Another Sony Rootkit?

An anonymous reader writes to tell us F-Secure is reporting that the drivers for Sony Microvault USB sticks uses rootkit techniques to hide a directory from the Windows API. "This USB stick with rootkit-like behavior is closely related to the Sony BMG case. First of all, it is another case where rootkit-like cloaking is ill advisedly used in commercial software. Also, the USB sticks we ordered are products of the same company — Sony Corporation. The Sony MicroVault USM-F fingerprint reader software that comes with the USB stick installs a driver that is hiding a directory under "c:\windows\". So, when enumerating files and subdirectories in the Windows directory, the directory and files inside it are not visible through Windows API. If you know the name of the directory, it is e.g. possible to enter the hidden directory using Command Prompt and it is possible to create new hidden files. There are also ways to run files from this directory. Files in this directory are also hidden from some antivirus scanners (as with the Sony BMG DRM case) — depending on the techniques employed by the antivirus software. It is therefore technically possible for malware to use the hidden directory as a hiding place."

Sony

What happened to Sony? Growing up they always seemed like a great tech company, pumping out quality products that most people liked. When did politics and this kinda crap really start. It's sad.

Re:Sony

It started when they became an entertainment corp, rather than a technology corp.

Re:Sony

It started when they became an entertainment corp, rather than a technology corp.

So, are rootkits entertainment or technology?

Re:Sony

I'm finding this all quite entertaining, I must say. So I think that's your answer.

Re:Sony

Seems like they've been pushing their own proprietary stuff for the past 20 yrs - most recently Blue Ray, but then there was that miniDisc that went nowhere. Not sure...did they have a roll in VHS/Beta? I used to be a fanboy, but it seems they get more negative press anymore.

MD disks were actually very successful across asia. They didn't find a market in North America. In the same span they have also created the 3.5 inch floppy, the CD, and had a bit of input on the DVD. It's be more accurate to describe their format strategies as being hit and miss since they have been part of some huge dogs (beta, UMD) and some very successful formats (CDs, 3.5 inch floppies).

Re:Sony

CD was Philips, not Sony.

As to DVD - Not sure about the original DVD format, but Sony effectively created the recordable DVD format war with the + series of formats.

And yes, Sony had a role in VHS vs. Beta - Beta was Sony's format.

Re:Sony

Philips and Sony collaborated on the CD specification.

Re:Sony

Like someone else pointed out, CD was a Sony/Philips collaboration and if you look at the spec and who contributed what it's nearly 50/50.

Re:Sony

But the Memory Stick had all sorts of advantages, like a useless DRM system and twice the price per bit of all of the competing flash solutions. It also capped out on capacity a lot quicker than its contemporaries. Who wouldn't want one?

Re:Sony

God, memory stick. I have a Sony phone, which is quite nice. I was recently in Tokyo, and I wanted some extra memory for my phone, so I went to Akihabara - geek central. All the sales assistants in about 20 shops I visited just looked at my phone, shrugged their shoulders and said "Sony!". My Japanese is pretty poor, but I got the message. So I went to the big Sony building at Ginza. No deal. They said they only sold memory sticks in the European market - they were using something else in Japan.

Since I was there, I pulled out a Sony camera I was trying to get a USB cable for. Again, no deal. This camera was North American Sony, and they didn't have those kinds of Sony cables in Japan.

Sigh. This insistence on ignoring standards and doing everything themselves - not even consistently across the world - bugs me like hell. I doubt I'll buy any more Sony consumer electronics until they get it. Hope they do - they know how to make nicely designed bits of technology.

Re:Sony

I had their laptop. After some time, its transformer stopped working. I live in Serbia, and it is a bit tricky to get decent technical support/service here, but Sony has huge store in Belgrade downtown.

I went there, but no luck. They do not sell laptops in Serbia (mine was brought from UK), so they gave me the telephone of one repair shop, but they were not sure if they could help me. Repair shop sent me to another repair shop, and so on... After three hops, they explained me what's the issue. Sony has very rigid standards for their repair shops. To be their certified repairmen, you have to guarantee that you'll solve all problems in 24 hours. They were not able to find anyone capable of that in Serbia, so they don't have any repair shop in Serbia.

That's very interesting policy. Instead to give second class service to your customers, you give them - none.

Re:Sony

That's very interesting policy. Instead to give second class service to your customers, you give them - none.

Which in turn provides first class metrics applauded by upper management.

Re:Sony

It happened when they added a movie studio and a recording label to the corporation. The media side of the house demanded copy protection from the technical side of the house, without understanding the technical limitations.

