Slashdot Mirror

We should be reading this article with the same degree of skepticism that we would read an article written by Jason Blair.

Has the slashdot community forgotten how Markoff reported Kevin Mitnick's case?
example from 2600 and another

We should be reading this article with the same degree of skepticism that we would read an article written by Jason Blair.

Has the slashdot community forgotten how Markoff reported Kevin Mitnick's case?
example from 2600 and another

Actually, I'm waiting for spammers to sue us for restrain of trade when we write about spam filters.

It's a little long to type up here, but I can give you the jist of the article. Basically it describes a way of getting all the active MAC address (of Windows machines) on your subnet by performing a portscan on Netbios (port 139), and using those (ifconfig in linux or perhaps MAC address cloning on you linksys router) to register an IP thru DHCP.

Since most Cable ISPs require the MAC of the connecting device to be registered, you need a vaild one. Any thing you do with an IP registered under an assumed MAC gets blamed on the person with the MAC you stole.

Thats the theory anyway. Could be traced, but probably enough to get you off the hook.

I hafta say you have a point..I hate the RIAA and the MPAA and putting so much as a penny in their pockets bothers me to no end..for that reason I only own a dvd player because it came with the ps2 and I only have like 4-6 dvd's because they came free with other stuff we bought. Not even venturing into the BS with RIAA in current events or the MPAA and 2600 Magazine.

There ARE ways to get around ANI though. The fact that you know the difference means you probably know that already but figured that someone here might need to know. A really good publication to read for such things(including the crap that NCO is putting this guy through) is 2600 Magazine: The Hacker Quarterly

B&N has been on my bad side since none in my area would carry this 2600. They simply stated that they werent revcieving this quarters issue. For all I know they could be telling the truth, but theyve carried all the others so ive com eup with my own little conspiricies...

Is it just me, or does this sound very similar to what happened to 2600 Magazine??

After reading the article, I can't help but wonder if this ruling essentially makes the publication of 2600 Illegal.
The US may have started out founded on freedom, but it appears that is has since turned its back on those principals

jeremycec writes " Evidently, nothing's been resolved since 2001 , when this happened the first time. In these Memorandum Opinion and Preliminary Injunction documents from Judge Royce C. Lamberth of the U.S. District Court for Washington, D.C., we see how the court stepped in to pull the plug on a system, which, through its abject lack of due care, left someone's important financial information wide open to attackers. According to the former CIO of the Bureau of Indian Affairs: 'For all practical purposes, we have no security, we have no infrastructure, ... Our entire network has no, firewalls on it. I don't like running a network that can be breached by a high school kid.' So, when the BIA could get no relief through Interior's IT Dept., it went to the courts. Source: Government Computer News "

The big problem with callerID is that the info is NOT CONTROLLED BY YOUR TELCO.

The information is added and changed by the phone switch the company owns (this is for bigger ones) and more often than, not filled out.

There was a really good article in 2600 that showed how to use those pbx switches to spoof caller info for social engineering.

They also made the winter 2003 cover of 2600 - Hacker Quarterly

We can alter the hardware within an xbox to use it for other purposes than M$ intended.

Er wait, actually no we can't. Anyone offering hardware to "circumvent security" is in violation of the DMCA (mod chip anyone?). Not only are sellers of this equipment in breach of the law, but anyone describing how to "circumvent security" is in breach. Not to mention a person possessing the hardware or reference material on how to do it is in breach...

You never know if the DoJ may come after you for selling Mods, and lets not forget the wholeDeCSS fiasco. (Can I even say "DeCSS" without getting sued/imprisoned?).

Well ok, maybe if you're a mod reseller you might get someone after you. But nobody is going to care if you write "circumventive" software right? Nope, no trouble with the law there.

Of course it's not like I could reference you back to a million different slashdot articles showing how the DCMA makes it illegal to modify your own hardware.

Oh well, at least it's not like I can't yell at my xbox for being useless unless I want to do what M$ wants me to do with it.

Yep, land of the free baby... er, wait a minute, I'm screwed.

