RFC 6189: ZRTP sonunda standart!

Sonunda ZRTP resmi RFC atama, atanmış RFC6189 Tekli Güvenli RTP Medya Yolu Anahtar Anlaşması: ZRTP.

Bu bir bağımlılık olarak vardı SRTP artık olarak tanımlanmıştır 256bit AES anahtar boyutu ile RFC6188 .

Çok gibi uçtan uca şifreleme için resmi bir standart olarak ZRTP ayarlamak için önemli bir kilometre taşı gibi, RFC nihayet yayımlanan görmek heyecan verici PGP e-postalar için olmuştur.

Şimdi dünyanın herhangi bir organizasyon uçtan uca protokol ses şifreleme için ZRTP uygulamak resmen mümkün olacak

Şu anda ZRTP protokolü 3 farklı kamu uygulamaları var:

Her biri protokol farklı özellikleri sağlamak, ama en önemli çalışacak şekilde bilinmektedir.

Yeni bir dalga telefon şifreleme sistemleri yapmanın şirketlerin çoğu özel şifreleme uyguluyor nerede gri bir alana irrupting, ses şifreleme dünyaya geliyor.

Şimdi standart kurulumu tamamlanarak farklı bir şey uygulamak için sol birkaç nedeni vardır.

Hurra Bay Zimmermann ve (gibi şirketlerin tüm topluluk PrivateWave (gibi) ve bireyler Werner Dittmann üzerinde çalıştı)!

Bugün büyük bir gün, teknoloji bu tür var olan çoklu uygulama ile şimdi de resmi ve olduğunu!

Philip, yine yaptın, senin saf ruh ve kararlılıkla benim övgü:-)

GSM Freiburg üniversitede çatlama için İlerleme

Mobil protokolleri (GSM, GSM-R, TETRA, UMTS, vb) hacking heyecan verici dünya üniversiteleri resmi araştırma faaliyetlerini oluyor.

Yatırım yazılım, bunun üzerinde çalışmalıyız onu geliştirmek ve güçlü araştırma yapmak üniversite öğrencilerine fırsat veriyor çatlama opensource kod sürümlerini yapmak.

Freiburg Üniversitesi sadece kağıt yayımlanan GSM Şifreleme A5 / 1 Pratik egzersiz bir birlikte gsmframencoder koklama, kod çözme ve çatlama sürecini iyileştirmek için destek aracı.

, Donanım Açılış yazılımını açmadan, açılış protokolüne özel bir yöntem veya birikmesi iletişim ve güvenlik teknolojileri sürecinin her türlü zayıflığını göstermektedir.

Bu telekomünikasyon protokolleri tasarımı sırasında çalışabilir ve açık yaklaşımı ile yalnızca gider sanayi zorlamak için özel ve kapalı teknolojinin her türlü-açmaya kadar denemek ve çatlak herhangi bir bilim hedefi olmalıdır.

Benim TOR çıkış düğümü deneyim gürültülü trafiği filtrelemek için çalışıyor

Bu yılın başlarında ben bir TOR çıkış i bir VPS getirdi böylece düğüm çalıştırmak için zamanı karar verdi hetzner.de (onlar bir olarak listelenen çünkü iyi TOR ISP ) ve kurulumu takma ile çıkış düğüm privacyresearch.infosecurity.ch bir 100Mbit ile / Aylık veriler, daha sonra 10MBit / s düz ilk 1TB s bağlantısı.

Ayrıca çalıştırmak TOR2WEB yazılım http://tor.infosecurity.ch .

Ben kurulum çıkış politika çalıştırarak önerilen minimum taciz ile çıkış düğümü ve hazırlanan kötüye yanıt şablonu .

İlk gün ben YDTHK trafik peer to peer nedeniyle şikayet derhal alınan düğümünü çalıştırmak oldum.

Yani filtre-out bazı P2P trafiği ile karar OpenDPI otomatik olarak ortadan şikayet iptables modülü ve DMCA:

iptables -A OUTPUT -m opendpi -edonkey -gadugadu -fasttrack -gnutella -directconnect -bittorrent -winmx -soulseek -j REDDİNE

Ben İtalyan değilim çünkü Sonra, ben bir TOR düğüm çalıştırıyorum olduğunu anlamadı çünkü aptalca bir savcı sabah beni uyandır ki olasılığını azaltmak amacıyla İtalyan internet adres alanına bağlanmak için benim TOR düğümü önlemek için karar.

Ben yardımıyla, denedim hellais bir yazdı Çık Politikası ifadeyi reddetmek yapmak için komut dosyası , dayalı tüm İtalyan netblocks reddetme ioError en blockfinder ama biz bulundu torrc yapılandırma 1000 hatları ile dosyaları TOR kaza yapıyor edildi.

Biz ülke tarafından TOR çıkış politikasını bloke etmek bizim girişimi hakkında kazasında bildirmek için bir bilet açmak için gitti ve benzer bir girişimde bulundu biz katkıda bulundu, ancak yine de açık bir sorun gibi görünüyor.

Sonuç, i kullanarak kirli yoldan gitmeye karar verdi böylece temiz ve nazik bir şekilde TOR çıkış düğüm için bir ülke Çıkış Politikası'nı yapmak mümkün değil olmasıdır iptables / geoip . Düzgün derleme yapmak için mücadele sonra, italya giden trafiği engellemek için iptables bir çizgi oldu:

REDDEDİYORSANIZ BT -j -m devlet -devlet YENİ -M geoip -dst-cc tcp -p iptables -A ÇIKTI

Şimdi benim çıkış-düğümden İtalyan ağlarına hiçbir bağlantı yapılacak ve ben muhtemelen aptal savcılar TOR anlamadan karşı güvende olduğumu (i daha önce uygulanan tüm TOR düğüm ip adresi için bir istisna var).

Ben almaya başladım diğer bazı gün sonra portscan faaliyetleri nedeniyle benim tor düğümlerden kaynaklanan yakınıyor.

Görmek benim kendi bakış açısından i anonimlik ağı, anonim değil hack girişimi desteklemek istiyoruz ve bu yüzden filtre-out portscan istiyorum ve ben yüklü arada böylece benim node.That menşeyli gelen saldırılar, bazı çalışma gerektiren karmaşık bir mesele scanlogd ve homurdanma , saldırılara tür benim TOR çıkış düğümü çıkıyorum kaç saldırıları, değerlendirmek istiyorum çünkü.
Daha sonra ben büyük saldırılar filtre edebilmek için emin olmak için filtreleme çeşit düzenlemek için çalışacağız.
PortScan ilgili ne için algılamak ve portscan giden filtre ama sadece gelen filtre portscan yüzden muhtemelen bir şey reklam-hoc yazmak gerekir için hiçbir kamu araçları olduğunu görünüyor.
Ben işler nasıl gidiyor bakın ve varsa olacak bazı güzel yolu lightwave yolu uygulamak için snort-inline benim çıkış düğümü kaynaklanan seçici filtre-out büyük saldırı girişimi için.

Amacım şikayet ISS ile ilgili çaba azaltmak ve makul bir sorumluluk ile çıkış düğümü çalıştırmak için elimden geleni yapmaya çalışıyorum, uzun vadeli (TOR bağışlanan ayda trafiğe en az 1TB) çalışan bir çıkış düğümü tutmaktır.

TETRA hack geliyor: OsmocomTETRA

Bu serbest bırakılmasını görmek çok heyecan verici OsmocomTETRA , ilk açık kaynak kodlu SDR ( Yazılım Tanımlı Radyo TETRA demodülatöre, PHY ve alt MAC katmanları) uygulama.

Bu bir TETRA versiyonu GSM airprobe böylece büyük hack fırsat vererek, veri ve TETRA haberleşme protokolü çerçevesinde erişim kilidini!

Şimdi de TETRA teknolojisinin opensource TETRA sniffer`lar görmek için, bu 2011 sırasında, biz beklemeliyiz açıldı ve muhtemelen de ÇAY şifreleme (Tetra Şifreleme Algoritması) kırık oldu!

TETRA Hatta şebeke kapsama (sadece baz istasyonu olmadan-mobil-mobil) sağlamak ve bazı özel yüksek kullanılabilirlik hizmetlerinin kullanılabilirliği olmadan çalışan alternatif bir mobil iletişim ağı olarak Polis, Acil Servis ve ordular tarafından kullanılmaktadır.

Benim slayt TETRA hakkında yazdı Başlıca Ses Güvenliği Protokolü İnceleme .

OsmocomBB posta listeleri bazı TETRA ağ durumu hakkında zaten tartışma vardı:

  • Belçika Polis TETRA ASTRID ağı: şifresiz
  • Alman Polis testi TETRA Aachen ağ: şifresiz
  • Bazı eski jugoslawia TETRA ağı: şifresiz
  • Hollanda C200 TETRA ağı: TEA2 statik anahtarları ile şifrelenir
  • İngiltere Airwave TETRA ağı: TEA2 Tea2 ile şifrelenmiş

Bu yeni Polis ve kurtarma hizmeti yeni dijital radyolar geri eski analog yaştan gelen hack görmek gerçekten çok eğlenceli olacak:-)

Hükümet 2.0, Open Data ve WikiLeaks

WikiLeaks, Openleaks, GlobalLeaks, BalkanLeaks arkasında kavramlar sadece halka sırlarını ifşa daha fazladır.

Bu sözde 'web 2.0 / wiki' işbirlikçi sistemleri ile bir hükümetin organizasyon, şeffaflık geliyor devrim ve işbirliği parçası.

Bir o da bakabilirsiniz Giriş - Hükümet 2.0 Daniel Berg, eş-kurucusu Anke Domscheit Berg, Yenilikçi Hükümet Programı Microsoft Almanya Talepleri tarafından ve eşi WikiLeaks ve şimdi kurucusu Openleaks .

Bir göz Open Data hükümet 2.0 yolsuzluğun azaltılması ve devlet örgütlenmesi performansını artırarak, devletin şeffaflığını uygulamak girişimi.

Sırlarını yayarak kaos yaratmak isteyen anarco-liberter korkak adamlar grubu sadece daha fazla olduğunu devrim, bu tam şeffaflık ve vatandaşlar ile güçlü bir işbirliği yararlanarak hükümetlerin yeni örgütlenme modeli elde etmek için acele sadece başlangıç.

ZORG, yeni C ++ ve Java ZRTP uygulanması kamu bırakma

Merhaba tüm, bugün PrivateWave Italia SpA, İtalyan şirket i CTO duyuyorum ses telekomünikasyon gizlilik koruma ve bilgi güvenliği teknolojileri geliştirme yapan, biz ZORG, yüklenebilir yeni bir açık kaynak ZRTP protokolü uygulaması bırakın : // www http. zrtp.org .

ZRTP [1] Eliptik Eğri Diffie-Hellmann 384bit AES-256 SRTP şifreleme ile uçtan uca anahtar alışverişi sağlar.

ZORG ilk geliştirilen ve aşağıdaki platformlar için kullanılabilir PrivateWave en PrivateGSM ses şifreleme ürünlerinde uygulamaya konulmuştur: Blackberry, Nokia ve iOS (iPhone).

Zorg C ++ PJSIP açık kaynak VoIP SDK [2] ile entegre edilmiş ve PJSIP 1.8.5 karşı entegrasyon yama olarak temin ediyor. Bu iPhone, Symbian, Windows, Linux ve Mac OS X üzerinde test edilmiştir

Zorg Java Blackberry platformunda MJSIP [3] açık kaynak SDK özel bir sürümü içinde entegre edilmiş ve asgari çöp toplayıcı aktivitesi azaltmak için gerekli bellek kullanımı iyileştirmeleri içerir.

Kriptografik algoritmalar uygulama kolayca diğer olanlarla takas olabilir ki her iki platformda ayrılmış ve modüler şifreleme arka uçları var.

. ZORG GNU AGPL altında lisanslı ve kaynak kodu ile github üzerinde kullanılabilir https://github.com/privatewave/ZORG .

Biz açık kaynak altında ve güvenliği bizim yaklaşımı ile uyum içinde serbest [4] biz gerçekten açık kaynak ekosistemi konuşma özgürlüğü destekleyen yeni bir ses şifreleme sistemleri oluşturmak için yararlı olabilir umuyoruz gibi.

Java ile yazılmış 20'den fazla pjsip tabanlı açık kaynak VoIP şifreleme yazılımı ve birkaç doğrudan ZORG salıverilmeden yararlanamazlar olabilir.

Biz geliştirmek için yararlı işbirliği, yeni entegrasyon, yeni şifreleme arka uçları, hata izciliğin ve her türlü öneri almak ve ZRTP ses şifreleme standardı olarak teyit için mutlu olurdu.

