What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Will online anything ever be safe? (1 Viewer)

TheIronSheik

SUPER ELITE UPPER TIER
It seems that every week we hear of a massive data breach. Retailers, hospitals, phones...

I'm not in security by any means, but it used to seem like buying something online or having information online was fairly safe minus a few rare security breaches. But now it's starting to seem like you're luckier if you find out your information hasn't been leaked.

Is this the new norm?

 
I think much like the TSA, we had a glossy facade of security. It was just a crap shoot we didn't get targeted by the people wanting to break it at the time.

 
Safe, yeah, sure. I'll just check with the boys down at the computer lab, they've got four more IT professionals working on it. They got us working in shifts!

 
I think much like the TSA, we had a glossy facade of security. It was just a crap shoot we didn't get targeted by the people wanting to break it at the time.
But now that we've been targeted pretty good, what's the gameplan? Like, do we ramp it up or do we shrug our shoulders and say, "Well, we had a good run."

 
Our old saying even way back in the 80s: The only way to keep others out is to unplug it.

 
Our old saying even way back in the 80s: The only way to keep others out is to unplug it.
This

No system is foolproof. All are vulnerable because they are built by and depend on people.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
http://www.wired.com/2014/09/eppb-icloud/?mbid=social_fb

Looks like a Russian spy program designed for LEO/MIL use has been leaked to torrents and is readily available for free. Implications are rather scary given it allows a full backup of your phone to be downloaded (contacts, apps, etc), not just images/videos. If you can figure out the person's username and password for the cloud account, you can siphon off 100% of the phone's contents.

In other news... not being a moron in selecting your password, and enabling 2-factor authentication pretty much eliminates this threat.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Security is about you not the internet. Are you using a real word as a password? If so begging for a breach. Not using 2 factor authentication? Begging to have your naked butt on the internet. Using the same password/login for everywhere? Begging to have your identity stolen and your accounts cleaned out. The reality is most people won't do the necessary stuff to stay safe on the internet not after this and not after the next breach or the one after that.

 
Security is about you not the internet. Are you using a real word as a password? If so begging for a breach. Not using 2 factor authentication? Begging to have your naked butt on the internet. Using the same password/login for everywhere? Begging to have your identity stolen and your accounts cleaned out. The reality is most people won't do the necessary stuff to stay safe on the internet not after this and not after the next breach or the one after that.
I've read articles that said this is a fallacy and that almost any password, no matter how strong, can be broken in a matter of minutes by the right tools.

 
Security is about you not the internet. Are you using a real word as a password? If so begging for a breach. Not using 2 factor authentication? Begging to have your naked butt on the internet. Using the same password/login for everywhere? Begging to have your identity stolen and your accounts cleaned out. The reality is most people won't do the necessary stuff to stay safe on the internet not after this and not after the next breach or the one after that.
I've read articles that said this is a fallacy and that almost any password, no matter how strong, can be broken in a matter of minutes by the right tools.
Depends on the length of the password and the set of allowed characters. Here's one of many password strength/time to crack calculators you can experiment with. For example 8 character passwords which allow upper, lower case, numbers and keyboard symbols (e.g. Y0u5uck!) will take a few years to crack.

Bottom line - don't voluntarily put anything on a machine connected to the internet that you're not comfortable with becoming publicly viewed.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Security is about you not the internet. Are you using a real word as a password? If so begging for a breach. Not using 2 factor authentication? Begging to have your naked butt on the internet. Using the same password/login for everywhere? Begging to have your identity stolen and your accounts cleaned out. The reality is most people won't do the necessary stuff to stay safe on the internet not after this and not after the next breach or the one after that.
I've read articles that said this is a fallacy and that almost any password, no matter how strong, can be broken in a matter of minutes by the right tools.
Brute force attacks generally start with a file that contains popular passwords.

Targeted attacks generally start with a list that's customized for you (pertinent names, dates, locations). Don't use that stuff.

Once you get past that, most hackers aren't going to go through the trouble of brute-forcing from scratch unless they're certain there's something they really want on the other side. WHen you factor in letters, capitalizations, numbers, and non-alphanumeric characters, you're quickly talking about ####loads of options.

Now, if the hack is a back door that doesnt require the password, then that's a different story entirely.

