Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

$16,000 Bounty for Sendmail, Apache Zero-Day Flaws

Posted by Zonk on Fri May 18, 2007 02:05 PM
from the step-right-up-rilly-big-shew dept.
Famestay writes "Verisign's iDefense is putting up a $16,000 prize for any hacker who can find a remotely exploitable vulnerability in six critical Internet infrastructure applications. The bounty is for a zero-day code execution hole on the following Internet infrastructure technologies: Apache httpd, Berkeley Internet Name Domain (BIND) daemon, Sendmail SMTP daemon, OpenSSH sshd, Microsoft Internet Information (IIS) Server and Microsoft Exchange Server. 'Immunity founder Dave Aitel, who also purchases flaws and exploits for use in the CANVAS pen testing tool, says its doubtful iDefense will get any submissions from hackers. "It's very hard to exploit [those listed applications]," Aitel said. "IIS 6 hasn't had a public remotely exploitable bug in it. Ever." Several other hackers I spoke to had very much the same message, arguing that $16,000 can never equate to the amount of work/expertise required to find and exploit a hole in the six targeted technologies.'"
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Mac Developer Mulls Zero-day Security Response 94 comments
1.6 Beta writes "Landon Fuller, the Mac programmer/Darwin developer behind the 'month of Apple fixes' project, plans to expand the initiative to roll out zero-day patches for issues that put Mac OS X users at risk of code execution attacks. The former engineer in Apple's BSD Technology Group has already shipped a fix for a nasty flaw in Java's GIF image decoder and hints an an auto-updating mechanism for the third-party patches. The article quotes him as saying, 'Perhaps [it could be] the Mac OS equivalent to ZERT,' referring to the Zero-day Emergency Response Team."
[+] News: $25M Bounty Offered for Global Warming Fix 766 comments
SaDan writes "Richard Branson is offering $25M as a bounty for a fix to global warming. The person or organization that can devise a method to remove at least a billion tons of carbon dioxide a year from the atmosphere will be able to claim the bounty. There are a few catches, of course. There can't be any negative impact on the environment, and the payment will come in chunks. A 5 million dollar payout will be paid when the system is put into place with the remainder of the bounty to be paid after 10 years of continuous use."
[+] MacBook Hacked In Contest Via Zero-Day Hole in Safari 156 comments
EMB Numbers writes "Shane Macaulay just won a MacBook as a prize for successfully hacking OS X at CanSecWest conference in Vancouver, BC. The hack was based on a Safari vulnerability found by Dai Zovi and written in about 9 hours. CanSecWest organizers actually had to relax the contest rules to make the hack possible, because initially nobody at the event could breach the computers under the original restrictions. 'Dai Zovi plans to apply for a $10,000 bug bounty TippingPoint announced on Thursday if a previously unknown Apple bug was used. "Shane can have the laptop, I want the money," Dai Zovi said in a telephone interview from New York. TippingPoint runs the Zero Day Initiative bug bounty program.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • $16,000 (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 18 2007, @02:08PM (#19182967)
    arguing that $16,000 can never equate to the amount of work/expertise required to find and exploit a hole in the six targeted technologies. Clearly, the so called experts aren't aware of the multitudes of enterprising folks living outside the inflated Western wage spectrum. For someone a little more eastbound, that's a nice chunk of change.
    • Re:$16,000 (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Mr. Underbridge (666784) on Friday May 18 2007, @02:17PM (#19183089)

      arguing that $16,000 can never equate to the amount of work/expertise required to find and exploit a hole in the six targeted technologies. Clearly, the so called experts aren't aware of the multitudes of enterprising folks living outside the inflated Western wage spectrum. For someone a little more eastbound, that's a nice chunk of change.

      Not only that, but I'm assuming that claiming the prize and the advertising that goes with it - advertising your skills, that is - is the more valuable part. I'm imagining that the type of person who could claim the prize is interested in doing this sort of thing anyway. The prize would be a nice cash reward and a fantastic thing to put on a resume.