Zorg kullanılabilir http://www.zrtp.org .

[1] ZRTP: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZRTP
[2] PJSIP: http://www.pjsip.org
[3] MJSIP: http://www.mjsip.org
[4] Güvenlik yaklaşım: http://www.privatewave.com/security/approch.html

Asterisk 1.8 ile sabit telefon görüşmeleri Şifreli mobil

Biz sadece bir teknik howto yayımladı sabit VoIP altyapısı Güvenceli cep oluşturmak için nasıl birlikte:

Önümüzdeki haftalarda diğer tüm şeffaflık ve açık kaynaklı güvenlik teknolojilerinin kaldıraç ruhu içinde, örneğin FreeSWITCH gibi diğer sunucu platformlarını kullanarak çıkacak bu gibi howto.

Düzenleyen Kriptografi Sekiz Epic Failure

Bir çok aydınlatıcı makale Kriptografi Düzenlenmesi Sekiz Epic Failure teknoloji çalıştığını nasıl geniş bir bakış açısı yok hükümet düzenleyicileri tarafından ve ortak yanlış.

Cahil hükümet düzenleyiciler sıkı bir düzenleme aşağıdaki sakıncaları olurdu anlaşılmaktadır değildir:

  1. Bu güvenlik riski yaratacak
  2. Bu kötü adamlar durmayacak
  3. Bu yenilik zarar edecek
  4. Bu ABD iş zarar edecek
  5. Bu tüketicilerin mal olacak
  6. Bu anayasaya aykırı olacak
  7. Bu vergi dolar büyük bir harcama olacak

PrivateGSM: ZRTP veya SRTP / SDES ile Blackberry / iPhone / Nokia cep ses şifreleme

Ben kesinlikle her türlü ürün tanıtımına yapmak benim kendi kişisel blog kullanmak için kaçının.

O zaman farklı değil, ama ben size ben fantezi pazarlama olmadan çalıştığı bir ürün, ancak teknik kaldıkları hakkında gerçekleri söylemek istiyorum.

Bugün, en PrivateWave where i am CTO ve kurucularından , biz Blackberry, iPhone ve Nokia için kamuya mobil VoIP şifreleme ürünlerini yayımladı:

logo-privatewave-colore.png

PrivateWave anda bizim okumak, orada en çok ses şifreleme şirket farklı bir yaklaşım saygı kullanmak güvenliğine yaklaşımı .

Teknoloji ve endüstri manzara bu ürünlerin alaka aşağıdaki gibi özetlenebilir:

  • Sadece standartları güvenlik protokolleri kullanarak ilk ses şifreleme bir şirket (ve CSD mirası gelen özel teknoloji aynı değerleri veremezsiniz açıktır biz, pazar tepki bekliyoruz)
  • Sadece açık kaynak ve standart şifreleme motoru kullanmak için ses şifreleme ilk yaklaşım
  • Farklı teknolojiler (uçtan uca kullanılarak farklı güvenlik modeli sağlamak için ilk ses şifreleme yaklaşım ZRTP ve sonu-to-site için SRTP )

Sadece en iyi telekomünikasyon ve güvenlik teknolojileri kullanılarak profesyonel güvenlik kullanım için tasarlanmış Mobil Güvenli Müşteriler, bu paketi, kötü ağ koşullarında da iyi bir performans ile birlikte yüksek bir koruma derecesi sağlar:

Uygulamalar şunlardır:

icona-pgsm.png

Desteklenen mobil cihazlar şunlardır:

İlgili ZRTP biz stres ve tüm güvenlik ve bazı küçük ilavesi ile protokol paranoyak özelliği germek karar verdim:

Bizim sıkı adres defteri entegrasyonu, ötesinde ZRTP RFC cep ekranına bakmak için değil çünkü kullanıcı davranışı cep telefonlarında kullanıldığında şartname, belirli saldırılara karşı savunmasız olabilir.

ZRTP bu koşulları hafifletmek kullanarak bizim paranoy yolu, biz daha sonra bu konuda yazacağım ve / veya RFC eklenmesi için belirli ayrıntıları katacak.

ZRTP ile uçtan uca şifreleme ile PrivateGSM Professional Bazı kelimeler

Oku teknik levha var!

Için indirmek için buraya tıklayınız ve sadece telefon numarasını koymak

Bu daha bir zor çalışma ortamında zorlu teknolojileri (ses şifreleme) (kirli mobil ağlar ve kirli mobil işletim sistemleri) tüm benim çok yetenekli personelin zor iş sonuçları (16 kişi 3 farklı platformlar için bu 6 proje üzerinde çalıştı) vardır 2 yıl daha.

Ben bizim personeli çok gurur duyuyorum!

Ne gelecek?

Önümüzdeki haftalarda bu tür yıldızlarla, freeswitch ve ben fark olacak eminim heyecan verici bazı diğer güvenlik teknolojisi haberleri ile birlikte başka bir Güvenlik Etkin PBX, entegrasyon gibi evrakların büyük kümesi serbest göreceksiniz;)

Bir çok çalışma olmuştur ve daha fazla yapmış ama güvenlik ve açık toplum gibi ürünleri ve bir çok siyasi nötr (trojan ücretsiz) teknolojisini yapmak açık önemli bültenleri ve açık kaynak entegrasyonu ile de bizim şeffaf bir yaklaşım gibi olacak eminim edilmesi gerekir .

Güzel VPN sağlayıcı bir çift

Bir internet çukur bir VPN erişmek gerekir neden nedeni bir yeri vardır.

Örneğin siz ve / veya protokollere (skype gibi voip) muhtemelen kullanarak kötü engelleme ülke dışında internet bağlantısı taşımak isteyeyim (anti-yerel-hükümet web sitesi, porno, vb) belirli içerikleri engelleyen bir ülkede yaşıyorsanız şifreli VPN tünel.

Ben birkaç barındırılan VPN sunucusu değerlendirildi ve bunlardan bir çift gibi hizmetlerin yaygın arzı arasında oldukça iyi geliyor:

SwissVPN

İsviçre internete çıkış.

Maliyet 6 CHF / ay

İsteğe bağlı kamu sabit IP adresi

Faydalı ihtiyacınız varsa:

  • Sadece iyi yüksek bant genişliği yerel ülke filtreleri atlamak
  • Kamu hizmetleri isteğe bağlı kamu sabit bir IP adresi ile VPN yalak Açığa.

Fazla önemsemek

20 farklı ülkeden (her bağlandığınızda) arasında seçerek internete çıkış.

Yapmanız gereken ise Yararlı:

  • rakip üzerinde iş zekası (onları bağlarken ülke X gelmiş gibi görünen)
  • sadece ulusal IP web alanlarda izin verilen film / televizyon filmi görmek
  • Farklı ülkeler arasında google sonuçlarını görmek

ECC güvenlik yalak: Her eliptik eğri aynı

 Kendi ECC eğrisi güvenlik ve seçim analizi

vn9jna1BdgrzDCYNBJHi09q09q.jpg

Bir küçük anahtar boyutu ve hesaplama gücü azaltır, DH (Diffie-Hellman) veya RSA (Rivest, Shamir ve Adleman) olarak bilinen geleneksel kripto sisteminin eşdeğer güvenlik gücü vermek, o en modern kripto kullanımı Eliptik Eğri Şifreleme (ECC).

Herkes ECC şifreleme gelecekteki herhangi bir şifreleme uygulamaları için seçilen ve hatta SSL / TLS (web sabitlemek için kullanılan şifreleme) ECC için hareket ettiğini bilir.

Ben RSA ve DH terk sözde "özel şifreleme ürünler" bol bulundu bile alışmak kripto ECC hangi tür belirtmeden keyfi kullanımı ECC bit anahtar boyutu eğilimi ECC alternatifleri ile gider.

Ancak orada Eliptik Eğriler etrafında karışıklık bir sürü, farklı isimler ve anahtar boyutu kripto şeyler değerlendirirken kendi şekil yapmak için bir non-kriptoğrafik deneyimli kullanıcı için zorlaştırır bir sürü.

Çünkü bu kadar yayılmış karışıklık i kullanmak için en iyi ECC şifreleme eğrileri ve sağ ECC anahtar boyutu olduğunu öğrenmek için kendi analizini yapmaya karar verdi.

Bu analiz çeşitli standartlar ve güvenlik protokolleri alınan çeşitli seçenekler özetleyen, zaten yıllarda yapılmış olan matematik ve kripto analitik düşünceler bırakarak çeşitli eğriler ve anahtar boyutları arasında bir güvenlik sanayiye dayalı seçim sağlamak istiyoruz.

İlk sonuç.

Benim analizinde sadece aşağıdaki ECC eğrileri (IPSec, OpenPGP, ZRTP farklı otoriteler (ANSI, NSA, SAG, NIST, ECC BrainPool), farklı güvenlik protokolü standartları arasından seçilir tek çünkü şifreleme sistemlerinde kullanılmak üzere kabul edilecek, Kerberos, SSL / TLS) ve sadece NSA Suite B güvenlik şartları uyan bir NATO askeri çevre için de (de-facto standart):

  • Eliptik Başbakan Eğri 256 bit - P-256
  • Eliptik Başbakan Eğri 384 bit - P-384

Sadece için, isteğe bağlı hala kullanışlı sayılmaz fazla anahtar boyutu biraz, almak istiyorum gerçekten paranoyak:

  • Eliptik Başbakan Eğri 521 bit - P-521

Ben onlar kripto analitik aktivitesi üzerine yeterince garanti yok ve etkili oldukları gibi Koblitz eğrileri herhangi bir anahtar boyutu (163/283/409/571) 'de, kaçınılması gerektiğini ifade etmek istiyorum:

  • NSA Suite-B şifreleme seçimi bir parçası değil
  • ECC Brainpool seçimi bir parçası değil
  • ANSI X9.62 seçimi bir parçası değil
  • OpenPGP ECC uzatma seçimi bir parçası değil
  • ECC eğri seçimi için Kerberos uzantısı bir parçası değil

Ben bile derin teknik kökenli olmayan ama en azından iyi bir teknolojik alt yapıya bir kriptografi bazı temel bit ile anlaşılabilir temellerini anlamak için benim analiz yalak takip okuyucuyu davet ediyoruz.

 Burada analizi ile gitmek
 

Amacım açık bilimsel ve güvenlik topluluk IETF RFC (bir açık ve hakemli bir şekilde Internet Standartları tanımlamak olanlar) tarafından tanımlanan güvenlik protokolleri ve standartları kullanım için ECC kripto sistemini seçmek nasıl / ne bir analiz yapmaktır.

Kullanmak daha iyi ve daha iyi ne var dışlamak için ne olduğunu anlamak için analiz olsun mevcut sistemin içine ECC tanıtan RFC kümesi aşağıda:

  • RFC5639 : ECC Brainpool Standart eğriler ve eğri oluşturma
  • RFC4869 : IPsec için NSA Suite B Şifreleme Suites
  • RFC5430 : Transport Layer Security for NSA Suite B profili (TLS)
  • RFC5008 : NSA Suite B Güvenli in / Çok Amaçlı Internet Posta Uzantıları (S / MIME)
  • RFC3766 : Simetrik Keys alışverişi için kullanılır Genel Anahtarlar İçin belirlenmesi Güçlü
  • RFC5349 : Kerberos kimlik doğrulama ilk Public Key Kriptografi (PKINIT) için Eliptik Eğri Kriptografi (ECC) Destek
  • RFC4492 : Eliptik Eğri Şifreleme (ECC) Şifreleme Suites Transport Layer Security (TLS)
  • ZRTP ses şifreleme Philip Zimmermann ECC eğrisiyle
  • OpenPGP'de ECC (taslak d sal-jivsov-openpgp-ecc-06 )
  • Microsoft tarafından seçilen ECC Curves Akıllı Kart Kerberos login

Biz değerlendirme kısmını yapmak için Internet Güvenlik Protokolleri tanımlayarak bilim adamı tarafından yapılmış bir seçim kullanır.
Ayrıca bu Eğrisi seçim kullanmak ne ve atlamak için ne sanayi anlatmak amacıyla Eğrilerin kendi seçimini yaptı, farklı makamlardan gelen anlaşılır olmalıdır:

Biz değerlendirme kısmını yapmak için standardizasyon kuruluşlarında bilim adamı tanımlayarak güvenlik gereksinimleri tarafından yapılan seçim kullanacaktır.
Ayrıca, bir şey çoğu kişi bilmiyor ki, ama bizim analizine son derece alakalı olduğunu, ECC eğri kriptografi ve onların "büyüklüğü" Bu eğrinin türüne bağlı olarak farklı farklı tür olmasıdır:

  • Başbakan Field üzerinde ECC Curves (genellikle P-KeySize ile eliptik Eğrisi olarak anılacaktır ve temsil)
  • İkili Field üzerinde ECC Curves (genellikle K-KeySize tarafından Koblitz Eğrisi olarak anılacaktır ve temsil)

Eliptik Eğri ve Kobliz Eğri bir güvenlik gücü, denklik verilen örneğin biz ECC 571 biz ECC 521 Prime eğrisine eşdeğer gücü ile Koblitz Curve başvuruyorsunuz okurken, farklı anahtar boyutu var.

