SynTAX

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

Third-party markets in Asia are the main culprits. The number of Android viruses continues to rise steadily; roughly one in ten apps are now fully or partially malware. According to its half-year 2014 report, Cheetah Mobile collected 24.4 million sample files during the first six months of 2014. Of those samples, 2.2 million turned out to be viruses, or roughly 9% of the total. In the first half of 2014, the number of samples that contained viruses also grew rapidly. Cheetah Mobile’s collection of 2.2 million virus samples constitutes an increase of 20.5 times over 2012’s numbers and an increase of 2.5 times over the total from 2013. The firm also found that payment-based viruses are becoming more prevalent, endangering the finances of users. In fact, they accounted for more than two thirds of the aforementioned viruses, while consumption viruses occupy a distant second place at 16%. These two types of viruses mainly result in financial losses for the user. “Since 2013, payment viruses have swept the globe and the growth rate in 2014 has reached new heights,” Cheetah noted in a blog. “In all current virus samples, payment viruses account for 68% of the total. It is theorized that their growth is concomitant with the growth of mobile payment systems worldwide. Hacking SMS or app payment methods is easier for hackers compared to hacking online banking systems.” An analysis of the spread of payment viruses over the past year shows that in June 2013 there were on average 1,500 new virus variations popping up each month. However, in May 2014, this number increased to 6,500, increasing fourfold. Payment viruses are also prominent worldwide. In the first half of 2014, Russia and southern Asia were the most widely infected areas, as shown below. “2014 is destined to be the year in which mobile payment viruses become the primary threat to Android devices, both in terms of absolute number and proportion of infections,” the firm said. Cheetah Mobile also found that Asia and select parts of Western Europe have undoubtedly had the highest rates of overall infection during the past six months. This is due in part to the prevalence of third-party app stores in these regions, which the firm said “have very lax checks to ensure that applications do not contain viruses. Malware, the primary vector for the spread of viruses, is often rife on these sites.” The main Android markets are found in Korea (Samsung, T-store); the US (Amazon); Russia (Yandex store); and in China, there are countless markets. In contrast, infection rates in the US, Australia and most other parts of Europe are low (except for France and Russia at 2.97% and 1.88% respectively). In all, the probability of a device in Asia being infected is two to three times greater than one in Europe or the Americas. Sursa: Infosecurity - 1 in 10 Android Apps Are Virus-Infected

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

WASHINGTON - The head of the CIA has apologized to US lawmakers after an investigation confirmed claims that his officers had "improperly" accessed Senate computers, the agency said Thursday. In March, CIA Director John Brennan dismissed allegations the agency had spied on Senate intelligence committee investigators probing torture allegations, insisting: "Nothing could be further from the truth." But on Thursday, in an abrupt climb down, the US intelligence agency confirmed that a review by its own inspector general had confirmed that officers had indeed acted beyond their authority. A spokesman said Brennan had informed Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) Chairwoman Senator Dianne Feinstein and her deputy "and apologized to them." The scandal centers around a computer archive, RDINet, set up by the CIA in a secure building in Virginia to make classified documents available to Senate officials investigating allegations that the agency tortured prisoners between 2002 and 2006. In March, Feinstein furiously accused the CIA of penetrating this network during the Senate investigation, an apparent breach of the US Constitution's separation between the legislative and executive arms of government. On Thursday, the agency admitted "some CIA employees acted in a manner inconsistent with the common understanding reached between SSCI and the CIA in 2009 regarding access to the RDINet." CIA spokesman Dean Boyd said a new inquiry -- an "accountability board" with the power to discipline officers -- would be forced under the chairmanship of former senator Evan Bayh. Feinstein confirmed she had been briefed on the CIA inquiry and described it and the accountability board "as positive first steps." "The investigation confirmed what I said on the Senate floor in March," she said. "CIA personnel inappropriately searched Senate Intelligence Committee computers in violation of an agreement we had reached, and I believe in violation of the constitutional separation of powers." The committee's 2009-2012 investigation produced a secret 6,300-page report into "enhanced interrogation techniques" -- including some normally regarded as torture, such as waterboarding -- used by the CIA in the first years of the so-called "war on terror." In theory, the report should eventually be declassified and made public, but President Barack Obama's administration has yet to complete the procedure to do so. Sursa: CIA Apologizes for Spying on US Senate | SecurityWeek.Com

