VAULT7 [Wikileaks vs. CIA]

[Centurix]

Lots of Python in those tools. There's references to a library I've used a few times, angr. It's useful for ELF/PE analysis, but there's a few classes in there which do pure analysis which is cool but I've never had a use for them.

 

As for Stuxnet. Purely beautiful piece of infection. And to top it all, it cross infects architectures into Siemens PLCs. Magnificent. 4 Zero days, WinCC injection, 3 rootkits. Pinpoint targeting and reeks of government involvement.

 

There's an analysis project here.

[caze]

But since it can record keystrokes, it would be trivial to get around encryption if it had been compromised, and since we don't know if it has been compromised...

I'm aware of the benefits of it, but the premise of Intel's security in it is security through obscurity. Which is not really security at all.

 

we don't know if lots of other things have been compromised either, e.g. backdoors in closed source operating systems (which could easily place a keylogger in the login screen for all we know), we also have no evidence that they are either (we just have the company's assurances that they're not, but they could be under gag order to say so). the exact same applies to this thingie.

[caze]

these tools are basically no different from the CIA breaking into your home and planting listening devices in the light fixtures. they're just the modern technological equivalent. they are not in any way similar to the previous NSA scandal.

[Centurix]

Apparently this is less than 1% of the number of tools they have at their disposal.

 

Here's pictures of one of the NSA intercept stations

[juiceciuj]

no they have to physically break into your house to install the bugs. didn't you see the dismissive tweets on the last page?

weird how a few years ago people were shitting their bed about prism and sopa, calling senators and what not. now that the cia is just doing this shit w/no oversight everyone's like "well, duh!" and doesn't care?

[caze]

no they have to physically break into your house to install the bugs. didn't you see the dismissive tweets on the last page?

weird how a few years ago people were shitting their bed about prism and sopa, calling senators and what not. now that the cia is just doing this shit w/no oversight everyone's like "well, duh!" and doesn't care?

 

the two things aren't the same though, the NSA was spying on everyone indiscriminately, the CIA has the capability to spy on specific people if they want (and judging by the tools that have been so far revealed it usually requires physical access to the devices in question), something they always have had, in the past they spied on people with the technology available to them at the time, today they do the same.

[juiceciuj]

to me it makes sense to assume that if one gov't security agency is grossly overstepping its bounds then so is another? especially when they're deliberately crafting an expansive toolset that allows them to do so?

[caze]

to me it makes sense to assume that if one gov't security agency is grossly overstepping its bounds then so is another? especially when they're deliberately crafting an expansive toolset that allows them to do so?

 

this isn't about bounds and whether they're being overstepped or not it's about technical realities.

 

but I'm sure the CIA would overstep their bounds if the felt it was necessary, as no doubt they've done all throughout their history. so even from that angle, there's nothing particularly newsworthy in this leak.

[chenGOD]

there's nothing particularly newsworthy in this leak.

The newsworthy bit of the leak so far is the actual tools, how they're constructing them and the software they use to do so.

It's also interesting how much they rely on unpatched/older versions of an OS for their exploits to work.

It's also shitty for them not to inform the vendors, once you create a software tool, there's no guarantee it won't fall into the "wrong" hands.

[ignatius]

Apparently this is less than 1% of the number of tools they have at their disposal.

 

Here's pictures of one of the NSA intercept stations

 

 

can't recall the documentary i saw but was a room in a building that was a hub where like half the internet/phone whatever traffic went through and next door to the room they built a duplicate of the room w/a fucking splitter in the feed so both rooms got same data.. one room was for AT&T and the other room was for NSA or whatever.. that was like 10 years ago.  they get all the data they want/need and no court gives them authorization. they just do it. partner w/the telecommunications company and there's that. 

[Centurix]

 

there's nothing particularly newsworthy in this leak.

The newsworthy bit of the leak so far is the actual tools, how they're constructing them and the software they use to do so.