I just skimmed the articles I used for references, I apologize if I accidentally used any not pertinent to what I was talking about.

Wired is a wannabe rag. ;)

No, its readers are. But I think the real point is that Wired is doing something atypical and more akin to 2600: The Hacker Quarterly.

It's also been published in the latest issue of 2600.

2,600 gadgets ? I didn't know there were that many new boxes, phone phreak tools and kiddie scripts out there! I need to get back on IRC and USENET to see what I am missing :(

Does X10 have encryption?

I tried to find any specs about that, but couldn't find any. I however doubt that there would be any encryption, because all they actually did according to the page was to combine a screen and a X10 reciever. Or am I missing something here?

You could however check the article in 2600 about "warspying" which said to have inspired them.

It would be quite sad if someone were to uncover some illegal pornography and tip-off the FCC^HPatriot Act^HHOMOLAND SECURITY FORCES and shutdown their service for a bell or two.

Robert

Im shooting for April 10th. Ill have every theater in Las Vegas covered.
http://www.2600.com/news/view/article/18

I imagine some Pynchonesqe system involving guys in trench-coats exchanging plain wrapped packages on street corners... like a 2600 meeting, only classier. A network of "no, I don't have that book... but I know a guy who can get it for you..." etc.

At the time I was thinking of going into security consulting. I thought it would be best to really study up.

They live near Portland, Oregon, which is the home of the famous Powells bookstore, and Powells Technical Books, probably the best technical bookstore in the world. It's worth visiting Portland just to go to Powell's technical books.

So on a visit to the bookstore I bought a copy of 2600 just to see what the bad guys were up to. You know, so I'd be a better security expert.

Well, this got my parents really worried. They thought I was going to start cracking people's boxes. My mother, in a very frightened tone of voice, asked me to promise never to do that. I don't think they really believed that I was trying to learn about it so I could do a better job as a consultant.

Considering that the government can now force bookstores to reveal book purchases without either a search warrant or your knowledge, I would suggest purchasing the book (and any security books) from a brick & mortar bookstore, and paying cash.

If my mother thought I was studying it so I could become 31337, imagine what John Ashcroft might think.

if I had 2600 employees.

(just kidding... I'd actually trust them more than most)

Registrant:
The iSO News (ISONEWS-DOM)
Jacobus van 't Hoffstraat 69
Nijmegen, MR 6533
NL

Domain Name: ISONEWS.COM

Administrative Contact, Technical Contact:
The iSO News (20726749O) mraskolnikov@hotmail.com
The iSO News
Jacobus van 't Hoffstraat 69
Nijmegen, MR 6533
NL
555 555 1212 fax: 555 555 1212

Record expires on 01-Mar-2004.
Record created on 01-Mar-1999.
Database last updated on 27-Feb-2003 07:39:05 EST.

Domain servers in listed order:

NS1.ISONEWS.COM 149.101.1.3
NS2.ISONEWS.COM 149.101.1.6

But.. check the owner of IP's 149.101.1.3..

OrgName: US Dept of Justice
OrgID: UDJ
Address: 1151D Seven Locks Rd
City: Rockville
StateProv: MD
PostalCode: 20854
Country: US
NetRange: 149.101.0.0 - 149.101.255.255
CIDR: 149.101.0.0/16

This looks a lot like the same tactics used in the drug enforcement cases noted by 2600 magazine.

As pointed out to me by someone this could be part of a plea-bargain. But it's at least interesting from a privacy-view since all visits to the new isonews site will now probably be logged very thoroughly.

When I read the article first I was reminded on this one I saw yesterday: DRUG ENFORCEMENT TAKES CONTROL OF DOMAIN NAMES, THREATENS PRIVACY.

Seems that the war on [drugs, terrorism, general stupidity etc] has moved on to a level higher.

Uhm... Isn't the DCMRA already taking a stand on this front?

