RE: Hacked web server

["Jason Coombs" <jasonc () science org>]

Ryan,

You seem to be implying with your comments below that an auto-updater is a
*good thing* that makes computer systems more secure. This is just not true.
A computer system designed to do things without your knowledge or permission
that runs services that you don't need or want and can't turn off is the
starting point of insecurity. You cannot add yet another complex automated
service that downloads and executes code automatically to an already complex
bug- and service-ridden infrastructure and think this makes everything okay
now.

Many computerized systems would be far better off (more secure, cheaper to
operate, etc.) using a couple full-time humans with calculators, pen and
paper, and maybe even telephones provided the staff receive proper security
training.

> Microsoft has created the 'auto update' scheduler which runs regularly
> 'behind the scenes' that the administrator can use to have it
> automatically apply these patches.
>       How is it that with services like this available that people are
> still not aware of them? Or, could it be that they are well aware of them
> but are falling victim to the notion that there really is no need for
> security in general, and that they are not at risk?

-----Original Message-----
From: Ryan Yagatich [mailto:ryany () pantek com]
Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 8:53 AM
To: Rogelio Vidaurri Courcelle
Cc: incidents () securityfocus com
Subject: Re: Hacked web server


Hi all,
        As the answer to this has already been mentioned (iis unicode), I
will skip the details behind it. My question is actually related to a more
broader topic.
        This is a case where a party utilizes their firewall to keep their
network secure, as well as applying Microsoft Service Packs to their
systems behind it. The problem that I see with this is that many NT
administrators that I come across all have the same notion in mind that as
long as they apply the latest service pack to their systems, whether it be
immediately after it comes out, or a day or so after, they believe that
the system is declared secure.
        As many people know, and many do not, Microsoft releases security
bulletins regularly which patch vulnerabilities and the such. If the
administrator is using Microsoft Windows 2000, XP (or maybe others by now)
Microsoft has created the 'auto update' scheduler which runs regularly
'behind the scenes' that the administrator can use to have it
automatically apply these patches.
        How is it that with services like this available that people are
still not aware of them? Or, could it be that they are well aware of them
but are falling victim to the notion that there really is no need for
security in general, and that they are not at risk?
        Then we have the firewall. Again, many people believe that a
firewall alone protects their network. In some scenarios you have
firewalls that are performing (e|in)gres filtering, and some that are just
machines with NAT on them being called a firewall. What about the other
elements of a firewall? What about proxying, IDS's, monitoring, and
integrity? What about protecting the firewall itself?
        So we have basically a world of technology where security is not
really a big concern to many, which then introduces the fact that they are
either uneducated or have insufficient funds to keep their systems secure.
(yes there are more, but I'm just covering the basics here). So the next
question is, how does the security community 'bridge the gap' between the
people who are either uneducated enough or educated and not able to afford
the security with that of a company/individual who is willing to 'make the
sacrifice'?
        From my experience, the only real time when someone is interested
in the security, at least interested being willing to move forward, is if
their systems are compromised either once or many times over. The other
side of this is persistence, I worked with a company at one point where
they swore up and down that their systems were secure, exactly by the
method as the email snippet from below. Over time, I continued to persist
and state that services packs and firewalls are not the only elements of
security. What wound up happening? Eventually they gave in and said 'here,
go ahead and try to prove us wrong', and sure enough 15 minutes later
their primary web server was found to be vulnerable to several different
vulnerabilities.
        So, we have 2 scenarios where we can broadcast this information
out, but since the world contains so many information systems that contain
only the 'latest service pack', its almost overwhelming as to what to do
to alert these people of the problems.
        My final question now, is, how are we to really communicate with
the rest of the world with information like what is mentioned above? There
are many companies out there which have been trying to advertise this
information out to the world, but they usually get the typical responses
declining the services.
        I am interested in hearing from both sides of this, from the sides
of the people whom have had experience in dealing with this common
scenario as well as those whom decline security services like IDSs and the
such.

Thanks,
,_____________________________________________________,
\ Ryan Yagatich                     support () pantek com \
/ Pantek Incorporated                  (877) LINUX-FIX /
\ http://www.pantek.com/security        (440) 519-1802 \
/       Are your networks secure? Are you certain?     /
\___1E3695185FDAB9800641B94CC170FB8267C18DF695784F22___\

On Fri, 10 Jan 2003, Rogelio Vidaurri Courcelle wrote:

> Hi... my web server (NT 4.0 SP6a) was hacked last friday, it has only
> one NIC with a public IP
> we have an OpenBSD Firewall (PF) that filters both incoming and
> outcoming traffic.... this firewall has no ip addresses.....
> external users have access to our web server only by port 80...
> we had a popup window in our default page.... i dont know if that's why
> he could hack our server.... i'm not an expert in these.. i'm a
> begineer.....
<SNIP>....


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
This list is provided by the SecurityFocus ARIS analyzer service.
For more information on this free incident handling, management
and tracking system please see: http://aris.securityfocus.com


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
This list is provided by the SecurityFocus ARIS analyzer service.
For more information on this free incident handling, management 
and tracking system please see: http://aris.securityfocus.com