Spoofing URLs With Unicode
Embedded Geek writes: "Scientific American has an interesting article about how a pair of students at the Technion-Israel Institute of Technology registered "microsoft.com" with Verisign, using the Russian Cyrillic letters "c" and "o". Even though it is a completely different domain, the two display identically (the article uses the term "homograph"). The work was done for a paper in the Communications of the ACM (the paper itself is not online). The article characterizes attacks using this spoof as "scary, if not entirely probable," assuming that a hacker would have to first take over a page at another site. I disagree: sending out a mail message with the URL waiting to be clicked ("Bill Gates will send you ten dollars!") is just one alternate technique. While security problems with Unicode have been noted here before, this might be a new twist."
When you pay money, say with paypal.com, you always want to check the URL. Of course someone could have fake link like: "click here to pay with paypal" and then redirect you to their bogus site with the intention of stealing your passwords. But it would be fairly obvious from the location bar in the broswer that the URL was not paypal.com. But if unicode can be used to spoof the location bar then it will rope in even cautious users.
I recently received an email from a confused user who had received an email that appeared to be from Apple, and was selling Apple products using Apple logos, Apple website concepts and images, etc., but was not from Apple. He didn't sign up for the list, and though it appeared to be a legitimate Apple affiliate as far as I could tell (though perhaps one that used somewhat shaky methods to reach customers), he was confused why Apple was sending him email that he didn't ask for. It was his belief that the mail had actually come from Apple, because it looked like it was from Apple.
Non-nerds have proven to be extremely difficult to educate on the concept that "what email claims to be is not always what email is, and where it claims to come from is not always where it really came from". During the recent Klez outbreak, I even received a message from a nerd-friend saying that he thought my machine might be infected, because he received an infected message from "me". Of course it was spoofed, because I happen to be in a lot of peoples address books, but since I haven't used Windows on the desktop in over three years, it clearly didn't actually originate with my box.
Folks are just kinda thick about questioning the veracity of claims (hell, astrology still sells books and 900-number phone calls). And this could definitely be used for nasty purposes...and certainly will. Spammers will have a field day with this, because they can't help but seem 'fly by night' because they cannot establish a real brand name due to the disgusting nature of their busines. If they stand still, they'll get lynched. But if they can, even for a short time, hijack a real name that people trust, and offer up a too-good-to-be-true scam under that trusted name...well, you see where I'm going with this.
Of course, everyone here knows that unsolicited "business offers" by email are always scams run by filthy people...but my grandmother doesn't know it, nor do my parents or many of my non-nerd friends for that matter.
Just a thought. We'll see how it plays out, I reckon...
Most people just blindly click OK, because it is usually OK.
A lot of small e-business sites want to use their hosting provider's cert, but don't want the user's browser to display the hosting company's domain rather than their own. (Yes I know it's stupid, people are picky as fuck when you are making web pages).
Anyway, that causes the browser to warn that the cert is not valid for the domain it is being used in.
It's kinda possible to get around this using frames, but then the browser might say something about mixed secure and unsecure items on a page. The only real way to do it right is to just let the users see the hosting provider's address, as far as I know, or have the site buy their own cert.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
Dan Bernstein has a proposal for internationalized domain names which solves this problem and many other problems. It's called IDNC3. IDN stands for ``internationalized domain name.'' C3 stands for ``clean, careful, conservative.''
Don't piss off The Angry Economist
1) Some people are not good at spelling, and wouldn't know microsoft.com from microssoft.com, especially if it's just seen in a few quick glances.
.biz or .info TLD does not mean it is the same company... but no doubt alot of people think that's true.
n =allyourmoneyarebelongtous
2) There are more TLDs out now, and the same name at a
3) There's always the old numeral "1" swapped for the lowercase "L" or the uppercase "I", trick, among other similar things that never involved Unicode, but rather human vision and high-resolutions.
4) The "@" symbol in the URL trick, like http:\\microsoft.com\moneyfrombil@haxor.com?actio
So if you haven't figured out my point yet, a good percentage of people that use the internet are going to be fooled by far simpler feats of social engineering. Who needs Unicode to do it?
Actually, no. Glagolitic was indeed invented by Cyrill and Methodius, in the 9th century. I don't know where the previous poster got the St. Clement reference. See here for the character set and a bit of history.
These two also invented cyrillic. The difference is that glagolitic didn't survive very long, while the cyrillic is still in use today. The last country to use glagolitic in any quantity is Croatia, up to the end of the 19th century.
Tsunami -- You can't bring a good wave down!
Even better... I seem to recall a scam that did just that with paypal. They sent out bulk mail about updating your account or something but the link was not paypa(lower case 'L').com but paypa(Capital 'I').com and had made a carbon-copy of paypal's website, hoping you would log in. The address in the location bar looks identical for both. This sounds like the same kind of thing but using Unicode to make the spoof.
Umm, that holds true ... if you were talking about a dictionary. The accent mark is for such purposes only (or for books for foreigners). It would be like spelling English with ä, ë, etc. to describe vowel lengths and values. This holds true even for foreign words. You just don't see accent marks in normal Russian text (unless it is dire necessity involving verbal aspect and such) ... but for a name? Nah ...
That is, if you are interested in the dry, technical details... ;-)
Can you perhaps explain why KOI8 characters are out of order?
Because they were ordered as a transliteration for the Latin alphabet (sorry, can't put it in Cyrillic): ABCDEF instead of ABVGDE.
My guess is that this was done to easily transform Russian text written using the Latin alphabet into Cyrillic by simply flipping a bit.....
I'm trying not to sound like a lingual elite-ist by any means, but can anyone really say that we shouldn't standardize on English/ASCII?
Yes. It's ridiculous to ask people to learn (admitedly a small part of) a new language to use a computer. Just because English is taught in a lot (not all) of schools around the world, it doesn't mean that everyone is comfortable using it. A truely usable computer should be one which allows you to interact with it 100% in your own langauge.
The internet has shrunk the barrier to exchange information, which has made diverse languages even more significant of a barrier.
The main barrier to computer usage in a large part of the world is that it is still an elitist medium - only useable (and affordable) by the well-educated. If you are actually interested in making it easier for everyone to communicate, then the main technical issue to be solved is how to make the internet useable by anyone from any background.
If we use UNICODE and just let accept that everyone wants to use their own language, then the internet will end up as a group of national islands of information. Each group will surf their set of native language web sites.
This already happens. Of course people surf websites in their own language! Because you (and I) only surf the English-speaking fraction of the web, you don't see it. All that international domain names adds is that a Russian accessing a Russian website can do so via a Russian URL. What could be more sensible or obvious than that?
If no standard is agreed upon, proprietory standards will pop up all over the place, and it'll be a huge mess. In fact this is already happening - although he's the current anti-Christ of Slashdot, the big selling point of RealNames was for non-English languages, and if you believe Keith Teare's account, he was shafted by Microsoft because they wanted to control (via their browser) the translation of non-ASCII names to ASCII URLs.
The Homograph Attack