Rather coincidentally, just the other day, at the Borders Cafe (oh yeah, I can rhyme!), I found and read an article about the DMCRA in the current issue of 2600 magazine. The article took the opinion that the DMCRA put Fair Use back into the equation and stated that it specifically makes exemptions for the cases of scientific research and other legitimate uses.

The article went on, with minimal explanation, to state that the DMCRA reestablishes the Betamax standard with regard to the digital world. Being unfamiliar the Betamax or any related standard, myself, has anyone else an explanation just what that means?

I think most of the people that have gotten in trouble for violations of the DMCA are those who have made something that circumvents the copy protection of something else. Like Dimitry Skylarov and Elcomsoft, who made the software to read Adobe's e-books. They weren't end users, they were the developers. Or 2600 for publishing the DECSS. I would imagine the IEEE would like developers to have more freedom to create new stuff using their standards.

As can be heard here and read here, Valenti's worst enemy is his own lack of ignorance of the topics on which he debates. His retarded allusions and allegory are just the pretty doily on which his pile of bullshit rests.

Go hear/read it for yourself. He's a douche (not breaking news though, is it?). His "no need for back-ups" statement only further demonstrates this fact.

I, for one, wish to see the guy run out of town on a rail, but you can wish in one hand...

As can be heard here and read here, Valenti's worst enemy is his own lack of ignorance of the topics on which he debates. His retarded allusions and allegory are just the pretty doily on which his pile of bullshit rests.

Go hear/read it for yourself. He's a douche (not breaking news though, is it?). His "no need for back-ups" statement only further demonstrates this fact.

I, for one, wish to see the guy run out of town on a rail, but you can wish in one hand...

You can't fast forward through the FBI warning and I have seen a few DVDs (Disney I think) that FORCE you to watch the previews by disabling FF during them.

I mean really are they next going to tell us that to use the fast forward, pause, and rewind buttons are a violation of the copyright

He answered the question on the radio show Off The Hook (see the 10/16/02 show.)

Although he cannot use the internet himself, he is allowed to observe other people who are using it, and talk about the webpage as they view it. Technically he has not been allowed to direct the persone browsing the web, but they sort of work around that via a series of "yes-no" questions.

OMG! Emmanuel from 2600 and Off the Hook is using one of these GPS equipped cars to navagate the western USA right now! Just listen to the Jan. 15 2003 show at the link.

If someone jams a New Yorker in Nevada, what are the odds of them finding their way back to NYC without a subway map ;-)

Hackers 2 == TakeDown (screenshots)

With the new RCA Alert Guard models, television viewers are assured of receiving the latest information on natural disasters threatening their area - such as hurricanes, tornados or floods - as well as nuclear power plant alerts, chemical spills and even threats to the national welfare in the form of terrorist attacks. Even while the consumer is sleeping (and electricity is available), the RCA Alert Guard TV can be set to sound a built-in chime or alarm when danger is imminent.

Kind of reminds me of this news item.

BTW, does anyone read posts by people who just don't like registration?

Kevin was on Off the Hook recently, talking about how he's owned a laptop for a year now, and he's just not allowed on the internet. When asked by a caller what OS he used, he said he used to use SunOS and VMS back in the day, but now he uses Windows XP and thinks it's quite nice. Really sad, actually.

Sorry but you can ask these people if that's still allowed

Yep. As I recall, it was 2600Hz (and that's where 2600 was thought of), at least at the start.

I love changing the homepage of computers at the gateway store, or the roadrunner kiosk at the mall to http://www.2600.com. I come back later and they're all freaked out because they think they got h4x0r3d by some 1337 d00d.

Are friends at 2600 has a good quick article about "Total Information Awareness" and who is behind the department. This is Big government brought to you by Bush.

Hmmm, there are 2600 schools in the Kerala school district according to that memo. Coincidence? I think not! poof! (disappears in a puff of logic)

I could just see this technology being used to ferret out "terrorists". Imagine, you are listening to 2600's radio show and suddenly you are mysteriously pulled over...scary stuff

When you turn off advertising including all banners, you are stealing from your favorite websites.

