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

CloudFlare's Heartbleed challenge cracked

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 155 posts

Re: CloudFlare's Heartbleed challenge cracked

#141

Post by midas007 »

drakaal wrote: post #115
nl wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CIA and FBI had knowledge of variations of this vulnerability nearly 10 years ago. This isn't true. Don't make things up - this bug is bad enough without misinformation. OpenSSL has been patching variations of this bug for that whole time Untrue. OpenSSL has been patching unrelated bugs since it was created (as has most software). https://www.openssl.org/news/secadv_20030930.txt* This is unrelated to heartbleed.

It is related in that there has never been a release of OpenSSL that was secure. Not one. Ever. The known vulnerabilities list for OpenSSL has never had a release that didn't have a flaw that allowed some amount of "backdooring", Dataextraction, or data manipulation. (as opposed to just a path for a DoS attack) >Don't make things up - I don't have to make things up. The CIA and FBI keep a list of known vulnerabilitie…

To paraphrase Thomas, a core issue is getting the right eyes auditing code. We need more CTFs that offer cred and prizes to keep projects honest. Also, important core projects like OpenSSH, OpenSSL, GnuPG and core projects like zlib need to be held to a greater deal of scrutiny and adversarial reporting. But as it stands now, projects like zlib dont even bother GPG sign releases, so how much confidence can you have in the rest of their security posture? This is failure by way of academic happy-clappy laziness waiting to happen. Also other important projects like Glibc that were massive big balls of mud are likely to conceal all sorts of vulns by their enormous codebase and number of features AND poor support history, hence Debian's selection of eglibc.

So in conclusion there are a number of hard but necessary steps to reduce the threat surface from this sort of thing ever happening again. Because doing the same thing and expecting a different result is the literal definition of "stupid."

FOSS is part of the economy and important projects should be treated with the seriousness, responsibility and customer service of a business, even if the sale price is $0.

Re: CloudFlare's Heartbleed challenge cracked

#142

Post by thrownaway2424 »

PhasmaFelis wrote: post #78
drakaal wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>we had the bug 16 days early, no we had the bug 18 days early And we didn't know what to do about it... CIA and FBI had knowledge of variations of this vulnerability nearly 10 years ago. OpenSSL has been patching variations of this bug for that whole time, and every good hacker, (and the bad ones) have been exploiting OpenSSL since its creation. https://www.openssl.org/news/secadv_20030930.txt People act surprised,…

> CIA and FBI had knowledge of variations of this vulnerability nearly 10 years ago. Source?

The bug wasn't even implemented 10 years ago.

Re: CloudFlare's Heartbleed challenge cracked

#143

Post by cryptbe »

benmmurphy wrote: post #134
cryptbe wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't need to use p or q. See http://vnhacker.blogspot.com/2014/04/idea-to-solve-cloudflar...

apparently these temp values are scrubbed by openssl. i would definitely verify because there could be some implementation bug that stops their scrubbing. so what nginx does is: handle_request: do_decryption scrub_temporaries write_to_client handle_another_request: .. because nginx is single threaded there shouldn't be any requests handled between do_decryption and scrub_temporaries. but this is a problem on other se…

Yeah, you're correct. So it seems that you don't need math to solve this challenge, but maybe luck and patience.

Re: CloudFlare's Heartbleed challenge cracked

#144

Post by vxNsr »

ademarre wrote: post #34

https://twitter.com/eastdakota/status/454792635279220737 Pic of the CloudFlare team reviewing the attack. Ten guys crowded around one monitor.

Gonna be that guy:

That looks a lot like the scene from SV where the Snooli guys figure out that the "algorithm" is really good.

Also that's one BIG monitor.

Re: CloudFlare's Heartbleed challenge cracked

#145

Post by nl »

drakaal wrote: post #127
itsnotvalid wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which kind of proxies? What are they using them actually?

Just one example, but this is a typical setup. http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/interfaces_modules/serv... I don't suggest doing the Clear Text between server and proxy, but the idea is the same. You use a proxy so that you don't ever have user names or passwords in memory longer than a few ms. Once a user is authenticated data passes through quickly making it very very difficult to do a fingerprint match of the…

This is a great example of why a little knowledge is a bad thing. It almost sounds like you know what you are talking about, which probably confuses people.

Heartbleed is dangerous because it exposes private keys, and that let's you decrypt SSL traffic. That in turn may let you read passwords.

Don't conflate the two separate things.

Compartmentizing is good, but doesn't protect against Heartbleed.

Disposable proxies don't protect you.

Perfect Forward Secrecy does protect you because the private keys aren't reused. It is notable that you didn't mention the one technique that actually helps.

To me that shows you misunderstand what heartbleed is. Some if your critisms of OpenSSL are valid, but not for the reasons you claim.