Re:Sony

When did politics and this kinda crap really start.

Hype here notwithstanding, this is not a "rootkit". It seems to be a bizarre form of write-protection.

Re:Sony

Yes, it is a rootkit. It's modifying the kernel space to hide directories from the user. There are better ways of doing such a thing, but a rootkit has the advantage of keeping the files hidden from common methods of hidden-file detection. Something like a virus or trojan would tend to use a kit like this to make sure that it couldn't be found by antivirus software. Such kits also tend to mask the presence of their processes, just to make sure that they REALLY can't be detected.

Re:Sony

If it is a rootkit or not seems to me an academic question. I prefer to be asking: is my computer more vulnerable?

Re:Sony

According to TFA (which could be wrong, I suppose) this isn't a malformed directory. It's one that's being explicitly hidden from listings by a rootkit. The files are still there, but they're completely invisible to any and all tools. If you uninstall the rootkit, suddenly they'd pop back into visibility.

Re:A virus could put its files in the hidden folde

A virus wouldn't put itself in this hidden folder instead?

%USERPROFILE%\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.IE5

Or this one?
%USERPROFILE%\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK6F

Maybe one this windows built in rootkit folder?

c:\$Extend

..or maybe one of these hidden files?
c:\$AttrDef

c:\$BadClus

c:\$Bitmap

c:\$Boot

c:\$LogFile

c:\$Secure

c:\$Volume

All which the handy SysInternals hides as "Standard NTFS Metadata Files" by default.

The existence of these files/folders are hidden to most users and most of them don't even know about them. You think virus scanners check the c:\$Extend folder? Is someone willing to drop in a known virus and see if it detects it? Honestly, I'm curious as to how many actually check this folder...

Re:Sony

Your definition is the original definition, but it's not how it's currently used. By your definition, the BMG CDs were not rootkits either. These days "rootkit" is used on Windows systems to refer to software which modifies the kernel space for nefarious purposes.

Re:Sony

I posted this on the firehose version of this article. Thought I should do so here too:

Please note: this software simply creates a directory that is hidden from the Windows API for its fingerprint authentication. It's not actually a rootkit, just using one of the many tools of the trade of rootkits. The concern is that the hidden directory is hidden from all of the Windows API, including virus scanners, and thus could be used by malicious software to hide infected files.

I'm not sure that it's reasonable to accuse Sony of distributing a rootkit when they've simply distributed software which uses a technique that could accidentally help malicious software.

It's also probably a bad thing to keep swinging the rootkit-bat around like this. The next time some large corporation really tries to root all of their customers' machines, no one will believe the story.

Re:Sony

Please note: this software simply creates a directory that is hidden from the Windows API for its fingerprint authentication. It's not actually a rootkit

Please note the defenition of "rootkit," ripped from the beginning of the rootkit wikipedia article:

A rootkit is a set of software tools intended to conceal running processes, files or system data from the operating system.

If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, yada yada yada.

If it looks like a duck...

If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck,...

Then lawyers for some large corporation will argue that it's actually some previously rare form of feathered marsupial?

Re:Sony

Please note the defenition of "rootkit," ripped from the beginning of the rootkit wikipedia article:

A rootkit is a set of software tools intended to conceal running processes, files or system data from the operating system.

If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, yada yada yada.

This is a naive definition (I'll edit it later, with appropriate sources). Many programs attempt to conceal files which are not rootkits. Rootkits are the core of a type of software that seeks to hide its own existence. This Sony software does no such thing. You can see the software. You can remove the software. You can view every one of the software's files. Even F-Secure said that they believed the software was designed only with the security of the thumbnail drive data in mind, not with any subversion of the host (like the real Sony rootkit that got them in so much trouble). It only seeks to protect sensitive biometric data which should not be visible to all programs) from the normal Windows API. Again, I'm not defending how they did this. It's poor design, as it has huge security implications. However, it's not a rootkit, but a poorly designed driver.

We need to be more careful to cry wolf when there's, you know... a wolf. Otherwise, when some company decides to deploy a real rootkit again, no one is going to listen to us.

You're missing the point.

It only seeks to protect sensitive biometric data which should not be visible to all programs) from the normal Windows API.

The intentions behind the software are irrelevant. The only thing that matters is what it does. What this software does is an end-run around the operating system, deliberately hiding things that should not and need not be hidden.

Why shouldn't it be hidden? Because as has already been pointed out, malicious software can take advantage of the rootkit—which is what this is—as an attack vector to control someone's machine without their knowledge, and with damn little they can do about it.

