5 ms·

This whole submission looks like an ad for Shodan. For those who don't know. Shodan is a basically a search engine on top of a DB created by mass port scanning.

This whole submission looks like an ad for Shodan. For those who don't know. Shodan is a basically a search engine on top of a DB created by mass port scanning. If it sounds shoddy as fuck to you, you would be right. They basically managed to find few ISPs that disregard hundreds or possibly thousands of abuse notifications they must be receiving and they are monetising their find. No doubt someone will reply "but port scanning is not illegal", well walking from car to car and trying door-handles to see if any are open in a supermarket car park is also not illegal, but don't be surprised if you get a security guy's baton treatment if you're spotted doing that. My point is, it is not illegal, but it is also not acceptable. Don't believe me? Try to do a mass port scan on any normal ISP's connection. You'll be getting a phone call or a letter in the post to stop it soon or they will disconnect you. Same with AWS, Azure, Rackspace and any other reputable cloud provider. "Oh, but we provide a much needed service to companies that need to be notified if any unsecured devices pop up on their network" - they'll say. My answer to this is that there are hundreds if not thousands of WhiteHat scanning companies that will happily provide you with a scanning service if you prove you own the range. It is only Shodan that will preemptively scan everyone and then let people search their DB. This is basically equivalent to a script kiddie running nmap on 0.0.0.0/0. Seriously, this is not OK. Some ISPs that should be named and shamed for allowing this to be going on: SingleHop - a US based cloud provider CariNet Inc from San Diego - another small cloud provider M247 Europe - a Colo provider in Romania The above have been found to be hosing one or more of the servers that do the actual Shodan scanning. Servers are named censusX.shodan.io where X is a single digit. I suggest that everyone annoyed with Shodan's activity emails those service providers and tells them what they think about it.

iofiiiiiiiii 7y ago
Hiding our heads in the sand only means that the vulnerabilities will not be fixed and that only especially crafty attackers (i.e. the most dangerous ones) can exploit them. We need more openness, not security based on someone's feelings of morality.
- Roark66 7y ago
  How does Shodan promote openness? Anyone who wants to scan their own network can already do so with paid for and free tools. What this service does is, it scans your network whether you want it or not, then allows others to search for vulnerable hosts. It is a script kiddie wet dream come true service. Continuing my "trying door handles on cars or houses" analogy imagine there is a service that has people walking from car to car and from house to house covering whole cities. Then once it compiled a database of which houses/flats/cars tend to be unlocked it made a business out of selling access to that DB. Would you have no moral reservations about that? Almost everyone is for openness in matters of vulnerabilities in software so companies are forced to fix them, but still most 0day researches give heads up to the companies and shortly later mailing lists about the vulnerabilities they discover before they openly publish all the details including an example exploit. Therefore openness has widely accepted limits. Making a business out of selling information about third parties that are vulnerable is way past those limits.
  - def_true_false 7y ago
    If it forces people to invest in securing their systems, it will have already done more good than whining about morality.
    - Roark66 7y ago
      >If it forces people to invest in securing their systems, it will have already done more good than whining about morality It'll not force people to do anything, unless by forcing them you mean it will send attackers their way, they will get pwned, their systems screwed and they learn their lesson the hard way. You may well be in favour of this kind of mass education of inept-admins, but I'm not. As for "whining" about morality, you know humans invented and use it when making decisions because it is useful in preventing conflict. What happens if companies don't give a fuck about morality of their actions? People hurt by them use forceful means to "make things right" in their mind.
NickNameNick 7y ago
Shodan is far from the only 'player' in that space. And the scan's aren't necessarily as noisy as you think. There's enough 'internet background radiation', script-kiddies and virus's scanning the internet, that a heavier-weight scanner that has a few agents to do the scanning, and is somewhat clever about how they allocate IPs and ports to the agents can disappear into the background noise. And if you really want to spread out the load, it'd probably be depressingly easy to recreate the 'internet cencus 2012'/ Carna botnet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carna_botnet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carna_botnet NB that having something like Shodan is invaluable to defenders in identifying potential hosts for botnets.
pas 7y ago
People freaking out about port scans are pretty much part of the problem, not the solution. They are who block ICMP making P-MTU discovery broken, etc. Making people jump through hoops to get a port scan also seems to be part of the problem. The network operator community is slowly progressing on building out the necessary infrastructure (both institutional and technical) to deal with DDoSes in a kind of automated way. (Initially BGP null route / blackhole propagation, now some extra computation - so just drop certain percentage of packets, that match this trivial bitmask, etc.) All this is because people forget how easy it was to get your unpatched Win XP machine owned by Blaster/MyDoom. And it's not much harder today with IoT devices, countless unpatched WordPress, phpMyAdmin, Django, RoR sites. Of course, I'm not particularly happy about this state of things, but I have no issue with scanning, I have a lot more problem with real malware left unchecked, opportunists mistaken for real abusers.

