You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to receive the selected newsletter s which you may unsubscribe from at any time.
You also agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge the data collection and usage practices outlined in our Privacy Policy. What are you looking for? Preferences Community Newsletters Log Out. Written by Ryan Naraine , Contributor.
Ryan Naraine Contributor Ryan Naraine is a journalist and social media enthusiast specializing in Internet and computer security issues. Full Bio. Here is a Mac OS X user explaining the attack : This has happened to me twice now, on two separate computers at work. Linux has a similar filesystem, I believe it's used for boot CDs.
It pairs the read-only volume with a RAM drive, and all writes are cached there and discarded. That's funny, I don't see a shop by [circuitcity. Try searching in desktops, laptop is not the only option in most stores That's not funny. Funny would involve the computer coming from a man walking into a bar after crossing the road on a chicken, or asking many of those 6gigs of RAM it would take to change a lightbulb. There's no chickens involved here, and definitely no light bulb. I deduce that you're using sarcasm, maybe to convey the idea that you don't believe you can get a computer out of 'em with 6gig RAM Earth, Wind and Fire?
So, basically, writing to your hard drive is twice as hard as it is on a normal computer? And you call that a feature that should be installed by default? Your original problem is that have programs installed that do stuff to your computer that you don't want.
And your solution is an extra layer that those programs are not designed to penetrate. There are two problems with having such software installed by default: a it would be twice as hard to do stuff.
I'm sure you realize this, and have already gotten used to it, and accept it. Programmers would be somewhat inconvenienced, and would have to use special libraries for writing to the hard disk, and users would be annoyed. This EWF software you speak of is for a niche market, and would fail for everybody if it became popular. It's sort of how Linux doesn't have many viruses. Except Linux not having viruses is a side effect, and there are plenty of other reasons to use Linux if it became popular and malware authors decided to target it, whereas your software would fail if it became popular, and malware authors targetted it.
It's kind of like how the Windows outgoing firewall is useless. Every piece of malware knows to put themselves on that whitelist. Whereas if you use a software firewall that is not installed by default, then chances are good that the malware author didn't spend time on bypassing that one. I suppose it would be possible to populate the clipboard with corrupted contents, perhaps a string of XML that another app would try to consume.
If that other app, designed strictly for desktop use, has a vulnerability in the way it processes said XML an attacker may be able to gain privileges.
It's possible such an app will examine the clipboard contents just to determine if it should enable the Paste menu. Which means you could be vulnerable even though you never paste from the clipboard. Considering there are websites out there that can own a Windows PC just by having someone visit a page with IE, I'd say this is a pretty good attack vector.
You might not get many, but you'll get some who copy and paste a URL or accidentally paste it into an email instead of the string they meant and not notice until they've hit enter or clicked send.
Some P2P clients support a "pull links directly from clipboard" feature, where they watch the clipboard for any link with the format they use and automatically download what it's pointing to.
The danger in this - both the parsing, and the downloading - is obvious. I don't believe any clients run downloaded things by default, but it's still potentially quite nasty. Every ms, put some evil UNIX commands on the clipboard, surrounded by line breaks.
I'm sure you can come up with a one-liner that compromises a user's system. I paste into Terminal windows all the time. For example, I might copy an error message and then grep another file for the message. If there's an evil web page open while I do that, the paste will own me. If that's something to be worried about then no amount of "security" is going to protect these people.
Protect them? Protect us! They get their machines infected, they become latest members of bot nets, flood our mailboxes with spam, his the servers we use with ddos attacks You can't figure out a simple solution? Like, have the banner ad companies screen for flash commands that shouldn't be needed for simple ads, like setClipboard?
Even if I don't paste the url into my browser and run whatever's on that webpage, I don't want something wiping whatever I have in the clipboard at the time Yep, which is why I actually have the browser ask me if an attempt is made whether to allow it. I'll bet you can do it too in Shockwave with copyToClipboard. Thinking about it, any web service that supports the clipboard should be able to do this.
Seriously, blocking ads and javascript and flash stuff is like a game for me now, I get a little thrill of victory every time I block one of those things, it's great. Only if you block all Flash you did not specifically allow you are clear. NoScript should work, then. And some of us have to develop in Flash stupid designer - stupid clients so NoScript is out of the question. You realize you can white list your own sites in NoScript.
I'm a developer who uses NoScript on my browser. I have no problems. I get a little thrill of victory every time I block one of those things, it's great. It doesn't leech since static banner ads load up just fine, but NoScript blocks flash, java, and other plug-ins PDF, etc by default. It also disables javascript on a per-domain basis plus detects and blocks X. I second this, but I would only permanently whitelist sites you absolutely need to out of convenience or trust; everything else I temporarily whitelist on an as-needed basis, and I find that unless I'm shopping or something there are number of sites I don't need javscript to run for basic use.
I figure with SQL injection attacks and other random maliciousness, even "trusted" web sites can be compromised and this keeps my exposure to a minimum. I think that's an X11 anachronism you're dealing with there. No idea why it still exists in FWIW, there's a Firefox bug that lets sites hijack your 'primary' clipboard the one that middle mouse clicks paste.
See bug The way I see it, having multiple clipboards, and multiple ways to write to and from the clipboard, are separate issues. I can see the reason behind multiple access points to the clipboard, but having multiple, unrelated clipboards is somewhat of an annoyance.
And there is another issue. Try opening an editor, or browser. Write some text, and copy that text to the clipboard. Now exit the editor. Your data in the clipboard is lost. This has tripped me up many times, and I would really like to fix it. It doesn. Most computer users don't even know that Windoze has a clipboard, let alone know how to press Ctrl-V to do something with it, nevermind getting some program to actually follow the link.
Okay so the flash ad just copies something to the clipboard in a loop. Closing the tab or browser stops this. I suppose if you are running your browser in the background this would be very annoying and you wouldn't know. Today firefox and IE prompt if you want to use the clipboard from javascript, but it used to not be this way.
I'm sure Adobe will patch this soon enough. This is like old popups It's like getting a wet willing or you head stuffed in a toilet.
The issue is here that both Flash and the underlying operating system don't have any kind of cut and paste protection. I've changed the way I charge my iPhone.
You should, too. Time for a Linux smartphone? Developers are in short supply. Here are the skills and programming languages employers need. Best iPhones : Which model is right for you? Windows Do these six things right away after you finish setup.
The painful shame of owning an Android phone. So the exploit does work without problems. This is all I understand. I don,t say it,s fault of FF. Ofcourse it,s problem with Adobe flash. Last edited: Aug 20, Joined: Jan 2, Posts: 3, Interesting POC Indeed DefenseWall does not protect against this.
Not a peep from AntiBot either. LoneWolf , Aug 20, Am I true? Adobe people need to fish their flash or we get silverlight. Joined: Jul 9, Posts: 72, Location: U. JRViejo , Aug 20, Joined: Jun 16, Posts: 1, Location: Philippines. Hmmm, false confidence alarm.
0コメント