multi-snapshot adversaries, who The existing PDE systems on mobile devices [21], [34], may examine the storage medium of a user’s mobile device at different points of time and force the user to decrypt data. [35], [43], [27], [20] are not resilient against such multi- MobiCeal relies on “dummy write” to obfuscate the differences snapshot attacks since they hide sensitive data in the ran- between multiple snapshots of storage medium due to existence domness initially filled across the entire disk. By comparing of hidden data. By incorporating PDE in block layer, MobiCeal storage snapshots at different points of time, a multi-snapshot supports a broad deployment of any block-based file systems on adversary may detect any unaccountable changes to the ran- mobile devices. -
The Rise of Autorun- Based Malware by Vinoo Thomas, Prashanth Ramagopal, and Rahul Mohandas Report the Rise of Autorun-Based Malware
Report The Rise of AutoRun- Based Malware By Vinoo Thomas, Prashanth Ramagopal, and Rahul Mohandas Report The Rise of AutoRun-Based Malware Table of Contents Abstract 3 The Return of Removable-Disk Malware 3 Distribution of AutoRun-Based Malware 4 AutoRun Woes 6 Incomplete autorun.inf cleaning 7 Traditional detection methods 8 Smart removal of autorun.inf 8 Leveraging In-the-Cloud Computing Technology 10 The Road Ahead 11 About the authors 12 Report The Rise of AutoRun-Based Malware Abstract Most people associate today’s computer viruses and other prevalent malware with the Internet. But that’s not where they started. Lest we forget, the earliest computer threats came from the era of floppy disks and removable media. With the arrival of the Internet, email and network-based attacks became the preferred infection vector for hackers to spread malicious code—while security concerns about removable media took a back seat. Now, however, our attention is returning to plug-in media. Over the years, floppy disks have been replaced by portable hard drives, flash media cards, memory sticks, and other forms of data storage. Today’s removable devices can hold 10,000 times more data than yesterday’s floppy disks. Not only can they store more data, today’s devices are “smart”—with the ability to run portable software programs1 or boot operating systems. 2,3 Seeing the popularity of removable storage, virus authors realized the potential of using this media as an infection vector. And they are greatly aided by a convenience feature in operating systems called AutoRun, which launches the content on a removable disk without any user interaction. -
Windows Command Prompt Cheatsheet
Windows Command Prompt Cheatsheet - Command line interface (as opposed to a GUI - graphical user interface) - Used to execute programs - Commands are small programs that do something useful - There are many commands already included with Windows, but we will use a few. - A filepath is where you are in the filesystem • C: is the C drive • C:\user\Documents is the Documents folder • C:\user\Documents\hello.c is a file in the Documents folder Command What it Does Usage dir Displays a list of a folder’s files dir (shows current folder) and subfolders dir myfolder cd Displays the name of the current cd filepath chdir directory or changes the current chdir filepath folder. cd .. (goes one directory up) md Creates a folder (directory) md folder-name mkdir mkdir folder-name rm Deletes a folder (directory) rm folder-name rmdir rmdir folder-name rm /s folder-name rmdir /s folder-name Note: if the folder isn’t empty, you must add the /s. copy Copies a file from one location to copy filepath-from filepath-to another move Moves file from one folder to move folder1\file.txt folder2\ another ren Changes the name of a file ren file1 file2 rename del Deletes one or more files del filename exit Exits batch script or current exit command control echo Used to display a message or to echo message turn off/on messages in batch scripts type Displays contents of a text file type myfile.txt fc Compares two files and displays fc file1 file2 the difference between them cls Clears the screen cls help Provides more details about help (lists all commands) DOS/Command Prompt help command commands Source: https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc754340.aspx. -
PV204: Disk Encryption Lab
PV204: Disk encryption lab May 12, 2016, Milan Broz <[email protected]> Introduction Encryption can provide confidentiality and authenticity of user data. It can be implemented on several different layes, including application, file system or storage device. Application encryption examples are PGP or ZIP compression with password. Encryption of files (inside filesystem or through independent layer like Linux eCryptfs) provides more generic solution. Yet some parts (like filesystem metadata) are still unencrypted. However this solution provides encrypted data with private key per user. (Every user can have own directory encrypted by own key.) Encryption of the low-level storage (disk) is called Full Disk Encryption (FDE). It is completely transparent to the user (no need to choose what to encrypt – the whole disk is encrypted). The encrypted disk behaves as the same as a disk without encryption. The major disadvantage is that everyone who knows the password can read the whole disk. Often we combine FDE with another encryption layer. The primary use of FDE is to provide data confidentiality in power-down mode (stolen laptop does not leak user data). Once the disk is unlocked, the main encryption key remains in system, usually directly in system RAM. Exercise II will show how easy is to get this key from memory image of system. Another disadvantage of FDE is that it usually cannot guarantee integrity of data. Encryption is fully transparent and length-preserving, the ciphertext and plaintext device are of the same size. There is no space to store any integrity information. This allows attacks by direct modification of ciphertext. -
Disk Clone Industrial
