03.07.10

Security Disinformation

Posted in Free/Libre Software, FUD, Microsoft, Security at 8:57 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: Latest OpenSSL FUD and Microsoft’s Howard Schmidt’s role informing the public about cyber-security risks

OUR complaints about The Register have intensified recently [1, 2, 3, 4] because of poor articles like this one (see the comments).

The Register spreads FUD about OpenSSL (not the first such smear, after comparisons to "communism" too) and Bradley M. Kuhn from the SFLC has responded as follows:

Ok, Be Afraid if Someone’s Got a Voltmeter Hooked to Your CPU

Boy, do I hate it when a FLOSS project is given a hard time unfairly. I was this morning greeted with news from many places that OpenSSL, one of the most common FLOSS software libraries used for cryptography, was somehow “severely vulnerable”.

I had a hunch what was going on. I quickly downloaded a copy of the academic paper that was cited as the sole source for the story and read it. As I feared, OpenSSL was getting some bad press unfairly. One must really read this academic computer science article in the context it was written; most commenting about this paper probably did not.

First of all, I don’t claim to be an expert on cryptography, and I think my knowledge level to opine on this subject remains limited to a little blog post like this and nothing more. Between college and graduate school, I worked as a system administrator focusing on network security. While a computer science graduate student, I did take two cryptography courses, two theory of computation courses, and one class on complexity theory. So, when compared to the general population I probably am an expert, but compared to people who actually work in cryptography regularly, I’m clearly a novice. However, I suspect many who have hitherto opined about this academic article to declare this “severe vulnerability” have even less knowledge than I do on the subject.

There are much bigger problems to worry about, such as the latest news about Windows botnets [1, 2, 3]. The authors of the Windows exploit might not even face a jail sentence, based on this report.

Three Spanish men were arrested last month for allegedly building an international network of more than 12 million hacked PCs that were used for everything from identity theft to spamming. But according to Spanish authorities and security experts who helped unravel the crime ring, the accused may very well never see the inside of a jail cell even if they are ultimately found guilty, due to insufficient cyber crime legislation in Spain.

Regarding this new article about Scott Charney’s outrageous remarks [1, 2] (he worked for the US government before Microsoft hired him), Groklaw wrote 3 days ago: “First Microsoft fills the world with security issues and problems, then it wants the public to be taxed to fix them? I think Microsoft needs to fix its own software itself.” Microsoft’s own negligence [1, 2, 3] ought to have Microsoft bear the bill.

Howard Schmidt, the US Cyber Czar who came directly from Microsoft [1, 2, 3, 4], claims/pretends that there is no problem, even though many firms that include Google were intruded due to an Internet Explorer hole that Microsoft had knowingly ignored for 5 months [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12] (there are more security patches coming shortly). Even Google source code got grabbed. [via]

Operation Aurora continues to be a hot topic inside and outside of security circles. At this week’s RSA Conference in San Francisco many conversations are on the topic of the attacks that hit Google and dozens of other companies in January.

These reports indicate that proprietary source code got nicked from Google. Microsoft also nicks proprietary source code from companies/projects like Plurk [1, 2, 3, 4], which probably puts the Redmond-based company at the same side as the crackers.

“Cyberwar Hype Intended to Destroy the Open Internet,” says this report from Wired. [via]

The biggest threat to the open internet is not Chinese government hackers or greedy anti-net-neutrality ISPs, it’s Michael McConnell, the former director of national intelligence.

McConnell’s not dangerous because he knows anything about SQL injection hacks, but because he knows about social engineering. He’s the nice-seeming guy who’s willing and able to use fear-mongering to manipulate the federal bureaucracy for his own ends, while coming off like a straight shooter to those who are not in the know.

And on the other hand, on the same occasion we find that “US urges ‘action’ needed to fight net attacks,” according to the BBC.

Homeland Security secretary Janet Napolitano has admitted there is an urgent need to step up efforts to protect Americans from cyber attacks.

They seem to contradict themselves. Now they claim to be looking for ideas:

Homeland Security wants to pick your brains

[...]

The lucky winners will be invited to an event in Washington DC in late May or early June. They’ll get to partner with the department to lead in the planning of the National Cybersecurity Awareness Campaign, due to launch in October.

Over at CNET, Dennis O’Reilly has this new article about “five ways to keep your [Windows] PC free of viruses and Trojans”. Here is one of his suggestions.

If you can’t give up Windows, you may still be able to install Linux on an old PC or in a partition of your Windows PC. Then you can use that system (or partition) whenever you engage in any sensitive computer activities. You’ll find instructions for dual-booting Windows and the Ubuntu version of Linux on the Ubuntu Community Documentation site.

Thumbs up to Dennis. █

“Usually Microsoft doesn’t develop products, we buy products. It’s not a bad product, but bits and pieces are missing.”

–Arno Edelmann, Microsoft’s European business security product manager

Permalink  Send this to a friend