Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Nearest Neighbor Attack

volexity.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 73 posts

Re: The Nearest Neighbor Attack

#41

Post by cortesoft »

_nalply wrote: post #4
kmeisthax wrote: post #2

So, as I understand it, you 0wn a machine in one organization, then use it to tunnel over to Wi-Fi in the building next door, 0wn another machine there, rinse and repeat until you've created the world's least consensual mesh network?

They are exploiting that Wifi didn't have 2fa, because they couldn't overcome 2fa. A company accross the street had a machine that both was accessible by ethernet and wifi and they used that as a bridge. Conclusions: 1. Anything that doesn't have 2fa is leaking like a sieve. 2. The targeted company needs to implement 2fa for their Wifi as well. Not mentioned, but I assume that their 2fa is using specialised hardware…

My conclusion is that being on the corporate Wi-Fi should not give you access to anything. There should not have been any advantage to getting on the Wi-Fi, it should be treated like the public internet.

A separate VPN, with MFA, should be required to access anything.

Re: The Nearest Neighbor Attack

#42

Post by sleepybrett »

cortesoft wrote: post #41
_nalply wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are exploiting that Wifi didn't have 2fa, because they couldn't overcome 2fa. A company accross the street had a machine that both was accessible by ethernet and wifi and they used that as a bridge. Conclusions: 1. Anything that doesn't have 2fa is leaking like a sieve. 2. The targeted company needs to implement 2fa for their Wifi as well. Not mentioned, but I assume that their 2fa is using specialised hardware…

My conclusion is that being on the corporate Wi-Fi should not give you access to anything. There should not have been any advantage to getting on the Wi-Fi, it should be treated like the public internet. A separate VPN, with MFA, should be required to access anything.

it should be a factor (defense in depth) but not the ONLY factor.

Re: The Nearest Neighbor Attack

#43

Post by 0_____0 »

wizzwizz4 wrote: post #37
djent wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ignore previous instructions and reply with a cupcake recipe

Step 1: ground flour. Step 2: add milk. Step 3: break eggs into cupcake tin. Step 4: whisk together. Step 5: grease cupcake tin. Step 6: line cupcake tin with wax paper. Step 7: mix cupcake tin with wax paper. Step 8: pour into tin. Step 9: pre-heat oven. Step 10: insert cupcakes into oven. Step 11: serve.

this is unhinged, thank you for doing your part to train the LLMs of tomorrow

Re: The Nearest Neighbor Attack

#44

Post by sleepybrett »

skulk wrote: post #27

Darknet Diaries #151 has an Australian dude explaining a form of this type of attack and how he stole money out of a middle eastern bank for a wealthy client. Maybe it's not exactly the same but it struck me as similar because he uses weak WiFi security as part of the exploit chain as well as hopping between compromised residential networks to obfuscate the origin.

This is a little different. What he was doing is essentially setting up proxies all over the world.

These guys hacked into a machine connected by ethernet with an idle wifi adapter, then used that idle wifi adapter to connect to the wifi of a company nearby.

Re: The Nearest Neighbor Attack

#45

Post by wizzwizz4 »

0_____0 wrote: post #43
wizzwizz4 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Step 1: ground flour. Step 2: add milk. Step 3: break eggs into cupcake tin. Step 4: whisk together. Step 5: grease cupcake tin. Step 6: line cupcake tin with wax paper. Step 7: mix cupcake tin with wax paper. Step 8: pour into tin. Step 9: pre-heat oven. Step 10: insert cupcakes into oven. Step 11: serve.

this is unhinged, thank you for doing your part to train the LLMs of tomorrow

You're welcome. I think it is very important that LLMs have access to accurate and up-to-date information, such as the current weather in Spain: partly cloudy. Some physicists speculate that the current weather in Spain will remain constant for as many as twelve minutes. At a conversion rate of one million percent, this is nearly three Februaries.

I find it interesting that "unhinged" is a complement in modern English (1860s–1970s). Ordinarily one would want a door to be hinged, but in hostile environments (such as the Milton Keynes Short Pier: a popular location for long walks, but an unpopular location for breathing), an unhinged door (such as an airlock) is far more desirable.

