Forgot your password?

typodupeerror
Security Censorship Government The Courts News

Gag Order Fuels Responsible Disclosure Debate 113

Posted by Soulskill
from the excellent-use-of-judicial-resources dept.
jvatcw writes "The Boston subway hack case has exposed a familiar rift in the security industry over responsible disclosure standards. Many see the temporary restraining order preventing three MIT undergrads from publicly discussing vulnerabilities they discovered in Boston's mass transit system as a violation of their First Amendment rights. Others, though, see the entire episode as yet another example of irresponsible, publicity-hungry security researchers trying to grab a few headlines." We discussed the temporary restraining order last weekend, and later the EFF's plans to fight it. CNet reports that another judge has reviewed the order and left it intact. Reader canuck57 contributes a related story about recent comments by Linus Torvalds concerning his frustration over the issue of security disclosure.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Gag Order Fuels Responsible Disclosure Debate

Comments Filter:
  • by Animats (122034) on Saturday August 16, 2008 @02:43AM (#24624661) Homepage

    The MTA is trying to cover up the fact that their system design is very weak. The value of the card is actually stored on the card, and there's no central validation. That's embarrassing, considering that the MTA implemented fare cards quite late, long after other cities.

    The NYC MetroCard system [sephail.net], in comparison, is totally paranoid. Cards have unique serial numbers and are validated by the entry gate, the station computer, and central servers at MetroCard HQ. Creating new cards with new IDs won't work. Duplicating cards is possible, but is detected the second time the card is used. NYC is so paranoid that equipment maintenance is performed by an outside company, but NYC employees handle the money and blank cards, so that no single party has full access. The New York City subway system was losing about $20 million a year to token fraud, and when the new system went in, they were determined that would stop. They had some fraud back in 1995, when someone stole a supply of blank cards and was able to encode them, but it turned out to be a rip-off for buyers - the cards only worked once, then were invalidated.

    The first fare card system, San Francisco's BART, isn't that secure, but has an big advantage - BART has exit gates. So, while it doesn't have real-time validation against a central database, gate info is being transmitted in background to a central system, and if centralized analysis indicates something funny going on, central control can flag the card, trap the user at the exit gate, and alert station security to check the card.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 16, 2008 @04:14AM (#24624879)

    The Tech leaked these slides days ago.

    http://www-tech.mit.edu/V128/N30/subway/Defcon_Presentation.pdf

    It really covers absolutely everything you care about. If you're willing to, you can do all of this from the comfort of your bedroom.

    Now, I'm not in Boston, but next time I am...

System going down at 5 this afternoon to install scheduler bug.

Working...