Firefox Community Site Hacked 292
Ryan Paul writes "The Mozilla Foundation reveals that remote attackers infiltrated the SpreadFirefox server by exploiting a site vulnerability. While it appears as though no personal information was accessed, e-mails were sent to inform all registered SpreadFirefox users of the breach. Ars Technica has the complete story." From the Ars article: "Preliminary analysis indicates that the exploit was limited to SpreadFirefox exclusively, meaning that other Mozilla Foundation web sites were not attacked or compromised. The vulnerability, which was exploited by 'unknown remote attackers,' could potentially have enabled the forces of computing darkness to obtain the username and password of every registered SpreadFirefox user, as well as any other optional information that users may have provided, including: real name, web site URL, e-mail address, IM screename, and home address."
Please remember to patch! (Score:5, Informative)
It is likely that exploit was facilitated by a recently discovered vulnerability in Drupal, the open source CMS utilized by SpreadFirefox and other community sites. I have not yet been able to verify my suspicions on the matter, as the Mozilla Foundation has not yet revealed exactly which vulnerability was exploited.
If it was due to the vulnerability present in older versions of Drupal (pre June 29th) then it was the admins of spreadfirefox.com that left it unpatched until July 10th (11 days). There is no excuse for that kind of delay in patching a vulnerability on a system that could affect as many users as SpreadFirefox caters to.
Especially bad: (Score:2)
No patching even after being presented as an example for a vulnerable site is more than just neglectance.
Re:Please remember to patch! (Score:2, Insightful)
Just because a patch comes out doesnt mean to jump on it immediately and patch the vulnerability. There must be testing first to make sure that this patch does not break anything important in running that site.
A fatal mistake I see with some admins is that they run patches, service packs, support packs (for you Novell lovers out there) or any kind of fix without extensive testing. The only reason I would throw a patch on a system immediately is if that exploit is causing an immediate problem.
Yeah t
Re:Please remember to patch! (Score:3, Informative)
Still, even if they had taken time to "test" the patch as you claim they should, then they had 10 days to do so which should have been plenty of time.
Re:Please remember to patch! (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Please remember to patch! (Score:2)
thanks (Score:2)
Re:Please remember to cacth criminals! (Score:5, Insightful)
Nice way to twist the arguement.
Except that if it was widely publicized that ABC, Inc locks had a fatal flaw in them, but there was a modification to make it secure. But you didn't and somebody exploited that flaw to steal stuff.
Yes you'd bear some responsibility since you're housing OTHER peoples data and not doing everything reasonable to protect that data...and applying patches is plenty reasonable.
Re:Please remember to cacth criminals! (Score:2, Insightful)
If this was just someones lame "Look at pictures of my puppies" website that held no personal information about anyone and it got hacked, the fault would lie totally with the hacker.
You house other peoples private data, you better be securing the site, or you are negligent.Re:Please remember to cacth criminals! (Score:2)
Don't you mean ACME?
Re:Please remember to cacth criminals! (Score:5, Insightful)
Assume that the landlord of your apartment building uses ABC, Inc. locks with said flaw, and fails to fix that flaw in a timely manner, despite the fact that the fix is moderately simple and free to implement. You, the tennant, have no ability to apply this change yourself. Now, when the burglars come and exploit that flaw to steal all of your stuff, wouldn't you want to hold the landlord at least partially to blame as well as the burglars?
Re:Please remember to cacth criminals! (Score:2, Insightful)
All locks are flawed. No security is perfect. Since you chose not to move into Fort Knox, you knew that your security was not perfect. Hence I saw you are 120% to blame, since you chose not to move into Fort Knox. See, I'm holding you responsible for stuff stolen from your neighbors, and replacing t
Re:Please remember to cacth criminals! (Score:2, Interesting)
Say you purchased a car from Foo Motor Company in 2000. In 2001, they release a "recall" for a brake spring that is faulty. In this recall it states that the part failure may result in the serious malfunction of the braking system and could render the brakes useless. All parts and labor are covered on the repair, just take to your nearest dealer.
