DOCSLIB.ORG

SA-C0056 Information About DROWN Vulnerability

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
SA-C0056 Information About DROWN Vulnerability Alcatel-Lucent Security Advisory No. SA-C0056 Ed. 01 Information about DROWN vulnerability Summary DROWN stands for Decrypting RSA with Obsolete and Weakened eNcryption. The DROWN attack has been reported in March 1st 2016 allowing a remote attacker to execute harmful actions on a vulnerable server. A server is considered as vulnerable if - it allows SSLv2 connections or - it shares a public key with another vulnerable server allowing SSLv2 connections. The severity is considered as the same for Heartbleed and the official risk is currently rated High. The classification levels are Very High, High, Medium and Low. This vulnerability is identified under CVE-2016-0800 and is associated to seven other vulnerabilities affecting the OpenSSL library (CVE-2016-0702, CVE-2016-0703, CVE-2016-0704, CVE-2016-0705, CVE-2016-0797, CVE-2016-0798, CVE-2016-0799). The analysis of these vulnerabilities is followed with a particular attention since it concerns SSL and TLS cryptographic protocols that have been challenged these last years with Heartbleed and Poodle attacks A closer inspection reveals that the DROWN attack may be executed on a vulnerable server in under a minute using a single PC and the general variant of the attack can be conducted in under 8 hours. Alcatel-Lucent Enterprise voice products using affected version of OpenSSL 0.9.8, 1.0.0 and 1.0.1 are concerned by this security alert. However, although OpenSSL versions are affected, the protocol SSLv2 (as well as SSLv3) was removed in Alcatel-Lucent Enterprise voice products. OpenSSL 1.0.2 servers should upgrade to 1.0.2g OpenSSL 1.0.1 servers should upgrade to 1.0.1s The Alcatel-Lucent Enterprise Security Team is currently investigating implications of this security flaw and working on corrective measures. This note is for informational purpose about the DROWN vulnerability. References CVE-2016-0800 http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2016-0800 Advisory severity CVSS Base score : 5.8 (HIGH) - AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:N CVE-2016-0799 http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2016-0799 Advisory severity CVSS Base score : 2.6 (LOW) - AV:N/AC:H/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:P CVE-2016-0798 http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2016-0798 Advisory severity CVSS Base score : 4.3 (LOW) - AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:P CVE-2016-0797 http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2016-0797 Advisory severity CVSS Base score : 4.3 (LOW) - AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:P CVE-2016-0705 http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2016-0705 Advisory severity CVSS Base score : 2.6 (LOW) - AV:N/AC:H/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:P CVE-2016-0704 http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2016-0704 Advisory severity CVSS Base score : 4.3 (MEDIUM) - AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:N CVE-2016-0703 http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2016-0703 Advisory severity CVSS Base score : 4.3 (MEDIUM) - AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:N CVE-2016-0702 http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2016-0702 Advisory severity CVSS Base score : 2.6 (LOW) - AV:L/AC:H/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:N DROWN documentation references https://drownattack.com https://www.openssl.org/news/secadv/20160301.txt https://access.redhat.com/articles/2176731 Description of the vulnerabilities Information about DROWN attack. DROWN stands for Decrypting RSA with Obsolete and Weakened eNcryption. The DROWN attack has been reported in March 1st 2016 allowing a remote attacker to execute harmful actions on a vulnerable server. A server is considered as vulnerable if - it allows SSLv2 connections or - it shares a public key with another vulnerable server allowing SSLv2 connections. The severity is considered as the same for Heartbleed and the official risk is currently rated High. The classification levels are Very High, High, Medium and Low. This vulnerability is identified under CVE-2016-0800 and is associated to seven other vulnerabilities affecting the OpenSSL library. CVE-2016-0800 A padding oracle flaw was found in the Secure Sockets Layer version 2.0 (SSLv2) protocol. An