Re: CloudFlare's Heartbleed challenge cracked

#146

Post by nl »

PhasmaFelis wrote: post #139
drakaal wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CIA and FBI servers are easy to find, and many run OpenSSL. Go see which ones have the vulnerability. You won't find it on them. Their branch doesn't have the issue. Also look through this http://web.nvd.nist.gov/view/vuln/search-results?query=opens... You will see mentions of this bug in products that use OpenSSL quite often.

Do you have evidence of that being true a week ago? It's no surprise that the CIA and FBI would scramble to lock down vulnerabilities as soon as they were announced, but that's not proof that they never had them in the first place. After the Snowden business, I wouldn't be hugely surprised if the gov't was secretly aware of Heartbleed, but I'm not comfortable taking a random stranger's word for it.

If the government was aware of Heartbleed,you can be sure that knowledge was buried deep in the NSA, not at your local FBI office. It is laughable to think the FBI knew about this.

Re: CloudFlare's Heartbleed challenge cracked

#147

Post by nilved »

pinaceae wrote: post #119
ademarre wrote: post #34

https://twitter.com/eastdakota/status/454792635279220737 Pic of the CloudFlare team reviewing the attack. Ten guys crowded around one monitor.

to be that guy: that's a bunch of kids. goes to show that we're far from being a mature industry when critical pieces of internet infrastructure are being run by bright, but inexperienced people. and of course they're inexperienced, no one really is, the whole thing is in its infancy. but imagine this being "the team" in charge of mission critical stuff on a 777. experience cannot be gained through shortcuts or pure…

Say no to age discrimination.

Re: CloudFlare's Heartbleed challenge cracked

#148

Post by dogsky »

cryptbe wrote: post #128
alexkus wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You now know the two primes (p,q) which multiply together to make n (the public key modulus). We also know e (the public key exponent). d (the private key) is:- d = e^-1 mod ((p-1)(q-1)) To work this modular inverse out you use the extended Euclidean algorithm. This is why you need to know the factorisation of n=(p*q). You can't compute d (the private key) with just the composite n.

You don't need to use p or q. See http://vnhacker.blogspot.com/2014/04/idea-to-solve-cloudflar...

Very interesting. So, just with the private key given p/q and the modulus is really possible to extract the private key? I saw the RSATool (https://github.com/ius/rsatool), but it needs an "n" and "d" parameter. So, how to use the output from this modified hertbeet exploit with RSATool since it only prints "Using Modulus", "Got result:" and "Found Prime" and all are much larger in comparison with parameters for RSATOOL. Thanks.

Re: CloudFlare's Heartbleed challenge cracked

#149

Post by quasque »

dogsky wrote: post #148
cryptbe wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't need to use p or q. See http://vnhacker.blogspot.com/2014/04/idea-to-solve-cloudflar...

Very interesting. So, just with the private key given p/q and the modulus is really possible to extract the private key? I saw the RSATool ( https://github.com/ius/rsatool ), but it needs an "n" and "d" parameter. So, how to use the output from this modified hertbeet exploit with RSATool since it only prints "Using Modulus", "Got result:" and "Found Prime" and all are much larger in comparison with parameters for RSA…

If you have modulus n and prime p, you can get the other prime q by dividing n by p. This gives you both primes, which is the input to RSA key generation (along with the public exponent which is usually 65537, but can be extracted from the X.509 certificate along with the modulus).

Re: CloudFlare's Heartbleed challenge cracked

#150

Post by drakaal »

nl wrote: post #145
drakaal wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just one example, but this is a typical setup. http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/interfaces_modules/serv... I don't suggest doing the Clear Text between server and proxy, but the idea is the same. You use a proxy so that you don't ever have user names or passwords in memory longer than a few ms. Once a user is authenticated data passes through quickly making it very very difficult to do a fingerprint match of the…

This is a great example of why a little knowledge is a bad thing. It almost sounds like you know what you are talking about, which probably confuses people. Heartbleed is dangerous because it exposes private keys, and that let's you decrypt SSL traffic. That in turn may let you read passwords. Don't conflate the two separate things. Compartmentizing is good, but doesn't protect against Heartbleed. Disposable proxies…

The Private key thing is "bad" but far less bad than the user data that is being exposed.

The Private Key Exposure lets you do impersonation, but you would have to do something with DNS, or such to get it to work. Where as me getting your user/pass, or account information has immediate impact, and can't be "undone".

PS Conflate doesn't mean what you think it does. Conflate has to be wrapper for several topics or ideas that are related.

I can't "conflate" two unrelated things because conflation is by default "true". If we were discussing Gentrification, and Inflation in the housing market of San Francisco then we be talking about the conflated issue of "The San Francisco Housing Crisis".

Just as you can't "inflate" something with a vacuum or sand, or peanut butter, you can't conflate it with something that is unrelated.

This issue of the understanding of the word conflate comes from the fact that people think that "confused" sounds so much like it, and when they are trying to sound smart they use the word conflate when they really mean confuse, and think the two are synonyms.

-Brandon Wirtz

PlexiNLP (I know my words)

Post reply on HN