5 ms·
I thought it was pretty clear. They had already developed a Sonic Wall VPN exploit. They used zmap to scan for vulnerable devices then grepped the hostnames for
by goatsi 7y ago
I thought it was pretty clear. They had already developed a Sonic Wall VPN exploit. They used zmap to scan for vulnerable devices then grepped the hostnames for "bank". When they exploited the VPN it gave them the whole network.
>In this case, on the other hand, it was the same Windows domain passwords that were used to authenticate against the VPN, so I could get a good user password, including that of the domain admin. Now I had full access to his network
- badrabbit 7y agoYou're right, I tried to skip the rest and find the technical part but missed it.
- tetha 7y agoTo me, the scary part about this is: After Equifax, this is another big hack... and practically, it's one layer of defense and that's it. Shellshock, one password, everything's fucked. And yes, expletives are appropriate there. The rest is largely access maintenance, keyloggers and execution. That's scary. Maybe I'll need to badger my boss about a serious pentest of everything.
- Avamander 7y agoPentesters don't drop 0-days though, but yes, it shouldn't be one layer of security to bypass.
- q3k 7y agoDepends who you hire and how much you pay them :).
- badrabbit 7y agoDude, forget a pentest, have a security architect look things over. Simple segmentation and endpoint firewall witha good edr might have stopped this. Everyone misses the basics, a lot of networks were pieced together 10+ years ago when people were not as security conscious as they are now.
- SlowRobotAhead 7y agoOur first pen test, before I took over as CTO... We had a JSON file with admin credentials on a shared drive. IT company needed it there so some tool could log in as admin and do some robot work. Fired them, and good riddance. But... STUPID SIMPLE things can get overlooked for years until you have someone else come in and test. +1 for pentests.
- badrabbit 7y agoFor sure, I wasn't disagreeing. I meant have someone look at your architecture and make sure best practices are followed and insane designs don't exist before you pay for a pentester . pentest results can be used to adjust architecture but a pentester will show you one or a few ways they acheived the objective, they won't do a hollistic review of architecture,procedures,practices,etc...
- pc86 7y agoSo after firing the vendor, who on your side got fired for allowing it in the first place?
- presumably 7y agoThe way you phrase the question is odd/misleading. GP wrote that he replaced the previous CTO. Before firing the vendor, the responsible party on their side had already left the role.
- SlowRobotAhead 7y agoLike many orgs that don't know any better, our CFO thought because he was good at excel that he was qualified to direct IT. That is no longer the case. To answer your question though, you know how hard it is to fire a CFO? Let me know if you have any tips.
- badrabbit 7y agoWhy would anyone get fired, explicit approval and imppicit incompetence should be handled differently. If pentests get people fired, no one wants a pentest. Refusing to accept and resolve pentest results can be fireable but a pentest is suppose to help you improve what you have already.
- goatsi 7y agoAs I understand it this hack took place in 2016, they are just claiming it now. That's why they mention powershell being more useful.
- phyzome 7y agoCrunchy on the outside, chewy on the inside.