Please remember also that a lot of computer viruses and worms didn't start out with people saying, "I'm going to write a computer virus today!" They started out with someone saying, "Hmmm... I wonder if that would work..." and it goes from there. In fact, the guy who is credited with writing the first computer virus [slashdot.org] said, "It was a practical joke combined with a hack. A wonderful hack." Maybe, but it's stupid to deny what it was, a virus, just as it is to deny what this is, a rootkit.

Consider

It is therefore technically possible for malware to use the hidden directory as a hiding place.

Isn't software behaving like that already considered malware?

Re:Consider

Isn't software behaving like that already considered malware?

yes and no. it depends on what and how you use it. if you use the property of hiding directories as a simple way of keeping data from less experienced people [eg. slashdotters hiding the porn from their parents] then it isn't malware; in this case sony's software doesn't seem to be hding a directory for any good purpose, so yes it is malware.

Re:Consider

No. The distinction is WHO's doing the hiding. If a user on the computer intentionally hides files or directories from other possible users on the computers, it's not malware. It may or may not be ethical, depending on who's doing the hiding and why. Presumably, it's the owner of the computer and they have a right to hid info from prying eyes. If not, the issue is with the user's actions and not with the software. If, however, a program creates files or directories and hides them (by means other than simply using the H attribute, at least) from the owner/user of the computer, it's malware. It's understandable for a content owner to wish to protect their content, but that doesn't justify them altering the behavior of a computer without the owner's express understanding and permission for what they're doing.

Hidden files

Is root kit now the new buzzword for "please send me traffic"? This isn't the same as a rootkit, it's just a annoyingly hidden directory. Can we tag this as FUD?

Re:Hidden files

It doesn't matter what their intent is, they are using rootkit techniques to hide shit on your computer. This allows other parties to piggyback on that tech and install other nastier UNDETECTABLE malware. It would be like if your house cleaning lady leaves your front door wide open when she leaves. Someone could stroll in, fuck your shit up, and leave undetected. Definitely something to seriously worry about.

Re:Hidden files

Hiding from the API is pretty important, actually. That's done by pulling the rug under the pointers to the functions that retreives lists of files/directories. If that's not a Windows rootkit, what is?

And much like their last rootkit, this one can easily be used to cloak files on your system and is pretty much a fantastic place to put your virus. Way to really push the limits, guys.

Re:Hidden files

First sentence from wikipedia article:

"A rootkit is a set of software tools intended to conceal running processes, files or system data from the operating system"

So, it sounds like a rootkit as described by wikipedia.

Wikipedia?

So, it sounds like a rootkit as described by wikipedia.

Not for long! *rushes to edit wikipedia*

"A rootkit is a set of software tools intended to conceal running processes, files or system data from the operating system, except when it's with Sony products"

There! Now by definition, sony's isn't a rootkit anymore! :D

(Legal Disclaimer: This was actually a joke, I didn't vandalize wikipedia or the like. <-- you can't never be too sure these days)

Re:Hidden files

If it doesn't show up in nautilus via ctrl+h it is... if it doesn't show up in windows with "show hidden files and folders" checked it is.... simply setting an *intended* file system attribute isn't the same as hiding from the operating system.

Format before use

Maybe formatting USB memories before usage would be a good move.
And using OS that won't run anything from the newly attached memry as a default would also help.

Is there a way to permanantly disable this?

I'd really rather not have this 'capability' when using windows, to allow software to hide files/directories on my system through these registry/filesystem techniques.

Is there anything that would break if one was to find a way to nullify this functionality in OS calls?

Ryan Fenton

Why?

How many lawsuits is it going to take before Sony gets it into their head that rootkit=bad? I, for one, am going to fight against our new malware overlords.

tsk tsk tsk...

They are simply conditioning a public growing weary of dishonest tactics and policies to steer clear of any products they produce. Sony has many divisions and has a presence in many markets, and they are royally screwing all of them up. First the music cd fiasco, now this, no wonder they were prematurely blasted for the SecuROM program that was talked about on here a few days ago. Most people automatically saw it as a rootkit or something they didn't want on their computer because of the record that Sony is establishing for itself. It doesn't matter that maybe it wasn't a rootkit or something malicious, if the public starts thinking that everything you produce is going to create security vulnerabilities and screw up their machine, they'll simply stay away without giving you a second (or third, [or fourth]) chance...

kiosk

It seems to me that our personal computers are becoming more and more like kiosks where "vendors" install software they want and the "end users", ie) us, have less and less control over our own PCs. Think about it- DRM, (truly) hidden folders, subscriptino software, product activation, ..vista?

Wow...