Eliptik Eğriler ve Kotbliz Eğrilerin arasındaki güç bir karşılaştırma aşağıda bildirilmiştir (den Mikey ECC internet Taslak ):

 | Koblitz | ECC | DH / DSA / RSA
 | 163 | 192 | 1024
 | 283 | 256 | 3072
 | 409 | 384 | 7680
 | 571 | 521 ​​| 15360

Aşağıda tüm çeşitli kurum ve (gelen kendi ismi ile seçilen tüm eğriler bir karşılaştırma var TLS için ECC kullanım için IETF RFC4492 ):

 Farklı standartlar kuruluşlar tarafından seçilen eğri isimleri
 ------------ + --------------- + -------------
 USG | ANSI X9.62 | NIST
 ------------ + --------------- + -------------
 sect163k1 | | NIST K-163
 sect163r1 | |
 sect163r2 | | NIST B-163
 sect193r1 | |
 sect193r2 | |
 sect233k1 | | NIST K-233
 sect233r1 | | NIST B-233
 sect239k1 | |
 sect283k1 | | NIST K-283
 sect283r1 | | NIST B-283
sect409k1 | | NIST K-409
sect409r1 | | NIST B-409
sect571k1 | | NIST K-571
sect571r1 | | NIST B-571
secp160k1 | |
secp160r1 | |
secp160r2 | |
secp192k1 | |
secp192r1 | prime192v1 | NIST P-192
secp224k1 | |
secp224r1 | | NIST P-224
secp256k1 | |
secp256r1 | prime256v1 | NIST P-256
secp384r1 | | NIST P-384
secp521r1 | | NIST P-521
------------+---------------+-------------

What immediately appear is that there are only two curves selected by all authorities, and that there is a general dumping of koblitz curves by ANSI.The only commonly agreed among the 3 authorities are the following two ECC curve:

  • secp192r1 / prime192v1 / NIST P-192
  • secp256r1 / prime256v1 / NIST P-256

Of those selection of ECC curve for TLS the RFC5430 skipped completely koblitz curves and selected for usage only:

  • P-256, P-384, P-521

The ECC Brainpool skipped completely Koblitz curves and selected for usage the following ECC Curves:

  • P-160, P-192, P-224, P-256, P-320, P-384, P-512 ( that's the only particular because it's not P-521 but P-512, the only key-size referred by ECC brainpool. Tnx Ian Simons from Athena SCS )

The OpenPGP internet draft for ECC usage in PGP d raft-jivsov-openpgp-ecc-06 skipped completely Koblitz curves and selected the following ECC curves

  • P-256, P-384, P-521

The Kerberos protocol extension for ECC use, defined in RFC5349 and defined by Microsoft for smartcard logon skipped completely Koblitz curves and selected the following ECC curves:

  • P-256, P-384, P-521

So, sounds clear that the right selection of ECC is for P-256, P-384 and P-521 while the Koblitz curve have been skipped for Top Secret use and for any security sensitive protocol (IPSec, OpenPGP, ZRTP, Kerberos, SSL/TLS).

Why i made this analysis?

I have done this analysis following a discussion i had regarding certain voice encryption products, all based on custom and proprietary protocols, that are all using Elliptic Curve Diffie Hellman 571 bit / ECDH 571 / 571-bit ECDH / Koblitz 571 bits .
All them are using the K-571 that, as described before, has been removed from all security sensitive environment and protocols and being myself a designer of voice encryption stuff i think that their cryptographic choice is absolutely not the best security choice.
Probably it has been done just for marketing purpose, because K-571 (Koblitz curve) seems stronger than P-521 (Elliptic curve based on Prime number). If you have “more bit” your marketing guys can claim to be “more secure”. Koblitz elliptic curve are faster than the top secret enabled prime elliptic curve and so give the product manager a chance to provide “more bit” in it's own product while keeping the key exchange fast.

It's a matter of philosophical choice.

I prefer to follow the trend of scientific community with the humility of not to considering myself a cryptographic expert, knowledgable more than the overall security and scientific community itself.

I prefer instead to use only algorithms that are approved for use in highly sensitive environments (top secret classification), that have been selected by all the authorities and working group analyzing encryption algorithms existing out-there and that represent the choice of almost all standard security protocols (IPSec, OpenPGP, ZRTP, Kerberos, SSL/TLS, etc).
I prefer to count the amount of brains working on the crypto i use, that check that's really secure, that evaluate whether there's some weakness.

The number of brais working on Crypto widely diffused are of order of magnitude more than the number of brains working on crypto used by just few people (like Koblitz curve).
So i am not demonizing who use ECDH 571 using Koblitz Curve, but for sure i can affirm that they did not taken the best choice in terms of security and that any security professionals doing a security benchmarking would consider the fact that Elliptic Curve Diffie Hellman 571 bit done with Koblitz Curve is not widely diffused, it's dumped from standard security protocols and it's not certified for top secret use.

ESSOR, Avrupa Güvenli Yazılım Radyo (SDR) Tanımlı

I had a look at European Defense Agency website and found the ESSOR project, a working project funded for 106mln EUR to develop strategic defense communication products based on new Software Defined Radio approach.

SDR approach is a revolutionary system that's completely changing the way scientist and industry is approach any kind of wireless technology.

Temelde yerine radyo frekans protokoller ve teknikler çoğu uygulamaya donanım çipi yanan, farklı radyo protokoller bir sürü radyo arayüzü gibi davranan, farklı frekanstaki bir sürü üzerinde çalışabilirsiniz özel radyo donanım "yazılım" itilir.

Örneğin dan USRP (Evrensel Yazılım Radio Periferik) Ettus Araştırma 1000-2000USD tam yüklü mal, açık kaynak kodlu yalak GnuRadio çerçeve, bir açık kaynak kodlu uygulama gördük:

Ve protokolleri ve iletim teknolojileri daha bir sürü.

Radyo İletim Sistemi yeni bir yaklaşım bu tür "radyo protokol" iyileştirmeler sağlamak amacıyla yazılım "radyo protokolü kendisi" yükseltmek için gibi yeni yeteneği veren, uygulanan yönlü telsiz sistemini değiştirmek destinated edilir.

Kısa vadelerde biz de gibi SDR teknolojileri kullanarak çok güçlü bir güvenlik araştırma gördük çatlama GSM ve Bluetooth koklama .

Biz düşük seviye protokoller kesmek tasarımı ile zayıf ancak donanım cihazlara kısıtlama tarafından korunan diğer teknolojiler, yakında kesmek almak olacağını bekleyebiliriz. İlk listede gerçekten TETRA hack, kapalı zihniyet ve gizli şifreleme algoritmaları, ben gerçekten sevmediğim bir şey doğan bir teknoloji görmek istiyorum;-)

Ürün yönetimi ve organizasyon

Ben daha farklar neden gerekli olduğuna yazılım şirketlerinde Ürün yönetimi ve Ürün pazarlama yönetimi ile ilgili kavramlar, rol ve görevleri, anlamak vardı ve nasıl bir organizasyon yapısı içinde uygun.

Çoğu kişi ben işin bu özel alana hiç ilgi biliyorum, ama bir ürün şirket (ve bir danışmanlık veya çözüm şirketi) olmasını istediğiniz zaman, farklı hedef müşterileri farklı yalak farklı kanalları satılan için farklı platformlarda farklı ürünler olan başlamak bir yükleme / farklı dağıtım süreci ve bu karmaşıklığı ile fiyatlandırma uygun şekilde yönetilmesi gerekmektedir.

Bunu fark etmesi ürün şirket değil gibi Pazarlama, Satış, Ar-Ge gibi sert organizasyon rolleri zihninizi kapanış, resmen ürün yönetimi faaliyetlerini organize etmek için gereken doğru yönde büyümesine izin için.

Biz Ürün Yönetimi bahsederken ben aydınlatıcı okuma tavsiye Ürün Yönetimi stratejik rolü bile ona eğer outlook net ayrılık, bir çok şey açıklığa kavuşturmak olduğunu (bir pazar odaklı odak insanların satın almak istedikleri ürünleri inşa götürmektedir nasıl) ürün yönetimi rolleri, bir şey t şapka bir başlatma gibi küçük bir şirket için çok ağır.

Hala Ürün Yönetimi ve Ürün Pazarlama arasında görev bir farklılaşma sağlamak.

I başlatma ile ilgili ürün yönetimi iyi bir anlayış makalede verilen s Başlangıçta Ürün Yönetimi oluşturma şirket haline ürün Görücünün rollerine ilişkin farklı dava gösteren.

Bu daha fazla çaba gerektiren iç işlev Geliştirme, Pazarlama, Satış veya olduğu gerçeğinden bağımsız, odak ve ihtiyaç duyulan çaba sağlayarak ürün yönetimi görevleri çeşitli organizasyon fonksiyonu haline etrafında atlamak o anlamda ürünün şartları genel müdürün tanıtmak İletişim. Ahenkli vizyon şirket çapında yapım tüm ana ürün ile ilgili fonksiyonlar arasında ihtiyaç duyulan gibi bu pratik ürün vizyonunu artırılması demektir ediyor.

Ürün yönetimi ve ürün pazarlama faaliyetlerinin iyi bir temsil de Stratejik, Teknik ve Pazarlama sektörü arasında farklılaşma ile tarif edilir ve açıkça Yönetimi, Pazarlama (Satış) ve Ar-Ge arasındaki ayrılmış değildir:

Triad.jpg

Ben ürün müdürü arka plan bilgi ve şirket odak bağlı olarak farklı olduğunu okudum ( ürün yönetimi organizasyonda aittir? ):

  • B2C -> Pazarlama deneyimi
  • B2B -> Teknik deneyim

Bir (benim için) aydınlatıcı ve ürün yönetimi görevlerine ilişkin çok önemli farklılaşma arasındaki farklılaşma olduğunu:

  • Ürün Yönetimi
  • Ürün Pazarlama

Yönetim vs Ürün Pazarlama ait spesifik görevleri büyük ölçüde açıklanmıştır Ürün Yönetimi İçin Rol Tanımları ve Ürün Pazarlama daha iyi organizasyon genelinde görev ve sorumlulukları tanımlamak için izin i okumanızı öneririm. Eğer bu rakam için bakmak gerekirse o da iş gereksinimleri iyi bir tanımını sağlamak!

Aynı zamanda ürün yönetimi DEĞİLDİR anlamak önemlidir, etkili Ürün Yönetimi sadece önceliklendirme özelliği değildir .

Aynı zamanda kendisi bir ürün yöneticisi DEĞİLDİR profesyonel olan rakam anlamak önemlidir:

  • Ürün yönetimi genellikle pazarlamacıların pazarlama planı odaklanmış ve genellikle genel ürün sürüş yönünü değil, bir pazarlama disiplini olarak görülürken - Ürün yöneticisi bir pazarlama yöneticisi değil. Bu bağlamda, ancak özellikle küçük organizasyon, ürünün pazarlama kollarını var Ürün pazarlama müdürü bulunamadı.
  • Ürün yöneticisi bir satış müdürü değil - satış müdürü (çözüm, bir ürünü satmak için nasıl bulma satış yöntemi, tekniği ve kanalları hangi takip ve müşteri odaklı şirket için bir pazar odaklı bir şirket (ürün) gelen şirket sürücü olabilir üzeresiniz ve danışmanlık)
  • Ürün yöneticisi bir geliştirici değil - Geliştiriciler genel ürünün teknoloji odaklı ve değildir. Bazı büyük ürün yöneticileri eski geliştiriciler vardır, ama her ikisi de aynı anda yapmak zordur. Dengeli bir ürün yaratmak için muhafaza edilmelidir geliştiriciler ve ürün yöneticileri arasında doğal bir gerginlik var.
  • Ürün yöneticisi bir yazılım yöneticisi değildir - yazılım yöneticisi bir fonksiyonel yöneticisi ve genellikle ürün veya müşteri odaklı değil.
  • Ürün müdürü ne hakkında ise proje yöneticileri, nasıl ve ne zaman vardır - Ürün yöneticisi bir proje yöneticisi değil. Proje yöneticileri, ürün yaşam döngüsünün farklı aşamalarında başarılı tamamlanmasını sağlamak için ürün yöneticileri ile yakın bir çalışma.

