Aws Guardduty Unusual Protocol
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Fast, Accurate, Vulnerability Assessments
SOLUTIONS / MANAGED SECURITY / VULNERABILITY SCANNING Managed Vulnerability Scanning FAST, ACCURATE, SOLUTION VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENTS AT-A-GLANCE • Scanning options include Identify and Mitigate Vulnerabilities that OS, database, application, Threaten Compliance and host • Credentialed Patch Vulnerability scanning is a critical component of protecting any hybrid Audit Scans IT infrastructure system, especially those that need to meet strict • Host/Network FedRAMP, HIPAA, and PCI-DSS compliance requirements. Managing Discovery Scans vulnerabilities helps identify software flaws, missing patches, malware, • CIS Hardening Scans misconfigurations across operating systems, devices and applications. • Web Application Scans Knowledge is Power • Auditing and scanning DataBank’s Managed Vulnerability Scanning solution leverages for WannaCry, Spectre, Meltdown, Bash Shellshock, hundreds of configuration and compliance scanning templates to Badlock, and Shadow audit against industry benchmarks and best practices while powerful Brokers reporting and visibility tools help you to make sense of the findings. DataBank’s Managed Vulnerability Scanning helps you accomplish your goals of identifying and mitigating vulnerabilities before they become a problem. DataBank’s solution is supported by a dedicated staff of security engineers and a seasoned Chief Information Security Officer. KEY BENEFITS LAYERED DEFENSE PROACTIVE SERVICE EXPERT GUIDANCE CONTINUOUS MONITORING HOW IT WORKS ASSET VULNERABILITY VULNERABILITY VULNERABILITY DISCOVERY SCANNING ASSESSMENT -
Technical Report RHUL–ISG–2019–1 27 March 2019
20 years of Bleichenbacher attacks Gage Boyle Technical Report RHUL–ISG–2019–1 27 March 2019 Information Security Group Royal Holloway University of London Egham, Surrey, TW20 0EX United Kingdom Student Number: 100866673 Gage, Boyle 20 Years of Bleichenbacher Attacks Supervisor: Kenny Paterson Submitted as part of the requirements for the award of the MSc in Information Security at Royal Holloway, University of London. I declare that this assignment is all my own work and that I have acknowledged all quotations from published or unpublished work of other people. I also declare that I have read the statements on plagiarism in Section 1 of the Regulations Governing Examination and Assessment Offences, and in accordance with these regulations I submit this project report as my own work. Signature: Date: Acknowledgements I would first like to thank my project supervisor, Kenny Paterson. This project would not have been possible without his continuous encouragement to push the boundaries of my knowledge, and I am grateful for the commitment and expertise that he has provided throughout. Secondly, I would like to thank Nimrod Aviram for his invaluable advice, particularly with respect to algorithm implementation and understanding the finer details of this project. Further thanks should go to Raja Naeem Akram, Oliver Kunz and David Morrison for taking the time to teach me Python and how to run my source code on an Ubuntu server. I am grateful for the time that David Stranack, Thomas Bingham and James Boyle have spent proof reading this project, and for the continuous support from my part- ner, Lisa Moxham. -
TLS Deep Dive
12/9/17 TLS Deep Dive Website Security & More Joe Pranevich December 5, 2017 Today’s Session – Overview of TLS – Connection Establishment – Testing Tools – Recent Security Issues 1 12/9/17 What is SSL/TLS? – Core internet protocols (IP, TCP, HTTP) were designed without default security – SSL was invented in 1995 by Netscape to support encryption of web traffic for ecommerce and other uses. – SSL/TLS sits above TCP. It can be used to encrypt many protocols, but mostly used for HTTP. – Over two decades, SSL has been improved (with vulnerabilities discovered in older versions). The name was changed to TLS in 1999. SSL & TLS Timeline Protocol Released Notes SSLv2 1995 Vulnerable, depreciated in 2011 SSLv3 1996 Vulnerable, depreciated in 2015 TLS 1.0 1999 At risk, no longer permitted by PCI TLS 1.1 2006 TLS 1.2 2008 TLS 1.3 TBD Internet Draft 2 12/9/17 But Wait, There’s More! – TLS supports dozens of different encryption methods, compression methods, hashing functions, and other details. – Clients and servers select from a menu of these options