attacker can potentially use this flaw to decrypt RSA-encrypted cipher text from a connection using a newer SSL/TLS protocol version, allowing them to decrypt such connections. This cross-protocol attack is publicly referred to as DROWN. CVE-2016-0799 The fmtstr function in crypto/bio/b_print.c in OpenSSL 1.0.1 before 1.0.1s and 1.0.2 before 1.0.2g improperly calculates string lengths, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (overflow and out-of-bounds read) or possibly have unspecified other impact via a long string, as demonstrated by a large amount of ASN.1 data, a different vulnerability than CVE-2016-2842. CVE-2016-0798 A memory leak flaw was found in the way OpenSSL performed SRP user database look-ups using the SRP_VBASE_get_by_user() function. A remote attacker connecting to certain SRP servers with an invalid user name could leak approximately 300 bytes of the server's memory per connection. CVE-2016-0797 An integer overflow flaw, leading to a NULL pointer dereference or a heap-based memory corruption, was found in the way some BIGNUM functions of OpenSSL were implemented. Applications that use these functions with large untrusted input could crash or, potentially, execute arbitrary code. CVE-2016-0705 A double-free flaw was found in the way OpenSSL parsed certain malformed DSA (Digital Signature Algorithm) private keys. An attacker could create specially crafted DSA private keys that, when processed by an application compiled against OpenSSL, could cause the application to crash. CVE-2016-0704 It was discovered that the SSLv2 protocol implementation in OpenSSL did not properly implement the Bleichenbacher protection for export cipher suites. An attacker could use a SSLv2 server using OpenSSL as a Bleichenbacher oracle. CVE-2016-0703 It was discovered that the SSLv2 servers using OpenSSL accepted SSLv2 connection handshakes that indicated non- zero clear key length for non-export cipher suites. An attacker could use this flaw to decrypt recorded SSLv2 sessions with the server by using it as a decryption oracle. CVE-2016-0702 A side-channel attack was found that makes use of cache-bank conflicts on the Intel Sandy-Bridge microarchitecture. An attacker who has the ability to control code in a thread running on the same hyper-threaded core as the victim's thread that is performing decryption, could use this flaw to recover RSA private keys. Status on Alcatel-Lucent Enterprise products For supported products and extended support contracts on former versions, Alcatel-Lucent Enterprise will provide fixes. For unsupported products, please refer to official patch provided by the OS vendors depending on your OS version. Status on Alcatel-Lucent Enterprise products Products concerned by the DROWN vulnerability OpenTouch Edge Server Up to 2.1.1 OpenTouch Business Edition Up to 2.1.1 Notes: Include OT server and virtual machine of OmniPCX Enterprise Media Services OpenTouch Multimedia Services Up to 2.1.1 Notes: Include OT server and virtual machine of FlexLM OpenTouch Messaging Center Up to 2.1.1 Products NOT concerned by the DROWN vulnerability Alcatel-Lucent 8 Series IP Touch Phones Phased-out. Alcatel-lucent Premium Deskphones R210.3.20.41 and above 8002/8012 Deskphone R110.3.55.2 OmniTouch 8082 My IC Phone R300.1.15.9 and above 8088 Smart Deskphone R100.1.008.2 and above OpenTouch Connection 2.1.205.002 OpenTouch Conversation 2.1.105.003 OTC Web Not impacted since depend on OTC One the version of web browser OTC Meeting Manager 4059 IP attendant Not impacted 4059 EE IP attendant v1.6.1.6 and above OmniTouch 8460 Advanced Communications Server Note: concerns only standalone installation OmniTouch 8660 My Teamwork Unified Messaging OmniTouch 8670 Automated Message Delivery System Omnivista 8770 Network Management system R.2.6.7.01and above OpenTouch Messaging Center OT2.1.1 and above OpenTouch Fax Center 7.5.2.98 and above OpenTouch Session Border Controller R2.0 and 2.1.x Please, report to the FAQ OmniTouch Contact Center Standard Edition Not impacted OmniTouch 8400 Instant Communications Suite 6.7.400.300.d and above IP Touch Security Solution Not impacted Note: concerns only SIP-TLS OmniPCX Office Rich Communication Edition From R8.0 to above vmFlex 2.1.100.005 Solution for affected products Fixed Software Versions/Patches Product Fix in Date OpenTouch Edge Server Under investigation OpenTouch Business Edition 2.1.100.06x OT 2.1.1 MD2 (2.1.100.06x) will be Notes: available beg of June 2016 Include OT server and virtual machine