Tipik ürün yönetimi faaliyetleri aşağıdaki gibi özetleyebiliriz aşırı sentez olabilir:

  • Strateji: Bir ürün stratejisini planlama
  • Teknik: lider ürün gelişmeler
  • Pazarlama: sağlayarak ürün ve teknik içerik
  • Sales: provide pre sales support and work effectively with sales

Product management so it's not precisely development, is not precisely marketing, it's not precisely sales, so typically it's difficult to identify “where it should stay” inside the organization structure (it's even difficult to understand that's needed)?

The Silicon Valley Product Group provide a nice insight on Product Organization Structure by pointing out which are the advantages and risks of several choices. Still the Cranky Product Manager say that It doesn't matter where the product manager live in the organization .

It's relevant to be careful not to have persons that are too much technical or too much sales oriented in order to fill the gap among different organization. Too much fragmentation of assigned duties across the organization may lead to bureaucracy, too much duties on one person may lead to ineffective implementation of needed tasks in some area and to a internal competition perception respect to the traditional roles.

Check there a very nice Resume of a professional with practical experience in product management (it's an half techie/half marketing guys).

Ah! Another very common misunderstanding is to confuse marketing with communication where ai found a so good definition of Marketing that i really like and understand for strict relationship with Product Management:

Marketing is know the market so well that the product sell itself

But what happen when you don't handle a product management and product marketing management process in a defined way?

A nice story is shown as example in The strategic role of Product Management :

Your founder, a brilliant technician, started the company years ago when he quit his day job to market his idea full time. He created a product that he just knew other people needed. And he was right. Pretty soon he delivered enough of the product and hired his best friend from college as VP of Sales. And the company grew. But before long, the VP of Sales complained, “We're an engineering-led company. We need to become customer-driven.” And that sounded fine. Except… every new contract seemed to require custom work. You signed a dozen clients in a dozen market segments and the latest customer's voice always dominated the product plans. You concluded that “customer-driven” meant “driven by the latest customer” and that couldn't be right.

If you want to be a product company it's relevant to precisely follow a strategy driven by product marketing and management and not by sales.

Confusion between duties of product management/marketing and sales could lead to unsuccessful product company that are not able to proceed within their strategy, simply because they getting opportunities that drive the business out-of-scope.

A product company must invest in it's own product development and marketing in order to let sales activity stay focused and guarantee that the organization is every day more effective on the market.

After this reading, my understanding is that it's relevant to identify how to create a set of flexible business process on how to handle various product management and product marketing duties separating them from sales.

Uzaktan snom VoIP telefonları dinlemesini

I suggest reading remotely tapping VoIp phones ” on VoIP Security Alliance Blog by Shawn Merdinger .

A concrete example on how current telephony infrastructure are getting more vulnerable to cyber attacks.

Sesli iletişim güvenliği atölyesi

Merhaba,

i made a talk about voice communication security technologies at University of Trento following an interesting information exchange with Crypto Lab managed Professor Massimiliano Sala .

I suggest interested people to read it, especially the second part, as there is an innovative categorization of the various voice encryption technologies that get used in several sectors.

I tried to explain and get out from this widely fragmented technological sector by providing a wide overview on technologies that usually are absolutely unrelated one-each-other but practically they all apply to voice encryption following that categorization:

  • Mobile TLC Industry voice encryption standards
  • Government and Military voice encryption standards
  • Public safety voice encryption standards
  • IETF voice encryption standards
  • Misc proprietary voice encryption technologies

It's a huge slideware, 122 slides, i suggest to go reading the 2nd part skipping interception technologies overview already covered by my presentation of 2009.

Voice communication security


View more presentations from Fabio Pietrosanti .

Especially i like the concept of Chocolate grade encryption that want to provide some innovation on the Snake Oil Encryption concept.

But i need to get more in depth about the Chocolate grade encryption context, will probably do before end-of-year by providing an applied course on understanding and evaluating practically the real security context of various voice encryption technologies.

27C3 – CCC Congress CFP: We come in peace

We come in peace

189322778_8cb9af1365_m.jpg

We come in peace, said the conquerers of the New World.

We come in peace, says the government, when it comes to colonise, regulate, and militarise the new digital world.

We come in peace, say the nation-state sized companies that have set out to monetise the net and chain the users to their shiny new devices.

We come in peace, we say as hackers, geeks and nerds, when we set out towards the real world and try to change it, because it has intruded into our natural habitat, the cyberspace…

Call for paper for participation to 27C3 CCC congress is open, and i never saw a so exciting payoff :-)

See you on 30 December 2010 in Berlin!

GSM penetrasyon test metodolojileri (OSSTMM) çatlama?

Bu blog okuyucu çoğu zaten bildiği gibi, geçmiş yıllarda GSM denetim ve çatlama için kamu araştırma faaliyetleri ile ilgili bir sürü oldu.

Araştırma sonuçlarını çatlama GSM için çok büyük medyada vardı ancak ne zaman, araçlar kırma hala çok verimsiz gerçekten erken evre olduğunu ve yapmak.

Şimdi Frank Stevenson , zaten kırdı Norveçli decode Bozulma Sistemi İçerik açtığı A51 çatlama projeye katılan, DVD video disk Karsten Nohl yayımlanan, Kraken , A51 çatlama sisteminin yeni geliştirilmiş bir versiyonunu.

It's interesting to notice that WiFi cracking had a similar story, as the first WiFi wep cracking discovery was quite slow in earlier techniques but later Korek, an hacker working on cracking code, improve the attack system drammatically.

Bu güvenlik araştırma işbirliği hikaye, bir araştırma başlatmak, birisi onu takip ve geliştirmek, diğer bazı onu takip ve geliştirilmiş ve sonunda size sonuç almak.

Read more on the Kraken GSM Cracking software release .

Ve gerekli ayrıntıları açıklayacağız Blackhat Konferans Karsten Nohl önümüzdeki hafta olduğu gibi bizi izlemeye devam edin bunu nasıl donanım kurulumu ve ayrıntılı talimatlar :-)

Ben gerçekten içine dahil bu araçları görmek istiyorum Penetrasyon Testi Linux Dağıtımı BackTrack ile OSSTMM ortasında GSM durdurma ve insanın test uygulanmasına metodolojinin:-)

Işler bu şekilde ve devam ederseniz Ettus Araştırma aşağı alınmayacaktır (düşük maliyetli GSM sinyal alma için kullanılan USRP2 yazılım radyonun yapımcı), biz hala görebilirsiniz.

Snake-oil security claims on crypto security product

Security market grow, more companies goes to the market, but how many of them are taking seriously what they do?

You know, doing security technology mean that you are personally responsible for the protection of the user's information. You must make them aware of what they need, exactly what your are doing and which kind of threat model your product protect.

A typical problem of product's security features is represented by the inability of the user to evaluate the security claims of the product itself.

So there's a lot companies doing a not-so-ethical marketing of security features, based on the facts that no user will be able to evaluate it.

The previously explained situation reside in the security topic of Snake Oil Encryption , an evolution in the scientific cryptographic environment that let us today use best of breed information protection technologies without having to worry too much about backdoors or insecurities.

Let's speak about Snake Oil Encryption

Snake Oil Cryptography : In cryptography , snake oil is a term used to describe commercial cryptographic methods and products which are considered bogus or fraudulent. Distinguishing secure cryptography from insecure cryptography can be difficult from the viewpoint of a user. Many cryptographers, such as Bruce Schneier and Phil Zimmermann , undertake to educate the public in how secure cryptography is done, as well as highlighting the misleading marketing of some cryptographic products.

The most referenced crypto security guru, Philip Zimmermann and Bruce Schneier, was the 1st to talk about Snake Oil Encryption:

Snake Oil by Philip Zimmermann

Snake Oil by Bruce Schneier

The Michigan Telecommunications and Technology Law Review also made a very good analysis related to the Security Features of Security Products, SNAKE-OIL SECURITY CLAIMS” THE SYSTEMATIC MISREPRESENTATION OF PRODUCT SECURITY . They explain about the nasty marketing tricks used to tweak users inability to evaluate the security features, including economic and legal responsibility implication.

Several snake oil security product companies does not explain and are not clear about the threat model to which the product apply. Very famous is the sentence of Russ Nelson :

“Remember, crypto without a threat model is like cookies without milk. ….. Cryptography without a threat model is like motherhood without apple pie. Can't say that enough times. More generally, security without a threat model is by definition going to fail.”

So, how to spot snake oil security products?

Check a guideline of to spot Snake Oil Encryption Products: Snake Oil Warning Signs, Encryption Software to Avoid by Matt Curtin .

You can see this very good Cryptographic Snake Oil Examples by Emility Ratliff (IBM Architect at Linux Security), that tried to make clear example on how to spot Cryptographic Snake Oil.

Here represented the basic guideline from Matt Curtin paper:


By checking that points it's possible to evaluate how serious an encryption technology or product is.

But all in all how to fix that unethical security approach?

It's very significative and it would be really useful for each kind of security product category to make some strongly and independent evaluation guideline (like OSSTMM for Penetration testing) , to make this security evaluation process really in the hands of the user.

It would be also very nice to have someone making analysis and evaluation of security product companies, publishing reports about Snake Oil signs.

Web2.0 privacy leak in Mobile apps

Sen web2.0 dünyası Gizlilik ve kullanıcılara ilişkin her türlü (profil, profil, profil) ve kaçak bol bulunuyor başlar biliyor ilgili olmaktan bunun hakkında.

Kullanıcılar sürekli Örneğin, ne yaptıklarını ayrıntılarını bilmeden uygulamaları indirmek iFart serin, eğlenceli ve bazen faydalıdır, çünkü sadece.

On mobile phones users install from 1000% up to 10.000% more applications than on a PC, and those apps may contain malware or other unexpected functionalities.

Son infobyte analiz UberTwitter müşteri ve müşteri sızıntı ve gibi onların sunucuya birçok kişisel ve hassas veri gönderme olduğunu keşfetti:

- Blackberry PIN

- Telefon numarası

- Email Address

- Geographic positioning information

UbertTwitter hakkında okuyun 'casus' burada keşif özellikleri ile infoByte .

It's plenty of applications leaking private and sensitive information but just nobody have a look at it.

Should mandatory data retention and privacy policies became part of application development and submission guideline for mobile application?

Bir kullanıcıların sadece uygulama yetenekleri ve API kullanımı aynı zamanda cep telefonu içinde ele gidiyor bilgilerin hangi tür ile ne yapacağı konusunda uyardı edilmemelidir imho.

Yetenekleri Coğrafi API kullanmak için, örneğin, belli bir işlevleri kullanmak için uygulamayı, ancak yetki ne anlama kullanıcı bunu yetkili kez bu tür bilgileri sağlayacak yapmak ve kim olacak uygulama?

That's a security profiling level that mobile phone manufacturer does not provide and they should, because it focus on the information and not on the application authorization/permission respect to the usage of device capabilities.

ps evet! ok! I agree! Konu, sıcak ve oldukça belden olduğu gibi yazılan bu tür 3-4 sayfa uzunluğunda bir tartışma gerektirecek ama Cumartesi sabah ve gitmem gerek!

AES algoritması alanda kullanım için seçilen

I encountered a nice paper regarding analysis and consideration on which encryption algorithm it's best suited for use in the space by space ship and equipments.

The paper has been done by the Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems that's a consortium of all space agency around that cumulatively handled more than 400 mission to space .

topban.jpg

Read the paper Encryption Algorithm Trade Survey as it gives interesting consideration and comparison between different encryption algorithms.

Obviously the finally selected algorithm is AES , while KASUMI (used in UMTS networks) was avoided.

Blackberry Güvenlik ve Şifreleme: Şeytan veya Melek?

Blackberry have good and bad reputation regarding his security capability, depending from which angle you look at it.

This post it's a summarized set of information to let the reader the get picture, without taking much a position as RIM and Blackberry can be considered, depending on the point of view, an extremely secure platform or an extremely dangerous one .

bblock.jpg

En gider edelim.

Bir tarafı Blackberry bu şifreleme özelliklerine platform bol, güvenlik cihazı (özel kripto ile) şifreli, her yerde özellikleri var, iletişim (ile şifrelenmiş özel özel protokoller gelen, çok iyi Gelişmiş Güvenlik Ayarları, Şifreleme çerçevesi gibi IPPP gibi) Certicom ( şimdi aittir RIM ).