For whatever reason (probably because you are busy) you never take the
Re:Please remember to cacth criminals! (Score:5, Insightful)
What you are saying is, if I have a door and the lock breaks, it is my fault if I get robbed because I did not change the lock??
The above poster said nothing of the kind. He did not blame the site for getting hacked, he blamed the administrators for not providing enough security. Let me rewrite your analogy.
Yesterday at the local businessman's meeting, security expert Mr. Smith revealed that the cheap, Walmart brand padlocks in use on many stores can be broken into very easily with a ordinary pen. Mr. Smith said that these locks should be replaced and are even in use on the jewelry store down the street where a number of us have our membership rings being resized... and two weeks later the jewelry store is broken into with a pen but someone happened by and the robbers ran away without stealing much.
Would it or would it not be correct to criticize the store owner for not changing the locks, even after they were shown faulty and after the whole group was told that he was using them?
How do we stop people from hacking websites and causing disturbances?
How do we stop people from robbing jewelry stores? Well we make sure the cops enforce the laws and we put in good locks and a security system. Nothing will ever stop all robberies or all cracks, but that does not mean we should not do our best to make any given store or server a hard target. Nor does it mean we should ignore security warnings.
Re:Please remember to cacth criminals! (Score:2)
So the
Re:Please remember to cacth criminals! (Score:2)
Re:Please remember to cacth criminals! (Score:2)
If you take in other's personal property, and you do nothing to secure that property, then you are negligent and not deserving of trust until you prove you are no longer negligent.
Re:Please remember to cacth criminals! (Score:2)
If there are consequences for his customers, then yes he may be. It's called negligence, and he could easily be in a lot of trouble for it.
Having said that, you seem to think that this implies a lack of guilt for the robber. It clearly does not. The robber is just as guilty as if the store owner had practiced good security.
The two variables (guilts) are independant.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Please remember to cacth criminals! (Score:3, Insightful)
How about this analogy:
There's a "webserver", and this "webserver" is running "software". The people that make the "software" have released a "patch" 2 weeks ago that "fixes" a number of "security holes" in the "software".
Then, the people who run this "webserver" didn't apply the "patch", and "webserver" got "hacked".
The "webserver" was also storing "3rd party contact information"; ergo, the people who run the "webserver" should have applied the "patch" more quickly.
Come on, folks. Every thread on sla
Re:Please remember to cacth criminals! (Score:3, Funny)
Come on, folks. Every thread on slashdot lately, it seems everyone tries to make analogies, and everyone else is correcting them.
So it's like when you write a book, and something in it is confusing, and then some editor scribbles something less confusing in the margin, but everyone still ends up confused?
Re:Please remember to cacth criminals! (Score:2)
What you're selling is personal irresponsibility under the guise of personal responsibility.
If I open a bank and leave the place empty and unlocked at night, it is not my fault that people walk in and take all the money. It is their fault.
But it is absolutely my fault that I didn't lock things up securely. There ARE bad people out there
Re:Please remember to cacth criminals! (Score:2)
You immediately patch when the coders tell you that it's in your best interests to do so. Regardless of "outdated and wrong thinking" it protects you.
Re:Please remember to cacth criminals! (Score:2)
Re:Please remember to cacth criminals! (Score:2)
The bank did not commit a crime but they have some responsibility. If nothing else a reduction if the trust of it's customers.
The same could be said of a website. While not criminally responsible they are at least a little bit responsible
Re:Please remember to cacth criminals! (Score:2)
Now I know this isn't as serious (althouh with identity theft I guess it could have the potential to be.. (to start anyways... you'd still need a SSN/SIN #).
It's not your fault for the actions of the hackers... it's your fault for not taking procautions to secure the machines. Doesn't make the hacker any less guilty.