      • Well I have one exploit for each platform.
        It is remote, and it is foolproof.
        I want the money.
        -nB

        The exploit is to take the admins family hostage, demanding whatever code you want to be run in exchange for the family's safety.
        Since you are using a phone to control the admin it is a remote exploit.
        Have a nice day.
    • Bidding war. (Score:3, Interesting)

      Suppose you know an exploit in IIS or Exchange.

      Do you sell it to those guys for $16K ... or do you see what Microsoft will pay you NOT to sell it to them?
      • Re:Bidding war. (Score:5, Insightful)

        by MarkGriz (520778) on Friday May 18 2007, @03:02PM (#19183767)
        "Do you sell it to those guys for $16K ... or do you see what Microsoft will pay you NOT to sell it to them?"

        Neither. You auction it off to the highest bidding spamgang. Or so I've heard.

    • Re:$16,000 (Score:4, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 18 2007, @02:38PM (#19183371)
      Indeed, $16K is exactly 2.5 times the annual salary I used to make when I worked as a software engineer in Egypt.
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        Bullcrap. I live in Pennsylvania and that's still chump change!

        Must be nice.. I live in Pa and I'd love to have a extra $16k ...
  • hMMM (Score:3, Funny)

    by multipart/mixed (163409) on Friday May 18 2007, @02:08PM (#19182969)
    Does it count if we "find" a "hole" in the current CVS snapshot?
    • # # 'RC' (Release candidate), 'Beta', 'Technology Preview' and similar versions of the listed technologies are not included in this challenge

      So, it would be reasonable to assume that any development branch stuff including current CVS snapshot would be inadmissible.

      • But it's a good question: how much do you trust the CVS authors? 16 thousand might be chump change, but how bout a couple million?
  • No, but... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by TheSHAD0W (258774) on Friday May 18 2007, @02:09PM (#19182985) Homepage
    It's a great reward if you've stumbled across a hole. Also, you may be able to collect multiple bounties from different organizations for the same hole. I think the bounty system has plenty of merit.
  • IIS 6 (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 18 2007, @02:10PM (#19183005)

    IIS 6 hasn't had a public remotely exploitable bug in it. Ever.

    How can that be? IIS is crap! Slashdot tells me so!

    • Re:IIS 6 (Score:5, Funny)

      by eln (21727) on Friday May 18 2007, @02:14PM (#19183053) Homepage
      No one has ever found a hole in it because no one has ever managed to keep it up and running for long enough to find one without it crashing first.
      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        now now no need to get nasty about IIS6 just beacause its a microsoft product!

        IIS6 is very good and new IIS7 is even better, also to note on all the 11 Suse dedicated servers i run i switched from Apache 2 to a lighter, less resource hoging alternative

        Btw IIS6 has less unpatched vulnerabilities [secunia.com] than apache [secunia.com]

        so there
          • Re:IIS 6 (Score:4, Interesting)

            by TheRaven64 (641858) on Friday May 18 2007, @03:24PM (#19184135) Homepage Journal
            I'd like to second the grandparent's plug of Lighttpd. It's very light-weight and easy to configure. Apache has some features it doesn't, but those are all module that I don't use, which just add to the amount of code that's running on my system and could be responsible for an exploit. Lighttpd seems to have been built with security in mind; it drops privileges and chroots itself at system start. If you want scripting language support, it talks to fastcgi servers, and those can run in their own chroots if you want even more paranoia.
            • Re:IIS 6 (Score:5, Interesting)

              by Bishop (4500) on Friday May 18 2007, @03:48PM (#19184471)
              Lighttpd may seem to have been built with security in mind, but it hasn't. Superficially Lighttpd does all the right security things, but search for "lighttpd memory leak." Secure software does not leak memory.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      > IIS 6 hasn't had a public remotely exploitable bug in it. Ever.