Diğer tarafta onlar sadece BIS (adlandırılan bir cihaz, ancak bir bindirme erişim ağı sağlamaz Blackberry Internet Service ), yani göz atabilir ya da CheckMail blackberry.net AP kullanırken böğürtlen girmek küresel dünya çapında geniş alan ağı var.

When you, or an application, use the blackberry.net APN you are not just connecting to the internet with the carrier internet connection, but you are entering inside the RIM network that will proxy and act as a gateway to reach the internet.

Eğer bir kurumsal kullanımını olduğunda aynı olur: BB cihazı ve kurumsal BES Hem bir tür olarak hareket RIM ağa bağlanmak vpn konsantrasyon ağı .

So basically all the communications cross trough RIM service infrastructure in encrypted format with a set proprietary encryption and communication protocols.

Just as a notice, think that google to provide gtalk over blackberry.net APN, made an agreement in order to offer service inside the BB network to the BB users. Gtalk yüklediğinizde 3 ekledi olsun servis kitapları işaret GTALKNA01 internete GTalk ağ geçidi olarak intra-BIS iletişim ve hareket sağlamak için RIM ağ içinde GTalk geçidi adını bulunuyor.

The mobile operators usually are not even allowed to inspect the traffic between the Blackberry device and the Blackberry Network.

Hepsi birlikte paketlenmiş ve sadece ama kullanıcı "cihaz ve yazılımı olsun" edemez ve kurumsal her zaman bağlı olan ve hizmete bağlı bir platform, bir ağ ve bir hizmet sağlayacak şekilde RIM ve Blackberry onların yaklaşımı nedense benzersiz ağ.

Bu iyi ve RIM, üçüncü şahıslara karşı çeşitli düzeyde bilgi, cihaz ve bilgiye erişimi korumak için son derece iyi güvenlik özellikleri ve yetenekleri sağlamak anlamına gelir, çünkü bu, kötü.

But it's always difficult to estimate the threat and risk related to RIM itself and who could make political pressure against RIM.

Cihazdaki-ve çapraz bilgilere bilgilere, cihaz üzerinde yetkiye sahip nasıl bir platform yapılır RIM için: i "RIM verilere bakarak" ama nesnel risk analizi yapma demiyorum dikkate alınız ağ. (Read my Mobile Security Slides ).

Örneğin en Nokia telefonları için aynı bağlamı düşünelim.

Once the Nokia device is sold, Nokia does not have authority on the device, nor on the information on-the-device nor on the information that cross the network. Ama böyle Kurumsal entegrasyon (RIM VPN tüneli), BIS erişim ağı ve Blackberry sağlayan tüm yerel ve uzaktan güvenlik sağlanmış özellikleri aynı zamanda Nokia, sadece cihaz sağlamak ve katma değerli hizmetler sunmak değil doğrudur.

Yani (kendi hizmet) veya Google Apps gibi bir SaaS hizmeti almak ister Microsoft Exchange Server seçimi çok benzer bir örnek, platformu seçerken uygun şekilde risk bağlamı dikkate meselesi.

Her iki durumda sağlayıcı güven gerekiyor, ancak ilk örnekte sen 2. örnekte Google'a güven gerekir iken erişimi yok ki, bir platformu ve servis sağlayıcı olarak, yazılım üzerinde bir arka kapı koymak olmadığını Microsoft'a güven gerekiyor Bilgilerinizi.

Yani senin tehdit modeline bağlı olarak değerlendirilmesi gereken farklı bir paradigma var.

If your threat model let you consider RIM as a trusted third party service provider (much like google) than it's ok. Eğer çok yüksek bir risk bağlamı varsa, çok gizli bir gibi, o zaman düşünün ve tam cihazdan izole Blackberry hizmetleri tutmak ya da üretici sunucular ve hizmetler ile etkileşimi olmadan başka bir sistem kullanmak daha iyi olmaz olsun dikkatle değerlendirelim.

Now, let's get back to some research and some facts about blackberry and blackberry security itself.

Diğer karar ise her şeyden önce çeşitli hükümetler, diğer çünkü doğrudan İngiltere ve Amerika'da bulunan sunucular yüksek görevlileri için Blackberry kullanımını yasaklamak için karar ise kendi hizmet ağlarını geçmeye bilgilere erişim sağlamak için onları zorlamak amacıyla RIM ile uğraşmak zorunda Kendi arka kapı programları yüklemek.

There's a lot of discussion when the topics are RIM Blackberry and Governments for various reasons.

RIM böğürtlen platformda resmi güvenlik ile ilgili bir bilgi kümesi aşağıda:

Ve burada resmi olmayan Güvenlik ve RIM Blackberry platformda Hacking ilgili bir bilgi kümesi:

Because it's 23.32 (GMT+1), i am tired, i think that this post will end up here.

Ben okuyucuya yararlı bilgiler ve analiz etmek ve genel böğürtlen güvenliği dikkate alınarak daha derinlemesine gitmek için göz bir dizi sağladı umut (bu her zaman tehdit modeli bağlıdır iyi ve kötü olarak!).

Şerefe

Fabio Pietrosanti (naif)

ps i Blackberry platformuna güvenlik teknolojisi geliştirme (ses şifreleme teknoloji) yönetiyorum ve ben bakış geliştirme açısından bu gelişme uyumluluk ve hız açısından Nokia daha kesinlikle daha iyi olduğunu söyleyebilirim, ama sadece Rimos 5.0+ kullanabilirsiniz!

Celebrating “Hackers” after 25 years

A cult book , ever green since 25 years.

201007010924.jpg

It's been 25 years since “Hackers” was published. Author Steven Levy reflects on the book and the movement.

http://radar.oreilly.com/2010/06/hackers-at-25.html 
Steven Levy wrote a book in the mid-1980s that introduced the term "hacker" -- the positive connotation -- to a wide audience. In the ensuing 25 years, that word and its accompanying community have gone through tremendous change. The book itself became a mainstay in tech libraries.
O'Reilly recently released an updated 25th anniversary edition of "Hackers," so I checked in with Levy to discuss the book's development, its influence, and the role hackers continue to play.

Botnet for RSA cracking?

I read an interesting article about putting 1.000.000 computers, given the chance for a serious botnet owner to get it, to crack RSA.

The result is that in such context attacking an RSA 1024bit key would take only 28 years, compared to theoretical 19 billion of years.

Reading of this article , is extremely interesting because it gives our very important consideration on the cryptography strength respect to the computation power required to carry on cracking attempt, along with industry approach to “default security level”.

I would say a must read .

Patent rights and opensource: can they co-exist?

How many of you had to deal with patented technologies?

How many of the patented technologies you dealed with was also “secrets” in their implementation?

Well, there's a set of technologies whose implementation is open source ( copyright) but that are patented ( intellectual property right) .

A very nice paper about the topic opensource & patents that i suggest to read is from Fenwick & West and can be downloaded here (pdf) .

China Encryption Regulations

Hi all,

i found this very interesting paper on China Encryption Import/Export/Domestic Regulations done by Baker&Mckenzie in the US.

It's strongly business and regulatory oriented giving a very well done view on how china regulations works and how it may behave in future.

Read here Decrypting China Encryption's Regulations (form Bakernet website) .

IOScat – a Port of Netcat to Cisco IOS

A porting of famous netcat to Cisco IOS router operating system: IOSCat

The only main limit is that it does not support UDP, but that's a very cool tool!

A very good txt to read is Netcat hacker Manual .

The (old) Crypto AG case and some thinking about it

In the '90, closed source and proprietary cryptography was ruling the world.

That's before open source and scientifically approved encrypted technologies went out as a best practice to do crypto stuff.

I would like to remind when, in 1992, USA along with Israel was, together with switzerland, providing backdoored (proprietary and secret) technologies to Iranian government to tap their communications, cheating them to think that the used solution was secure , making also some consideration on this today in 2010.

caq63crypto.t.jpg

That's called The Crypto AG case , an historical fact involving the United States National Security Agency along with Signal Intelligence Division of Israel Ministry of Defense that are strongly suspected to had made an agreement with the Swiss cryptography producer company Crypto AG .

Basically those entities placed a backdoor in the secure crypto equipment that they provided to Iran to intercept Iranian communications.

Their crypto was based on secret and proprietary encryption algorithms developed by Crypto AG and eventually customized for Iranian government.

You can read some other facts about Crypto AG backdoor related issues:

The demise of global telecommunication security

The NSA-Crypto AG sting

Breaking codes: an impossible task? By BBC

Der Spiegel Crypto AG (german) article

Now, in 2010, we all know and understand that secret and proprietary crypto does not work.

Just some reference by top worldwide cryptographic experts below:

Secrecy, Security, Obscurity by Bruce Schneier

Just say No to Proprietary cryptographic Algorithms by Network Computing (Mike Fratto)

Security Through Obscurity by Ceria Purdue University

Unlocking the Secrets of Crypto: Cryptography, Encryption and Cryptology explained by Symantec

Time change the way things are approached.

I like very much the famous Philip Zimmermann assertion:

“Cryptography used to be an obscure science, of little relevance to everyday life. Historically, it always had a special role in military and diplomatic communications. But in the Information Age, cryptography is about political power, and in particular, about the power relationship between a government and its people. It is about the right to privacy, freedom of speech, freedom of political association, freedom of the press, freedom from unreasonable search and seizure, freedom to be left alone.”

Any scientist today accept and approve the Kerckhoffs' Principle that in 1883 in the Cryptographie Militaire paper stated:

The security of a cryptosystem should not depend on keeping the algorithm secret, but only on keeping the numeric key secret.

It's absolutely clear that the best practice for doing cryptography today obbly any serious person to do open cryptography, subject to public review and that follow the Kerckhoff principle.

So, what we should think about closed source, proprietary cryptography that's based on security trough obscurity concepts?

I was EXTREMELY astonished when TODAY, in 2010, in the age of information society i read some paper on Crypto AG website.

I invite all to read the Crypto AG security paper called Sophisticated Security Architecture designed by Crypto AG of which you can get a significant excerpt below:

The design of this architecture allows Crypto AG to provide a secret proprietary algorithm that can be specified for each customer to assure the perfect degree of cryptographic security and optimum support for the customer's security policy. In turn, the Security Architecture gives you the influence you need to be fully independent in respect of your encryption solution. You can determine all areas that are covered by cryptography and verify how the algorithm works. The original secret proprietary algorithm of Crypto AG is the foundation of the Security Architecture .

I have to say that their architecture is absolutely good from TLC point of view. Also they have done a very good job in making the design of the overall architecture in order to make a tamper-proof resistant crypto system by using dedicated crypto processor .
However there is still something missing:

T he overall cryptographic concept is misleading, based on wrong encryption concepts .

You may think that i am a troll telling this, but given the history of Crypto AG and given the fact that all the scientific and security community does not approve security trough obscurity concepts , it would legitimate to ask ourself:

Why they are still doing security trough obscurity cryptography with secret and proprietary algorithms ?



Hey, i think that they have very depth knowledge on telecommunication and security, but given that the science tell us not to follow the secrecy of algorithms, i really have serious doubt on why they are still providing proprietary encryption and does not move to standard solutions (eventually with some kind of custom enhancement).

Missiles against cyber attacks?

The cyber conflicts are really reaching a point where war and cyberwar merge together.

NATO countries have the right to use the force against attacks on computer networks .

Mobile Security talk at WHYMCA conference

I want to share some slides i used to talk about mobile security at whymca mobile conference in Milan.

Read here my slides on mobile security .

The slides provide a wide an in-depth overview of mobile security related matters, i should be doing some slidecast about it putting also audio. Maybe will do, maybe not, it depends on time that's always a insufficient resource.

iPhone PIN: useless encryption

I recently switched one of my multiple mobile phones with which i go around to iPhone.

I am particularly concerned about data protection in case of theft and so started having a look around about the iPhone provided protection system.

There is an interesting set of iPhone Business Security Features that make me think that iPhone is moving in the right path for security protection of the phone, but still a lot of things has to be done, especially for serious Enterprise and Government users.

201006011551.jpg

For example it turned out that the iPhone PIN protection is useless and it can be broken just plugging the iPhone to a Linux machine and accessing the device like a USB stick.

That's something disturbing my paranoid mindset that make me think not to use sensitive data on my iPhone if i cannot protect my data.

Probably an iPhone independent disk encryption product would be very useful in order to let the market create protection schemas that fit the different risk contexts that different users may have.