iofiiiiiiiii 7y ago

Hiding our heads in the sand only means that the vulnerabilities will not be fixed and that only especially crafty attackers (i.e. the most dangerous ones) can exploit them. We need more openness, not security based on someone's feelings of morality.

Roark66 7y ago
How does Shodan promote openness? Anyone who wants to scan their own network can already do so with paid for and free tools. What this service does is, it scans your network whether you want it or not, then allows others to search for vulnerable hosts. It is a script kiddie wet dream come true service. Continuing my "trying door handles on cars or houses" analogy imagine there is a service that has people walking from car to car and from house to house covering whole cities. Then once it compiled a database of which houses/flats/cars tend to be unlocked it made a business out of selling access to that DB. Would you have no moral reservations about that? Almost everyone is for openness in matters of vulnerabilities in software so companies are forced to fix them, but still most 0day researches give heads up to the companies and shortly later mailing lists about the vulnerabilities they discover before they openly publish all the details including an example exploit. Therefore openness has widely accepted limits. Making a business out of selling information about third parties that are vulnerable is way past those limits.
- def_true_false 7y ago
  If it forces people to invest in securing their systems, it will have already done more good than whining about morality.
  - Roark66 7y ago
    >If it forces people to invest in securing their systems, it will have already done more good than whining about morality It'll not force people to do anything, unless by forcing them you mean it will send attackers their way, they will get pwned, their systems screwed and they learn their lesson the hard way. You may well be in favour of this kind of mass education of inept-admins, but I'm not. As for "whining" about morality, you know humans invented and use it when making decisions because it is useful in preventing conflict. What happens if companies don't give a fuck about morality of their actions? People hurt by them use forceful means to "make things right" in their mind.

NickNameNick 7y ago

Shodan is far from the only 'player' in that space. And the scan's aren't necessarily as noisy as you think. There's enough 'internet background radiation', script-kiddies and virus's scanning the internet, that a heavier-weight scanner that has a few agents to do the scanning, and is somewhat clever about how they allocate IPs and ports to the agents can disappear into the background noise. And if you really want to spread out the load, it'd probably be depressingly easy to recreate the 'internet cencus 2012'/ Carna botnet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carna_botnet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carna_botnet NB that having something like Shodan is invaluable to defenders in identifying potential hosts for botnets.

pas 7y ago

People freaking out about port scans are pretty much part of the problem, not the solution. They are who block ICMP making P-MTU discovery broken, etc. Making people jump through hoops to get a port scan also seems to be part of the problem. The network operator community is slowly progressing on building out the necessary infrastructure (both institutional and technical) to deal with DDoSes in a kind of automated way. (Initially BGP null route / blackhole propagation, now some extra computation - so just drop certain percentage of packets, that match this trivial bitmask, etc.) All this is because people forget how easy it was to get your unpatched Win XP machine owned by Blaster/MyDoom. And it's not much harder today with IoT devices, countless unpatched WordPress, phpMyAdmin, Django, RoR sites. Of course, I'm not particularly happy about this state of things, but I have no issue with scanning, I have a lot more problem with real malware left unchecked, opportunists mistaken for real abusers.