Come on. (Score:2)
That being the case, it is incumbent upon administrators to secure, monitor, and protect their systems. If they don't do that, sure as hell no one's going to get caught, and it'll happen over and over and over again.
So instead of wishing for pie in the sky or some oth
Re:Please remember to cacth criminals! (Score:4, Insightful)
The problem is with the criminal who breaks into websites. If I wanted zero security for my website, I should be allowed to have zero security and not have anyone hack in.
Ugh, I am so sick of the never-ending analogies in this friggin place! Try this non-analogous rebuttal on for size:
negligence Audio pronunciation of "negligence" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (ngl-jns) n.
1. The state or quality of being negligent.
2. A negligent act or a failure to act.
3. Law. Failure to exercise the degree of care considered reasonable under the circumstances, resulting in an unintended injury to another party.
Re:Please remember to cacth criminals! (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Please remember to cacth criminals! (Score:2, Funny)
But wait, if you call today, you'll also get 30% off our Enhanced Titanium Adobe-feel roof, providing NSA-grade penetration security in style!
All our products come with build-in machine gun mounts, and are blast and impact proof up to 300 kg of TNT.
When you care about the safety of your family, you protect it with "Armored Homes"!
Call you
Re:Please remember to cacth criminals! (Score:2)
That is extortion. What you are saying is nobody can start an internet buisness where they have customers data unless they hire a competent administrator?
Say I want to sell the Worlds Best Cookies, they are homemade by me, nobody else has them. I decide to set up a simple website, use tomact and write some code where people enter in their names, addresses and credit card numbers. I don't want to pay for a thi
Random Passwords (Score:2, Funny)
why would you ever list this info? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:why would you ever list this info? (Score:5, Insightful)
I never give real information to any websites. None. I have one spam email account that I use just for activating crap. I give them the wrong state, wrong everything. I don't want to even be included in accurate demographics. Why should I? I just know the information will be sold to some mega corporation. The "privacy statememnt" is not worth the paper it is printed on.
I'll give one example. There was an awesome website with information for EVERY tv show ever on tv. They had episode information, forums, cast lists, everything. It was called TvTome. For 3 or 4 years, I was a memeber, I loved that website, I talked to lots of people about shows I loved. Then one day, a corporation comes by, and takes this hobby board, and offers the owner 5 million dollars to buy all his data, website, everything. All the people who registered at the old website had their information sold to the new corporation. The new website sucks. It is non-functional, nobody uses it. Do I want some large company buying my personal information? NO!!
Re:why would you ever list this info? (Score:2, Interesting)
So now I'm wondering, how can I design a registration page when all I require is a userID and password? Wouldn't that look weird as a registration page? Any advice?
Re:why would you ever list this info? (Score:3, Insightful)
So now I'm wondering, how can I design a registration page when all I require is a userID and password? Wouldn't that look weird as a registration page? Any advice?
I think the #1 problem new websites will have is t
Re:why would you ever list this info? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:why would you ever list this info? (Score:3, Funny)
I never give real information to any websites.
Me neither, and it's a good thing, too. I've ordered tons of crap from that rip-off place amazon.com, and NONE of it has EVER arrived! It's a good think I didn't give them my real address... who knows what kind of scams they would pull if they could find my house.
Re:why would you ever list this info? (Score:2)
Re:why would you ever list this info? (Score:2)
People who do this type of thing, ie commit a dime for notoriety and attention tend to pick not the most $$$ lucrative targets, but the ones their peers will notice the most...
Sort of like stealing hubcaps from a police car- the hubcaps aren't any more valuable, but it gets you a bi
Re:why would you ever list this info? (Score:3, Funny)
oh no (Score:5, Funny)
Little fox is growing up! (Score:5, Funny)
content of mail from SpreadFirefox.com site (Score:5, Informative)
From: admin@spreadfirefox.com
Reply-To: admin@spreadfirefox.com
To: announce@spreadfirefox.com
Date: Jul 15, 2005 2:52 AM
Subject: Spread Firefox outage and privacy breach notice
On Tuesday, July 12, the Mozilla Foundation discovered that the server hosting Spread Firefox, our community marketing site, had been accessed on Sunday, July 10 by unknown remote attackers who exploited a security vulnerability in the software running the site. This exploit was limited to SpreadFirefox.com and did not affect other mozilla.org web sites or Mozilla software.
