full-disclosure - How we caught an Identity Thief

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: Mon Feb 20 14:15:35 2006
From: bpasdar at igxglobal.com (Babak Pasdar)
Subject: How we caught an Identity Thief

Dear Barry,

I can appreciate your point below.  Yes, you are correct in that these
commands only take a few minutes to run.  However please consider that
in the scenario presented.

1. I had to get back to our office from the client site over an hour
away :)  Laws of physics to New York City traffic apply no matter what.

2. The client or a security company's network are not the best source
for scanning and investigation activities.  Lest you have someone who
looks for these early signs of the investigation.  Scans have to be
alternately sourced.

3. Running a few commands by no means is an indication of a fully
packaged and verified set of information. A forensics case has to be
started fully documenting all actions and times for possible future
reference in legal proceedings.  Rushing through something like this and
not following procedure is the first step in being caught with your
pants down later.

Thank you for your response Barry.

Babak

On Mon, 2006-02-20 at 13:53 +0000, Barrie Dempster wrote:
> From the article linked:
> > 1. The domain name 
> > 2. Who registered it
> > 3. Who was serving DNS for it
> > 4. The IP address of the web site 
> > 5. The Service Provider for the IP address 
> > 6. The OS of the host 
> > 7. The Web Server
> > 8. Some general information about the application the site was using
> > 
> > Within hours we had collected all of the above information. It was my
> recommendation to > the client that we contact the FBI at this point. 
> 
> It took you "hours" to run nmap/dig/whois ?
> 
> Not a very good advertisement of your talents, which the post seemed to
> be attempting. Even giving you the benefit of the doubt and assuming the
> phishers employed basic obfuscation of the host (Which I would doubt as
> usually it's someone else machine anyway) hours is a seriously long time
> to run a few basic commands.
> 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 827 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.grok.org.uk/pipermail/full-disclosure/attachments/20060220/94c9eadd/attachment.bin
-------------- next part --------------

_________________________________
igxglobal utilizes state of the art technology from PGP to ensure the safeguard of all electronic correspondences.  This message could have been secured by PGP Universal. To secure future messages from this sender, please click this link and contact your representative at igxglobal for further information:

https://keys.igxglobal.com/b/b.e?r=full-disclosure%40lists.grok.org.uk&n=4Njq7juzEf1Yn9MHjRn9Ow%3D%3D