Courtroom Recording Software Compromised With Backdoor Installer (arstechnica.com) 18
Hackers have compromised a popular courtroom recording software, JAVS, gaining full control through a backdoored update. Louisville, Kentucky-based Justice AV Solutions, its maker, pulled the compromised software, reset passwords, and audited its systems. Cybersecurity firm Rapid7 found that the corrupted installer grants attackers full access and transmits host system data to a command-and-control server. The Record adds: In its advisory, Rapid7 stressed the need to reimage all endpoints where the software was installed, and to reset credentials on web browsers and for any accounts logged into affected endpoints, both local and remote. "Simply uninstalling the software is insufficient, as attackers may have implanted additional backdoors or malware. Re-imaging provides a clean slate," they wrote. "Completely re-imaging affected endpoints and resetting associated credentials is critical to ensure attackers have not persisted through backdoors or stolen credentials."
may also want to rebuild the full image if an olde (Score:2)
may also want to rebuild the full image if an older version is part of the base image.
cloud based software needs to go / have an local s (Score:1)
cloud based software needs to go / have an local server install.
And not this
you must open your firewall to us
you can't defer updates / only can skip them for an limited time
are hosted out side of your control.
etc
Re:cloud based software needs to go / have an loca (Score:5, Informative)
cloud based software needs to go
This had nothing to do with "the cloud."
The problem was with Windows-based software and Powershell.
have an local server install.
A local install by the courthouse "IT guy" was the problem, not the solution.
Re: (Score:3)
Yup. That's why whenever anyone says if they're on jury duty they'll taint the jury because they believe people are getting screwed, I always respond with I agree with them. If I'm ever on a jury for a murder case I'll vote to acquit because I believe they should get the death penalty. Since that's not an option they can go back on the streets.
Re: (Score:1)
In your dystopic world, maybe you will get accused of murdering someone. Then it is off to the gallows with you, we'll skip the trial since we now know what you want.
Re: (Score:2)
In your dystopic world, maybe you will get accused of murdering someone. Then it is off to the gallows with you, we'll skip the trial since we now know what you want.
None of what you said makes sense. In his dystopic world he's going to get *falsely* accused of murder? And it's going to be worse because he's going to be hanged for a false accusation? And somehow all trials get skipped in his worldview and you just get executed on false accusations?
Huh. Someone might want to check on gtall. What with the low UID, incoherent ramblings, and amazing logical leap to "skipping trials", he might be having a stroke.
What can you do once you gain access? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
That's exactly the problem.
You might not realize it but the transcript (and recordings) of a court case are the evidence of the proceedings. If you were to file an appeal, the transcripts and recordings are the primary evidence the court of appeal uses to determine if there
JAVS Suite 8: Built for Windows 10 and beyond (Score:5, Insightful)
What's court proceedings even doing on the open Internet?
Court records are public (Score:3)
In most "free" countries, court records are public unless there is a pressing need to close the court. Transparency is seen as key to ensuring people are receiving fair trials.
Re: (Score:3)
You shouldn't be able to remotely alter the court record.
Re: (Score:2)
You seem to be completely misunderstanding what the software is supposed to do. It isn't supposed to allow court records to be altered. It allows endpoints to upload recordings, etc. to a central server. The issue is someone screwed up building an installer for the client software that runs on the endpoints, so it installs some kind of malware. Since these endpoint computers have Internet access, the malware can communicate with its command and control network. The concern is that this could alter the
Re: (Score:2)
You shouldn't be able to remotely alter the court record.
Re: (Score:2)
It isn't about being able to alter it remotely. It's about software running locally on the PC doing the recording altering it before it's uploaded. If the recording device is compromised, you can't trust the recordings - this is unavoidable. There's no suggestion here that the records could be remotely altered after being uploaded.
I can hear it now: (Score:5, Funny)
"If the software's shit, you must acquit!"