Henrique Schunck

Some of you likely recall the talk back in 2016 or so of updating the OWASP Foundation website to not appear so much like a...well, a wiki. That talk was carried forward into 2017 and 2018 and, with each year, the proposal got pushed ahead as there were other, deeper projects to tackle. With the arrival of 2019 and a firm project plan under the guidance of Mike McCamon, Executive Director, we are finally moving toward a functioning, modern website that will be a whole lot less...wiki-like. The journey has been circuitous and, while we are not anywhere near complete, we have a set plan in place to bring it to fruition within the calendar year (second quarter of the year, actually).

TLDR: How Can You Help?

There are certainly ways in which you can get involved now. For instance, we are looking for a clean way to get wiki pages into GitHub markdown format for archival. I have done some work here but there are parsing issues with some of the tools. Do you know a good tool or have you done similar work? Also, are you or do you know a good designer, someone familiar with GitHub pages that can provide some useful help and feedback along the way? A Jekyll expert to help code a theme with a handful of templates would be a great addition. In addition, we could use website server admins who could help with assigning redirects to maintain search integrity. Finally, there will be a great many pages to move that we will also eventually need community involvement in.

So, What Have We Done?

Thus far we have researched various ideas for standing up a new site, including modifying the current wiki, spinning up our own web server, contracting a third party to host and build a new site, and also using existing infrastructure with our own content to launch a new face for OWASP. Our discussions led us to a familiar place, one that nearly every developer in the OWASP space is familiar with: GitHub.

In our conversations with GitHub, it became readily apparent that using the platform would be a win for the Foundation as well as GitHub. Nearly everyone who runs a project at OWASP (documentation or otherwise) uses GitHub. Because our target audience is also mostly developers we know that they are also very comfortable with the platform. And while GitHub has a number of high profile companies using their GitHub Pages, the use of the platform as the basis for the entire website of the number one non-profit foundation in the application security sector is a big draw.

We have run with that GitHub Pages idea and have spent internal manpower on a proof of concept. This proof of concept is less about the UX of the site than the functionality, the ability to utilize the authentication systems, and the ability to utilize automation to push out changes quickly.

Where Are We Now?

We are doing the final stages of website architecture. We are also planning what needs to be in the site, how the pieces will integrate with current projects and chapters, and how we might utilize the community to integrate the pieces so that we have a visually and functionally cohesive website that spans across multiple repositories.

What Is Next?

We will soon be looking for a modern website design that is responsive and clean. We will begin using the knowledge gained from our proof of concept to build out the internals of the website and then we will start implementing the highest traffic pages and administrative areas into the new platform. Once we have the big-ticket items moved we will start looking at what is left and moving over those pieces. The eventual goal would be to have a new, modern website for the future of OWASP while keeping the wiki as an archive of really useful information.

We hope you are as excited as we are about the future of the OWASP Foundation website and will join us as we move toward a modern web presence. If you have any questions or would like to volunteer your time, experience or knowledge, please contact me at harold.blankenship@owasp.com

Continue reading

Just a week after Apple released its brand new iPhone X on November 3, a team of researchers has claimed to successfully hack Apple's Face ID facial recognition technology with a mask that costs less than $150. They said Apple iPhone x face id can be hacked with silicon mask easily.

apple iPhone x face id hacked
Yes, Apple's "ultra-secure" Face ID security for the iPhone X is not as secure as the company claimed during its launch event in September this year.

"Apple engineering teams have even gone and worked with professional mask makers and makeup artists in Hollywood to protect against these attempts to beat Face ID," Apple's senior VP of worldwide marketing Phil Schiller said about Face ID system during the event.

"These are actual masks used by the engineering team to train the neural network to protect against them in Face ID."

However, the bad news is that researchers from Vietnamese cybersecurity firm Bkav were able to unlock the iPhone X using a mask.

Yes, Bkav researchers have a better option than holding it up to your face while you sleep. Bkav researchers re-created the owner's face through a combination of 3D printed mask, makeup, and 2D images with some "special processing done on the cheeks and around the face, where there are large skin areas" and the nose is created from silicone.

The researchers have also published a proof-of-concept video, showing the brand-new iPhone X first being unlocked using the specially constructed mask, and then using the Bkav researcher's face, in just one go.

"Many people in the world have tried different kinds of masks but all failed. It is because we understand how AI of Face ID works and how to bypass it," an FAQ on the Bkav website said.

"You can try it out with your own iPhone X, the phone shall recognize you even when you cover a half of your face. It means the recognition mechanism is not as strict as you think, Apple seems to rely too much on Face ID's AI. We just need a half face to create the mask. It was even simpler than we ourselves had thought."

Researchers explain that their "proof-of-concept" demo took about five days after they got iPhone X on November 5th. They also said the demo was performed against one of their team member's face without training iPhone X to recognize any components of the mask.

"We used a popular 3D printer. The nose was made by a handmade artist. We use 2D printing for other parts (similar to how we tricked Face Recognition 9 years ago). The skin was also hand-made to trick Apple's AI," the firm said.

The security firm said it cost the company around $150 for parts (which did not include a 3D printer), though it did not specify how many attempts its researchers took them to bypass the security of Apple's Face ID.

It should be noted that creating such a mask to unlock someone's iPhone is a time-consuming process and it is not possible to hack into a random person's iPhone.

However, if you prefer privacy and security over convenience, we highly recommend you to use a passcode instead of fingerprint or Face ID to unlock your phone.

More information

In the Hacking Windows 95, part 1 blog post, we covered that through a nasty bug affecting Windows 95/98/ME, the share password can be guessed in no time. In this article, I'm going to try to use this vulnerability to achieve remote code execution (with the help of publicly available tools only).