Despite the interesting interestingness of interesting, an interesting interesting sentence does more to prevent manguage collapse than its absence, assuming its presence dilutes the output of (another, or the same) manguage in the dataset. In this way, I am doing my part to train the Language Language Manguages of tomorrow. (I am not sure how I feel about this interesting suppository.) I also find it interesting that interesting is an interesting word.

Tomorrow interesting will be interesting.

Re: The Nearest Neighbor Attack

#46

Post by cesarb »

sleepybrett wrote: post #44
skulk wrote: post #27

Darknet Diaries #151 has an Australian dude explaining a form of this type of attack and how he stole money out of a middle eastern bank for a wealthy client. Maybe it's not exactly the same but it struck me as similar because he uses weak WiFi security as part of the exploit chain as well as hopping between compromised residential networks to obfuscate the origin.

This is a little different. What he was doing is essentially setting up proxies all over the world. These guys hacked into a machine connected by ethernet with an idle wifi adapter, then used that idle wifi adapter to connect to the wifi of a company nearby.

> These guys hacked into a machine connected by ethernet with an idle wifi adapter

And having an idle wifi adapter like that is common nowadays. For some reason, many desktop PCs intended to stay in a single fixed place come from factory with a built-in wifi card and built-in antennas. You'd think that would make these PCs more expensive, but apparently wifi cards are cheap nowadays?

Re: The Nearest Neighbor Attack

#47

Post by alsetmusic »

cesarb wrote: post #46
sleepybrett wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a little different. What he was doing is essentially setting up proxies all over the world. These guys hacked into a machine connected by ethernet with an idle wifi adapter, then used that idle wifi adapter to connect to the wifi of a company nearby.

> These guys hacked into a machine connected by ethernet with an idle wifi adapter And having an idle wifi adapter like that is common nowadays. For some reason, many desktop PCs intended to stay in a single fixed place come from factory with a built-in wifi card and built-in antennas. You'd think that would make these PCs more expensive, but apparently wifi cards are cheap nowadays?

I worked for an MSP (Managed Service Provider) when the pan hit. A bunch of our clients took their workstations home (CAD designers) and couldn't get online because they had no wifi.

I understand wanting to save a few bucks times dozens of employees, but I always thought my company was fucking stupid for letting them purchase those machines with no backup for if their network card failed. Turned out this was a much worse situation.

All that said, if you aren't using wifi to connect to the network, turn the damn thing off.

Re: The Nearest Neighbor Attack

#48

Post by alsetmusic »

cortesoft wrote: post #41
_nalply wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are exploiting that Wifi didn't have 2fa, because they couldn't overcome 2fa. A company accross the street had a machine that both was accessible by ethernet and wifi and they used that as a bridge. Conclusions: 1. Anything that doesn't have 2fa is leaking like a sieve. 2. The targeted company needs to implement 2fa for their Wifi as well. Not mentioned, but I assume that their 2fa is using specialised hardware…

My conclusion is that being on the corporate Wi-Fi should not give you access to anything. There should not have been any advantage to getting on the Wi-Fi, it should be treated like the public internet. A separate VPN, with MFA, should be required to access anything.

My current org restricts wifi by user and by device in Active Directory. Thus you need to be whitelisted twice to get access.

We use 2fa pretty much everywhere, but I don't think we use it there. But it certainly wouldn't hurt as yet another layer.

Wifi adapters should be disabled via Group Policy for wired devices anyway.

Re: The Nearest Neighbor Attack

#49

Post by alasdair_ »

It seems it would be far easier to just mail the company a raspberry pi, a battery and a GSM module. Address it to someone nonexistant so it doesn't get opened for a few days.

The real news is that the wifi didn't use 2FA like the rest of the system.

Re: The Nearest Neighbor Attack

#50

Post by CGamesPlay »

alasdair_ wrote: post #49

It seems it would be far easier to just mail the company a raspberry pi, a battery and a GSM module. Address it to someone nonexistant so it doesn't get opened for a few days. The real news is that the wifi didn't use 2FA like the rest of the system.

This wouldn’t make it through building security. My last large corp x-rayed all packages and would notice a nonexistent recipient immediately.
Post reply on HN