We don't have any evidence that the attackers obtained personal information about site users, and we believe they accessed the machine to use it to send spam. However, it is possible that the attackers acquired information site users provided to the site.
As a Spread Firefox user, you have provided us with a username and password. You may also have provided us with other information, including a real name, a URL, an email address, IM names, a street address, a birthday, and private messages to other users.We recommend that you change your Spread Firefox password and the password of any accounts where you use the same password as your Spread Firefox account. To change your Spread Firefox password, go to SpreadFirefox.com, log in with your current password, select "My Account" from the sidebar, select "Edit Account" from the sidebar, then enter your new password into the Password fields and press the "Save user information" button at the bottom of the page.
The Mozilla Foundation deeply regrets this incident and is taking steps to prevent it from happening again. We have applied the necessary security fixes to the software running the site, have reviewed our security plan to determine why we didn't previously apply those fixes in this case, and have modified that plan to ensure we do so in the future.
Sincerely,
The Mozilla Foundation
Welcome, Firefox (Score:4, Insightful)
Wide spread usage, this is firefox.
(sarcastic comment overload)
Re:Welcome, Firefox (Score:2)
They're still waiting on meeting this mysterious Mr. Code Red, and his second cousin, Ms. Nimda.
Dr. Slammer could not be reached for comment.
Mozilla Not At Risk! (Score:5, Informative)
Just clearing that up for people.
I can hardly wait for the FUD (Score:3, Insightful)
As mentioned previously, it happens to the best of us, so we all need to be on top of keeping up with patches and installing them.
Precisely! (Score:2)
Spread Firefox (Score:3, Insightful)
That's precisely why you should always treat information submitted to a site like Spread Firefox as though it will be released to the public sometime in the future. If you aren't ready for everybody to have access to your home address, then simply don't release your home address.
Use a hash (and salt)! (Score:2, Insightful)
Lots of people probably use the same password for their email and websites such as SpreadFirefox. If any users use webmail and provided thei
Re:Use a hash (and salt)! (Score:2)
If their software is remotely modern, then the user passwords are probably stored as "irrevocable" hashes. It wouldn't stop their attacker from sniffing the contents of an unencrypted HTTP POST during authentication, however, and that could be one reason Asa is advocating that users change their passwords.
Re:irrevocable? (Score:2)
But that doesn't help the hacker, because the number of collisions is small compared to the size of the space to explore. So the hacker might come up with a working-but-incorrect password by brute force, but brute force is too expensive to be practical.
Even if they steal the file, they still have to brute-force it (or come up with some clever algorithm, of which none is publicly kno
MOD PARENT UP (Score:2)
Re:Use a hash (and salt)! (Score:2)
Given enough time and computing power, even a salted password hash can be broken by brute force. Markus Hess did that with passwords scammed from Cliff Stoll's machine all the way back in 1986, as described in The Cuckoo's Egg; the laws of mathematics haven't changed since then.
And it looks like the Mozilla Foundation realizes this, too, and are giving good advice.
A quick question... (Score:2)
For example, say my username is SoCalChris, and my password is 12345. When it hashes the password, it would hash "SoCalChris12345SomeRandomKey".
Would that be more secure than just using a key, so that all password hashes use the same salt?
I'm thinking that by using the username in the salt, it makes it impossible to do a brute force attack for all users at the same time, but would instead make it so that you
Probably an automated attack (Score:5, Interesting)
My guess it that the spammer didn't even know what site they hacked.
