DOUG. Router woes, Megaupload in megatrouble, and extra MOVEit mayhem.
All that and extra on the Bare Safety podcast.
[MUSICAL MODEM]
Welcome to the podcast, all people.
I’m Doug Aamoth; he’s Paul Ducklin.
Paul, how do you do?
DUCK. Only a disambiguation for our British and Commonwealth English listeners, Doug…
DOUG. “Router.” [PRONOUNCED UK-STYLE AS ‘ROOTER’, NOT US-STYLE AS ‘ROWTER’]
DUCK. You don’t imply the woodworking instruments, I suppose?
DOUG. No! [LAUGHS]
DUCK. You imply the issues that allow crooks break into your community in the event that they’re not patched in time?
DOUG. Sure!
DUCK. The place the behaviour of what we might name a ‘ROOTER’ does to your community extra like what a ‘ROWTER’ would do to the sting of your desk? [LAUGHS]
DOUG. Precisely! [LAUGHS]
We are going to get to that shortly.
However first, our This Week in Tech Historical past section.
Paul, this week, on 18 June, means again in 1979: an enormous step ahead for 16-bit computing as Microsoft rolled out a model of its BASIC programming language for 8086 processors.
This model was backward appropriate with 8-bit processors, making BASIC, which had been obtainable for the Z80 and 8080 processors, and was discovered on some 200,000 computer systems already, an arrow in most programmers’ quivers, Paul.
DUCK. What was to turn into GW-BASIC!
I don’t know whether or not that is true, however I preserve studying that GW-BASIC stands for “GEE WHIZZ!” [LAUGHS]
DOUG. Ha! [LAUGHTER]
DUCK. I don’t know whether or not that’s true, however I wish to assume it’s.
DOUG. Alright, let’s get into our tales.
Earlier than we get to stuff that’s within the information, we’re happy, nay thrilled, to announce the primary of three episodes of Suppose You Know Ransomware?
This can be a 48-minute documentary sequence from your mates at Sophos.
“The Ransomware Documentary” – model new video sequence from Sophos beginning now!
The primary episode, referred to as Origins of Cybercrime, is now obtainable for viewing at https://sophos.com/ransomware.
Episode 2, which is known as Hunters and Hunted, shall be obtainable on 28 June 2023.
Episode 3, Weapons and Warriors, will drop on 5 July 2023.
Test it out at https://sophos.com/ransomware.
I’ve seen the primary episode, and it’s nice.
It solutions all of the questions you could have concerning the origins of this scourge that we preserve preventing 12 months after 12 months, Paul.
DUCK. And it feeds very properly into what common listeners will know is my favorite saying (I hope I haven’t turned it right into a cliche by now), specifically: Those that can not keep in mind historical past are condemned to repeat it.
Don’t be that individual! [LAUGHS]
DOUG. Alright, let’s stick with reference to crime.
Jail time for 2 of the 4 Megaupload founders.
Copyright infringement at difficulty right here, Paul, and a couple of decade within the making?
Megaupload duo will go to jail eventually, however Kim Dotcom fights on…
DUCK. Sure.
Bear in mind final week after I paraphrased that joke about, “Oh, what buses are like? None come for ages, after which three arrive without delay?” [LAUGHTER]
However I needed to parlay it into “two arrive without delay”…
…and no sooner had I mentioned it than the third one arrived. [LAUGHTER]
And that is out of New Zealand, or Aotearoa, because it’s alternatively identified.
Megaupload was an notorious early so-called “file locker” service.
That’s not “file locker” as in ransomware that locks up your recordsdata.
It’s “file locker” like a gymnasium locker… the cloud place the place you add recordsdata so you will get them later.
That service obtained taken down, primarily as a result of the FBI within the US obtained a takedown order, and alleged that its major objective was really not a lot to be a mega *add* service as to be a mega *obtain* service, the enterprise mannequin of which was primarily based on encouraging and incentivising copyright infringement.
The first founding father of this enterprise is a well-known title: Kim Dotcom.
And that actually is his surname.
He modified his title (I feel he was initially Kim Schmitz) to Kim Dotcom, created this service, and he’s simply been preventing extradition to the US and continues to take action, although the Aotearoa courts have dominated that there’s no purpose why he can’t be extradited.
One of many different 4, a chap by the title of Finn Batato, sadly died of most cancers final 12 months.
