Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 08/02/14 in all areas

  1. Ce poti face cu el daca nu pt il iei pt hacked cum zici?
    1 point
  2. News that two Carnegie-Mellon CERT researchers have developed an inexpensive way to breach the Tor network has the project, privacy advocates, and probably criminals who use the network equally concerned. The Tor Project posted has advised relays to upgrade to Tor 0.2.r.23e or 0.2.5.6-alpha to close the protocol vulnerability used by the researchers, but It warned that preventing traffic confirmation in general "remains an open research problem." Hidden service operators should consider changing the location of their service, the Tor Project said. "So much for being secure," remarked Jim McGregor, principal analyst at TIrias Research. "If you were using Tor for classified communications and data, this could be very serious," he told TechNewsWorld. What the Tor Project Found On July 4, the Tor Project found a group of relays that were trying to deanonymize people who operate or access Tor hidden services by modifying Tor protocol headers to conduct traffic confirmation attacks. The attack also probably tried to learn who9 published hidden service descriptors, Tor said. This would let the attackers learn the location of hidden services and, in theory, link users to their destinations on normal Tor circuits, although this was unlikely because the operators did not operate any exit relays. The attack might aid other attackers in deanonymizing Tor users, the project cautioned. Technical Details of the Attack The attackers are believed to have used a combination of a traffic confirmation attack and a Sybil attack. In a traffic confirmation attack, the attacker controls or observes the relays on both ends of a Tor circuit and compares traffic timing, volume or other characteristics to discover whether the two relays are on the same circuit. If the first relay in the circuit, also known as the "entry guard," knows a user's IP address and the last relay knows the resource or destination being accessed, the user can be deanonymized. There are several varieties of confirmation attacks; the one used consisted of the attackers injecting a signal into the Tor protocol headers at the relay on one end and having the relay on the other end read the signal. That let the attackers obtain the HSDir ("suitable for hidden service directory") and Guard ("suitable for being an entry guard"). The attackers then injected the signal whenever it was used as a hidden service directory and looked for an injected signal whenever it was used as an entry guard. The Sybil attack was standard. The attackers signed up 115 fast non-exit relays running on either of two IP addresses: 50.7.0.0/16 or 204.45.0.0/16. These added up to about 6.4 percent of the Tor network's Guard capacity, and they became entry guards for "a significant chunk" of Tor users over the five months they were in operation, Tor said. Was the NSA Involved? The attackers were Carnegie-Mellon CERT researchers Alexander Volynkin and Michael McCord. They were scheduled to present their findings at the Black Hat security conference, to be held in Las Vegas in August, but they canceled the presentation. Richard Lynch of the Carnegie Mellon Software Engineering Institute, which runs CERT, demurred when approached for comment. "Sorry, but we're not able to comment on Tor," he told TechNewsWorld. Carnegie-Mellon CERT boasts of partnering regularly with government and law enforcement, which has given rise to speculation that the NSA or U.S. law enforcement agencies may have been behind the attack on Tor. "That was the first thing that came to mind," McGregor said. "Who better than the government to attack Tor?" On the other hand, disclosure of the attack would have worked against the interests of law enforcement and the NSA, Rob Enderle, principal analyst of the Enderle Group, told TechNewsWorld. Announcing the breach "leads to people putting resources into monitoring this kind of attack," he said, "improving the response time, and moving to something that could be more difficult to penetrate or that's less well known." Sursa: http://www.technewsworld.com/story/80834.html
    1 point
  3. Microsoft announced on Thursday the general availability of the Enhanced Mitigation Experience Toolkit ( EMET) 5.0. According to the company, version 5.0 of the free security tool comes with two new mitigations, Attack Surface Reduction (ASR) and Export Address Table Filtering Plus (EAF+), both of which were introduced in EMET 5.0 Technical Preview. The ASR mitigation is designed to block specific plugins or modules within an application. For instance, companies can use this feature to block Web browsers from loading Java plugins on external websites, while allowing them to work on internal sites. EMET can also be utilized to prevent Microsoft Word from loading Adobe Flash Player, a component which, just like Java, is often exploited in cyberattacks. The EAF+ mitigation is designed to disrupt advanced attacks with two new safeguards: performing additional integrity checks on stack registers and stack limits when export tables are read from certain lower-level modules, and preventing memory read operations by adding what Microsoft calls "page guard" protection. The EAF+ started off as an extension to EAF. However, Microsoft says it has made numerous improvements so it has decided to make it a separate mitigation. In addition to the mitigations, EMET 5.0 brings some other improvements, including the availability of the Deep Hooks, Stack Pivot, Load Library and MemProt Return Oriented Processing (ROP) mitigations on 64-bit platforms. Improvements have also been made to the way EMET terminates untrusted SSL connections with the addition of new "blocking rule" options. Some of the tasks done by EMET Agent in previous versions of the tool have been picked up by a new feature called EMET Service. "The EMET Service, among other things, takes care of evaluating the Certificate Trust rules, appropriately dispatching EMET Agents in every user’s instance, and automatically applying Group Policy settings pushed through the network. Also, a service offers more resiliency and better ability to being monitored," the EMET Team explained in a blog post. Re there have been several research papers on how to bypass or disarm EMET protections, which is why the latest release has been hardened against such techniques, Microsoft said. Chris Betz, senior director of the Microsoft Security Response Center, revealed that EMET 5.0 also brings some new configuration options to deliver additional flexibility, and new default settings to provide stronger protection immediately after the solution is installed. Sursa: Microsoft Launches EMET 5.0 | SecurityWeek.Com
    1 point
  4. de ce plm ai lasat feedback negativ lache?? ca ti am zis ca nu e gratis contul si l ai luat cu codul ala??
    -1 points
  5. Asta este un forum de securitate, nu este un forum de jocuri.
    -1 points
  6. Off!..Si eu as avea nevoie de asa ceva,iesim impreuna la o cafea?
    -1 points
  7. CE e frate cu challenge-ul asta? Doamne fereste. Ba voi chiar nu aveti minte? Postati frate o stire, un tutorial, lasati prostiile.
    -1 points
  8. .... Acolo ai scris doar ca sa faci un post in plus ...
    -1 points
×
×
  • Create New...