From: charrington at syseng.com (Christopher Harrington)
Subject: MSN Webcam / Chat Spoof

OCSP is not per cert, you can request cert status of multiple certificates
in one request. You would have more connections with OCSP than with
checking a CRL, there is no question. With OCSP you get near real time
validation status. In a CRL model you are only as accurate as your last
CRL. Some CA's issue delta CRLS, but that gets resource intensive. If
Verisign publishes a CRL every Monday and I revoked my cert today, you
would not know about it until the next CRL is published. As far as
financial transactions go, OCSP is definitely the standard. IDENTRUS,
Swift, GTA, SET, Certeca, all use OCSP as their method of cert status
checking..none rely on CRL's for time sensitive financial transactions. 

I use Verisign Class 1 because that's all I need. I don?t care that
Verisign does not have enough info on me to grant a Class2 or Class3 or
that the recipients of my email cant verify my cert via OCSP. I only care
that the emails I send are not tampered with and that I can sign / encrypt
email in an MS environment (my workplace) with minimal difficulty. Even if
I did have a Class 2 or Class 3 the percentage of people who could check
my cert via OCSP is very small ( I know because I was Technology Director
at a now defunct company that developed and sold OCSP software / plugins )

--Chris


-----Original Message-----
From: yossarian [mailto:yossarian@...net.nl] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2003 6:47 PM
To: Christopher Harrington; full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com
Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] MSN Webcam / Chat Spoof


MessageMaybe for use in e-mail - OCSP is per cert, which means that every
transaction will lead to a separate connect. Maybe good enough for e-mail,
certainly not for say money transactions - you rather update once in a
while, on quiet hours on your internet connection - not as a home user,
but as a corporate admin. Yes with OCSP you have less data per connection,
but you would have far more connections - if people were to use whatever
subtype of PKI in any significant numbers - which fortunately they don't.
In networking it is not just size that matters, also the number of
requests.

If you prefer OCSP - why do you use Verisign Class I - not validated? Then
I noticed something not working in my Outlook E Sp1 on win2k: I said to
explicitily NOT trust this certificate and the darn thing refuses to save
this setting. Am Ioverlooking something or did I stumble into another
minor MS Cockup Experience and have disclosed something?

BTW - Thawte is most commonly used to push dialers onto innocent
p0rnsurfers.... Hey, it trusted and safe software, so you really should
install it .... Lets' associate this great product with connection
stealers and p0rnpeddlers of the worst kind. It will really help get it
accepted by the general public, i guess.

Yossarian

----- Original Message -----
From: Christopher Harrington
To: Steve Poirot ; full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2003 10:23 PM
Subject: RE: [Full-Disclosure] MSN Webcam / Chat Spoof


If more clients had embraced OCSP, SCVP, CAM or some other form of
certificate validation, the size of the CRL would be irrelevant. An OCSP
request is only 2kb for example.

--Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Poirot [mailto:poirotsj@....net]
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2003 1:45 PM
To: full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com
Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] MSN Webcam / Chat Spoof


I don't know about IE, but with Netscape you can import the CRLs and
arrange for automatic updates with the maximum frequency being once per
day.

John.Airey@...b.org.uk wrote:

Because Thawte don't have the hardware capabilities to do this. I'd asked
them this before and they told me it would be too difficult to set this
up. Even if they did, imagine how much network traffic would be required
for verifying every certificate worldwide?

PKI as it is set up at the moment is as useful as the British MOT test.
All it says is that on a given day your identity (or car) was
satisfactorily inspected. The other 364 (or 365) days anything could
happen.

-
John Airey, BSc (Jt Hons), CNA, RHCE
Internet systems support officer, ITCSD, Royal National Institute of the
Blind, Bakewell Road, Peterborough PE2 6XU,
Tel.: +44 (0) 1733 375299 Fax: +44 (0) 1733 370848 John.Airey@...b.org.uk

Appeasement is the policy of being nice to a crocodile in the hope that he
will eat you last. (Winston Churchill)


-----Original Message-----
From: Richard M. Smith [mailto:rms@...puterbytesman.com]
Sent: 12 May 2003 18:09
To: full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com
Subject: RE: [Full-Disclosure] MSN Webcam / Chat Spoof


The other problem with Authenticode is that certifcates aren't revokable.
Why doesn't IE go back to Thawte to see if the "Browser Plugin"
certificate is still valid?