A bit early to suggest that. (Score:2)
Passwords? Doubt it (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Passwords? Doubt it (Score:3, Insightful)
From there, a truly malicious user could get them from database select statements (by turning on and looking at db logs, like mysql's query log), or changing your CMS's authentication code to also email the username/passwords during the authentication process to an ex
Re:Passwords? Doubt it (Score:2)
Yes, it means you need to send the password in cleartext once. Well, once is better then every time, while there is a chance a cracker is sniffing the first session, the chance of a cracker sniffing one of a infinite number of sessions
Re:Passwords? Doubt it (Score:2)
Good times, eh?
Re:Passwords? Doubt it (Score:2)
If they wanted the passwords, they could get 'em
Re:Passwords? Doubt it (Score:2)
Re:Passwords? Doubt it (Score:2)
not very many.
No Worries (Score:2)
No worries. All that means is some geek in a Dr. Doom custom might show up at other nerds' parents' home looking for the comic book convention being held in the basement.
Why should I trust that my data was not accessed? (Score:2)
Why should I trust their competency now? They let their server be compromised by a very well-known, well-publicized, and fixed/patch-available vulnerability. How can I be sure that the operators of the attacked site are capable of properly analyzing the attack? I mean, if they can't even keep up to date with the latest patches, then how can the
Encrypted passwords (Score:2)
If they broke in and the system was properly designed, shouldn't they have what amounts to an /etc/passwd file which they then have to crack? In other words, if you used strong passwords, you should be safer than if you used "Z1ON101" or "secret" as the password?
Not that this by any stretch of the imagination implies that a "strong" password can't be cracked in this situation, just that it's more trouble.
Re:Encrypted passwords (Score:2, Troll)
This way you never store the actual password on the server and it is nearly impossible recover the password. A quick test is, try the "forgot password" feature of a site. If it sends you back your cleartext password, you know the site is not safely handling logins.
However once a site is hacked, the attacker can of course read any
How secure is PHP? (Score:2)
I have been considering moving some sites to a PHP-based system for some time now, but after hearing stuff like this I just don't know about PHP anymore.
Re:How secure is PHP? (Score:2)
Re:How secure is PHP? (Score:2)
Re:How secure is PHP? (Score:2)
Re:How secure is PHP? (Score:2)
Database access is given through the php script, if you fail to double check the content being drawn, ( example: SELECT * FROM user_table, opposed to SELECT * FROM user_table WHERE id=blaat ), this is poor program security.
A majority of the OpenSource php
Perls of wisdom, yeah right (Score:2)
This is just another PHP growing pain. Sysadmins continue to watch the patches. Perl mongers.. "I told you so" is over rated...
Exploit Information - Drupal (Score:2, Informative)
"I found out that there's a "new" drupal exploit which allows posters to inject arbitrary code into the system for execution on the server -by way of comments. The Drupal.org site is presently down, and apparently has been last night. If you're running Drupal 4.5.1 or 4.6.2, turn off your comments. For visitors here, I'm sorry that you presently cannot comment and I'll turn them back on as soon as possible."
http://www.knowprose.com/node/2866 [knowprose.com]
Sample source code of the exploit:
http://ww [milw0rm.com]
Re:Exploit Information - Drupal (Score:3, Informative)
Response Headers - http://www.spreadfirefox.com/ [spreadfirefox.com]
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 20:01:52 GMT
Server: Apache/2.0.52 (Red Hat)
Red Hat doesn't make an advanced server, redhat makes Red Hat Enterprise Linux WS, ES & AS.
Also RHEL 3 ships with Apache 2.0.46, RHEL 4 ships with 2.0.52.
According to Red Hat's site, the vulnerability for php has been patched as of July 7, 2005. My guess, lazy admin.
RHEL3:
https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2005-564.html [redhat.com]
RHEL4:
http [redhat.com]
Password Vulnerability (Score:2, Informative)
Anyone else get creeped out when big commercial sites don't hash passwords (and can therefore recover them)?