Probably a general consumer is not worried about this PIN vulnerability but for me, working within highly confidential envirnonment such as intelligence, finance and military, it's something that i cannot accept.

I need strong disk encryption on my mobile phone.

I do strong voice encryption for it , but it would be really nice to have also something to protect the whole iPhone data and not just phone calls.

Who extract Oil in Iran? Business and UN sanction together

I like geopolitic and i am following carefully iran issues.

I went to National Iranian Oil Company website and have seen “ Exploration & Production ” section where are listed all the companies and their country of origin that are allowed to make Exploration of oil in Iran.

On that list we find the list of countries along with the data of signing of exploration agreement:

  • Norway/Russia (2000)
  • Australia/Spain/Chile (2001)
  • India (2002)
  • China (2001)
  • Brazil (2004)
  • Spain (2004)
  • Thailand (2005)
  • China x 2 (2005)
  • Norway (2006)
  • Italy (2008)
  • Vietnam (2008)

Those countries's oil companies are allowed to do oil extraction in Iran and i would like to point out that Iran is the 2nd world Oil Reserve just after Saudi Arabia.

As you can see there's NO USA company doing extraction.

Of European Countries the only one doing business with IRAN are:

IRAN Norway Relationship

IRAN ITALY Relationship

IRAN SPAIN Relationship

While of the well known non-US-simpatizing countries, the one doing Oil business with Iran are:

IRAN RUSSIA Relationship

IRAN BRAZIL Relationship

IRAN China Relationship

Don't missing some Asian involvement.

IRAN India Relationship

IRAN Vietnam Relationship

As you can see Iran is doing Oil business with most big south America and Far Asia countries, with some little exception in Europe for what apply to Norway, Italy and Spain.

To me it sounds that those European countries are going to face serious trouble whether they will accept and subscribe UN sanction against Iran.

Or some of them, like Italy, are protected by the strenghtening cooperation they are doing with Russia on Energy matters?

Well, i don't know how things will end up, but it's possible the most hypocrit countries like the European ones doing business in Iran while applying Sanctions will be the only European winning in the international competition for Iran Oil (Unless France did not drop a nuclear bomb on theran ;) ).

Exploit code against SecurStar DriveCrypt published

It seems that the hacking community somehow like to target securstar products, maybe because hacking community doesn't like the often revealed unethical approach already previously described in this blog by articles and user's comments.

In 2004 a lot of accusation against Hafner of SecurStar went out because of alleged intellectual property theft regarding opensource codes such as Encryption 4 the masses and legal advert also against the Free and opensource TrueCrypt project .

In 2008 there was a pre-boot authentication hacking against DriveCrypt Plus posted on Full-Disclosure.

Early 2010 it was the time of the fake infosecurity research secretly sponsored by securstar at http://infosecurityguard.com (that now they tried to remove from the web because of embarrassing situation, but backup of the story are available, hacking community still wait for apologies) .

Now, mid 2010, following a research published in December 2009 about Disk Encryption software vulnerabilities made by Neil Kettle (mu-b), Security researcher at digit-labs and Penetration tester at Convergent Network Solutions , DriveCrypt was found to be vulnerable and exploitable breaking on-device security of the system and exploit code has been just released.

Exploit code reported below (thanks Neil for the code release!):

  • Arbitrary kernel code execution security exploit of DriveCrypt: drivecrypt-dcr.c
  • Arbitrary file reading/writing security exploit via unchecked user-definable parameters to ZxCreateFile/ReadFile/ WriteFile: drivecrypt-fopen.c

The exploit code has been tested against DriveCrypt 5.3, currently released DriveCrypt 5.4 is reported to be vulnerable too as it has just minor changes related to win7 compatibility. Can anyone make a double check and report a comment here?

Very good job Neil!

In the meantime the Free Truecrypt is probably the preferred choice for disk encryption, given the fact that it's difficult to trust DriveCrypt, PGP has been acquired by Symantec and there are very bad rumors about the trust that people have in Symantec and there are not many widely available alternatives.

Rumors say that also PhoneCrypt binaries are getting analyzed and the proprietary encryption system could reveal something fun…

Quantum cryptography broken

Quantum cryptography it's something very challenging, encryption methods that leverage the law of phisycs to secure communications over fiber lines.

To oversimplify the system is based on the fact that if someone cut the fiber, put a tap in the middle, and joint together the other side of the fiber, the amount of “errors” that will be on the communications path will be higher than 20% .

So if QBER (Quantum Bit Error Rate) goes above 20% then it's assumed that the system is intercepted.

Researcher at university of toronto was able to cheat the system with a staying below the 20%, at 19.7% , thus tweaking the threshold used by the system to consider the communication channel secure vs compromised.

The product found vulnerable is called Cerberis Layer2 and produced by the Swiss ID Quantique .

Some possibile approach to detect the attack has been provided but probably, imho, such kind of systems does not have to be considered 100% reliable until the technology will be mature enough.

Traditional encryption has to be used together till several years, eventually bundled with quantum encryption whether applicable.

When we will see a quantum encryption systems on an RFC like we have seen for ZRTP , PGP and SSL ?

-naif

FUN! Infosecurity consideration on some well known films

Please read it carefully Film that needed better infosec .

One the the review, imho the most fun one on film Star Wars :

The scene

Death star getting blown up

Infosec Analysis

Darth Vader must be heralded as the prime example of a chief executive who really didn't care about information security. The entire board was unapproachable and clearly no system testing was undertaken. The network security was so poor that it was hacked into and the designs for the death star were stolen without anyone knowing.

Even worse than that, the death star had a major design flaw where by dropping a bomb thingy into a big hole on the outside, it actually blew up the entire thing!

Darth Vader needed to employ a good Security Consultant to sit on the executive board and promise not to force choke him. Should have commissioned a full risk assessment of the death star followed by a full penetration test. Only then should the death star have been released into the production environment.

great point of view

Because security of a cryptographic system it's not a matter of “how many bits do i use” but using the right approach to do the right thing to mitigate the defined security risk in the most balanced way.

security.png

Encryption is not scrambling: be aware of scrambler!

Most of us know about voice scrambler that can be used across almost any kind of voice based communication technology.

Extremely flexible approach: works everything

Extreme performance: very low latency

but unfortunately…

Extremely weak: Scrambling cannot be considered secure.

Only encryption can be considered secure under the Kerckoff's principle .

So please don't even consider any kind of analog scrambler if you need real security.

Read deeply the paper Implementation of a real-time voice encryption system ” by Markus Brandau, especially the cryptoanalysis paragraph.

SecurStar GmbH Phonecrypt answers on the Infosecurityguard/Notrax case: absolutely unreasonable! :-)

UPDATE 20.04.2010: http://infosecurityguard.com has been disabled. Notrax identity became known to several guys in the voice security environments (cannot tell, but you can imagine, i was right!) and so our friends decided to trow away the website because of legal responsibility under UK and USA laws.

UPDATE: Nice summary of the whole story (i know, it's long and complicated to read at 1st time) on SIPVicious VoIP security blog by Sandro Gauci .

Following my discoveries, Mr. Hafner, SecurStar chief exec, tried to ultimately defend their actions, citing absolutely unreasonable excuses to The Reg instead of publicly apologizing for what they have done: creating a fake independent security research to promote their PhoneCrypt product .

He tried to convince us that the person behind IP 217.7.213.59, used by the author of infosecurityguard.com and pointing to their office DSL line, was this hacker Notrax, using their anonymous surfing service and not one of their employees at their office:

“SecurStar chief exec Wilfried Hafner denied any contact with Notrax. Notrax, he said, must have been using his firm's anonymous browsing service, SurfSolo, to produce the results reported by Pietrosanti”

Let's reflect a moment on this sentence… Would really an hacker looking for anonymity spend 64 EUR to buy their anonymity surfing service called surfsolo instead of using the free and much more secure TOR (the onion router) ?Then let's reflect on this other piece of information:

  • The IP 217.7.213.59 is SecurStar GmbH's office DSL line
  • On 217.7.213.59 they have installed their VoIP/Asterisk PBX and internet gateway
  • They promote their anonymous proxy service for “Anonymous p2p use” ( http://www.securstar.com/products_ssolo.php ). Who would let users do p2p from the office dsl line where they have installed their corporate VoIP PBX ? If you do VoIP you can't let third party flood your line w/ p2p traffic, your phone calls would became obviously unreliable (yes, yes, you can do QoS, but you would not place an anonymous navigation proxy on your company office DSL line…).
  • Which company providing an anonymous navigation service would ever use their own office IP address? Just think how many times you would have the police knocking at your door and your employees as the prime suspects. (In past i used to run a TOR node, i know the risks…). Also think how many times you would find yourself blacklisted on google as a spyware bot.
  • Mr. Hafner also says “We have two million people using this product. Or he may have been an old customer of ours”. 2M users on a DSL line, really?
  • I don't use Surfsolo service, however their proxies are probably these ones:

surfsolo.securstar.net – 67.225.141.74

surfsolo.securstar.com – 69.16.211.133

Frankly speaking I can easily understand that Mr. Hafner is going do whatever he can to protect his company from the scandal, but the “anonymous proxy” excuse is at the very least suspicious.

How does the fact that the “independent research” was semantically a product review of PhoneCrypt, along with the discovery that the author come from the SecurStar GmbH IP address offices, along with the anonymity of this Notrax guy (SecurStar calls him a “well known it security professional” in their press release..) sound to you?

It's possible that earth will get an attack from outer space that's going to destroy our life?

Statistically extremely difficult, but yes, possible. More or less like the “anonymous proxy” story told by Mr. Hafner to cover the fact that they are the ones behind the infosecurityguard.com fake “independent security review”.

Hey, I don't need anything else to convince myself or to let the smart person have his own thoughts on this.

I just think that the best way for SecurStar to get out of this mess would probably be to provide public excuses to the hacking community for abusing the name and reputation of real independent security researches, for the sake of a marketing stunt.

Saygılar,

Fabio Pietrosanti

ps I am currently waiting for some other infos that will more precisely confirm that what Mr. Hafner is saying is not properly true. Bizi izlemeye devam edin.

Evidence that infosecurityguard.com/notrax is SecurStar GmbH Phonecrypt – A fake independent research on voice crypto

Below evidence that the security review made by an anonymous hacker on http://infosecurityguard.com is in facts a dishonest marketing plan by the SecurStar GmbH to promote their voice crypto product.

I already wrote about that voice crypto analysis that appeared to me very suspicious.

Now it's confirmed, it's a fake independent hacker security research by SecurStar GmbH, its just a marketing trick!

How do we know that Infosecurityguard.com, the fake independent security research, is a marketing trick from SecurStar GmbH?

1) I posted on http://infosecurityguard.com a comments to a post with a link to my blog to that article on israelian ministry of defense certification

2) The author of http://infosecurityguard.com went to approve the comment and read the link on my own blog http://infosecurity.ch

3) Reaching my blog he leaked the IP address from which he was coming 217.7.213.59 (where i just clicked on from wordpress statistic interface)

4) On http:// 217.7.213.59/panel there is the IP PBX interface of the SecurStar GmbH corporate PBX (openly reachable trough the internet!)

5) The names of the internal PBX confirm 100% that it's the SecurStar GmbH:

6) There is 100% evidence that the anonymous hacker of http://infosecurityguard.com is from SecurStar GmbH

Below the data and reference that let us discover that it's all but a dishonest marketing tips and not an independent security research.

Kudos to Matteo Flora for it's support and for his article in Debunking Infosecurityguard identity !

The http referral tricks

When you read a link going from a website to another one there is an HTTP protocol header, the “Referral”, that tell you from which page someone is going to another webpage.

The referral demonstrated that the authors of http://infosecurityguard.com read my post, because it was coming from http://infosecurityguard.com/wp-admin/edit-comments.php that's the webpage you use as a wordpress author/editor to approve/refuse comments. And here there was the link.

That's the log entry:

217.7.213.59 – - [30/Jan/2010:02:56:37 -0700] “GET /20100129/licensed-by-israel-ministry-of-defense-how-things-really-works/ HTTP/1.0″ 200 5795 “ http://infosecurityguard.com/wp-admin/edit-comments.php ” “Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 5.1; Trident/4.0; GTB6.3; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.4506.2152; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; InfoPath.2)”

The PBX open on the internet tell us that's SecurStar GmbH

The SecurStar GmbH PBX is open on the internet, it contains all the names of their employee and confirm us that the author of http:/infosecurityguard.com is that company and is the anonymous hacker called Notrax.