However two of the opposite people who had been the prime movers of the Megaupload service, Mathias Ortmann and Bram van der Kolk…
…they fought extradition (you may perceive why) to the US, the place they probably confronted massive jail sentences.
However ultimately they appeared to have achieved a take care of the courts in NZ [New Zealand/Aotearoa] and with the FBI and the Division of Justice within the US.
They agreed to be prosecuted in NZ as an alternative, to plead responsible, and to help the US authorities of their ongoing investigation.
They usually ended up with jail sentences of two years 7 months and a couple of years 6 months respectively.
DOUG. The choose in that case had some fascinating observations, I felt.
DUCK. I feel you’re proper there, Doug.
Notably, that it wasn’t a query of the court docket saying, “We settle for the truth that these huge megacorporations all all over the world misplaced billions and billions of {dollars}.”
In truth, the choose mentioned that it’s a must to take these claims with a pinch of salt, and quoted proof to counsel that you could’t simply say that everyone who downloaded a pirated video would in any other case have purchased the unique.
So you may’t add up the financial losses in the best way that a few of the megacorps like to take action.
However, he mentioned, that doesn’t make it proper.
And much more importantly, he mentioned, “You actually did damage the little guys as nicely, and that issues simply as a lot.”
And he quoted the case of an indie software program developer from the South Island in NZ who had written to the court docket to say, “I seen piracy was making an enormous dent in my revenue. I discovered that 10 or 20 instances I needed to enchantment to Megaupload to have infringing content material taken down; it took me a variety of time to do this, and it by no means made the slightest distinction. And so I’m not saying that they’re completely liable for the truth that I may not make a residing out of my enterprise, however I’m saying I went to all this effort to get them to take the stuff down which they mentioned they might do, nevertheless it by no means labored.”
Truly that got here out elsewhere within the judgment… which is 38 pages, so it’s fairly an extended learn, nevertheless it’s very readable and I feel it’s very nicely price studying.
Notably, the choose mentioned to the defendants that they needed to bear accountability for the truth that they admitted that they didn’t need to get too robust on copyright infringers as a result of “Development is principally primarily based on infringement.”
And he additionally famous that they devised a takedown system that mainly, if there have been a number of URLs to obtain the identical file…
…they stored one copy of the file, and for those who complained concerning the URL, they might take down *that URL*.
DOUG. Ah ha!
DUCK. So you’ll assume they’d eliminated the file, however they would depart the file there.
And he described that as follows: “You knew, and supposed, that takedowns would haven’t any materials impact.”
Which is precisely what this indie Kiwi software program developer had claimed in his assertion to the court docket.
They usually actually should have made some huge cash out of it.
For those who take a look at the photographs from the controversial raid on Kim Dotcom again in 2012…
…he had this huge property, and all these flash automobiles with bizarre quantity plates [vehicle tags] like GOD and GUILTY, as if he was anticipating one thing. [LAUGHS]
Megaupload takedown makes headlines and waves as Mr Dotcom applies for bail
So, Kim Dotcom continues to be preventing his extradition, however these different two have determined that they need to get it throughout with.
So that they pleaded responsible, and as a few of our commenters have identified on Bare Safety, “Golly, for what plainly they did once you learn by means of the judgment intimately, it does sound that their sentence was gentle.”
However the best way it was calculated is the choose labored out that he thought that the utmost sentences they need to get beneath Aotearoa regulation ought to be about 10 years.
After which he figured, primarily based on the very fact they had been pleading responsible, that they had been going to cooperate, that they’re going to pay again $10 million, and so forth and so forth, that they need to get 75% off.
And my understanding is that implies that they are going to put to mattress this worry that they are going to be extradited to the US, as a result of my understanding is the Division of Justice has mentioned, “OK, we’ll let the conviction and the sentencing occur abroad.”
Greater than ten years on, and nonetheless not over!
You’d higher say it, Doug…
DOUG. Yesss!
We are going to keep watch over this.
Thanks; let’s transfer on.
For those who’ve obtained an ASUS router, you could have some patching to do, though fairly a murky timeline right here for some fairly harmful vulnerabilities, Paul.
ASUS warns router prospects: Patch now, or block all inbound requests
DUCK. Sure, it isn’t extremely clear fairly when these patches got here out for the assorted many fashions of router which are listed within the advisory.