      "Microsoft Internet Information Services ASP Code Buffer Overflow"
      http://secunia.com/advisories/21006/ [secunia.com]

      Software:
      - Microsoft Internet Information Services (IIS) 5.x
      - Microsoft Internet Information Services (IIS) 6

      Impact:
      - System access
      - Security Bypass

      Where:
      - From remote

      "hasn't had a public remotely exploitable bug"? Ever? Yes, of course - ever ;)
      • Re:IIS 6 (Score:5, Informative)

        by EraserMouseMan (847479) on Friday May 18 2007, @02:33PM (#19183307)
        From your link, "Successful exploitation allows bypassing any security restrictions enforced by ASP or execution of API's with no ASP equivalent, but requires permissions to upload ASP code to a web folder."

        This is not a remotely exploitable bug. Nice try though.
                    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

                      Only if you keep your sessions in the same process as your application. ASP.NET supports keeping your session in another process (potentially on another machine) or in a database (slightly slower, but can survive server restarts etc). See http://www.eggheadcafe.com/articles/20021016.asp [eggheadcafe.com] for a quick summary.

                      You're correct about the application cache not surviving config changes, though typically this shouldn't be an issue as cache is only for convenience: users won't feel the difference if there's a cache mi
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 18 2007, @02:11PM (#19183023)
    $16000 is not worth the time to make the internet safer. Now stop bothering me while I spend my time trying to figure out how to save $15 by cracking DVDs. After that, I'm off to steal some music.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      Breaking DVD encryption is important for fair use IMHO, and I doubt the guys who have worked on this are completely motivated by saving money buying DVDs.
  • Entrapment? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anarchysoft (1100393) <anarchy&anarchysoft,com> on Friday May 18 2007, @02:13PM (#19183035) Homepage
    Considering that creating exploits and/or publishing them is considered a criminal offense in some jurisdictions, I wonder how many submissions they'll get. Especially when a good unknown exploit could be worth far more than 16,000.
  • Free money (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ThanatosMinor (1046978) on Friday May 18 2007, @02:26PM (#19183201)
    I wonder if the current rise in prizes being offered for discovering vulnerabilities in code might lead to some sneaky behavior.

    1. Leave subtle flaw in your code
    2. Share information with distant acquaintance
    3. Profit!
    • Somewhere, I believe in one of Scott Adam's (the Dilbert creator) books he has a (purportedly) true story about a company where the testers were paid $100 per bug they found. According to him, the program was scrapped after a week, but not before quite a few expensive gifts went from testers to programmers.

      It seemed like the an urban legend ala the Woz getting $100 for each chip he got off a board, but I've heard that that one is actually true, so maybe both are??

      Yes, it's the fallacy of assuming the who

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        I can't speak to Scott Adam's story, but I do know of a large shop that thought a bug bounty like that was a good idea. A rising star in management with little technical knowledge but lots of new ideas thought that a bug bounty would be a good motivator for QA. Fortunately for the company the idea was squashed by a number of experienced software engineers before it was implemented.

        Along a similar vein one of the companies I worked for had an idea for spurring innovation and lateral thinking. The program was
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      From Anton Chuvakin's Blog [blogspot.com]:
      ...most scary cyber-criminal of the future is not a spammer, a scammer, a phisher or a pharmer, and not even a good ole "cracker" - it is an unethical software engineer, who changes the code slightly to introduce a weakness (or a full-blown backdoor or a logic bomb) and later uses or sells this knowledge

  • >the following Internet infrastructure technologies:
    Since when are we using marketing speak here? Can we please call them programs or program systems?

  • by 7-Vodka (195504) on Friday May 18 2007, @02:33PM (#19183297) Journal

    ...arguing that $16,000 can never equate to the amount of work/expertise required to find and exploit a hole in the six targeted technologies.