Here there is their forum post where the SecurStar GmbH guys are debugging IPCOPfirewall & Asterisk together (so we see also details of what they use) where there is the ip 217.7.213.59 .

SecurStarproof.png

That's also really fun!

They sell secure telephony but their company telephony system is openly vulnerable on the internet . :-)

I was thinking to call the CEO, Hafner, via SIP on his internal desktop PBX to announce we discovered him tricks.. :->

They measured their marketing activity

Looking at the logs of my website i found that they was sensing the google distribution of information for the following keywords, in order to understand how effectively they was able to attack competing products. It's reasonable, if you invest money in a marketing campaign you want to see the results :-)

They reached my blog and i logged their search:

infosecurityguard+cryptophone

infosecurityguard+gold-lock

217.7.213.59 – - [30/Jan/2010:02:22:42 -0700] “GET / HTTP/1.0″ 200 31057 “http://www.google.de/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4SKPB_enDE350DE350&q=infosecurityguard+cryptophone” “Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 5.1; Trident/4.0; GTB6.3; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.4506.2152; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; InfoPath.2)”

217.7.213.59 – - [30/Jan/2010:04:15:07 -0700] “GET /20100130/about-the-voice-encryption-analysis-phonecrypt-can-be-intercepted-serious-security-evaluation-criteria/ HTTP/1.0″ 200 15774 “http://www.google.de/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4SKPB_enDE350DE350&q=gold-lock+infosecurityguard” “Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 5.1; Trident/4.0; GTB6.3; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.4506.2152; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; InfoPath.2)”


The domain registration data

The domain have been registered on 1st December 2009, just two months to start preparing the dishonest marketing campaign:

Domain Name: INFOSECURITYGUARD.COM

Registrar: GODADDY.COM, INC.

Updated Date: 01-dec-2009

Creation Date: 01-dec-2009

The domain is anonymously privacy protected trough a whois privacy service:

Administrative Contact: Private, Registration INFOSECURITYGUARD.COM@domainsbyproxy.com , Domains by Proxy, Inc. DomainsByProxy.com

Notrax hacker does not exist on google
As you know any hacker that get public usually have presence of it's activity on google, attending mailinglists, forum, homepage, past research, participation to conferences, etc, etc.
The fake hacker that they wanted us to to think was writing an independent blog does NOT have any trace on google. Only some hit about an anonymous browser called Notrax but nothing about that hacker.
Maybe when SecurStar provided the anonymity tool to their marketing agency, to help them protecting anonymity for the fake research, their provided them the anonymous browser notrax.So the marketing guy thinking about the nickname of this fake hackers used what? Notrax! :-)

The “independent review”completely oriented in publicizing PhoneCrypt

Of the various review don the phonecrypt review is only positive and amazing good feedback, while the other are only bad feedback and no single good point.

As you can imagine, in any kind of independent product evaluation, for all products there are goods and bad points. No. In this one there are only product that are good and product that are bad.

They missed to consider the security of the technology used by the products

They completely avoided to speak about cryptography and security of the products.

They do not evaluated basic security features that must be in that kind of products.That's in order not to let anyone see that they did not followed basic security rules in building up their PhoneCrypt.
The technology is closed source, no transparency on algorithms and protocols, no peer review.Read my new comparison (from the basic cryptographic requirement point of view) About the voice encryption analysis (criteria, errors and different results) .
The results are somehow different than their one .

UPDATE: Who's Wilfried Hafner (SecurStar founder) ?

I got a notice from a reader regarding Wilfred Hafner, SecurStar founder, CEO and security expert.

He was arrested in 1997 for telephony related fraud (check 2nd article on Phrack) earning from telephony fraud 254.000 USD causing damages to local telcos trough blueboxing for 1.15 Million USD.

He was not doing “Blueboxing” for the pleasure of phreaking and connecting with other hackers, but to earn money.

Hacking for profit (and not for fun) in 1997… brrr…. No hacker's ethic at all!

All in all, is that lawful?

Badmouthing a competitor amounts to an unfair competition practice in most jurisdictions, so it is arguable (to say the least) that SecurStar is right on a legally sound ground here.
Moreover, there are some specific statutes in certain jurisdictions which provide for a straightforward ban on the practice we are talking about. For example in the UK the British Institute of Practitioners in Advertising - in compliance with the Consumer protection from Unfair Trading regulation – ruled that:

”falsely claiming or creating the impression that the trader is not acting for the purposes relating to his trade, business, craft or profession, or falsely representing oneself as a consumer” is a criminal offense .

We have no doubt that PRPR (which is the UK-based *PR company for SecurStar GmbH, led by Peter Rennison and Allie Andrews as stated in SecurStar Press Release ) did provide their client with this information. Heck, they *are* in the UK, they simply cannot ignore that!

IANAL, but I would not be surpised if someone filed a criminal complaint or start civil litigation for unfair competition against SecurStar GmbH.
Whether this is going to be a matter for criminal and/or civil Courts or not is not that important. However, it is clear enough that SecurStar GmbH appears to be at least ethically questionable and not really worth of trust.

Nice try, gentlemen… however, next time just do it right (whether “right” for them means “in a honest manner” or “in a fashion not to be caught” I will let them choose)”

Fabio Pietrosanti (naif)

Dishonest security: The SecurStart GmbH Phonecrypt case

I would like to provide considerations on the concept of ethics that a security company should have respect to the users, the media and the security environment.

SecurStar GmbH made very bad things making that infosecuriguard.com fake independent research.

It's unfair approach respect to hacking community.

It's unfair marketing to end user. They should not be tricking by creating fake independent review.

It's unfair competition in the security market.

Let's make some more important consideration on this.

Must be serious on cryptographic products. They are not toys

When you do cryptographic tools you should be really aware of what you are doing, you must be really serious.

If you do bad crypto people could die.

If you don't follow basic security rules for transparency and security for cryptography you are putting people life at risk.

You are taking the responsibility of this. (I want to sleep at night, don't think SecurStar CEO/CTO care about this…)

Security research need reference and transparency

Security research have to be public, well done, always subject to public discussion and cooperation.
Security research should not be instrumentally used for marketing purpose.Security research should be done for awareness and grow of the knowledge of the worldwide security environment.

Hacking environment is neutral, should not be used instrumentally

Hackers are considered neutral, nerds, doing what they do for their pleasure and passion.

If you work in the security market you work with hackers.

If you use hackers and hacking environment for your own marketing purposes you are making something very nasty.

Hackers give you the technology and knowledge and you use them for your own commercial purpose.

Consideration on the authority of the information online

That's something that pose serious consideration on the authority of information online.An anonymous hacker, with no reference online, made a product security review that appear like an independent one. I have to say that the fake review was very well prepared, it always posed good/bad things in an indirect way. It did not appeared to me at 1st time like a fake. But going deeply i found what's going on.

However Journalists, news media and blogger went to the TRAP and reviewed their fake research. TheRegister, NetworkWorld and a lot of blogs reported it. Even if the author was completely anonymous.

What they have done is already illegal in UK

SecurStar GmbH is lucky that they are not in the UK, where doing this kind of things is illegal .

Fabio Pietrosanti (naif)

About the SecurStar GmbH Phonecrypt voice encryption analysis (criteria, errors and different results)

This article want to clarify and better explain the finding at infosecurityguard.com regaring voice encryption product evaluation.
This article want to tell you a different point of view other than infosecurityguard.com and explaining which are the rational with extensive explaination from security point of view.
Today i read news saying: “PhoneCrypt: Basic Vulnerability Found in 12 out of 15 Voice Encryption Products and went to read the website infosecurityguard .

Initially it appeared to my like a great research activity but then i started reading deeply the read about it.I found that it's not properly a security research but there is are concrete elements that's a marketing campaign well done in order to attract public media and publicize a product.
Imho they was able to cheat journalists and users because the marketing campaign was absolutely well done not to be discovered on 1st read attempt. I personally considered it like a valid one on 1st ready (they cheated me initially!).

But if you go deeply… you will understand that:
- it's a camouflage marketing initiative arranged by SecurStar GmbH and not a independent security research
- they consider a only security context where local device has been compromised (no software can be secured in that case, like saying SSL can be compromised if you have a trojan!)
- they do not consider any basic security and cryptographic security criteria

However a lot of important website reported it:

This article is quite long, if you read it you will understand better what's going on around infosecurityguard.com research and research result.

I want to to tell you why and how (imho) they are wrong.

The research missed to consider Security, Cryptography and Transparency!

Well, all this research sound much like being focused on the marketing goal to say that their PhoneCrypt product is the “super” product best of all the other ones.
Any security expert that would have as duty the “software evaluation” in order to protect the confidentiality of phone calls will evaluate other different characteristics of the product and the technology.

Yes, it's true that most of the product described by SecurStar in their anonymous marketing website called http://infosecurityguard.com have some weakness.
But the relevant weakness are others and PhoneCrypt unfortunately, like most of the described products suffer from this.
Let's review which characteristics are needed basic cryptography and security requirement (the best practice, the foundation and the basics!)

a – Security Trough Obscurity does not work

A basic rule in cryptography cames from 1883 by Auguste Kerckhoffs:

In a well-designed cryptographic system, only the key needs to be secret; there should be no secrecy in the algorithm.
Modern cryptographers have embraced this principle, calling anything else “security by obscurity.”
Read what Bruce Schneir, recognized expert and cryptographer in the world say about this
Any security expert will tell you that's true. Even a novice university student will tell you that's true. Simply because that's the only way to do cryptography.
Almost all product described in the review by SecurStar GmbH, include PhoneCrypt, does not provide precise details about their cryptographic technologies.
Precise details are:
  • Detailed specification of cryptographic algorithm (that's not just saying “we use AES “)
  • Detailed specification of cryptographic protocol (that's not just saying “we use Diffie Hellman ” )
  • Detailed specification of measuring the cryptographic strenght (that's not just saying “we have 10000000 bit key size “)

Providing precise details means having extensive documentation with theoretical and practical implications documenting ANY single way of how the algorithm works, how the protocol works with precise specification to replicate it for interoperability testing.
It means that scientific community should be able to play with the technology, audit it, hack it.
If we don't know anything about the cryptographic system in details, how can we know which are the weakness and strength points?

Mike Fratto, Site editor of Network Computing, made a great article on “Saying NO to proprietary cryptographic systems” .
Cerias Purdue University tell this .

b – NON peer reviewed and NON scientifically approved Cryptography does not work

In any case and in any condition you do cryptography you need to be sure that someone else will check, review, analyze, distruct and reconstract from scratch your technology and provide those information free to the public for open discussion.
That's exactly how AES was born and like US National Institute of Standard make crypto does (with public contest with public peer review where only the best evaluated win).
A public discussion with a public contest where the a lot of review by most famous and expert cryptographer in the world, hackers (with their name,surname and face, not like Notrax) provide their contribution, tell what they thinks.
That's called “peer review”.

If a cryptographic technology has an extended and important peer review, distributed in the world coming from universities, private security companies, military institutions, hackers and all coming from different part of the world (from USA to Europe to Russia to South America to Middle east to China) and all of them agree that a specific technology it's secure…
Well, in that case we can consider the technology secure because a lot of entities with good reputation and authority coming from a lot of different place in the world have publicly reviewed, analyzed and confirmed that a technology it's secure.

How a private company can even think to invent on it's own a secure communication protocol when it's scientifically stated that it's not possible to do it in a “proprietary and closed way” ?
IBM tell you that peer review it's required for cryptography .
Bruce Schneier tell you that “Good cryptographers know that nothing substitutes for extensive peer review and years of analysis.”
Philip Zimmermann will tell you to beware of Snake Oil where the story is: “Every software engineer fancies himself a cryptographer, which has led to the proliferation of really bad crypto software.”

c – Closed source cryptography does not work

As you know any kind of “serious” and with “good reputation” cryptographic technology is implemented in opensource.
There are usually multiple implementation of the same cryptographic algorithm and cryptographic protocol to be able to review all the way it works and certify the interoperability.
Supposing to use a standard with precise and extended details on “how it works”, that has been “peer reviewed” by the scientific community BUT that has been re-implemented from scratch by a not so smart programmer and the implementation it's plenty of bugs.

Well, if the implementation is “opensource” this means that it can be reviewed, improved, tested, audited and the end user will certaintly have in it's own had a piece of technology “that works safely” .

Google release opensource crypto toolkit
Mozilla release opensource crypto toolkit
Bruce Schneier tell you that Cryptography must be opensource .

Another cryptographic point of view

I don't want to convince anyone but just provide facts related to science, related to cryptography and security in order to reduce the effect of misinformation done by security companies whose only goes is to sell you something and not to do something that make the world a better.