to negotiate the best security (more on that later) – Most of these options have their own security histories, some have been deprecated, etc. Key Concepts – Shared Key Cryptography (Symmertric) – Public/Private Key Cryptography (Asymmetric) – Hashing 3 12/9/17 Connection Establishment – TLS Handshake – Cipher negotiation – Certificate Validation – Device Compatibility TLS Handshake – Part One – Client sends a “hello” message saying that they want TLS. – It includes TLS version, ciphers it supports, and other details – Server sends a “hello” message back. – It selects the most secure matching TLS version and ciphers – Connection will fail if client and server cannot agree on protocols and ciphers 4 12/9/17 Client Devices Have Different Capabilities As Do Servers & Load Balancers 5 12/9/17 We Care About The Intersection Backwards Compatibility Warning! – Web browsers and operating systems get updated frequently; you can usually rely on web users having a recent TLS stack when they connect to you. -
TLS Attacks & DNS Security
IAIK TLS Attacks & DNS Security Information Security 2019 Johannes Feichtner [email protected] IAIK Outline TCP / IP Model ● Browser Issues Application SSLStrip Transport MITM Attack revisited Network Link layer ● PKI Attacks (Ethernet, WLAN, LTE…) Weaknesses HTTP TLS / SSL FLAME FTP DNS Telnet SSH ● Implementation Attacks ... ● Protocol Attacks ● DNS Security IAIK Review: TLS Services All applications running TLS are provided with three essential services Authentication HTTPS FTPS Verify identity of client and server SMTPS ... Data Integrity Detect message tampering and forgery, TLS e.g. malicious Man-in-the-middle TCP IP Encryption Ensure privacy of exchanged communication Note: Technically, not all services are required to be used Can raise risk for security issues! IAIK Review: TLS Handshake RFC 5246 = Establish parameters for cryptographically secure data channel Full handshake Client Server scenario! Optional: ClientHello 1 Only with ServerHello Client TLS! Certificate 2 ServerKeyExchange Certificate CertificateRequest ClientKeyExchange ServerHelloDone CertificateVerify 3 ChangeCipherSpec Finished ChangeCipherSpec 4 Finished Application Data Application Data IAIK Review: Certificates Source: http://goo.gl/4qYsPz ● Certificate Authority (CA) = Third party, trusted by both the subject (owner) of the certificate and the party (site) relying upon the certificate ● Browsers ship with set of > 130 trust stores (root CAs) IAIK Browser Issues Overview Focus: Relationship between TLS and HTTP Problem? ● Attacker wants to access encrypted data ● Browsers also have to deal with legacy websites Enforcing max. security level would „break“ connectivity to many sites Attack Vectors ● SSLStrip ● MITM Attack …and somehow related: Cookie Stealing due to absent „Secure“ flag… IAIK Review: ARP Poisoning How? Attacker a) Join WLAN, ● Sniff data start ARP Poisoning ● Manipulate data b) Create own AP ● Attack HTTPS connections E.g. -
Circus Scam 1.9 0.5 UY Milford, Alison (Ls) Circu
Author Title AR Book AR Interest Joyce, Melanie (Ls) Billy's Boy 1.6 0.5 MY Milford, Alison (Ls) Circus Scam 1.9 0.5 UY Milford, Alison (Ls) Circus Scam 1.9 0.5 UY Milford, Alison (Ls) Circus Scam 1.9 0.5 UY Pearson, Danny (Ls) Escape From The City 1.9 0.5 MY Pearson, Danny (Ls) Escape From The City 1.9 0.5 MY Pearson, Danny (Ls) Football Smash 1.9 0.5 MY Pearson, Danny (Ls) Football Smash 1.9 0.5 MY Pearson, Danny (Ls) Football Smash 1.9 0.5 MY Powell, Jillian (Ls) Cage Boy: Level 5 1.9 0.5 MY Gray, Kes Oi Goat!: World Book Day 2018 2 0.5 LY Hurn, Roger (Ls) Too Hot: Level 3 2 0.5 MY Thomas, Valerie Winnie Flies Again 2 0.5 LY Thomas, Valerie Winnie Flies Again 2 0.5 LY Adams, Spike T. (Ls) Evil Ink 2.1 0.5 UY Adams, Spike T. (Ls) Snap Kick 2.1 0.5 UY Clayton, David Hell-Ride Tonight! 2.1 0.5 MY Cullimore, Stan (Ls) Bubble Attack 2.1 0.5 UY Cullimore, Stan (Ls) Bubble Attack 2.1 0.5 UY Cullimore, Stan (Ls) Robert And The Werewolf 2.1 0.5 UY Cullimore, Stan (Ls) Robert And The Werewolf 2.1 0.5 UY Higson, Charlie Silverfin: The Graphic Novel 2.1 1 MY Lee, Janelle (Ls) Badu Boys Rule! 2.1 0.5 MY Orme, David Boffin Boy And The Emperor's Tomb 2.1 0.5 MY Powell, Jillian (Ls) Chip Boy 2.1 0.5 UY Tompsett, C.L. -
It-Säkerhet - Examensarbete