Did anyone read the article before coming up with the post title? They say right in the middle of the article that it's not a rootkit, and "It is our belief that the MicroVault software hides this folder to somehow protect the fingerprint authentication from tampering and bypass. It is obvious that user fingerprints cannot be in a world writable file on the disk when we are talking about secure authentication. However, we feel that rootkit-like cloaking techniques are not the right way to go here."

This is also nothing new in terms of USB drives. I have a USB flash drive, which I can't remember the name of, that essentially keeps a secure partition hidden from Windows unless you run a special app to put in a password to make it visible to Windows.

Re:Wow...

Did anyone read the article before coming up with the post title? They say right in the middle of the article that it's not a rootkit, and "It is our belief that the MicroVault software hides this folder to somehow protect the fingerprint authentication from tampering and bypass.

The intent is irrelevant w.r.t. the fact whether or not it uses rootkit-like behavior to implement it.


  It is obvious that user fingerprints cannot be in a world writable file on the disk when we are talking about secure authentication.


This is why file access permissions/restrictions where invented in the 1970's.

This is also nothing new in terms of USB drives. I have a USB flash drive, which I can't remember the name of, that essentially keeps a secure partition hidden from Windows unless you run a special app to put in a password to make it visible to Windows.

That is a completely different technique at about 10 different levels. Of course the driver of some USB device may chose to reserve parts of the storage on said USB device for internal usage such that it cannot be (easily) accessed by normal means (i.e. the API offered by said driver). However, "cloaking" parts of the driver itself using rootkit-like mechanisms has, well, about nothing in common with such techniques.

Rootkits aside...

... which I still do not think should be called 'rootkit' in these instances, as this is what MS code allows for - it is part of the system and designed to be so.

The issue here is the biometric stuff. If your CC number gets stolen, or your password gets hacked, you can simply cancel the old CC/reset your account etc.

Now, what happens when your data 'fingerprint' [retina scan, whatever] gets hacked and compromised? Get new fingers? Get new eyeballs (ala Tom Cruise!)?. I think not. The sooner people learn not ot buy and trust this crap the better - but thinking, perhaps the people that buy this crap deserve a MS designed rootkit anyway.

You can't solve this on a single system.

The issue here is the biometric stuff.

This is an inherent problem in biometrics: you have to trust every scanner that takes a reading not to be trapdoored.

The entire authentication process has to be performed verifiably in the scanner hardware and firmware, and the scanner itself had to be trusted - either it's your scanner or it belongs to someone you have to trust anyway.

But no reversible form of the biometric information can be transferred to potentially untrusted storage.

Re:Rootkits aside...

A malicious driver is being installed that patches the Win32 API ( FindFirstFile() and FindNextFile() ) not to report the presence of a directory when enumerating through your C:\Windows folder.

How is this *NOT* a rootkit? This is the very definition of one!

Look at the bright side

You can now hide porn effectively, with little effort and money!

A Nasty Trick

It reminds me of the time that some friends and I discovered that a labmate had left himself logged in as root on a virtual console at his Linux workstation. Here's what we did:

1. Created a directory with the name " " (single space)
2. Added that directory to his path
3. Wrote a Perl script that would spit out a random quote from zippy 1/3 of the time, and then execute the program pointed to by argv[0]
4. Populated the special hidden directory with symlinks to the perl script, each given the name of a common command like ls, ps, and so on.

So whenever he ran a common command from his shell, he would first get a random quote from fortune appearing, followed by normal command output. He figured it out pretty quickly, but I like to think that there were a few moments where he entertained the idea of his workstation gaining sentience.

SUCKERS! What did you expect?

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

How fucking stupid can you people be? Stop buying Sony! [mcgrew.info]

-mcgrew

what a bunch of weasels

down around the courthouse, they have some terms for mutts who don't learn and keep on doing the same crimes.

the classy term is "recidivist."

of the others, we can probably safely post "weasel," "snake," "bastard," "crook," and "lowlife."

HDTV is around the bend, and I'm remodelling the basement soon to accomodate its new wiring requirements. Sony, the snake-in-a-box company, is not going to be a part of this undertaking.

Desensitized

The overuse of the term "rootkit" points to (at least) one thing: we've become so desensitized to security hazards that it takes a new buzzword for nefariousness to grab people's attention. Regardless of whether this is itself a rootkit or not, it's still a security hazard, and what's perhaps more ironic, that hazard was created in an attempt to effect "security through obscurity".

Not an Accident

This is no longer an accident with Sony. No longer a simple lapse in judgment. This is a bad, ugly, habit on their part now, likely caused by the dichotomy of trying to be a content producer and a tech company at the same time.