of OmniPCX Enterprise Media Services OpenTouch Multimedia Services 2.1.100.06x OT 2.1.1 MD2 (2.1.100.06x) will be Notes: available beg of June 2016 Include OT server and virtual machine of FlexLM OpenTouch Messaging Center 2.1.100.06x OT 2.1.1 MD2 (2.1.100.06x) will be available beg of June 2016 Frequently Asked Questions Where can I find the release policy for ALE products? Release policy for ALE products is available on Alcatel-lucent Enterprise Business Portal https://businessportal.alcatel-lucent.com Where can I download ALE software patches? Software patches will be available on Alcatel-lucent Enterprise Business Portal https://businessportal.alcatel-lucent.com Are Red Hat OS releases on ICS servers supported by ALE? ALE does not provide any Operating System (OS) support for the ICS releases.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Alcatel-Lucent Security Advisory Sa0xx
    Alcatel-Lucent Security Advisory No. SA0053 Ed. 04 Information about Poodle vulnerability Summary POODLE stands for Padding Oracle On Downgraded Legacy Encryption. The POODLE has been reported in October 14th 2014 allowing a man-in-the-middle attacker to decrypt ciphertext via a padding oracle side-channel attack. The severity is not considered as the same for Heartbleed and/or bash shellshock vulnerabilities. The official risk is currently rated Medium. The classification levels are: Very High, High, Medium, and Low. The SSLv3 protocol is only impacted while TLSv1.0 and TLSv1.2 are not. This vulnerability is identified CVE- 2014-3566. Alcatel-Lucent Enterprise voice products using protocol SSLv3 are concerned by this security alert. Openssl versions concerned by the vulnerability: OpenSSL 1.0.1 through 1.0.1i (inclusive) OpenSSL 1.0.0 through 1.0.0n (inclusive) OpenSSL 0.9.8 through 0.9.8zb (inclusive) The Alcatel-Lucent Enterprise Security Team is currently investigating implications of this security flaw and working on a corrective measure, for OpenTouch 2.1.1 planned in Q4 2015, to prevent using SSLv3 that must be considered as vulnerable. This note is for informational purpose about the padding-oracle attack identified as “POODLE”. References CVE-2014-3566 http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2014-3566 Advisory severity CVSS Base score : 4.3 (MEDIUM) - AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:N https://www.openssl.org/news/secadv_20141015.txt https://www.openssl.org/~bodo/ssl-poodle.pdf Description of the vulnerabilities Information about Poodle vulnerability (CVE-2014-3566).
    [Show full text]
  • Systematization of Vulnerability Discovery Knowledge: Review
    Systematization of Vulnerability Discovery Knowledge Review Protocol Nuthan Munaiah and Andrew Meneely Department of Software Engineering Rochester Institute of Technology Rochester, NY 14623 {nm6061,axmvse}@rit.edu February 12, 2019 1 Introduction As more aspects of our daily lives depend on technology, the software that supports this technology must be secure. We, as users, almost subconsciously assume the software we use to always be available to serve our requests while preserving the confidentiality and integrity of our information. Unfortunately, incidents involving catastrophic software vulnerabilities such as Heartbleed (in OpenSSL), Stagefright (in Android), and EternalBlue (in Windows) have made abundantly clear that software, like other engineered creations, is prone to mistakes. Over the years, Software Engineering, as a discipline, has recognized the potential for engineers to make mistakes and has incorporated processes to prevent such mistakes from becoming exploitable vulnerabilities. Developers leverage a plethora of processes, techniques, and tools such as threat modeling, static and dynamic analyses, unit/integration/fuzz/penetration testing, and code reviews to engineer secure software. These practices, while effective at identifying vulnerabilities in software, are limited in their ability to describe the engineering failures that may have led to the introduction of vulnerabilities. Fortunately, as researchers propose empirically-validated metrics to characterize historical vulnerabilities, the factors that may have led to the introduction of vulnerabilities emerge. Developers must be made aware of these factors to help them proactively consider security implications of the code that they contribute. In other words, we want developers to think like an attacker (i.e. inculcate an attacker mindset) to proactively discover vulnerabilities.