    Maybe there are people out there who already have more than one exploit for these and wouldn't mind trading one in for a legal source of quick cash. Who knows? 16k buys very a nice chunk of electronics for people who don't need the money for anything else.

  • Here are the terms of the challenge -

    * The vulnerability must be remotely exploitable and must allow arbitrary code execution in a typical installation of one of the technologies listed above

    Ok, so you pick some of the oldest and most robust technologies around - things that have had a LOT of the bugs worked out of them already and things are you're not that likely to have to pay out on.

    * The vulnerability must exist in the latest version of the affected technology with all available patches and/or upgrades applied
    * 'RC' (Release candidate), 'Beta', 'Technology Preview' and similar versions of the listed technologies are not included in this challenge

    So you eliminate any upcoming versions, but you forget to exclude the previous versions....

    * The vulnerability must be original and not previously disclosed to any party

    So if I've already informed the software maker, it's out, further reducing the likelihood of any kind of a payment having to be made.

    * The vulnerability cannot be caused by or require any additional third party software installed on the target system

    Reasonable, but...and this is a big but....many things are quite secure on their own, but not so much so when you actually start using them. Prime example, Apache. Apache on it's own is fine. Install one of the open source PHP web apps and then see how secure it is. How many people run Apache serving up hand coded HTML?

    * The vulnerability must not require any social engineering

    This is because we all know that there is no patch for human stupidity...though I've never seen it admitted quite so blatantly.

    PHOOEY ON YOUR CHALLENGE

    It would take me a lot of man hours to come up with something, more to code an exploit for it and by the time I'm done...I'd be better off financially if I had worked at Wal-Mart for those hours. $16,000 divided by 4 (people on my team) = $4000 each. Let's say we spend 5 weeks on this. That's 200 hours each. That works out to having a chance to get $20/hr. And frankly, I think that 200 hours each is pretty optimistic. We're talking about pouring over their code base, becoming familiar with it, and looking for places that we can try to break it. That's in excess of 89,000 lines of code just for Apache and more than another 70,000 for Sendmail. Then we have to load it up, write some code to test the exploit, and run it to see if works. If it doesn't on the first try, it's rinse and repeat until we give up on that possible exploit and try a different one.

    I'm guessing that this is more of a publicity stunt than anything else. Anyone in the industry should know better. This has to be something that the marketing poohbah's have dreamed up. Just more marketing hype so that they can say, "We're more secure than those other guys. We ran our challenge and we didn't get anything. These apps are safe to use."

    2 cents,

    Queen B.

  • Tried Google? (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anarchysoft (1100393) <anarchy&anarchysoft,com> on Friday May 18 2007, @02:47PM (#19183509) Homepage

    "IIS 6 hasn't had a public remotely exploitable bug in it. Ever."
    That's funny. A quick search [google.com] seems to reveal many!
    • by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 18 2007, @03:14PM (#19183963)

      Just to narrow it down, I redid your search with quotes and found 67. But the first one's a blast. It goes to the "w4ck1ng" forum where the thread goes...

      "Hello found this exploit: http://www.derkeiler.com/Mailing-Lis...5-04/0436.h tml [derkeiler.com] I have compiled it. And when i run it under linux, it gives me this error! [cut for brevity] ./iis.exe: 3: Syntax error: word unexpected (expecting ")") Anyone ?"

      ...and the response goes:

      "you can not use exe files under unix y0u have to compile it with GCC..."

      I *think* IIS is safe from *this* guy...

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        Warning up front: DO NOT RUN THE CODE IN THE BELOW LINK, YOU HALFWITS!!!

        Ok, now a clarification: the code [derkeiler.com] I think you meant to link to is not an exploit for IIS, it deletes the 1337 h4x0r's files. The exchange is a good way to run out the clock on a Friday, at least through:

        You are wrong again, it's "Smashing the Stick" you moron. Not smashing the stack. Ask anyone here!