When you do secure products, if they are not done following the proper approach people could die.
It's absolutely something irresponsible not to use best practice to do crypto stuff.

To summarize let's review the infosecurityguard.com review from a security best pratice point of view.

Product name Security Trough Obscurity Public peer review Open Source Compromise locally?
Caspertec Obscurity No public review Closed Evet
CellCrypt Obscurity
No public review
Closed
Evet
Cryptophone Transparency Limited public review Public Evet
Gold-Lock Obscurity
No public review
Closed
Evet
Illix Obscurity
No public review
Closed
Evet
No1.BC Obscurity No public review
Closed
Evet
PhoneCrypt Obscurity
No public review
Closed
Evet
Rode&Swarz Obscurity
No public review
Closed
Evet
Secure-Voice Obscurity
No public review
Closed
Evet
SecuSmart Obscurity
No public review
Closed
Evet
SecVoice Obscurity
No public review
Closed
Evet
SegureGSM Obscurity
No public review
Closed
Evet
SnapCell Obscurity
No public review
Closed
Evet
Tripleton Obscurity
No public review
Closed
Evet
Zfone Transparency Public review
Open Evet
ZRTP Transparency Public review
Open Evet

*Green means that it match basic requirement for a cryptographic secure system

* Red / Broken means that it does not match basic requirement for a cryptographic secure system
That's my analysis using a evaluation method based on cryptographic and security parameters not including the local compromise context that i consider useless.

However, to be clear, those are only basic parameters to be used when considering a voice encryption product (just to avoid being in a situation that appears like i am promoting other products). So it may absolutely possible that a product with good crypto ( transparency, peer reviewed and opensource) is absolutely a not secure product because of whatever reason (badly written, not usable causing user not to use it and use cleartext calls, politically compromised, etc, etc).
I think i will prepare a broader criteria for voice crypto technologies and voice crypto products, so it would be much easier and much practical to have a full transparent set of criterias to evaluate it.

But those are really the basis of security to be matched for a good voice encryption system!
Read some useful past slides on security protocols used in voice encryption systems (2nd part).

Now read below some more practical doubt about their research.

The security concept of the review is misleading: any hacked device can be always intercepted!

I think that the guys completely missed the point: ANY KIND OF SOFTWARE RUNNING ON A COMPROMISED OPERATING SYSTEM CAN BE INTERCEPTED

Now they are pointing out that also Zfone from Philip Zimmermann is broken (a pc software), just because they install a trojan on a PC like in a mobile phone?
Any security software rely on the fact that the underlying operating system is somehow trusted and preserve the integrity of the environment where the software run.

  • If you have a disk encryption system but your PC if infected by a trojan, the computer is already compromised.
  • If you have a voice encryption system but your PC is infected by a trojan, the computer is already compromised.
  • If you have a voice encryption system but your mobile phone is infected by a trojan, the mobile phone is already compromised.

No matter which software you are running, in such case the security of your operating environment is compromised and in one way or another way all the information integrity and confidentiality is compromised.

Like i explained above how to intercept PhoneCrypt.

The only things that can protect you from this threat is running in a closed operating system with Trust Computing capability, implementing it properly.
For sure on any “Open” operating system such us Windows, Windows Mobile, Linux, iPhone or Android there's no chance to really protect a software.
On difficult operating system such as Symbian OS or RimOS maybe the running software can be protected (at least partially)

That's the reason for which the security concept that guys are leveraging to carry on their marketing campaign has no clue.
It's just because they control the environment, they know Flexispy software and so they adjusted their software not to be interceptable when Flexispy is installed.
If you develop a trojan with the other techniques i described above you will 100% intercept PhoneCrypt.

On that subject also Dustin Tamme l, Security researcher of BreakPoint Systems , pointed on on VoIP Security Alliance mailing lists that the security analysis is based on wrong concepts .

The PhoneCrypt can be intercepted: it's just that they don't wanted to tell you!

PhoneCrypt can be intercepted with “on device spyware”.
Neden?
Because Windows Mobile is an unsecure operating environment and PhoneCrypt runs on Windows Mobile.
Windows Mobile does not use Trusted Computing and so any software can do anything.
The platform choice for a secure telephony system is important.
How?
I quickly discussed with some knowledgeable windows mobile hackers about 2 different way to intercept PhoneCrypt with an on-device spyware (given the unsecure Windows Mobile Platform).

a) Inject a malicious DLL into the software and intercept from within the Phonecrypt itself.
In Windows Mobile any software can be subject to DLL code injection.
What an attacker can do is to inject into the PhoneCrypt software (or any software running on the phone), hooking the Audio related functions acting as a “function proxy” between the PhoneCrypt and the real API to record/play audio.
It's a matter of “hooking” only 2 functions, the one that record and the one that play audio.
Read the official Microsoft documentation on how to do DLL injection on Windows Mobile processes. or forum discussing the technique of injecting DLL on windows mobile processes.
That's simple, any programmer will tell you to do so.
They simply decided that's better not to make any notice about this.
b) Create a new audio driver that simply act as a proxy to the real one and intercept PhoneCrypt
In Windows Mobile you can create new Audio Drivers and new Audio Filters.
What an attacker can do is to load a new audio driver that does not do anything else than passing the real audio driver function TO/FROM the realone. In the meantime intercept everything recorded and everything played :-)
Here there is an example on how to do Audio driver for Windows Mobile .
Here a software that implement what i explain here for Windows “Virtual Audio Cable” .
The very same concept apply to Windows Mobile. Check the book “Mobile Malware Attack and Defense” at that link explaining techniques to play with those techniques.
They simply decided that's better not to make any notice to that way of intercepting phone call on PhoneCrypt .
Those are just 2 quick ideas, more can be probably done.

Sounds much like a marketing activity – Not a security research.

I have to tell you. I analyzed the issue very carefully and on most aspects. All this things about the voice encryption analisys sounds to me like a marketing campaign of SecurStar GmbH to sell PhoneCrypt and gain reputation. A well articulated and well prepared campaign to attract the media saying, in an indirect way cheating the media, that PhoneCrypt is the only one secure. You see the press releases of SecurStar and of the “Security researcher Notrax telling that PhoneCrypt is the only secure product” . SecurStar PhoneCrypt is the only product the anonymous hacker “Notrax” consider secure of the “software solutions”.
The only “software version” in competition with:

SnapCell – No one can buy it. A security company that does not even had anymore a webpage. The company does not almost exist anymore.
rohde-schawarz – A company that have in his list price and old outdated hardware secure phone . No one would buy it, it's not good for genera use.

Does it sounds strange that only those other products are considered secure along with PhoneCrypt .

Also… let's check the kind of multimedia content in the different reviews available of Gold-Lock, Cellcrypt and Phonecrypt in order to understand how much the marketing guys pressed to make the PhoneCrypt review the most attractive:

Application Screenshots of application Video with demonstration of interception Network demonstration
PhoneCrypt 5 0 1
CellCrypt 0 2 0
GoldLock 1 2 0

It's clear that PhoneCrypt is reviewed showing more features explicitly shown and major security features product description than the other.

Too much difference between them, should we suspect it's a marketing tips?

But again other strange things analyzing the way it was done…
If it was “an impartial and neutral review” we should see good and bad things on all the products right?

Ok, see the table below regarding the opinion indicated in each paragraph of the different reviews available of Gold-Lock, CellCrypt and Phonecrypt (are the only available) to see if are positive or negative.

Application Number of paragraphs Positive paragraphs Negative paragraphs Neutral paragraphs
PhoneCrypt 9 9 0 0
CellCrypt 12 0 10 2
GoldLock 9 0 8 1

Detailed paragraphs opinion analysis of Phonecrypt
Paragraph of review Opinion expressed
From their website Positive Marketing feedback
Apple iPhone Positive Marketing feedback
Disk Encryption or voice Encryption Positive Marketing feedback
PBX Compatibility? Really Positive Marketing feedback
Cracking <10. Not. Positive Marketing feedback
Good thinking! Positive Marketing feedback
A little network action Positive Marketing feedback
UI Positive Marketing feedback
Good Taste Positive Marketing feedback
Detailed paragraphs opinion analysis of Gold-Lock 3G
Paragraph of review Opinion expressed
From their website Negative Marketing feedback
Licensed by The israeli Ministry of Denfese Negative Marketing feedback
Real Company or Part Time hobby Negative Marketing feedback
16.000 bit authentication Negative Marketing feedback
DH 256 Negative Marketing feedback
Downad & Installation! Neutral Marketing feedback
Cracking it <10 Negative Marketing feedback
Marketing BS101 Negative Marketing feedback
Cool video stuff Negative Marketing feedback
Detailed paragraphs opinion analysis of CellCrypt
Paragraph of review Opinion expressed
From their website Neutral Marketing feedback
A little background about cellcrypt Negative Marketing feedback
Master of Marketing Negative Marketing feedback
Secure Voice calling Negative Marketing feedback
Who's buying their wares Negative Marketing feedback
Downad & Installation! Neutral Marketing feedback
My Demo environment Negative Marketing feedback
Did they forget some code Negative Marketing feedback
Cracking it <5 Negative Marketing feedback
Room Monitoring w/ FlexiSpy Negative Marketing feedback
Cellcrypt unique features.. Negative Marketing feedback
Plain old interception Negative Marketing feedback
The Haters out there Negative Marketing feedback

Now it's clear that from their point of view on PhoneCrypt there is no single bad point while the other are always described in a negative way.
No single good point. Strange?
All those considerations along with the next ones really let me think that's very probably a marketing review and not an independent review.

Other similar marketing attempt from SecurStar

SecurStar GmbH is known to have used in past marketing activity leveraging this kind of “technical speculations”, abusing of partial information and fake unconfirmed hacking stuff to make marketing/media coverage.
Imho a rare mix of unfairness in leveraging the difficult for people to really understand the complexity of security and cryptography.

They already used in past Marketing activities like the one about creating a trojan for Windows Mobile and saying that their software is secure from the trojan that they wrote.
Read about their marketing tricks of 2007

They developed a Trojan (RexSpy) for Windows Mobile, made a demonstration capability of the trojan and later on told that they included “Anti-Trojan” capability to their PhoneCrypt software.They never released informations on that trojan, not even proved that it exists.

The researcher Collin Mulliner told at that time that it sounds like a marketing tips (also because he was not able to get from SecurStar CEO Hafner any information about that trojan):

“This makes you wonder if this is just a marketing thing.”

Now, let's try to make some logical reassignment.
It's part of the way they do marketing, an very unfriendly and unpolite approach with customers, journalist and users trying to provide wrong security concepts for a market advantage. Being sure that who read don't have all the skills to do in depth security evaluation and find the truth behind their marketing trips.

Who is the hacker notrax?

It sounds like a camouflage of a fake identity required to have an “independent hacker” that make an “independent review” that is more strong on reputation building.
Read about his bio:

¾ Human, ¼ Android (Well that would be cool at least.) I am just an enthusiast of pretty much anything that talks binary and if it has a RS232 port even better. During the day I masquerade as an engineer working on some pretty cool projects at times, but mostly I do the fun stuff at night. I have been thinking of starting an official blog for about 4.5 years to share some of the things I come across, can't figure out, or just cross my mind. Due to my day job and my nighttime meddling, I will update this when I can. I hope some find it useful, if you don't, well you don't.

There are no information about this guy on google.
Almost any hacker that get public have articles online, post in mailing archive and/or forum or some result of their activity.
For notrax, nothing is available.

Additionally let's look at the domain…
The domain infosecurityguard.com is privacy protected by domainsbyproxy to prevent understanding who is the owner.
The domain has been created 2 months ago on 01-Dec-09 on godaddy.com registrar.

What's also very interesting to notice that this “unknown hacker with no trace on google about him that appeared on December 2009 on the net” is referred on SecurStar GmbH Press Release as a “An IT security expert”.

Maybe they “know personally” who's this anonymous notrax? :)

Am i following my own conspiracy thinking or maybe there's some reasonable doubt that everything was arrange in that funny way just for a marketing activity?

Social consideration

If you are a security company you job have also a social aspects, you should also work to make the world a better place (sure to make business but “not being evil”). You cannot cheat the skills of the end users in evaluating security making fake misleading information.

You should do awareness on end users, to make them more conscious of security issues, giving them the tools to understand and decide themselves.

Hope you had fun reading this article and you made your own consideration about this.

Fabio Pietrosanti (naif)

ps Those are my personal professional opinion, let's speak about technology and security, not marketing.
pps i am not that smart in web writing, so sorry for how the text is formatted and how the flow of the article is unstructured!