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  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, 3 Aug 2021 20:36:29 +0200
From: Adrien JOLIBERT <>
To: Nick Boyce <>
Cc: Full Disclosure List <>
Subject: Re: [FD] Spammers Using storage[.]googleapis[.]com ?!!?

Quite an old trick becoming popular.
So yep, the stuff is hosted on one of the google services in private mode; redirections gives you a valid token to access.

> Le 3 août 2021 à 19:35, Nick Boyce <> a écrit :
> I notice that among the spam in my Gmail spam folder, there are a
> number of "address-check" type messages (i.e. that just seek
> confirmation my address exists), which attempt to get their response
> by performing a scripted redirect via a web property belonging to
> Google ...... and I tend to think "Huh? ... Surely Google wouldn't let
> that happen ... is this redirect something that by some chance they
> don't know about ?".
> Every link in the spam has the following HREF:
> https://storage[.]googleapis[.]com/medya00/redirectDOM80.html#[long-alphanum-string-that-presumably-identifies-me]
> The contents of 'redirectDOM80.html' just sets document.location.href
> to somewhere else, passing on the ID string.
> I won't include any of the above spam's boilerplate, but it's offering
> to let me check my "public records" so that I can find out what other
> people might know about me.
> So does anybody know WTF ?   Is this some unfortunate side-effect of a
> Google service that can't be avoided (I have no real idea what the
> purpose of 'storage[.]googleapis[.]c' might be), or is this in fact
> some dreadful snafu on the part of some Google sysadmin somewhere ?
> There's some useless discussion of what sounds like the same thing, here:
> but it's the very idea of there being an open redirect in a Google web
> property that astonishes me.
> These Google support tickets from 2020 suggest that anybody can store
> anything they want as a second-level URI within s.g.c, and that
> malicious artifacts are commonly stored there, and that Google is
> blissfully ignorant of it until each individual artifact is reported,
> and that even then Google doesn't care and does nothing:
> ..... but I can't quite believe it - surely they vet incoming traffic
> ?  Allowing the upload of arbitrary HTML to their own domain is ....
> well .. [head explodes].
> FWIW, people complain that Amazon AWS is also abused in the same way.
> [No, I haven't bothered to let Google know directly - all of my
> attempts to let them know about other minor issues with their services
> have just resulted in a deafening silence - but I will try if folks
> think I should.]
> Cheers
> Nick
> _______________________________________________
> Sent through the Full Disclosure mailing list
> Web Archives & RSS:

Sent through the Full Disclosure mailing list
Web Archives & RSS:

Powered by blists - more mailing lists