There was a fuckgeneralmotors.com before, but that's a completely different story.
See 2600.com for details

If so, who won?

The FBI does have the legal authority to monitor ALL activity at public libraries as well as place a gag order on the staff of said libraries. ( I believe it was the patriot act that made it legal, not sure though.) if you don't believe me check these links.

http://www.2600.com/offthehook/2002/0602.html the 6-26 show

http://www.2600.com/offthehook/2002/1102.html the 11-6 show

or right here of farking slashdot

http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/02/11/05/177237.shtml? tid=158

The FBI does have the legal authority to monitor ALL activity at public libraries as well as place a gag order on the staff of said libraries. ( I believe it was the patriot act that made it legal, not sure though.) if you don't believe me check these links.

http://www.2600.com/offthehook/2002/0602.html the 6-26 show

http://www.2600.com/offthehook/2002/1102.html the 11-6 show

or right here of farking slashdot

http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/02/11/05/177237.shtml? tid=158

Bored during my summer, I thought I would take this project on. I began my research on June 26, before 2600 published the article on uncapping. Through various methods (mainly IRC), I talked to several people and finally figured out how to uncap my modem. Well, it wasn't as easy as it seems.

I went to a lot of trouble that in the end left me without cable and nearly in jail.

My ISP, like many, uses a system called QoS, or Quality of Service. This means a few things.

1) You can't connect without a config that the ISP doesn't already have (i.e., you can't create a config file with a 10mbit/10mbit line if the cable company only offers 400/200 800/400 and 1.5/512). This means in order to uncap, you can only uncap to a better service plan (i.e., going from 400/200 to 1.5/512).

2) In order to uncap to a better service plan you must get the config for that service plan, as making one with those caps often will not work. Take note, this config file has a different name than the one sent to your modem, and since the TFTP protocol doesn't allow directory listing, you must either have once used the faster service and seen the config file, or you have to know someone who has it who can help you out. Should you manage to get this config file, your problems are still not over.

3) The QoS checks your modem's MAC address every 10-15 minutes (depending on the size of your node) to make sure that the parameters set in your modem are the ones that you pay for. Note: the MAC cannot be changed because you have to register your MAC with the ISP, s they inevitably know who you are. To get around the QoS resetting your modem, one may think "Well hay, let's just change the SNMP ports so they can't send the reboot command to me!" Hah! That pisses them off like nothing else, and yes, they can track that. All it takes is about a day to find your port. The default SNMP ports are 161 and 162. I changed minme to 9999999941 and 9999999942. In two days they were once again resetting via SNMP.

4) So you figure, "Well, that means I have one or two days of uncapped modem, right?" Wrong. There is another way they can reset you that you can do nothing about. In order for your modem to stay connected to the server it must "ping" the server and get responses back. I say "ping" in quotations since it is not your normal 52 byte packet ping. It is a special CMTS type ping. What the ISP can do, should they notice that you are indeed using a faster config, is "suspend" the "pings," meaning that they are lost, and none come back to the modem. This will force an "HFC: Async Error Range Failed" error on your modem's long, which will be followed by "HFC: Shutting Upstream Down," and then "BOOTING: (firmware version)."

So now, this doesn't seem that bad. You may be thinking, "Why is this guy even writing this stuff - if there is a will there is a way." That is true, but my purpose is to show you that if your ISP does use QoS (examples of some that do are: Blueyonder, ATTBI, Cableone, Charter, Comcast, and NTL) then if you ever attempt ot uncap, they will notice and they will call you.

I received my first call the morning after I requested tech support to come out and fix the signal strength of my line (it was way out of spec and kept resetting my modem). Well, as protocol they watch your line to see what they can diagnose before the tech arrived at your house. Well that morning (the 10th of July), I uncapped and within ten minutes I had a call from the headquarters of my ISP, some 600 miles away. This was a "tap on the wrist" type conversation. They said basically, we see that you are uncapping, and that violates our Terms of Service agreement. Don't do it again. So I didn't for a while.