IT-SÄKERHET - EXAMENSARBETE Största IT-säkerhetshoten mot svenska företag och organisationer idag, samt kontemporära metoder och verktyg för bekämpning av dessa IT-säkerhetshot. DEN 29 MARS 2016 BENJAMIN LUNDSTRÖM Examensarbete i Nät- & kommunikationsteknik, Umeå universitet. Löpnummer EL1609. BENJAMIN LUNDSTRÖM 16-03-29 IT-SÄKERHET - EXAMENSARBETE Sammanfattning Olika former av IT-relaterade hot har förekommit sedan internets födelse. Inledningsvis var de harmlösa humoristiska program som över tiden utvecklades till kriminella verktyg med ekonomiska syften. Elakartad programkod benämns under samlingsnamnet Malware. En angripare besitter idag ett stort antal metoder för otillåten tillgång till system, neka legitima användare tillgång till system eller på ett stort antal sätt bedriva kriminell verksamhet av ekonomisk karaktär. Skydds- och bekämpningsmetoderna innefattar brandväggar, olika analys-, detektions- och preventionssystem (IDS/IPS) och kryptering. Men för att komma tillrätta med IT-hoten fullt ut krävs också säkerhetsutbildning och incidenthantering som sker via incidentplanering, rapporter, dokumentation, backup och informationsklassning. Kontemporära IT-säkerhetshot av betydande art belyses i rapporten. Stuxnet (2009), som angrep Irans kärnvapenforskning. Flamer (2011), ett cybervapen vars syfte är spårlös informationsinhämtning. BlackEnergy (2015) och angreppet mot elförsörjningen i Ukraina. DDoS- attacken mot Svenska medier behandlas liksom Petya (2016) som är nya generationens Ransomeware. Det är vitalt för företag och organisationer att skydda sin viktigaste tillgång, informationen. Både mot cyberkriminella element i rent finansiellt syfte men i tilltagande grad också mot olika cybervapen och möjligtvis också mot cyberterrorism. Abstract A number of IT-related threats have emerged since the birth of internet. In the beginning they were harmless but over time they developed into fearsome criminal tools for economic purposes. -
Ethical Hacking : Methodology and Techniques
Ethical Hacking : Methodology and techniques TEI Heraklion [email protected] November 2017 Prerequisites You should have some knowledge of : 1. Basic network protocols : IP, ICMP, UDP, TCP 2. Network devices : routers, switches, access-points, firewalls, IDS/IPS 3. Basic network security : WiFi security (WPA2), SSL 4. Unsecured protocols VS secured protocols : FTP-SFTP-SCP / HTTP-HTTPS / Telnet- SSH 5. System administration : Basic Linux administration, Windows Active Directory Domains 6. Basic virtualization techniques using Vmware Workstation or Virtualbox Interesting skills if you plan a career in Computer Security : – Programming skills, System administration (Windows, Linux, Vmware, …), Database administration, Networking skills Disclaimer : The methodology, techniques and tools that you will learn must not be used in a production environment… Use these tools only in a protected lab environment 2/34 Hacking phases : RSGMC 1. Reconnaissance 2. Scanning 3. Gain access 4. Maintain access 5. Clear tracks 3/34 1. Reconnaissance Aim : gather info about target Target may be organization, system, employee What kind of info : Employee : linkedin, facebook, … Organization : location, ... Network infrastructure : Network integrator ? Architecture ? IP addresses ? Procedures ? Policies Types of reconnaissance : ACTIVE (= direct contact : social engineering, physical access) PASSIVE (no direct contact, internet queries) Sources of information Internet websites, google hacking, whois database, DNS footprinting, social media job sites -
How to Handle Security Flaws in an Open Source Project
How to Handle Security Flaws in an Open Source Project Jeremy Allison / Google / Samba Team All new products use Open Source • Economics drive this. – Underlying OS is Linux (usually) or FreeBSD. • Unless you employ Linus or other notable names, you don’t have full control over what goes into your product. • You must have a process to coordinate with Open Source upstream developers in order to ship secure products. – At the very least, you need to know about vulnerabilities in the code you’re using, even if you don’t (or can’t) fix it yourself. Dealing with upstream vulnerabilities • Ensure the upstream project takes security seriously. – This is not as common as you might think – do you have a contact point if someone reports a security flaw to you ? – https://www.linuxfoundation.org/blog/2018/04/software-security-is- a-shared-responsibility/ • Even projects that do security well themselves have dependencies. – Know what is going into your storage solution. • If you get this wrong, it can be a disaster. Process, process, process • Put a process in place to handle all security reports uniformly. – Start with an email alias: [email protected] – Can be hard to do with a pure volunteer organization, but without it you’re not professional. • Ability to get Common Vulnerability and Exposure (CVE) number is essential for tracking. – Linux distributions are your friends here, their security Teams can handle this for you. • The process doesn’t have to be perfect, but it does have to be consistent. The reputation game • Use gpg encrypted email to communicate with vulnerability reporters. -