 
Depends on the length of the password and the set of allowed characters. Here's one of many password strength/time to crack calculators you can experiment with.
:goodposting:

I generally generally have a few passwords I use... one or two for secure (financial/primary email/etc) and a couple for basic websites and non-critical email.

They always are 10+ digits... always use upper/lower case plus at least one number and non-alphanumeric character. Those passwords are essentially uncrackable (nearly 2 billion years at 500k attempts per second) without some insight/backdoor.

 
Security is about you not the internet. Are you using a real word as a password? If so begging for a breach. Not using 2 factor authentication? Begging to have your naked butt on the internet. Using the same password/login for everywhere? Begging to have your identity stolen and your accounts cleaned out. The reality is most people won't do the necessary stuff to stay safe on the internet not after this and not after the next breach or the one after that.
I've read articles that said this is a fallacy and that almost any password, no matter how strong, can be broken in a matter of minutes by the right tools.
Someone must think TV is real.

The longer your password the more secure. If we take the full set of allowed printable characters set (the last line above) and increase the password length, the possible combinations jump exponentially (odd, considering that the calculation includes exponents…)

  • 8 Characters > 645,753,531,245,761 (645 Trillion) Combinations
  • 9 Characters > 45,848,500,718,449,031 (45 Quadrillion) Combinations
  • 10 Characters > 3,255,243,551,009,881,201 (3 Quintillion) Combinations
So no some hacker is not going to hack a well conceived password in minutes unless he gets very lucky. Once you take dictionary based hacks out of the equation you make life miserable for most of the would be "hackers" out there who are really just script kiddies. There is a very small subset of people who can actually hack at a high level. And they aren't really interested in your stuff.

 
I went back to using "password" as my password. Nobody guesses that one anymore.

 
Once you take dictionary based hacks out of the equation you make life miserable for most of the would be "hackers" out there who are really just script kiddies. There is a very small subset of people who can actually hack at a high level. And they aren't really interested in your stuff.
THIS.

Most of the "threat" to individuals data is in the script kiddie realm who rely on a toolbox of "Hack-in-a-box" tools.

The movies where someone plugs a thumbdrive in to something and it rolls off a 10 digit password in 7 seconds is kinda funny.

 
Once you take dictionary based hacks out of the equation you make life miserable for most of the would be "hackers" out there who are really just script kiddies. There is a very small subset of people who can actually hack at a high level. And they aren't really interested in your stuff.
THIS.

Most of the "threat" to individuals data is in the script kiddie realm who rely on a toolbox of "Hack-in-a-box" tools.

The movies where someone plugs a thumbdrive in to something and it rolls off a 10 digit password in 7 seconds is kinda funny.
Yep.

 
Gr00vus said:
TheIronSheik said:
NCCommish said:
Security is about you not the internet. Are you using a real word as a password? If so begging for a breach. Not using 2 factor authentication? Begging to have your naked butt on the internet. Using the same password/login for everywhere? Begging to have your identity stolen and your accounts cleaned out. The reality is most people won't do the necessary stuff to stay safe on the internet not after this and not after the next breach or the one after that.
I've read articles that said this is a fallacy and that almost any password, no matter how strong, can be broken in a matter of minutes by the right tools.
Depends on the length of the password and the set of allowed characters. Here's one of many password strength/time to crack calculators you can experiment with. For example 8 character passwords which allow upper, lower case, numbers and keyboard symbols (e.g. Y0u5uck!) will take a few years to crack.

Bottom line - don't voluntarily put anything on a machine connected to the internet that you're not comfortable with becoming publicly viewed.
Thanks for posting my password...

 
I don't know about the so-called pros, but I can hack any Quickbooks file in less than two minutes. :bow:

 
[icon] said:
Gr00vus said:
Depends on the length of the password and the set of allowed characters. Here's one of many password strength/time to crack calculators you can experiment with.
:goodposting:

I generally generally have a few passwords I use... one or two for secure (financial/primary email/etc) and a couple for basic websites and non-critical email.

They always are 10+ digits... always use upper/lower case plus at least one number and non-alphanumeric character. Those passwords are essentially uncrackable (nearly 2 billion years at 500k attempts per second) without some insight/backdoor.
IL00Kandtalkl1kekennyP0Wwers2011

 
TheIronSheik said:
It seems that every week we hear of a massive data breach. Retailers, hospitals, phones...