Richard
-----Original Message-----
From: full-disclosure-admin@...ts.netsys.com
[mailto:full-disclosure-admin@...ts.netsys.com] On Behalf Of Daniel
Docekal
Sent: Monday, May 12, 2003 11:38 AM
To: 'Richard M. Smith'; full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com
Subject: RE: [Full-Disclosure] MSN Webcam / Chat Spoof


Sure Richard it is actually loader of dialer program itself - it even
updates itself any time it wants and it does anything it wants. And there
thousands of people who had this bad luck to "use" that kind of software
without properly realising what they are doing.

Concerning that certifitace - stop trusting things which cannot be
trusted. Would be any COmpany/Street text something you can trust? Would
it change any time that company relocates?

It's problem of Microsoft who made this "authenticode" verification so
misguided and people that they even trust to that. Actually one should not
trust to anything that is not personally known to him... -----Original
Message-----
From: full-disclosure-admin@...ts.netsys.com
[mailto:full-disclosure-admin@...ts.netsys.com] On Behalf Of Richard M.
Smith
Sent: Monday, May 12, 2003 4:10 PM
To: full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com
Subject: RE: [Full-Disclosure] MSN Webcam / Chat Spoof


The downloaded ActiveX file can be found at this URL:
http://80.96.118.2/ac/mw/MSN_QTPieJess1.exe

I ran a strings on the file and the control is called:  TIBS Loader module
and the ProgID is LoaderCon.LoaderCon.  I can't find anything on the Web
about this particular ActiveX control, but it wouldn't surprise me that it
is part of some sort adult dialer scheme.  The control appears to be more
of a downloader program and not the adult dialer itself.

My question:  Why can't an Authenticode certificate present the following
information to a user:

   - Company name
   - Street address
   - Phone number
   - Web site URL
   - Contact Email address
   - Company logo
   - Link to a product description page

All this information can be verified when a company applies for a
Authenticode signing tool.  The current scheme is just plain silly as this
MSN scam illustrates.  There is simply no way to verify where a piece of
software is really coming from.

Richard

-----Original Message-----
From: full-disclosure-admin@...ts.netsys.com
[mailto:full-disclosure-admin@...ts.netsys.com] On Behalf Of Daniel
Do?ekal
Sent: Monday, May 12, 2003 2:08 AM
To: full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com
Subject: RE: [Full-Disclosure] MSN Webcam / Chat Spoof


Browser Plugin is ADULT DIALER - it connects via modem to telephone
service and you pay your sexy adventure through your telephone bill. In
many cases, there are adult dialers committing fraud - they redirect your
dial-up internet connection to very expensive number without your
knowledge. -----Original Message-----
From: full-disclosure-admin@...ts.netsys.com
[mailto:full-disclosure-admin@...ts.netsys.com] On Behalf Of Richard M.
Smith
Sent: Monday, May 12, 2003 3:40 AM
To: full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com; secure@...rosoft.com
Subject: RE: [Full-Disclosure] MSN Webcam / Chat Spoof


You missed the good part.  If you actually go to the "MSN" Web site and
press the "Connect Now" button, the site tries to download some
questionable ActiveX control.  Not to worry however:

   Just press YES in the dialog box when it appears. This operation is
totally safe and certified by Microsoft Authenticode(tm)

The control is signed by "Browser Plugin".  I guess Thawte will give
anyone an Authenticode certificate nowadays.  I wonder who "Browser
Plugin" really is?




-


NOTICE: The information contained in this email and any attachments is
confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended
recipient you are hereby notified that you must not use, disclose,
distribute, copy, print or rely on this email's content. If you are not
the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and then
delete the email and any attachments from your system.


RNIB has made strenuous efforts to ensure that emails and any attachments
generated by its staff are free from viruses. However, it cannot accept
any responsibility for any viruses which are transmitted. We therefore
recommend you scan all attachments.


Please note that the statements and views expressed in this email and any
attachments are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those
of RNIB.


RNIB Registered Charity Number: 226227


Website: http://www.rnib.org.uk


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3797 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.grok.org.uk/pipermail/full-disclosure/attachments/20030514/177a6ba5/smime.bin

Powered by blists - more mailing lists