Security Report
PwC Weekly Security Report This is a weekly digest of security news and events from around the world. News items are summarised and web links are provided for further information. Cyber-execs: Expect a cataclysmic cyber-terror event within 2 years When it comes to the growing threats of global The findings accordingly show that 72% cyber-terrorism, the current state of security actually feel that the topic isn’t hyped within the US and the ability of organizations to enough, and that education and awareness prevent such attacks, information security is critical to foment a re-examination of executives feel deeply at risk. In fact, many the type of security technology used to expect a catastrophic incident to occur within protect both the US government and the next 24 months. private sectors. The majority of those surveyed (89%) believe that both military A survey from Thycotic, a provider of privileged and businesses need to focus more on account management (PAM) solutions, found developing capabilities to defend against that 63% of respondents feel that terrorists are terrorist-inspired cyber-attacks. capable of launching a catastrophic cyber- attack on the US, and could do so within the upcoming year. “Over two-thirds of respondents stated they did Source: http://www.infosecurity- magazine.com/news/cyberexecs- feel that terrorists were this close, and over 80 expect-a- percent agreed they could strike within two cataclysmic/http://www.symantec years,” said Nathan Wenzler, executive director .com/connec of security at Thycotic. “A consensus like this is not unusual these days, as more and more terrorist organizations have demonstrated increasing sophistication in their use of technology to communicate, social media to recruit new members, and of course, technical exploits and direct attacks against websites, corporate networks and government entities.” Even so, 92% of respondents believe that a majority of US companies either need more security or are way behind the security curve to defend against cyber-terrorism attacks. -
Comparison of Modern Network Attacks on TLS Protocol
565 Comparison of Modern Network Attacks on TLS Protocol Oleksandr Ivanov, Victor Ruzhentsev Roman Oliynykov Department of Information Technology Security, Department of Information Systems and Technologies Kharkiv National University of Radio Electronics Security, Kharkiv, Ukraine V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University [email protected], [email protected] Kharkiv, Ukraine [email protected] Abstract—The Transport Layer Security (TLS) is protocol uses cipher suites, key exchange algorithms and cryptographic protocol that provides confidentiality and certificates to provide privacy, data integrity and integrity of data in untrusted networks connections. The authentication of communicating parties [18, 19, 20]. protocol is composed of two layers: the TLS Record Protocol Originally, TLS was started as the Secure Sockets Layer for encapsulation of various higher-level protocols and the (SSL). Then it was adopted by the Internet Engineering TLS Handshake Protocol for connection security. Nowadays Task Force (IETF) and specified as TLS 1.0 [17]. Many TLS has become the secure standard of choice for Internet modern network protocols (e.g., HTTPS, SMTP, FTP, and mobile applications. There are many attacks on the TLS LDAP) use TLS for securing an application-level traffic protocol that exploit its vulnerabilities: Cipher Block [20]. Chaining (CBC) mode encryption, data compression, using obsolete cypher suites and hash functions. Therefore, it is Since 2011, this protocol is actively being explored. necessary to identify and examine existing threats of TLS. BEAST and CRIME are the first attacks that proposed by The paper explores the TLS protocol versions and main Thai Duong and Juliano Rizzo [21, 22]. These attacks differences between them. -