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      I like how the second result listed is actually trojan program that runs rm -rf /. There aren't any remote exploits for IIS6 which is a 4 year old product.
            • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

              As pointed by many, the thing you showed isn't remotely exploitable. You need another mean of access to the machine, with freagin write access, to put code in a folder where it has script execute permission. Basically, you need a freagin account on the box. Not quite it.
        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          Read through that advisory and then get back to us on the amount of things that have to be screwed up in the basic setup of a Server 2003 box before this vuln will work.

          If this had hit one of our servers, it wouldn't have worked because the "classic" ASP ISAPI handler is disabled by default, and that's how we leave it. And even if that were not true, you'd end up with the same privileges as the NETWORK SERVICE account, which on 2003 is basically useless. AND you still would need to have configured the roo

  • The bounty is for a zero-day code execution hole on the following Internet infrastructure technologies: ... Microsoft Internet Information (IIS) Server and Microsoft Exchange Server
    How do they expect to find $16,000 a day? Bank robberies?
  • The criminal underground (russian mafia etc.) supposedly pay $50k-$100k for zero-days, if you're after the money might as well sell your exploit to them.

    If you're after fame, you report it through the proper channels (CERT or the vendor directly). You get credited in the bugfix, but gain no money at all.

    Selling to one of these guys just goes into the pockets of these zero-day vendors, who then get more customers paying them $$$ to be a few days ahead of everyone else (but they'll get the patches at the same
  • Is that legal? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by HalAtWork (926717) on Friday May 18 2007, @03:14PM (#19183965)
    Could I just offer up a $16,000 bounty as well? 'Cause there's plenty of money to be made with 0day flaws.

    Anyone can discover them, so it's plausible that two people can know the same flaw. So one party gets the flaw and gives the $16,000, then communicates the exploit to a third party who hacks in and gets trade secrets (or teh g0ld) and sells those, or whatever.
  • FYI (Score:5, Funny)

    by Slashcrap (869349) on Friday May 18 2007, @03:44PM (#19184411)
    I guess some people reading this may be more used to Windows and therefore not entirely familiar with the functionality of the Unix packages that were mentioned. Allow me to summarise :

    OpenSSH - A service you can install on a Unix system to enable remote admin access for known users.

    Sendmail - A service you can install on a Unix system to enable remote admin access for complete strangers.

    Hope this helps.....
    • If you want to talk easy money think Sendmail.
      • Ummmm, try BIND.

        BTW -- TFA says that IIS 6 hasn't had a single public remotely-exploitable hole. That means essentially nothing to me, because most serious 'hackers' aren't using public exploits.
        • by icepick72 (834363) on Friday May 18 2007, @03:15PM (#19183999)
          Yes because we all know the public exploits just sitting out there are totally ignored by hackers in favour of the um non-public ones. Ummmm .... so ..... IIS must therefore be insecure because surely we can't say anything good about it here. I mean it's a piece of shit because we can hypothesize unstated scenarios about it.
          I think it does means a lot to many people when a piece of software has never had a publicly exploitable hole.
              • Here you go:

                Amit Klein has reported a vulnerability in Microsoft Windows, which can be exploited by malicious people to cause a DoS (Denial of Service).

                The vulnerability is caused due to the WebDAV XML Message Handler not limiting the number of attributes that can be specified in an XML element. This can be exploited through Internet Information Services by sending a specially crafted WebDAV PROPFIND request.

                Successful exploitation causes the WebDAV XML Message Handler to consume all CPU resources for a per

                  • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

                    The article summary itself states:

                    "IIS 6 hasn't had a public remotely exploitable bug in it. Ever."

                    I laughed. From there...

                    • First guy responded with - "don't laugh. It's true. And don't go telling me about the public remotely exploitable bug that everyone knows about since that doesn't count"
                    • I responded with a link to a google search containing 695,000 results for IIS 6 exploits
                    • Second guy responded with - "The fact remains, IIS 6 has never had a remotely exploitable hole." - even though I had already