Disk Clone Industrial USER MANUAL Ver. 1.0.0 Updated: 9 June 2020 | Contents | ii Contents Legal Statement............................................................................... 4 Introduction......................................................................................4 Cloning Data.................................................................................................................................... 4 Erasing Confidential Data..................................................................................................................5 Disk Clone Overview.......................................................................6 System Requirements....................................................................................................................... 7 Software Licensing........................................................................................................................... 7 Software Updates............................................................................................................................. 8 Getting Started.................................................................................9 Disk Clone Installation and Distribution.......................................................................................... 12 Launching and initial Configuration..................................................................................................12 Navigating Disk Clone.....................................................................................................................14 -
Investigating Powershell Attacks
Investigating PowerShell Attacks Black Hat USA 2014 August 7, 2014 PRESENTED BY: Ryan Kazanciyan, Matt Hastings © Mandiant, A FireEye Company. All rights reserved. Background Case Study WinRM, Victim VPN SMB, NetBIOS Attacker Victim workstations, Client servers § Fortune 100 organization § Command-and-control via § Compromised for > 3 years § Scheduled tasks § Active Directory § Local execution of § Authenticated access to PowerShell scripts corporate VPN § PowerShell Remoting © Mandiant, A FireEye Company. All rights reserved. 2 Why PowerShell? It can do almost anything… Execute commands Download files from the internet Reflectively load / inject code Interface with Win32 API Enumerate files Interact with the registry Interact with services Examine processes Retrieve event logs Access .NET framework © Mandiant, A FireEye Company. All rights reserved. 3 PowerShell Attack Tools § PowerSploit § Posh-SecMod § Reconnaissance § Veil-PowerView § Code execution § Metasploit § DLL injection § More to come… § Credential harvesting § Reverse engineering § Nishang © Mandiant, A FireEye Company. All rights reserved. 4 PowerShell Malware in the Wild © Mandiant, A FireEye Company. All rights reserved. 5 Investigation Methodology WinRM PowerShell Remoting evil.ps1 backdoor.ps1 Local PowerShell script Persistent PowerShell Network Registry File System Event Logs Memory Traffic Sources of Evidence © Mandiant, A FireEye Company. All rights reserved. 6 Attacker Assumptions § Has admin (local or domain) on target system § Has network access to needed ports on target system § Can use other remote command execution methods to: § Enable execution of unsigned PS scripts § Enable PS remoting © Mandiant, A FireEye Company. All rights reserved. 7 Version Reference 2.0 3.0 4.0 Requires WMF Requires WMF Default (SP1) 3.0 Update 4.0 Update Requires WMF Requires WMF Default (R2 SP1) 3.0 Update 4.0 Update Requires WMF Default 4.0 Update Default Default Default (R2) © Mandiant, A FireEye Company. -
Crypto Wars of the 1990S
Danielle Kehl, Andi Wilson, and Kevin Bankston DOOMED TO REPEAT HISTORY? LESSONS FROM THE CRYPTO WARS OF THE 1990S CYBERSECURITY June 2015 | INITIATIVE © 2015 NEW AMERICA This report carries a Creative Commons license, which permits non-commercial re-use of New America content when proper attribution is provided. This means you are free to copy, display and distribute New America’s work, or in- clude our content in derivative works, under the following conditions: ATTRIBUTION. NONCOMMERCIAL. SHARE ALIKE. You must clearly attribute the work You may not use this work for If you alter, transform, or build to New America, and provide a link commercial purposes without upon this work, you may distribute back to www.newamerica.org. explicit prior permission from the resulting work only under a New America. license identical to this one. For the full legal code of this Creative Commons license, please visit creativecommons.org. If you have any questions about citing or reusing New America content, please contact us. AUTHORS Danielle Kehl, Senior Policy Analyst, Open Technology Institute Andi Wilson, Program Associate, Open Technology Institute Kevin Bankston, Director, Open Technology Institute ABOUT THE OPEN TECHNOLOGY INSTITUTE ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Open Technology Institute at New America is committed to freedom The authors would like to thank and social justice in the digital age. To achieve these goals, it intervenes Hal Abelson, Steven Bellovin, Jerry in traditional policy debates, builds technology, and deploys tools with Berman, Matt Blaze, Alan David- communities. OTI brings together a unique mix of technologists, policy son, Joseph Hall, Lance Hoffman, experts, lawyers, community organizers, and urban planners to examine the Seth Schoen, and Danny Weitzner impacts of technology and policy on people, commerce, and communities. -
Hunting Red Team Activities with Forensic Artifacts
Hunting Red Team Activities with Forensic Artifacts By Haboob Team 1 [email protected] Table of Contents 1. Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 5 2. Why Threat Hunting?............................................................................................................................. 5 3. Windows Forensic.................................................................................................................................. 5 4. LAB Environment Demonstration ..................................................................................................... 6 4.1 Red Team ......................................................................................................................................... 6 4.2 Blue Team ........................................................................................................................................ 6 4.3 LAB Overview .................................................................................................................................. 6 5. Scenarios .................................................................................................................................................. 7 5.1 Remote Execution Tool (Psexec) ............................................................................................... 7 5.2 PowerShell Suspicious Commands ......................................................................................