The first thing we can do when we have read access to the Windows directory through the share, is to locate all the *.pwl files on the c:\windows directory, copy them to your machine where Cain is installed, switch to Cracker tab, pwl files, load the pwl file, add username based on the filename, and try to crack it. If you can't crack it you might still try to add a .pwl file where you already know the password in the remote windows directory. Although this is a fun post-exploitation task, but still, no remote code execution. These passwords are useless without physical access.

One might think that after having a share password and user password, it is easy to achieve remote code execution. The problem is:

there is no "at" command (available since Windows 95 plus!)
there is no admin share
there is no RPC
there is no named pipes
there is no remote registry
there is no remote service management

If you think about security best practices, disabling unnecessary services is always the first task you should do. Because Windows 95 lacks all of these services, it is pretty much secure!

During my quest for a tool to hack Windows 95, I came across some pretty cool stuff:

Internet periscope

Winfingerprint

LanSpy

But the best of the best is Fluxay, which has been written by chinese hackers. It is the metasploit from the year 2000. A screenshot is worth more than a 1000 words. 4 screenshot > 4 thousand words :)

It is pretty hard to find the installer, but it is still out there!

But at the end, no remote code execution for me.

My idea here was that if I can find a file which executes regularly (on a scheduled basis), I can change that executable to my backdoor and I'm done. Although there is no scheduler in the default Windows 95, I gave it a try.

Let's fire up taskman.exe to get an idea what processes are running:

Looks like we need a more powerful tool here, namely Process Explorer. Let's try to download this from oldapps.com:

LOL, IE3 hangs, can't render the page. Copying files to the Win95 VM is not that simple, because there are no shared folders in Win95 VM. And you can't use pendrives either, Win95 can't handle USB (at least the retail version). After downloading the application with a newer browser from oldapps, let's start Process Explorer on the test Windows 95.

Don't try to download the Winsocks 2 patch from the official MS site, it is not there anymore, but you can download it from other sites.

Now let's look at the processes running:

After staring it for minutes, turned out it is constant, no new processes appeared.
Looking at the next screenshot, one can notice this OS was not running a lot of background processes ...

My current Win7 has 1181 threads and 84 processes running, no wonder it is slow as hell :)

We have at least the following options:

You are lucky and not the plain Windows 95 is installed, but Windows 95 Plus! The main difference here is that Windows 95 Plus! has built-in scheduler, especially the "at" command. Just overwrite a file which is scheduled to execution, and wait. Mission accomplished!
Ping of death - you can crash the machine (no BSOD, just crash) with long (over 65535 bytes) ICMP ping commands, and wait for someone to reboot it. Just don't forget to put your backdoor on the share and add it to autoexec.bat before crashing it.
If your target is a plain Windows 95, I believe you are out of luck. No at command, no named pipes, no admin share, nothing. Meybe you can try to fuzz port 137 138 139, and write an exploit for those. Might be even Ping of Death is exploitable?

Let's do the first option, and hack Windows 95 plus!

Look at the cool features we have by installing Win95 Plus!

Cool new boot splash screen!

But our main interest is the new, scheduled tasks!

Now we can replace diskalm.exe with our backdoor executable, and wait maximum one hour to be scheduled.

Instead of a boring text based tutorial, I created a YouTube video for you. Based on the feedbacks on my previous tutorialz, it turned out I'm way too old, and can't do interesting tutorials. That's why I analyzed the cool skiddie videoz, and found that I have to do the followings so my vidz won't suck anymore:

use cool black windows theme
put meaningless performance monitor gadgets on the sidebar
use a cool background, something related with hacking and skullz
do as many opsec fails as possible
instead of captions, use notepad with spelling errorz
there is only one rule of metal: Play it fuckin' loud!!!!

Related articles

There are situations when c interacts with golang for example in a library, and its possible to exploit a golang function writing raw memory using an unsafe.Pointer() parameter.

When golang receive a null terminated string on a *C.Char parameter, can be converted to golang s tring with s2 := C.GoString(s1) we can do string operations with s2 safelly if the null byte is there.

When golang receives a pointer to a buffer on an unsafe.Pointer() and the length of the buffer on a C.int, if the length is not cheated can be converted to a []byte safelly with b := C.GoBytes(buf,sz)

Buuut what happens if golang receives a pointer to a buffer on an unsafe.Pointer() and is an OUT variable? the golang routine has to write on this pointer unsafelly for example we can create a golangs memcpy in the following way:

We convert to uintptr for indexing the pointer and then convert again to pointer casted to a byte pointer dereferenced and every byte is writed in this way.

If b is controlled, the memory can be written and the return pointer of main.main or whatever function can be modified.

https://play.golang.org/p/HppcVpLfuMf

The return addres can be pinpointed, for example 0x41 buffer 0x42 address:

We can reproduce it simulating the buffer from golang in this way:

we can dump the address of a function and redirect the execution to it:

https://play.golang.org/p/7htJHJp8gUJ

In this way it's possible to build a rop chain using golang runtime to unprotect a shellcode.

Henrique Schunck

terça-feira, 30 de maio de 2023

OWASP Web 2.0 Project Update

TLDR: How Can You Help?

So, What Have We Done?

Where Are We Now?

What Is Next?

Continue reading

APPLE IPHONE X FACE ID CAN BE HACKED WITH SILICON MASK

Hacking Windows 95, Part 2

segunda-feira, 29 de maio de 2023

Exploiting Golang Unsafe Pointers

More info

Você é meu visitante:

Páginas