    [Show full text]
  • Internet Security Threat Report VOLUME 21, APRIL 2016 TABLE of CONTENTS 2016 Internet Security Threat Report 2
    Internet Security Threat Report VOLUME 21, APRIL 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS 2016 Internet Security Threat Report 2 CONTENTS 4 Introduction 21 Tech Support Scams Go Nuclear, 39 Infographic: A New Zero-Day Vulnerability Spreading Ransomware Discovered Every Week in 2015 5 Executive Summary 22 Malvertising 39 Infographic: A New Zero-Day Vulnerability Discovered Every Week in 2015 8 BIG NUMBERS 23 Cybersecurity Challenges For Website Owners 40 Spear Phishing 10 MOBILE DEVICES & THE 23 Put Your Money Where Your Mouse Is 43 Active Attack Groups in 2015 INTERNET OF THINGS 23 Websites Are Still Vulnerable to Attacks 44 Infographic: Attackers Target Both Large and Small Businesses 10 Smartphones Leading to Malware and Data Breaches and Mobile Devices 23 Moving to Stronger Authentication 45 Profiting from High-Level Corporate Attacks and the Butterfly Effect 10 One Phone Per Person 24 Accelerating to Always-On Encryption 45 Cybersecurity, Cybersabotage, and Coping 11 Cross-Over Threats 24 Reinforced Reassurance with Black Swan Events 11 Android Attacks Become More Stealthy 25 Websites Need to Become Harder to 46 Cybersabotage and 12 How Malicious Video Messages Could Attack the Threat of “Hybrid Warfare” Lead to Stagefright and Stagefright 2.0 25 SSL/TLS and The 46 Small Business and the Dirty Linen Attack Industry’s Response 13 Android Users under Fire with Phishing 47 Industrial Control Systems and Ransomware 25 The Evolution of Encryption Vulnerable to Attacks 13 Apple iOS Users Now More at Risk than 25 Strength in Numbers 47 Obscurity is No Defense
    [Show full text]
  • The Dark Reality of Open Source Spotlight Report
    SPOTLIGHT The Dark Reality of Open Source Through the Lens of Threat and Vulnerability Management RiskSense Spotlight Report • May 2020 Executive Summary Open sourCe software (OSS) has quiCkly transformed both And while Heartbleed and the Apache Struts how modern applications are built and the underlying code vulnerabilities are the household names of open source they rely on. Access to high-quality and powerful open vulnerabilities, they are far from the only examples. Open source software projects has allowed developers to quickly source software is increasingly being targeted by integrate new capabilities into their applications without cryptominers, ransomware, and leveraged in DDoS having to reinvent the wheel. As a result, it is now estimated attacks. Unfortunately, OSS vulnerabilities are often a that between 80% and 90% of the code in most modern blind spot for many enterprises, who may not always be applications is made up of open source components. aware of all the open source projects and dependencies Likewise, many of the very tools that have enabled the that are used in their applications. growth of DevOps and CI/CD such as Jenkins, Kubernetes, and Docker are themselves open source projects. With this in mind, we have focused this version of the RiskSense Spotlight report on vulnerabilities in some of OSS also allows organizations to reduce their software today’s most popular open source software, including costs, and is often key to digital transformation efforts more than 50 OSS projects and over 2,600 vulnerabilities. and the transition of services to the cloud. It is no We then used this dataset to provide a risk-based surprise then that a 2020 report from Red Hat found that analysis of open source software to reveal the following: 95% of organizations view open source software as strategically important to their business.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Combat Top Security Vulnerabilities: HPE Tippingpoint Intrusion
    Business white paper Combat top security vulnerabilities HPE TippingPoint intrusion prevention system Business white paper Page 2 The year 2014 marked a new pinnacle for hackers. Vulnerabilities were uncovered in some of the most widely deployed software in the world—some of it in systems actually intended to make you more secure. HPE TippingPoint next-generation intrusion prevention system (IPS) and next-generation firewall (NGFW) customers rely on us to keep their networks safe. And when it comes to cyber threats, every second matters. So how did HPE TippingPoint do? This brief highlights the top security vulnerabilities of 2014—the ones that sent corporate security executives scrambling to protect their businesses. And it describes how HPE TippingPoint responded to keep our customers safe. Heartbleed—HPE TippingPoint intrusion prevention system stops blood flow early Any vulnerability is concerning, but when a vulnerability is discovered in software designed to assure security, it leaves businesses exposed and vulnerable. That was the case with the Heartbleed vulnerability disclosed by the OpenSSL project on April 7, 2014. They found the vulnerability in versions of OpenSSL—the open-source cryptographic library widely used to encrypt Internet traffic. Heartbleed grew from a coding error that allowed remote attackers to read information from process memory by sending heartbeat packets that trigger a buffer over-read. As a demonstration of the vulnerability, the OpenSSL Project created a sample exploit that successfully stole private cryptography keys, user names and passwords, instant messages, emails, and business-critical documents and communications. We responded within hours to protect TippingPoint customers. On April 8, we released a custom filter package to defend against the vulnerability.
