Live data from Hacker News

Phpfog "Down for maintenance"

phpfogsucks.com

51–60 of 125 posts

Re: Phpfog "Down for maintenance"

#51
post #32

Even at 16, you should be mature enough to know that this is classless. I hope for their sake they never start their own business and never fuck up, because that'd be awfully sad if the next kids to come along decided to show them the same courtesy they've shown here.

Agreed. 5 days ago one of the hackers wrote on Twitter: "Wow, heroku for PHP. I thought of this once, sadly I wouldn't be able to get 1.2 mil in funding :(". Well, at least we didn't have to look too hard for a motive.

"Wow, heroku for PHP. I thought of this once, sadly I wouldn't be able to get 1.2 mil in funding :("

A classic case of the fallacy that having the idea is 90% of the work.

Re: Phpfog "Down for maintenance"

#52
post #44
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Heroku has done it reasonably well too and they seem to do it only with POSIX permissions for the most part.

Ahem. There have been multiple exploits for heroku, some of which enabled access to code and data of other heroku customers (google for "heroku vulnerability"). From what I read about their virtualization (which may not be up-to-date) they seem to rely on the security of chroot(). If that is still the case then there is a big problem in their future.

Could you expand on the last sentence? Why is relying on chroot+file permissions inherently bad?

Re: Phpfog "Down for maintenance"

#54
Not sure what the hack was for the main server, but I'm not even sure I would consider the steps mentioned at this site as hacks so much as "server administration." It's a pretty obvious thing to try. It was only a matter of time before someone decided to poke around and see what they could do.

Re: Phpfog "Down for maintenance"

#56
post #52
post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ahem. There have been multiple exploits for heroku, some of which enabled access to code and data of other heroku customers (google for "heroku vulnerability"). From what I read about their virtualization (which may not be up-to-date) they seem to rely on the security of chroot(). If that is still the case then there is a big problem in their future.

Could you expand on the last sentence? Why is relying on chroot+file permissions inherently bad?

chroot has not been designed as a security feature but as a system testing tool. you only need a local root exploit to get out of chroot. you need additional protection to have a proper jail; freebsd does this, openbsd used to, not sure how it is now.

Re: Phpfog "Down for maintenance"

#57
Hey guys,

I'm Elliot Speck, one of the guys (let's be realistic, the main guy) behind the phpFog hack, I guess the record needs to be set straight about exactly what went down.

phpfogsucks.com isn't mine, I never contributed directly to it and any work credited by me is assumed by the creator and owner of that site.

My work was slightly different, I was proving that the system was horribly exploitable. Throughout the process I burnt into the box, gained root access, and took a screenshot. I also gained access to the phpFog Twitter account and posted a bit. I didn't damage any files, and when I finally came into contact with Lucas, I explained my methodology directly and gave him a few security pointers for immediate causes for concern. As a result, the project is now on standby as they fix up the issues that were made apparent by my break-in.

I don't consider what I did to be a bad thing. It's better me break in and make the fact I did public, than someone break in silently and wipe the box, losing hundreds of hours of both the team's and clients' time. That is below any moral standard I could possibly even consider upholding.

What I did not do:

-Damage or otherwise alter any of the system files

-Damage, alter or view any client files

-Post or otherwise make public the methodology behind my access

-Post or otherwise make public the engine code for phpFog, this was done by someone else who I showed the code to in order to investigate further potential security holes before I alerted the phpFog team.

I'm posting here to clear the air, but if you have any questions you can contact me on Twitter: @ElliotSpeck.

Re: Phpfog "Down for maintenance"

#59
Lucas notes some of the security improvements they plan on: http://help.phpfog.com/discussions/questions/84-details-on-t...

1) Every environment is going to be chrooted and Apache will be running under per-user mpm

2) The dedicated ec2 servers will be running in a way that has no security credentials of any sort, a walled garden that will not have access anywhere else.

Re: Phpfog "Down for maintenance"

#60

Hey guys, I'm Elliot Speck, one of the guys (let's be realistic, the main guy) behind the phpFog hack, I guess the record needs to be set straight about exactly what went down. phpfogsucks.com isn't mine, I never contributed directly to it and any work credited by me is assumed by the creator and owner of that site. My work was slightly different, I was proving that the system was horribly exploitable. Throughout the…

I would consider, " I also gained access to the phpFog Twitter account and posted a bit." to be a dick move.
Post reply on HN