4 ms·
Sorry, if it came across as me implying you pulled that from thin air. One of the most interesting things we had was the core dumps. Randomnly (depending on me
by jgrahamc 8y ago
Sorry, if it came across as me implying you pulled that from thin air.
One of the most interesting things we had was the core dumps. Randomnly (depending on memory state) we'd crash rather than dump out memory in the HTTP response. We had all that data going back over the entire period. That gave us a lot of confidence this hadn't been exploited because we could see the rate of crashes plus we could see the actual core dumps to see the memory state when the crash happened.
- tyingq 8y agoAhh. That's more comforting. So, any wide scale deliberate exploitation would have resulted in an obvious spike of crash dumps. That leaves whatever the scale of passively trolling, say, Google's cache might have been. Unknown, but probably not huge.
- jgrahamc 8y agoRight. Which was one of the reasons we used YARA on all the data we pulled from Google and other caches so we could extract the leaked data and categorize it. Then we called all the affected customers (I did a lot of those calls personally) and offered to give them the leaked information so they could look for exploitation. The idea being that if they had seen some anamoly with something that we knew was in Google's cache then it would be evidence of exploitation that way.
- dorianm 8y agoI'm curious why those core dumps, lasting for months at least, were not investigated
- jgrahamc 8y agoEnjoy my "Inside Cloudbleed" RSA talk: https://www.rsaconference.com/videos/inside-cloudbleed https://www.rsaconference.com/videos/inside-cloudbleed I talked about that and much more there.