    [Show full text]
  • IBM X-Force Threat Intelligence Quarterly, 1Q 2015
    IBM Security Systems March 2015 IBM X-Force Threat Intelligence Quarterly, 1Q 2015 Explore the latest security trends—from “designer vulns” to mutations in malware— based on 2014 year-end data and ongoing research 2 IBM X-Force Threat Intelligence Quarterly 1Q 2015 Contents Executive overview 2 Executive overview When we look back in history to review and understand the past year, you can be assured it will be remembered as a year of 4 Roundup of security incidents in 2014 significant change. 11 Citadel, the financial malware that continues to adapt In early January 2014, companies large and small scrambled to Are mobile application developers for Android putting their 14 better understand and analyze a major retail breach that left users at risk? them asking whether or not their own security measures would 17 Shaking the foundation: Vulnerability disclosures in 2014 survive the next storm. Before spring was barely in motion, we had our first taste of the “designer vuln”—a critical 21 About X-Force vulnerability that not only proved lethal for targeted attacks, 22 Contributors but also had a cleverly branded logo, website and call-name (or handle) that would forever identify the disclosure. 22 For more information 23 Footnotes These designer vulns appeared within long-held foundational frameworks used by the majority of websites, and they continued throughout 2014, garnering catchy name after catchy name—Heartbleed, Shellshock, POODLE, and into 2015, Ghost and FREAK. This in and of itself raises the question of what it takes for a vulnerability to merit a marketing push, PR and logo design, while the other thousands discovered throughout the year do not.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Automating Patching of Vulnerable Open-Source Software Versions in Application Binaries
    Automating Patching of Vulnerable Open-Source Software Versions in Application Binaries Ruian Duan:, Ashish Bijlani:, Yang Ji:, Omar Alrawi:, Yiyuan Xiong˚, Moses Ike:, Brendan Saltaformaggio,: and Wenke Lee: fruian, ashish.bijlani, yang.ji, alrawi, [email protected], [email protected] [email protected], [email protected] : Georgia Institute of Technology, ˚ Peking University Abstract—Mobile application developers rely heavily on open- while ensuring backward compatibility, and test for unin- source software (OSS) to offload common functionalities such tended side-effects. For the Android platform, Google has as the implementation of protocols and media format playback. initiated the App Security Improvement Program (ASIP) [21] Over the past years, several vulnerabilities have been found in to notify developers of vulnerable third-party libraries in popular open-source libraries like OpenSSL and FFmpeg. Mobile use. Unfortunately, many developers, as OSSPolice [15] and applications that include such libraries inherit these flaws, which LibScout [4] show, do not update or patch their application, make them vulnerable. Fortunately, the open-source community is responsive and patches are made available within days. However, which leaves end-users exposed. Android developers mainly mobile application developers are often left unaware of these use Java and C/C++ [1] libraries. While Derr et al. [14] flaws. The App Security Improvement Program (ASIP) isa show that vulnerable Java libraries can be fixed by library- commendable effort by Google to notify application developers level update, their C/C++ counterparts, which contain many of these flaws, but recent work has shown that many developers more documented security bugs in the National Vulnerability do not act on this information.
    [Show full text]
  • Cyberwar: the ISIL Threat & Resiliency in Operational Technology
    Cyberwar: The ISIL Threat & Resiliency in Operational Technology Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the Department of Information and Logistics Technology University of Houston In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master’s of Information Systems Security By Gregory S. Anderson May 2017 Cyberwar: The ISIL Threat & Resiliency in Operational Technology ____________________________________ Gregory S. Anderson Approved: Committee Chair: ____________________________________ Wm. Arthur Conklin, PhD Computer Information Systems and Information System Security Committee Member: ____________________________________ Chris Bronk, PhD Computer Information Systems and Information System Security Committee Member: ____________________________________ Paula deWitte, PhD Computer Information Systems and Information System Security ____________________________________ ____________________________________ Rupa Iyer, PhD Dan Cassler Associate Dean for Research and Graduate Interim Chair for Department of Information Studies, College of Technology and Logistics Technology THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Acknowledgments First, I would like to thank Dr. Chris Bronk and Dr. Art Conklin for their support and guidance throughout my time at the University of Houston. Their dedication to students is unparalleled for any other professor I have come across during my education. I would also like to thank my family for their ongoing encouragement and love. The fostering environment to peruse knowledge and “never settle for less” has been a constant inspiration throughout my life. Lastly, to my partner of 7 years, Lorelei. None of my achievements these past few years would have come to fruition without her continuous love, support, and willingness to sacrifice for the greater good is deeply appreciated. Thank you for being the most patient and steadfast person I have ever known, I love you.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]