Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Each box has a 50 email limit (FIFO) which was immediately overwhelmed. That makes me think the malicious author didn't expect this to spread as wide as it did.
It's my guess that Mailinator is extremely irrelevant to their plan. They planned to propagate via BCC but they needed a "To:" address - preferably one that didn't bounce. So they hit the "h" key awhile, then added @mailinator.com
Ask HN: Google Doc email virus?
161–170 of 220 posts
Re: Ask HN: Google Doc email virus?
#162I reported this attack vector to Google back in 2012. They awarded a modest bounty, and then a few months later I heard this: > "We're deploying some abuse detection and reactive measures to deal with impostors that might try to abuse this sort of attack. Given this, we do not intend to perform validation that the URL matches the branding information." That last part was in reference to one of my proposed mitigations…
This was particularly effective because the app was registered as "Google Docs" - to not even filter names of your own products out seems ripe picking for imposter apps.
Re: Ask HN: Google Doc email virus?
#163Earlier quoted context omitted.
> changing my passwords every 30 days is looking less and less important. Sidenote: I don't think that was ever a good idea, unless you think you were likely to type your password into phishing sites in the last month.
Sadly, PCI compliance requirements believe otherwise :(
Re: Ask HN: Google Doc email virus?
#164Earlier quoted context omitted.
It was shut down within 30 minutes.
No it was more like hours from when I reported it and when the app was finally blocked.
Re: Ask HN: Google Doc email virus?
#165Earlier quoted context omitted.
> changing my passwords every 30 days is looking less and less important. Using some non-English Unicode text as password will make the password really strong. I sometimes include Malayalam text for passwords as it's my native language.
Or made up Malayalam words such as Melcow!
Lastpass.
Re: Ask HN: Google Doc email virus?
#166Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even worst: The hacker could have taken a list of lets say the top 1000 banking (or any type of online service) websites accross the globe. The moment the hacker get access to your gmail account, he initiatite a password recovery request on each of those 1000 websites, get the password reset link from the email, reset the password, delete the email. he could now have access to any other online account you have that h…
Safe to assume that google could track such activity for affected accounts and notify if that was widespread? (or is that somehow against the 'only our anonymized ad display program can scan your email' privacy policy?)
Re: Ask HN: Google Doc email virus?
#167Though this is unrelated to the topic I think it would be good if Google reviewed apps permissions in Google Play too because users are bad at this.
Re: Ask HN: Google Doc email virus?
#168Re: Ask HN: Google Doc email virus?
#169Mailinator here: Yes, we sent the inbox to a blackhole but keep in mind, Mailinator does not and can not actually "Send" any email. It's a receive-only service. As always, any email "from" @mailinator.com has had it's reply-to forged (which is pretty trivial). Also - even before we blackholed the email, it's unlikely any email in that inbox (i.e. hhhh..) was read. Each box has a 50 email limit (FIFO) which was immedi…
Re: Ask HN: Google Doc email virus?
#170Earlier quoted context omitted.
Absolutely! My favorite is usually referred to as passwordless authentication, and generally means that when a user gives you their email address/SMS/etc, you send a login link to their device. Here's an article: https://medium.com/@ninjudd/passwords-are-obsolete-9ed56d483...
Most people today authenticate their email account by typing their password into the DOM and sending it over the wire. It puts a ton of pressure on email providers to be secure. I consider my email password the absolute most important piece of information I have. So although I do agree with you (and have created sites in the past that do passwordless login), the general password problem doesn't really get solved with…
Every Unix system has a mail daemon as a core function. If you've ever seen "This incident will be reported." because your user is not in the sudoers group, the incident gets reported via the local mail system. Mail servers today (outside of Microsoft's Exchange servers) are still overwhelmingly Unix-like systems. A mail user just needs a Unix host, a username and ssh + mutt/pine to access their mail in this way. Then an attacker needs to identify the unix host, the username and the ssh credentials. The first two bits are likely to be trivial - the Unix host is probably published in DNS MX records, and the username is probably the local part of the email address. The last part does not necessarily need to be a password. Good security practices will have it be an ssh keypair. ssh keypairs are provably computationally secure (until quantum computing comes along) and ssh private keys often also have passphrases. Other measures - like U2F security keys - can also be required as part of ssh authentication.
So this is probably the gold standard when it comes to security for an email inbox. Is there any way we can make this more usable so that a GUI mail client can be used? One answer is to run the mail client on the Unix host and use ssh X forwarding to display it on the client machine. Another answer is to run a POP or IMAP server on the Unix host, force TLS and use normal plaintext passwords over the TLS tunnel.
Both the ssh and the IMAPS solutions require some way to authenticate the server side of the connection. The ssh mechanism typically defaults to trust on first use, but since one is publishing DNS records anyways, a SSHFP (ssh fingerprint) record seems like a good additional step. The IMAPS solution requires re-authentication of the certificate for each session. I am not sure what the current state of the art is for this for IMAPS servers. I personally believe that the CA model used for HTTPS is severely flawed.
All of this to say that for the truly dedicated user of a certain minimum (but high!) level of technical sophistication, passwordless login everywhere is possible (ssh keys; or having the email client securely store the password for use with IMAPS).