I'm not in security by any means, but it used to seem like buying something online or having information online was fairly safe minus a few rare security breaches. But now it's starting to seem like you're luckier if you find out your information hasn't been leaked.

Is this the new norm?
Yep! Need to stick to brick and mortar places like Target and Home Depot.

 
The tricky thing about picking a good password is that password crackers know the same tricks you use to make your password "better".

So when you switch the letter E with a 3, that isn't really doing anything because they know about that one. And when you type out that favorite movie phrase? They know that trick too. And when you put a number at the end of your regular password because using letters and numbers is more secure? They know all about that too.

 
The tricky thing about picking a good password is that password crackers know the same tricks you use to make your password "better".

So when you switch the letter E with a 3, that isn't really doing anything because they know about that one. And when you type out that favorite movie phrase? They know that trick too. And when you put a number at the end of your regular password because using letters and numbers is more secure? They know all about that too.
It's not a question of knowing those things. It's giuessing correctly at every position. But yeah those are reasons not to use your favorite movie phrase or a real word. Make something up that has at least 8 characters and isn't a word.

 
NCCommish said:
TheIronSheik said:
NCCommish said:
Security is about you not the internet. Are you using a real word as a password? If so begging for a breach. Not using 2 factor authentication? Begging to have your naked butt on the internet. Using the same password/login for everywhere? Begging to have your identity stolen and your accounts cleaned out. The reality is most people won't do the necessary stuff to stay safe on the internet not after this and not after the next breach or the one after that.
I've read articles that said this is a fallacy and that almost any password, no matter how strong, can be broken in a matter of minutes by the right tools.
Someone must think TV is real.
I don't think the article I read was on a television show, but I could be mistaken.

 
TheIronSheik said:
It seems that every week we hear of a massive data breach. Retailers, hospitals, phones...

I'm not in security by any means, but it used to seem like buying something online or having information online was fairly safe minus a few rare security breaches. But now it's starting to seem like you're luckier if you find out your information hasn't been leaked.

Is this the new norm?
Yep! Need to stick to brick and mortar places like Target and Home Depot.
You missed the part after the part you bolded. I put it in red for easy reading.

 
Define "safe". Reality is, the mechanisms put in place to protect are only as good as the people using them.
Well, that's an interesting question. What is safe? Are we as safe as we were back in the early 2000's? Maybe we weren't totally safe, but I feel like we were safer then.

I guess safe, to me, would be odds like winning a lottery. In just about a year, I've got hit by the Target one and the hospital one.

 
Define "safe". Reality is, the mechanisms put in place to protect are only as good as the people using them.
Well, that's an interesting question. What is safe? Are we as safe as we were back in the early 2000's? Maybe we weren't totally safe, but I feel like we were safer then.

I guess safe, to me, would be odds like winning a lottery. In just about a year, I've got hit by the Target one and the hospital one.
It's easier to get information today than it was in the early 2000s and that's because there are more people on the internet putting more of their information out there. As a general rule, I don't give any institution outside of my bank my information across the internet. I don't link Target cards to bank accounts. I don't do auto bill pay. I don't use my check card to pay bills online. I have a low limit AMEX credit card for all things online. It's a $2000 limit and all my bills/purchases run through it. I have always found that AMEX is the best/quickest when it comes to fraud. A low limit reduces hacking desire. It's been gotten once before and AMEX wants to raise the rate just about every month, but I decline.

There's only so much we as consumers can do though. Simple data masking can go a long way to protecting us and most reputable sites do this and all financial institutions are required to do it with sensitive data.

 
Define "safe". Reality is, the mechanisms put in place to protect are only as good as the people using them.
Well, that's an interesting question. What is safe? Are we as safe as we were back in the early 2000's? Maybe we weren't totally safe, but I feel like we were safer then.

I guess safe, to me, would be odds like winning a lottery. In just about a year, I've got hit by the Target one and the hospital one.
Define "got hit".

As in (a) your information was included in the massive breach or (b) you actually suffered some kind of loss because of them. I'm guessing the former and don't know anyone who is in the latter category.

 
Define "safe". Reality is, the mechanisms put in place to protect are only as good as the people using them.
Well, that's an interesting question. What is safe? Are we as safe as we were back in the early 2000's? Maybe we weren't totally safe, but I feel like we were safer then.