Supreme Court of the United States
No. 19-783 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States NATHAN VAN BUREN, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES, Respondent. ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES CouRT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRcuIT BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE COMPUTER SECURITY RESEARCHERS, ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION, CENTER FOR DEMOCRACY & TECHNOLOGY, BUGCROWD, RAPID7, SCYTHE, AND TENABLE IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER ANDREW CROCKER Counsel of Record NAOMI GILENS ELECTRONic FRONTIER FOUNDATION 815 Eddy Street San Francisco, California 94109 (415) 436-9333 [email protected] Counsel for Amici Curiae 296514 A (800) 274-3321 • (800) 359-6859 i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TABLE OF CONTENTS..........................i TABLE OF CITED AUTHORITIES ..............iii INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE ..................1 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT .....................4 ARGUMENT....................................5 I. The Work of the Computer Security Research Community Is Vital to the Public Interest...................................5 A. Computer Security Benefits from the Involvement of Independent Researchers ...........................5 B. Security Researchers Have Made Important Contributions to the Public Interest by Identifying Security Threats in Essential Infrastructure, Voting Systems, Medical Devices, Vehicle Software, and More ...................10 II. The Broad Interpretation of the CFAA Adopted by the Eleventh Circuit Chills Valuable Security Research. ................16 ii Table of Contents Page A. The Eleventh Circuit’s Interpretation of the CFAA Would Extend to Violations of Website Terms of Service and Other Written Restrictions on Computer Use. .................................16 B. Standard Computer Security Research Methods Can Violate Written Access Restrictions...........................18 C. The Broad Interpretation of the CFAA Discourages Researchers from Pursuing and Disclosing Security Flaws ...............................22 D. Voluntary Disclosure Guidelines and Industry-Sponsored Bug Bounty Programs A re Not Sufficient to Mitigate the Chill . -
Iot Vulnerabilities Easily 5
• Babak D. Beheshti, Associate Dean of the School of Engineering and Computing Sciences at NYIT. • Clyde Bennett, Chief Healthcare Technology Strategist at Aldridge Health. • Ross Brewer, VP and MD of EMEA at LogRhythm. • Ben Desjardins, Director of Security Solutions at Radware. • Eric O'Neill, National Security Strategist at Carbon Black. • Jeff Schilling, Chief of Operations and Security at Armor. • Karl Sigler, Threat Intelligence Manager at Trustwave. • Sigurdur Stefnisson, VP of Threat Research at CYREN. • Amos Stern, CEO at Siemplify. • Ronen Yehoshua, CEO at Morphisec. ! Visit the magazine website at www.insecuremag.com Feedback and contributions: Mirko Zorz, Editor in Chief - [email protected] News: Zeljka Zorz, Managing Editor - [email protected] Marketing: Berislav Kucan, Director of Operations - [email protected] (IN)SECURE Magazine can be freely distributed in the form of the original, non-modified PDF document. Distribution of modified versions of (IN)SECURE Magazine content is prohibited without permission. ! Copyright (IN)SECURE Magazine 2016. www.insecuremag.com Are all IoT vulnerabilities easily 5. Insecure or no network pairing control op- avoidable? tions (device to device or device to net- works). Every vulnerability or privacy issue reported 6. Not testing for common code injection ex- for consumer connected home and wearable ploits. technology products since November 2015 7. The lack of transport security and encrypt- could have been easily avoided, according to ed storage including unencrypted data the Online Trust Alliance (OTA). transmission of personal and sensitive in- formation including but not limited to user OTA researchers analyzed publicly reported ID and passwords. device vulnerabilities from November 2015 8. Lacking a sustainable and supportable through July 2016, and found the most glaring plan to address vulnerabilities through the failures were attributed to: product lifecycle including the lack of soft- ware/firmware update capabilities and/or insecure and untested security patches/ 1.