It's also interesting how much they rely on unpatched/older versions of an OS for their exploits to work.

It's also shitty for them not to inform the vendors, once you create a software tool, there's no guarantee it won't fall into the "wrong" hands.

 

I think I read somewhere that Julian Assange was going to share the tools with open source vendors so they can patch where necessary.

[doublename]

 

Apparently this is less than 1% of the number of tools they have at their disposal.

 

Here's pictures of one of the NSA intercept stations

 

can't recall the documentary i saw but was a room in a building that was a hub where like half the internet/phone whatever traffic went through and next door to the room they built a duplicate of the room w/a fucking splitter in the feed so both rooms got same data.. one room was for AT&T and the other room was for NSA or whatever.. that was like 10 years ago. they get all the data they want/need and no court gives them authorization. they just do it. partner w/the telecommunications company and there's that.

I think that was on Frontline. Maybe the episode called "United States of Secrets".

[colunga]

Was just reading about that room!

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A

[juiceciuj]

 

no they have to physically break into your house to install the bugs. didn't you see the dismissive tweets on the last page?

weird how a few years ago people were shitting their bed about prism and sopa, calling senators and what not. now that the cia is just doing this shit w/no oversight everyone's like "well, duh!" and doesn't care?

why is it surprising that the "well duh" attitude is prevalent when we always knew the CIA were giant dicks that could do whatever they wanted. if you really thought your smart devices were ever secure you're incredibly naive. all this leak does is point out the obvious, and there's nothing we can do about it anyway. 

 

[Centurix]

[DerWaschbar]

Example of how malware and backdoors sometimes come pre-installed on new devices purchased legitimately. I don't think the  this is the CIA, though I remember from the snowden leaks something about the NSA intercepting devices in the post, installing malicious code and sending them on, so there is some precedent at least with that agency.

 

It will be interesting to see if any CIA software starts showing up on devices as malware scanners adapt to the leaks to come.

[DerWaschbar]

 

 

There's an interesting bit floating out there on the Intel backdoor. Virtually any intel chip in laptops has a backdoor for the alphabet agencies to exploit.

AFAIK IME hasn't been compromised. Also, even if it was, it wouldn't get around things like drive encryption.

The point is, how would you even know? That thing is a black box. We don't know for sure that it wouldn't get around drive encryption, it sits well below the OS down in a ring so protected the OS has no idea it's there.

https://arstechnica.com/security/2017/05/the-hijacking-flaw-that-lurked-in-intel-chips-is-worse-than-anyone-thought/

 

Is this what you were taking about?

[caze]

 

 

 

There's an interesting bit floating out there on the Intel backdoor. Virtually any intel chip in laptops has a backdoor for the alphabet agencies to exploit.

AFAIK IME hasn't been compromised. Also, even if it was, it wouldn't get around things like drive encryption.

The point is, how would you even know? That thing is a black box. We don't know for sure that it wouldn't get around drive encryption, it sits well below the OS down in a ring so protected the OS has no idea it's there.

https://arstechnica.com/security/2017/05/the-hijacking-flaw-that-lurked-in-intel-chips-is-worse-than-anyone-thought/

 

Is this what you were taking about?

 

 

yeah, that's the thing. that's a really dumb bug, it authenticates the login if you send through an empty password (though not if you put an empty password in the standard web interface, because that actually sends a hash of the password, which would never be an empty string, it only works if you manually construct the HTTP request to use an empty string). still, it's worth remembering that this thing isn't enabled by default and isn't even available on all Intel hardware (it's not on most consumer chips), and in most networks where it would be in use it would be behind a secure firewall. It's still a colossally stupid vulnerability, but looks more like incompetence than collusion at this point.

 

here's more info: https://arstechnica.com/security/2017/05/intel-patches-remote-code-execution-bug-that-lurked-in-cpus-for-10-years/

[DerWaschbar]

cheers