A couple of weeks went by and I used Ethereal, I common network "sniffer", to determine whether or not my ISP was watching my MAC address. Later I learned they were on the entire time and when they saw me "Sniffing" for info, they simply hid themselves behind the IP address 255.255.255.254. Not knowing that information, I decided it was safe to uncap again. And so I did and continued to be reset with HFC errors. I tried various methods to get around it, installed hacked firmware, sent various SNMP commands, even attempted to fake a CMTP server so that the CM would send the "pings" to a computer on my LAN, all to no avail. So when my modem would go back to normal, I would send it a new config, and the process went on and on like that for two weeks or so.

I left early on a Friday morning for a little weekend getaway. While I was out of town, I didn't even think about the status of my cable. No, I did not leave it uncapped when I left the house, but the damage had already been done. My ISP had all the evidence they needed to shut my cable off, and press misdemeaner charges, mainly based on cyber theft.

I returned to find a message on my answering machine from an "Internet Engineer" at the ISP's headquarters. He was not very pleased. The message was over 15 minutes long and contained a great deal of threats and comments obviously designed to scare an uncapped. It worked. I was terrified. After hearing the message, I went out to check the mail. In there was an envelope from my ISP containing a "Declaration of Termination of Service." In this letter were several items, including possible criminal charges to be pressed, two pages dealing every time I uncapped from July 10 to the present, and a long, long list of how I violated the Terms of Service with my ISP. Sure enough, when I went to contact the Internet Engineer by email, (the only contact information that was listed), my Internet service did not work. As a routing check, I looked at my modem's long file only to find this disturbing messsage: 7-Information D509.0 Retreived TFTP Config TRMNT.cm SUCCESS.

I twas clear. My service had been terminated. But my problems were not over yet.

The following day (August 5) I received another call from him, telling me that the ISP wanted to press charges. As soon as I was off the phone I immediately called my lawyer and told him the entire situation. My lawyer spent the rest of the day on the phone with my ISP and came to an agreement that for the two months that I uncapped, I would have to pay for the better service.

In the end, uncapping got me these final results:

Pros:

• 200+ KBps downloads (needing to be reconfigured every 35 minutes)
• 100+ KBps uploads (needing to be reconfigured every 35 minutes).

Cons:

• No more cable Internet.
• Almost got charges pressed.
• Ended up wasting about 150 hours of my life to no avail.
• Had to deal with really pissed off nerds with power.

The choice is up to you. This was just my experience.

----
Reprinted from 2600: The Hacker Quarterly, Volume 19, Number 3, Fall 2002 without permission. Even though Olsen's account obviously has some glaring mistakes (52-byte ping? Since when is the payload fixed? He probably means an ICMP ping.), I believe it provides an interesting account into what can happen if you're uncapped. Maybe not as drastic as the visit from the FBI in this Slashdot article, but certainly uncapping is still not worth it. Especially when your cable provider is a monopoly!

Soon privacy will just be a buzzword that you will lauch at (like .NET or M$) as everybody will know everything about you, your children and your children's children.

With regard to today's world, here in NZ the only really mandatory way to give ID is a photo and/or a signature and I'm fine with that. We don't have amazing crime rates that would really warrant biometric scans.

Off the hook had a show a bit back about this being mandatory in stores and the question really boils down to - After you press your hand/finger on this pad, where and for how long will it be stored?

I think that if the scan will just be used for ID and then dumped, then it's ok, but in your case your scan is actually stored somewhere else for comparison.

Simply - Get used to it, soon DNA scans, retinal scans, dental scans and psycological scans will be required before you walk ouside to verify that you're not a "threat" to the outside world.

Actually I heard Kevin Mitnik, talking on Emmanuel Goldstein's show, Off The Hook, about how it is very easy to spoof caller ID and tracking by hacking a PBX. Download the october 16th show it is described. According to them they can make any number appear as the origin, and it is nearly impossible to track, since the pbx itself is responsible for logging the call.

"Could Jesus Microwave a burrito so hot, that he himself could not eat it."HS