bugtraq - Re: Round One: "DLL Proxy" Attack Easily Hijacks SSL from Internet Explorer

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 23:56:29 -0500 (EST)
From: der Mouse <mouse@...ents.Montreal.QC.CA>
To: "John D. Hardin" <jhardin@...sec.org>,
	Darren Reed <avalon@...igula.anu.edu.au>, bugtraq@...urityfocus.com
Subject: Re: Round One: "DLL Proxy" Attack Easily Hijacks SSL from Internet
 Explorer

>> Depends.  Does it include the tools necessary to sign my own code?

>> If so, what's to stop a malware creator from using those same tools
>> to sign the attack vector?

> How does the malware author get the private half of a public key you
> trust for software installations?

The same way you do, of course.  Most likely it pops up a box asking
for it.  Given how boneheaded most users seem to be, and given that
signatures will be needed on most software installs, this will be a
common sight to many users, and they will probably cheerfully type in
whatever is necessary to fetch/decrypt it.  Look at how effective
phishing attacks are.

No, that wouldn't work against me (or, I would hope, you).  But I
wouldn't be running such a thing anyway, and even if I were-- having to
type a passphrase every time I recompiled something would be
intolerable, and if it were automated, malware could automate the
signing just as well as my compiler front-end could.

/~\ The ASCII				der Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTML	       mouse@...ents.montreal.qc.ca
/ \ Email!	     7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B