An unidentified threat group has compromised approximately 2,800 victims from various sectors around the world in an information stealing campaign that dates back to the end of 2010, according to a Kaspersky Lab Global Research & Analysis Team report. Security firm CrowdStrike had identified the campaign as "Energetic Bear" in January because the energy sector seemed to be the prime target, but Kaspersky renamed it "Crouching Yeti" since the manufacturing, pharmaceutical, construction, education, information technology, and, most of all, the industrial and machinery sectors are also being targeted. The stealthy Crouching Yeti team typically infects targets using trojanized software installers, waterhole attacks that take advantage of an assortment of exploits, and PDF documents embedded with Flash exploit CVE-2011-0611 that are attached to spearphishing emails. With 27 different version identified, the Havex trojan has been used most by the attackers to infect victims; however, they also rely on the Sysmain trojan, as well as the ClientX backdoor and the Karagany backdoor, according to the report. “This particular actor is out of the ordinary, from their victim set to their offensive toolkit,” Kurt Baumgartner, principal security researcher at Kaspersky Lab, told SCMagazine.com in a Friday email correspondence, adding that the attackers have left no hints behind as to their true identities. “They consistently re-use compromised, legitimate websites to host their exploit sites and redirectors to their exploit sites,” Baumgartner said. “The exploits delivered are not only commodity stuff; they are slightly modified, re-used Metasploit open source code.” The researchers with Kaspersky Lab are not entirely sure what the Crouching Yeti team plans to do with the compromised information, which was stolen with public key encryption – something that Baumgartner said he found unusual. Sursa: http://www.scmagazine.com/about-2800-victims-of-worldwide-info-stealing-campaign-targeting-various-sectors/article/364237/

CE e frate cu challenge-ul asta? Doamne fereste. Ba voi chiar nu aveti minte? Postati frate o stire, un tutorial, lasati prostiile.

Si eu astept confirmarea dar haideti sa fim seriosi, in ziua de astazi nici de la hostul platit nu ai prea multe asteptari, dar cel gratis?

Adica ai o bula de aer. Incearca cu un card sa scoti bula de aer de acolo, daca nu, inteapa fin, foarte foarte fin cu varful unui ac bula si va iesi singur, dar poate fi inestetic.

Incearca sa ne pui alta poza, mai concludenta. Acolo nu este decat o lumina mai puternica, cel putin atat vad eu.

Nu, nu apare. Verifica aici sa vezi ca nu apare. Doar atunci cand il activezi iti apare.

Nu te va ajuta nimeni. Daca vrei sa faci magarii, invata sa ti le faci singur. Aia nu e un mod de a te razbuna. Cu backup intr-un minut are indexul back. Daca vrei sa te razbuni cu adevarat, iei acces la respectivul forum si stai in umbra o perioada de timp. Asta este o razbunare cu cap.

BackTrack este Kali. Daca cautai pe forum gaseai. E mai usor saa stepti raspuns decat sa-l cauti tu?

Organisations should get their antivirus products security tested before deployment because the technology across the board dangerously elevates attack surfaces, COSEINC researcher Joxean Koret says. COSEINC is a Singapore security outfit that has run a critical eye about 17 major antivirus engines and products and found dangerous local and remotely-exploitable vulnerabilities in 14. Koret's analysis also suggests that antivirus companies fail by requiring overly extensive privileges, not signing product updates and delivering those over insecure HTTP, running excessive old code and not conducting proper source code reviews and fuzzing. The hall of shame included Avira, BitDefender, ESET and Panda and included various multiple remote and local vulnerabilities both subsequently patched and remaining as zero-day. While the core antivirus engines were mostly built with the defensive measure Address Space Layout Randomisation in place, many other functions were not including the user interfaces and libraries. Some major products had disabled data execution prevention. AV engines were often built in C which led to vulnerabilities like buffer and integer overflows, installed operating system drivers that provided for local privilege escalation and supported a laundry list of file formats resulting in bugs within the respective parsers. The more capable an antivirus engine, the more avenues it presents for malicious actors to break into networks. For this reason, antivirus with additional capabilities should be isolated from the rest of the corporate network. "If your application runs with the highest privileges, installs kernel drivers, a packet filter and tries to handle anything your computer may do ... your attack surface dramatically increased," Koret said in a presentation at Syscan 360. (Slides here). "AV engines make your computer more vulnerable with a varying degree of performance penalty [and] is as vulnerable to zero day attacks as the applications it tries to protect from. [it] can even lower the operating system exploiting mitigations. "Some AV companies don't give a f**k about security in their products." The excessive privileges used in antivirus was a boon for attackers because exploiting the software often provided root or system level access, he said. Villains could take advantage of the failure to both sign updates and deliver it using HTTPS to launch man-in-the-middle attacks against antivirus users "completely owning [their] machine". "Exploiting AV engines is not different to exploiting other client-side applications. They don't have or offer any special self-protection. They rely on the operating system features (ASLR/DEP) and nothing else and sometimes they even disable such features." Some antivirus products were more responsive than others to Koret's disclosures, including Avast which ran a bug bounty and paid out an undisclosed sum for the bugs. The largest vendors weren't notified as they should be already dedicating their sizable resources to vulnerability research. Koret recommends antivirus companies run dangerous code within an emulator or virtual machine which would make pwnage more difficult. Sursa: 14 antivirus apps found to have security problems • The Register

Maxim 12-13 milioane, asta cu indulgenta si daca-l dai pe tot. Daca-l dai pe bucati, pierzi si mai mult. Totusi, daca il dai pe bucati m-ar interesa hardul.