I guess safe, to me, would be odds like winning a lottery. In just about a year, I've got hit by the Target one and the hospital one.
Define "got hit".

As in (a) your information was included in the massive breach or (b) you actually suffered some kind of loss because of them. I'm guessing the former and don't know anyone who is in the latter category.
Well, the Target one I was part of the breach. But that means that my data is out there somewhere. The hospital one just happened, so who knows. But again, my data is out there in someone's possession.

 
Not sure if this was the article, but it's similar to the one I read.

qeadzcwrsfxv1331 = was cracked in a minute.
This is a different sort of attack - one in which a list of encrypted passwords was obtained from the site and then decrypted. Adobe was hacked like this not too long ago. Longer and more complex passwords aren't necessarily more secure from this sort of attack, but they are more secure overall in that they are less vulnerable to other types of attack.

 
Another consequence of the police state:

http://www.wired.com/2014/09/eppb-icloud/

The Police Tool That Pervs Use to Steal Nude Pics From Apple’s iCloud

As nude celebrity photos spilled onto the web over the weekend, blame for the scandal has rotated from the scumbag hackers who stole the images to a researcher who released a tool used to crack victims’ iCloud passwords to Apple, whose security flaws may have made that cracking exploit possible in the first place. But one step in the hackers’ sext-stealing playbook has been ignored—a piece of software designed to let cops and spies siphon data from iPhones, but is instead being used by pervy criminals themselves.

On the web forum Anon-IB, one of the most popular anonymous image boards for posting stolen nude selfies, hackers openly discuss using a piece of software called EPPB or Elcomsoft Phone Password Breaker to download their victims’ data from iCloud backups. That software is sold by Moscow-based forensics firm Elcomsoft and intended for government agency customers. In combination with iCloud credentials obtained with iBrute, the password-cracking software for iCloud released on Github over the weekend, EPPB lets anyone impersonate a victim’s iPhone and download its full backup rather than the more limited data accessible on iCloud.com. And as of Tuesday, it was still being used to steal revealing photos and post them on Anon-IB’s forum.

“Use the script to hack her passwd…use eppb to download the backup,” wrote one anonymous user on Anon-IB explaining the process to a less-experienced hacker. “Post your wins here ;-)”

Apple’s security nightmare began over the weekend, when hackers began leaking nude photos that included shots of Jennifer Lawrence, Kate Upton, and Kirsten Dunst. The security community quickly pointed fingers at the iBrute software, a tool released by security researcher Alexey Troshichev designed to take advantage of a flaw in Apple’s “Find My iPhone” feature to “brute-force” users’ iCloud passwords, cycling through thousands of guesses to crack the account.

If a hacker can obtain a user’s iCloud username and password with iBrute, he or she can log in to the victim’s iCloud.com account to steal photos. But if attackers instead impersonate the user’s device with Elcomsoft’s tool, the desktop application allows them to download the entire iPhone or iPad backup as a single folder, says Jonathan Zdziarski, a forensics consult and security researcher. That gives the intruders access to far more data, he says, including videos, application data, contacts, and text messages.

On Tuesday afternoon, Apple issued a statement calling the security debacle a “very targeted attack on user names, passwords and security questions.” It added that “none of the cases we have investigated has resulted from any breach in any of Apple’s systems including iCloud® or Find my iPhone.”

But the conversations on Anon-IB make clear the photo-stealing attacks aren’t limited to a few celebrities. And Zdziarski argues that Apple may be defining a “breach” as not including a password-guessing attack like iBrute. Based on his analysis of the metadata from leaked photos of Kate Upton, he says he’s determined that the photos came from a downloaded backup that would be consistent with the use of iBrute and EPPB. If a full device backup was accessed, he believes the rest of the backup’s data may still be possessed by the hacker and could be used for blackmail or finding other targets. “You don’t get the same level of access by logging into someone’s [web] account as you can by emulating a phone that’s doing a restore from an iCloud backup,” says Zdziarski. “If we didn’t have this law enforcement tool, we might not have the leaks we had.”

