4 ms·

> I'm still really surprised every time I see a windows-based ATM. So you're surprised every time you see an ATM? They're all Windows-based (unless there are s

by brazzy 13y ago

> I'm still really surprised every time I see a windows-based ATM. So you're surprised every time you see an ATM? They're all Windows-based (unless there are still some OS/2 ones around, which would not surprise me much). > Why would a full, general-purpose OS be included in those machines that need to do just under 10 operations? Among other things: Because the maker of that OS defined an API (XFS, mentioned in the article) to access the custom peripheral hardware used by ATMs. > but just to limit the exposed code, it could be based on something much more restricted. What exposed code? These machines aren't connected to the internet, talk only to their own servers, and have a very limited end user interface.

viraptor 13y ago
> So you're surprised every time you see an ATM? No. I'm also surprised every time I see people constructing sql queries by joining strings with no escaping. Which also happens all the time. > What exposed code? We're commenting on an article about a trojan using dynamic linking to inject itself. Try doing that with code loaded straight from flash which is verified by a separate chip. These machines have a chance to verify their whole code before running... but can't really do that if they're running a general-purpose OS. That's what I mean by exposed code. They should crash/report issue as soon as any modification is made.
- brazzy 13y ago
  Yeah, and it would be even safer of the entire functionality of the ATM were implemented as an ASIC. Except that's completely impractical. My point is that a system's resilence against manipulation is not all that important if the way it is operated affords little or no opportunity for manipulation. Note that the trojan described in the article apparently requires a criminal to be physically present at the machine to harvest the collected information and says nothing about how the machine would get infected. Remote infection (which is impossible for a normally operated ATM) wouldn't be much use when profiting from it requires physical access, so I infection probably also requires physical access to the inside of the machine. That's a worst case security scenario anyway.
  - viraptor 13y ago
    > Yeah, and it would be even safer of the entire functionality of the ATM were implemented as an ASIC. Except that's completely impractical. I agree. That's why I haven't even mentioned it. Running from flash and self-verification is already what most payment terminals do. This is not something new.

by brazzy 13y ago

viraptor 13y ago

> So you're surprised every time you see an ATM? No. I'm also surprised every time I see people constructing sql queries by joining strings with no escaping. Which also happens all the time. > What exposed code? We're commenting on an article about a trojan using dynamic linking to inject itself. Try doing that with code loaded straight from flash which is verified by a separate chip. These machines have a chance to verify their whole code before running... but can't really do that if they're running a general-purpose OS. That's what I mean by exposed code. They should crash/report issue as soon as any modification is made.

brazzy 13y ago
Yeah, and it would be even safer of the entire functionality of the ATM were implemented as an ASIC. Except that's completely impractical. My point is that a system's resilence against manipulation is not all that important if the way it is operated affords little or no opportunity for manipulation. Note that the trojan described in the article apparently requires a criminal to be physically present at the machine to harvest the collected information and says nothing about how the machine would get infected. Remote infection (which is impossible for a normally operated ATM) wouldn't be much use when profiting from it requires physical access, so I infection probably also requires physical access to the inside of the machine. That's a worst case security scenario anyway.
- viraptor 13y ago
  > Yeah, and it would be even safer of the entire functionality of the ATM were implemented as an ASIC. Except that's completely impractical. I agree. That's why I haven't even mentioned it. Running from flash and self-verification is already what most payment terminals do. This is not something new.