Fereste-te de https://rstforums.com/forum/87347-experienta-primului-interviu-pentru-job-de-programator.rst Fereste-te de astia ca de Bolosteanu:))

One of Microsoft’s top security executives said the company has never been asked by the United States government to build a backdoor into any of its products, and if the company was asked, it would fight the order in the courts. Since the Edward Snowden revelations began last summer, there have been many stories insinuating that large technology vendors such as Microsoft, Google and others may have built backdoors into some of their products in order to enable intelligence agencies or law enforcement to exploit them. Specifically, some of the documents leaked by Snowden last year illustrated close cooperation between Microsoft and the U.S. government on gaining access to some customers’ communications. Microsoft officials have said that they only provide the cooperation that is required by law or court orders and nothing more. On Thursday, Scott Charney, corporate vice president of Trustworthy Computing at Microsoft, said in a panel discussion at The Aspen Institute that the company would be very hostile to any suggestion of inserting a backdoor into one of its products. Asked specifically about the a backdoor in Skype, which Microsoft bought in 2011, Charney refuted any notion that the government had asked for backdoor access to the product. “One, they have never done that, and two, we would fight it tooth and nail in the courts,” Charney said. “Under the wiretapping statutes and FISA you can be compelled to provide technical assistance. If they said, put in a backdoor or something like that, we would fight it all the way to the Supreme Court.” Aside from the potential legal ramifications of such a move, Charney said that granting law enforcement or an intelligence agency secret access to customer data without a warrant or court order would be financial suicide for Microsoft. “If the government did that, and I really don’t think they would, it would be at the complete expense of American competitiveness,” he said. “Because if we put in a backdoor for the U.S. government, we couldn’t sell anywhere in the world, not even in America.” Sursa: Microsoft Exec Says Company Has Never Been Asked to Backdoor a Product | Threatpost | The first stop for security news

Eu ma duc si ma uit la cinema. Si multi altii ca mine la fel. Cei care sunt mari fani ai filmului, de orice gen, cu siguranta platesc pretul infim al unui bilet si va avea loc in primul rand. Si la propriu si la figurat.

Alege Krond. Eu am avut un site la ei prin 2008 sau 2009 si erau chiar ok. Acum nu stiu daca e diferenta pentru servere de cs, eu doar ti-am dat un sfat. Inca ceva. Daca faci ceva serios plateste chiar si dublu daca firma are istoric bun.

375 375+ Free Responsive WordPress Themes | Designrazzi

M-am referit la altceva dude.

Stai ca nu inteleg. Ce legatura are ubuntu cu faptu ca vrei sa instalezi BackTrack? Incearca kali, cum zic baietii mai jos. PS: Ubuntu NU ESTE LINUX.

Moscow wants to decrypt communications on the anonymity network. The Russian government is offering four million rubles ($114,000) to anyone who can crack online anonymity tool Tor, according to non-profit Global Voices. The Kremlin is apparently keen to get its hands on any tools which can decrypt the data sent over its unique onion routing system – which Tor describes as a “network of virtual tunnels that allows people and groups to improve their privacy and security on the internet”. The service was originally developed by the US Naval Research Laboratory as a way to protect government communications and is thought to have around four million users worldwide today. Many of these use Tor to prevent websites from tracking them, or to connect to sites which are blocked by their ISP. “Journalists use Tor to communicate more safely with whistleblowers and dissidents,” the non-profit which runs Tor says on its website. “Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) use Tor to allow their workers to connect to their home website while they're in a foreign country, without notifying everybody nearby that they're working with that organization.” However, the service is also a hit with cybercriminals, who are using it in increasing numbers to obfuscate their activities. Research by iovation last year reported that 30% of transactions conducted from Tor in August were fraudulent. “Cybercriminals are always looking for ways to fly under the radar,” said Scott Waddell, iovation CTO, in a statement at the time. “While Tor on its surface appears to be for the greater good, it is disproportionately used for fraudulent and abusive transactions.” As such, the Kremlin has a legitimate excuse for wanting to crack the Tor code, although many will be sceptical about its true motives. As Global Voices pointed out, security agency the FSB has already lobbied the Russian parliament to have Tor banned. Moscow’s track record on human rights and in particular abuse of journalists will not reassure many. It should also be pointed out, of course, that the NSA has also been trying to crack the Tor code, according to documents released by whistleblower Edward Snowden. Sursa: http://www.infosecurity-magazine.com/view/39470/russia-offers-100k-to-anyone-who-can-crack-tor/ @Maximus : mutati la stiri va rog, sunt neindemanatic.

La pasul 4 nu sunt dumerit, explica-mi mai detaliat te rog. PS: din ce stiu eu, pe comunitatea asta si in viata in general, respectul se castiga. Nu se cere. Nu te milogi, nu te va respecta nimeni aici daca nu dai motive sa fii respectat.

Chestia este ca eu am lucrat ca freelancer dar este de porc pentru ca trebuie sa lucrez mai mult pe gratis pana-mi fac portofoliu si voturi pozitive.

Asa ziceam si eu. O sa vezi ca o sa ajungi la un moment cand nu o sa mai poti sa te intretii lucrand de acasa si o sa ai nevoie de o facultate sau loc de munca. Insa pana atunci, bafta.