Elcomsoft is just one of a number of forensics firms like Oxygen and Cellebrite that reverse engineer smartphone software to allow government investigators to dump the devices’ data. But Elcomsoft’s program seems to be the most popular among Anon-IB’s crowd, where it’s been used for months prior to the most current leaks, likely in cases where the hacker was able to obtain the target’s password through means other than iBrute. Many “rippers” on Anon-IB offer to pull nude photos on behalf of any other user who may know the target’s Apple ID and password. “Always free, fast and discreet. Will make it alot easier if you have the password,” writes one hacker with the email address eppbripper@hush.ai. “Willing to rip anything iclouds – gf/bf/mom/sister/classmate/etc!! Pics, texts, notes etc!”

One of Anon-IB’s ripper who uses the handle cloudprivates wrote in an email to WIRED that he or she doesn’t consider downloading files from an iCloud backup “hacking” if it’s done on behalf of another user who supplies a username and password. “Dunno about others but I am too lazy to look for accounts to hack. This way I just provide a service to someone that wants the data off the iCloud. For all I know they own the iCloud,” cloudprivates writes. “I am not hacking anything. I simply copy data from the iCloud using the user name and password that I am given. Software from elcomsoft does this.”

Elcomsoft’s program doesn’t require proof of law enforcement or other government credentials. It costs as much as $399, but bootleg copies are freely available on bittorrent sites. And the software’s marketing language sounds practically tailor-made for Anon-IB’s rippers.

“All that’s needed to access online backups stored in the cloud service are the original user’s credentials including Apple ID…accompanied with the corresponding password,” the company’s website reads. “Data can be accessed without the consent of knowledge of the device owner, making Elcomsoft Phone Password Breaker an ideal solution for law enforcement and intelligence organizations.”

Elcomsoft didn’t respond to a request for comment.

On Monday, iBrute creator Troshichev noted that Apple had released an update for Find My iPhone designed to fix the flaw exploited by iBrute. “The end of fun, Apple have just patched,” he wrote on Github. But Anon-IB users continued to discuss stealing data with iBrute in combination with EPPB on the forum Tuesday, suggesting that the fix has yet to be applied to all users, or that stolen credentials are still being used with Elcomsoft’s program to siphon new data. Apple didn’t immediately respond to WIRED’s request for further comment, though it says it’s still investigating the hack and working with law enforcement.

For Apple, the use of government forensic tools by criminal hackers raises questions about how cooperative it may be with Elcomsoft. The Russian company’s tool, as Zdziarski describes it, doesn’t depend on any “backdoor” agreement with Apple and instead required Elcomsoft to fully reverse engineer Apple’s protocol for communicating between iCloud and its iOS devices. But Zdziarski argues that Apple could still have done more to make that reverse engineering more difficult or impossible.

“When you have third parties masquerading as hardware. it really opens up a vulnerability in terms of allowing all of these different companies to continue to interface with your system,” he says. “Apple could take steps to close that off, and I think they should.”

The fact that Apple isn’t complicit in law enforcement’s use of Elcomsoft’s for surveillance doesn’t make the tool any less dangerous, argues Matt Blaze, a computer science professor at the University of Pennsylvania and frequent critic of government spying methods. “What this demonstrates is that even without explicit backdoors, law enforcement has powerful tools that might not always stay inside law enforcement,” he says. “You have to ask if you trust law enforcement. But even if you do trust law enforcement, you have to ask whether other people will get access to these tools, and how they’ll use them.”

 
:lol:

Great. So you're working this thread into a "#### the police" thread? OK. Let's see if we can bring religion and politics into it, too.

 
:lol:

Great. So you're working this thread into a "#### the police" thread? OK. Let's see if we can bring religion and politics into it, too.
I'll bet it was some sort of militarized tool they got from the Obama admin to combat religious cults.

 
Use a two form password manager like, last pass or any number of others can do, and have it generate and store your passwords. It can create passwords of up to 100 characters. Which is probably way more than most websites will allow, but it's there if you can.

 
How would I remember some random made up password. What a pain it would be every time.I logged in

But I do want to be safer.

What is this double encryption thing you speqk of

 
Here's my take...If someone steals EVERY credit card number out there, what are the odds that somebody tries to use mine specifically? I'd rather them hack EVERYTHING than just hack a few of which I happen to be one...

Just make them all public. There's a 1-in-3 chance they'll use some Chinese guy's card.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top