Live data from Hacker News

New ‘Meow’ attack has deleted almost 4k unsecured databases

bleepingcomputer.com

61–70 of 544 posts

Re: New ‘Meow’ attack has deleted almost 4k unsecured databases

#61
post #35
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most SAAS db providers provide their database over the internet, but secured with a login/pass. Eg all DB's on Heroku elements marketplace work like this.

You can also usually lock it down by IP address.

Yes, or they provide an internal subnet only accessible to servers from the same tenant. Usually it's double useful because usually this traffic is not charged.

Re: New ‘Meow’ attack has deleted almost 4k unsecured databases

#63
post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like all that's left of a database after the attack is some generated indices or other data structures with their names ending with "meow".

Clearly fans of "Super Troopers" / BrokenLizard.

Meow why would you say that?

Re: New ‘Meow’ attack has deleted almost 4k unsecured databases

#64
post #11
post #5

Somehow I feel good about this. The article claims nothing good can come of deleting exposed databases, but I strongly disagree - I'd by far rather my data be deleted than stolen and shared. If the owner doesn't have proper backups AND can't secure a database, they have no business hosting such data, period. IMHO.

No other bad actors can get it, but we don't know if it's already been found, and now that it's gone we have no idea what data is out in the wild. And as you note, we can't trust the companies to accurately report it themselves.

Maybe this actor A downloaded the data, then deleted the database, preventing others from accessing and selling the same data? Only A can sell this data now?

Re: New ‘Meow’ attack has deleted almost 4k unsecured databases

#67
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No other bad actors can get it, but we don't know if it's already been found, and now that it's gone we have no idea what data is out in the wild. And as you note, we can't trust the companies to accurately report it themselves.

Ideally they'd report it so that password managers could warn everyone, but with just the database URI there isn't necessarily any obvious way to know what domain or business its associated with.

Doesn't really matter, as long as the credential is exposed, users can be warned. No matter where it came from.

Re: New ‘Meow’ attack has deleted almost 4k unsecured databases

#68
post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Databases that are read only would be unaffected by this attack.

Read-only in practice, not inherently read-only in the way that e.g. CD-ROM is. Such systems still need to have their otherwise-static dataset updated "online" by an ETL pipeline agent-user. Which often means, in the DBMSes with less fine-grained security models, that such users need to have full DML (and even DDL) capabilities, rather than only insert capability.

This attack was only possible on databases with unsecured or weakly secured read-write access.

Re: New ‘Meow’ attack has deleted almost 4k unsecured databases

#70
post #10
post #7

How does this work? Will it affect MySQL databases accessible from the Internet but secured with a long random password?

Don't expose MySQL databases to the internet. Just don't. Stick an API layer in at the very least with key based auth, and only the bare minimum capabilities allowed for the user. That said, if you'd read the article you'd see that so far only unsecured MongoDB, Elasticsearch and Redis installations are being attacked so far.

It's fine to expose MySQL to the internet, but it better before set up securely.. and you better be using the database-level user security.
Post reply on HN