A few of our readers are saying, “Nicely, I went and had a glance; I’ve obtained a type of routers and it’s on the record, however there are not any patches *now*. However I did get some patches a short time in the past that appeared to repair these issues… so why the advisory *now*?”
And the reply is, “We don’t know.”
Besides, maybe, that ASUS have found that the crooks are onto these?
But it surely’s not simply, “Hey, we suggest you patch.”
They’re saying you must patch, and for those who’re unwilling or unable to take action, then we “strongly suggest to (which mainly means ‘you had higher’) disable providers accessible from the WAN aspect of your router to keep away from potential undesirable intrusions.”
And that’s not simply your typical warning, “Oh, be sure that your admin interface isn’t seen on the web.”
They’re noting that what they imply by blocking incoming requests is that you must flip off mainly *all the things* that includes the router accepting the surface initiating some community connection…
…together with distant administration, port forwarding (unhealthy luck for those who use that for gaming), dynamic DNS, any VPN servers, and what they name port triggering, which I suppose is port knocking, the place you look forward to a specific connection and solely once you see that connection do you then hearth up a service domestically.
So it’s not simply internet requests which are harmful right here, or that there is perhaps some bug that lets somebody log in with a secret username.
It’s a complete vary of several types of community visitors that if it may well attain your router from the surface, may pwn your router, it appears.
So it does sound terribly pressing!
DOUG. The 2 most important vulnerabilities right here…
…there’s a Nationwide Vulnerability Database, the NVD, which scores vulnerabilities on a scale of 1 to 10, and each of those are 9.8/10.
After which there’s a complete bunch of different ones which are 7.5, 8.1, 8.8… a complete bunch of stuff that’s fairly harmful right here. Paul.
DUCK. Sure.
“9.8 CRITICAL”, all in capital letters, is the type of factor meaning [WHISPERING], “If the crooks determine this out, they’ll be throughout it like a rash.”
And what’s maybe the weirdest about these two 9.8/10 badness-score vulns is that certainly one of them is CVE-2022-26376, and that’s a bug in HTTP unescaping, which is mainly when you might have a URL with humorous characters in, like, areas…
…you may’t legally have an area within the URL; it’s a must to put %20 as an alternative, its hexadecimal code.
That’s fairly basic to processing any type of URL on the router.
And that was a bug that was revealed, as you may see from the quantity, in 2022!
And there’s one other one within the so referred to as Netatalk protocol (that gives help for Apple computer systems) which was the vulnerability, Doug, CVE-2018-1160.
DOUG. That was a very long time in the past!
DUCK. It was!
It was really fastened in a model of Netatalk which I feel was model 3.1.12, which got here out on 20 December *2018*.
They usually’re solely warning about “you must get the brand new model of Netatalk” proper now, as a result of that too, it appears, may be exploited by way of a rogue packet.
So that you don’t want a Mac; you don’t want Apple software program.
You simply want one thing that talks Netatalk in a dodgy means, and it may give you arbitrary reminiscence write entry.
And with a 9.8/10 bug rating, it’s a must to assume meaning “distant outsider pokes in a single or two community packets, takes over your router fully with root stage entry, distant code execution horror!”
So fairly why it took them that lengthy to warn people who they wanted to get the repair for this 5 12 months outdated bug…
…and why they didn’t even have the repair for the 5 12 months outdated bug 5 years in the past isn’t defined.
DOUG. OK, so there’s a record of routers that it’s best to verify, and for those who can’t patch, you’re imagined to do all that “block all of the inbound stuff”.
However I feel our recommendation could be patch.
And my favorite recommendation: For those who’re a programmer, sanitise thine inputs, please!
DUCK. Sure, Little Bobby Tables has appeared but once more, Doug.
As a result of one of many different bugs that wasn’t on the 9.8 stage (this was on the 7/10 or 8/10 stage) was CVE-2023-28702.
It’s mainly the MOVEit-type bug another time: Unfiltered particular characters in internet URL enter may trigger command injection.
In order that appears like a reasonably broad brush for cybercriminals to color with.
And there was CVE-2023-31195 that caught my consideration, beneath the guise of a Session hijack.
The programmers had been setting what are basically authentication token cookies… these magic strings that, if the browser can feed them again in future requests, proves to the server that earlier on within the session the person logged in, had the suitable username, the suitable password, the suitable 2FA code, no matter.