SpreadFirefox uses CivicSpace (Score:4, Interesting)
This brings up a good question (Score:2)
Re:This brings up a good question (Score:2)
any encryption scheme used would therefore be only for protecting against accidental viewing by admins it has no use against an attacker or against an admin that really wan'ts the password.
What is this world coming to? (Score:2)
\Given that Spreadfirefox by its very mission had such sensitive information that could have been used to destroy so many users lives, it is deplorable that the admins were not more tight about security.\
notes on the breach (Score:3, Informative)
I'm a foundation employee and the guy who wrote the message we sent to Spread Firefox users. A few notes:
Re:the security flaw? (Score:3, Insightful)
How is this insightful? It's nothing but an uninformed troll...
Drupal's staff has already stated that it is using *all* of the money donated for server and backend stuff as that's what the community expected it to be used for when they donated.
Drupal is just like any other piece of open source software... It has bugs, they are patched, and the notifications of the necessity to patch go o
Re:the security flaw? (Score:2)
You're absolutely right. It is an uninformed troll - That's the SlashDot Way (TM).
Seriously, what I meant to say was that I'm hoping that the donations help them (Drupal) to keep up with the patching and updating of their own software. I didn't mean to malign them for the problems that the SpreadFirefox admin(s) had.
And on another note - my post was moderated "troll". And that happens fairly regularly on
Re:the security flaw? (Score:2)
a) the project is open source -- why would they need to put forth money to find and secure holes? They do it on a regular basis as it is (and as was proven by the patch available on 6/29)
b) they obviously have no idea what they are talking about when they mention the 10k donated (see this [drupal.org] post) as it's *all* going to the backend servers.
I may be pro-Drupal but I'm certainly not doing it because I'm a parrot. At least my post was ba
Re:the security flaw? (Score:2)
What are you doing on
Re:the security flaw? (Score:2)
Much like any time that a politician in the real world accuses some other group or individual of being "terrorists" or supporting "terrorism", it is the politican who is usually the most prolific user of terror and fear for political means.
Re:the security flaw? (Score:2)
Re:Are the passwords saved as plain text? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Are the passwords saved as plain text? (Score:2)
Re:How many people... (Score:5, Funny)
(hands over tinfoil hat)
Re:How many people... (Score:2, Insightful)
Funny, I suspected the growing popularity and the shitheaded zealousy surrounding FireFox.
Then again, MS is suspected of everything bad in the world around here. You guys are just kidding yourselves if you think Microsoft is FireFox's only enemy.
Re:Weak security (Score:3, Informative)
I try not to visit sites that store passwords as plain text somewhere.
Re:Weak security (Score:2)
Re:Weak security (Score:3, Insightful)
I assume that every website I have ever registered for is storing their passwords in plaintext. After all, it's slightly easier to manage, nobody expects to get broken into, and people are lazy.
Sure, some sites you visit will be secure against this kind of problem, but as a external customer, how could you ever know?
Re:Fortunately (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, I came across this at Google News prior to stopping Slashdot. It's hard to say how much press coverage it will get. I suppose it all depends on whether or not the FUD spinners feel they can use this to show that Open Source is no more secure than proprietary software. Be that as it may, software is a huge part of the picture; however, you can't rule out the the impact that the human factor and the choic
Re:But why hack SpreadFirefox? (Score:2, Informative)
Good and evil are completely subjective. Someone pro-Microsoft could think Firefox is the devil incarnate (let's not discuss why someone would be pro-Microsoft and just grant the premise that there could exist a tech savvy zealot with either something against Mozilla or a hard-on for MS)
2) As said in the summary, these guys could get, "real names, web site URLs, e-mail addresses, IM screenames, and home addresses." No credit card information, no b
Re:But why hack SpreadFirefox? (Score:2)
Re:Was Mozilla.org also defaced? (Score:3, Informative)