The Chinese Solar Machine Layer by Layer Fire in the Library The Mystery Behind Anesthesia
Technology Review
A researcher discloses the details of the major flaw he discovered earlier this year.
On Wednesday, at the Black Hat computer security conference in Las Vegas, Dan Kaminsky, director of penetration testing at IOActive, released the full details of the major design flaw he found earlier this year in the domain name server system, which is a key part of directing traffic over the Internet. Kaminsky had already revealed that the flaw could allow attackers to control Internet traffic, potentially directing users to phishing sites--bogus sites that try to elicit credit-card information--or to sites loaded with malicious software. On Wednesday, he showed that the flaw had even farther-reaching implications, demonstrating that attackers could use it to gain access to e-mail accounts or to infiltrate the systems in place to make online transactions secure.
Kaminsky first announced the flaw in the domain name system in July, at a press conference timed to coincide with the massive coordinated release of a temporary fix, which involved vendors such as Microsoft, Cisco, and Sun. He didn't release details of the flaw, hoping to give companies time to patch it before giving attackers hints about how to exploit it. Although the basics of the flaw did leak before Kaminsky's Black Hat presentation, he says he's relieved that not all of its implications were publicly discovered.
The domain name system is, as its name might imply, responsible for matching domain names--such as technologyreview.com--to the numerical addresses of the corresponding Web servers--such as 69.147.160.210. A request issued by an e-mail server or Web browser might pass through several domain name servers before getting the address information that it needs.
Kaminsky says that the flaw he discovered is a way for an attacker to impersonate a domain name server. Imagine that the attacker wants to hoodwink Facebook, for instance. He would start by opening a Facebook account. Then he would try to log in to the account but pretend to forget his password. Facebook would then try to send a new password to the e-mail address that the attacker used to create the account.
The attacker's server, however, would claim that Facebook got the numerical address of its e-mail server wrong. It then tells Facebook the name of the domain name server that--supposedly--has the right address. Facebook has to locate that server on its own; this is actually a safety feature, to prevent an attacker from simply routing traffic to his own fake domain name server in the first place.
At this point, the attacker knows that Facebook's server is about to look up where to find the domain name server. If he can supply a false answer before the real answer arrives, he can trick Facebook into looking up future addresses on his own server, rather than on the domain name server. He can then direct messages sent by Facebook anywhere he chooses.
I actually find all these “its worse than we thought” articles amusing. DNS is the foundation of the Internet, a vulnerability in it will affect everything build on top of it. Did they just realize that a house would not stand without a foundation? Get a clue.
It is easy to say 'get a clue'. How about constructive input for a change of heart. Bartering and cash look good after this. Drum signals worked in Africa thousands of years ago. Sideline hecklers are everywhere. Try to be different.
When someone with the reputation and stature in the security community such as Dan Kaminsky speaks, I highly recommend you listen. That this could be a serious problem is proven by the actions taken by the major players to close the hole.
Guest (wjhalverson1008)
The curse of In-band signalling
The 'root cause' of all these 'security holes' lies in the fact that all computers using TCP/IP send signalling packets along with end user data packets across the same logical network.
Until people realize the solution is to adopt a divided architecture (signalling packets run on separate channels from end user packets) the world will always be waiting for the next 'security hole' to be discovered. I'm surprised it took this long to catch the DNS problem. Others are coming, too.
For an alternate approach to signalling security, look at how the ITU uses SS7.
Re: The curse of In-band signalling
Good thinking wj. Finally a positive thought.
Manufacturing in the United States is in trouble. That's bad news not just for the country's economy but for the future of innovation.
Our list of the 50 most innovative companies, including the following:
Silacon
55 Comments
Internet Security Revealed
We at Silacon believe we have an answer or something that would lead to a solution: NSA and MIT alum, Dr. Roger R. Schell (schellr@alum.mit.edu). He is in the private sector now so can consult or his firm of which he is CEO can help.
This is worrisome thing as all of perceived enemies will exploit the flaw immediately. Somewhere out there is a kid with a 180 IQ that is mad the USA or the Google's of the internet and very dangerous.
Charles G. Nutter, CEO Silacon Corporation
Reply
LDighera
13 Comments
Re: Internet Security Revealed
... "the researchers chose a fix that kept the exact nature of the problem hidden."
There's an old saying among system administrators that the quote above brings to mind: Security through obscurity is insecurity.
Microsoft TechNet: The Great Debate: Security by Obscurity
Wikipedia: Security through obscurity
Why Security-Through-Obscurity Won't Work
Reply
bugloaf
1 Comment
Re: Internet Security Revealed
If they were really counting on obscurity, then they wouldn't have released a patch, and Dan Kaminsky would not have described the bug to the public. While the patch was being developed, however, they had to rely on obscurity, because they had no other choice.
All current security systems I can think of (maybe not quantum cryptography) rely on some level of obscurity. When you pick a password or store a private key, you are hoping they are obscure enough that no attacker will find them.
Reply