And now they’re bringing this magic “entry card”.
So, you’re imagined to tag these cookies, once you set them, in order that they are going to by no means get transmitted in unencrypted HTTP requests.
That means it makes it a lot more durable for a criminal to hijack them… and so they forgot to do this!
In order that’s one other factor for programmers: Go and assessment the way you set actually vital cookies, ones that both have non-public info in them or have authentication info in them, and be sure you usually are not leaving them open to inadvertent and straightforward publicity.
DOUG. I’m marking this down (towards my higher judgment, however that is the second of two tales up to now) as one that we’ll keep watch over.
DUCK. I feel you’re proper, Doug, as a result of I don’t actually know why, provided that for a few of the routers these patches had already appeared (albeit later than you might need needed)… why *now*?
And I suppose that a part of the story should must emerge.
DOUG. Seems that we completely can not *not* keep watch over this MOVEit story.
So, what do we’ve this week, Paul?
MOVEit mayhem 3: “Disable HTTP and HTTPS visitors instantly”
DUCK. Nicely, sadly for Progress Software program, the third bus got here alongside without delay, because it had been. [LAUGHTER]
So, simply to recap, the primary one was CVE-2023-34362, which is when Progress Software program mentioned, “Oh no! There’s a zero-day – we genuinely didn’t find out about this. It’s a SQL injection, a command injection downside. Right here’s the patch. But it surely was a zero-day, and we discovered about it as a result of ransomware crooks, extortion crooks, had been actively exploiting this. Listed below are some Indicators of Compromise [IoCs].”
So that they did all the suitable issues, as rapidly as they might, as soon as they knew that there was an issue.
Then they went and reviewed their very own code, figuring, “You understand what, if the programmers made that mistake in a single place, perhaps they made some comparable errors in different components of the code.”
And that led to CVE-2023-35036, the place they proactively patched holes that had been like the unique one, however so far as they knew, they discovered them first.
And, lo and behold, there was then a 3rd vulnerability.
This one is CVE-2023-35708, the place plainly the one that discovered it, certainly understanding full nicely that Progress Software program was completely open to accountable disclosure and immediate response…
…determined to go public anyway.
So I don’t know whether or not you name that “‘full disclosure” (I feel that’s the official title for it), “irresponsible disclosure” (I’ve heard it referred to love that by different folks at Sophos), or “dropping 0-day for enjoyable”, which is how I consider it.
In order that was slightly little bit of a pity.
And so Progress Software program mentioned, “Look, any individual dropped this 0-day; we didn’t find out about it; we’re engaged on the patch. On this tiny interim interval, simply flip off your internet interface (we all know it’s a problem), and allow us to end testing the patch.”
And inside a couple of day they mentioned, “Proper, right here is the patch, now apply it. Then, if you need, you may flip your internet interface again on.”
So I feel, all in all, though it’s a foul search for Progress Software program for having the bugs within the first place…
…if this could ever occur to you, then following their type of response is, in my view, a reasonably jolly first rate approach to do it!
DOUG. Sure, we do have reward for Progress Software program, together with our remark for this week on this story.
Adam feedback:
Looks like tough going for MOVEit recently, however I applaud them for his or her fast, proactive, and apparently trustworthy work.
They may theoretically have tried to maintain this all quiet, however as an alternative they’ve been fairly up-front about the issue and what must be achieved about it.
On the very least it makes them look extra reliable in my eyes…
…and I feel that’s a sentiment that’s shared with others as nicely, Paul.
DUCK. It’s certainly.
We’ve heard the identical factor on our social media channels too: that though it’s regrettable that they had the bug, and everybody needs they didn’t, they’re nonetheless inclined to belief the corporate.
In truth, they could be inclined to belief the corporate greater than they had been earlier than, as a result of they assume that they preserve cool heads in a disaster.
DOUG. Superb.
Alright, thanks, Adam, for sending that in.
If in case you have an fascinating story, remark or query you’d wish to submit, we’d like to learn it on the podcast.
You’ll be able to e-mail ideas@sophos.com, you may touch upon any certainly one of our articles, or you may hit us up on social: @nakedsecurity.
That’s our present for at the moment; thanks very a lot for listening.
For Paul Ducklin, I’m Doug Aamoth, reminding you till subsequent time to…
BOTH. Keep safe!
[MUSICAL MODEM]