Slashdot Mirror


San Francisco DA Discloses City's Passwords

snydeq writes "The office of San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris has made public close to 150 usernames and passwords used by various departments to connect to the city's VPN. The passwords were filed this week as Exhibit A in a court document arguing against a reduction in $5 million bail in the case against Terry Childs. Though they placed the passwords in the public record, city prosecutors do seem to think that they are sensitive. InfoWorld's Paul Venezia, who has been following the case closely, provides further analysis of the technical details in the city's case. 'By themselves, [the passwords] would not be enough to allow anyone to access the network via VPN,' Venezia writes, 'but the fact that the city entered them into evidence is quite shocking. At the very least, they'll have to shut down their VPN access for awhile until they've changed them all and modified the configurations of some large number of VPN clients.'"

333 comments

  1. Ah HA! by clang_jangle · · Score: 5, Insightful

    AH HA! See, Childs was right , he is the only competent one!

    --
    Caveat Utilitor
    1. Re:Ah HA! by WK2 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Why did the DA even have access to these passwords? Why were they not in hash form? Did Child's have anything to do with that part?

      --
      Write your own Choose Your Own Adventure. http://www.freegameengines.org/gamebook-engine/
    2. Re:Ah HA! by kesuki · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "AH HA! See, Childs was right , he is the only competent one!"

      from TFA: 'Some of the passwords would benefit from a change because they are identical to the VPN log-in name or extremely easy to guess.'

      wow, bad passwords, no wonder the guy was worried, using dictionary words is like not having a password as far as hackers are concerned, same deal with identical user/pass combos. i realize they use a encrypted key along with the password, but still...

    3. Re:Ah HA! by Maniacal · · Score: 1

      Holy crap. This is great. I can picture Childs in his cell right now doing the "Where the hell is Matt" dance. If he's held on $5 million bail this dipshit should be arrested and held without bail.

      --
      MG
    4. Re:Ah HA! by Volante3192 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Bad IT policy, or bad users? IT is sadly not as much a dictatorship as we'd like. If enough users whine, it ends up being policy that passwords get lax. These users "are too important to have to come up with complex passwords incorporating at least 3 different character types in 8 or more characters"

      Make password policies too complex, users just write them down. Frying pan, fire...welcome to IT.

    5. Re:Ah HA! by Hanzie · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Hey guys,

      If you have any other opinions you'd really like entered into the public record, have at it. I'd say there's a very good chance that this discussion will be entered as evidence by the defense.:)

      If anyone is counting, add my vote for the VPN passwords' disclosure being hard evidence that the IT admin was perfectly correct.

      That and the fact that the SF network stayed up while the world's hackers KNEW that the network was completely unsupervised.

      Frankly, if I were looking to hire somebody, I'd be chipping into this guy's defense fund. Speaking as a real-world IT manager, I'd say this guys judgement is spot on, and his admin skills are amazing.

      In my own humble opinion, then SF DA's office is full of idiots.

      hanzie.

      --
      ********* sig: If you don't like the law, get filthy stinking rich, and buy a better one.
    6. Re:Ah HA! by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Childs' defense attorney has got to be happy about this.

      "Your Honor.. I would like to direct the Court's attention to Exhibit A; the mere existence of which proves our case..."

    7. Re:Ah HA! by GameboyRMH · · Score: 4, Insightful

      My first thought. Whenever a password is stored in a form that it could be retrieved (rather than only reset), the users should be notified beforehand, otherwise it's just unethical IMO...not to mention the security issues.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    8. Re:Ah HA! by kesuki · · Score: 1

      you should teach users to write down hints that aren't the actual password, but allow them to remember what the password is.

      besides, writing down passwords is only bad if you don't protect who can read the paper properly.

    9. Re:Ah HA! by yehooti3 · · Score: 1

      Just classic!

    10. Re:Ah HA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Childs was right , he is the only competent one!

      In the state of California?

    11. Re:Ah HA! by Darkk · · Score: 1

      Better yet, I've seen users use Post-It notes to write down passwords and guess where they stick it on?

    12. Re:Ah HA! by Atari400 · · Score: 1

      Exactly who is the DA going to expert witness against Terry Childs, should matters come to trial?

      --
      IBM doesn't play chess with the Universe.
    13. Re:Ah HA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      $DIETY, don't I know it. I run VPNs where I work, and we just set up a bunch of users in our Risk Management department to be able to log in and retrieve critical data files, using only a logon name, password, and 4-6 digit PIN. Everyone else that gets on the network has to use RSA SecurID tokens, but these users "don't need to be bothered with having to keep track of tokens."

    14. Re:Ah HA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to the article they were retrieved from Child's computer. So from the perspective of the city they were already compromised, since who knows how Child obtained them, or who he gave them too. This basically just reinforcing the need for the users to change their passwords.

    15. Re:Ah HA! by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 1

      you should teach users to write down hints that aren't the actual password, but allow them to remember what the password is.

      I had tried that with my truecrypt drive... the problem is, even when i remember perfectly what the hint is, i forgot the password :'(

      Bye bye truecrypt partition.

    16. Re:Ah HA! by CrazedWalrus · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      IIRC a Slashdot article a day or two ago, it said that Childs gave the passwords to the Mayor. I'd guess that's how they wound up with the DA.

      I guess they don't teach politicians good IT security policy. Color me surprised.

    17. Re:Ah HA! by Heembo · · Score: 1

      Why did the DA even have access to these passwords? Why were they not in hash form? Did Child's have anything to do with that part?

      Hash form is not enough; might as well be plaintext for up to 10 or more characters. They need to be in *per-user salted* hash form.

      --
      Horns are really just a broken halo.
    18. Re:Ah HA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a trap!

      "At the very least, they'll have to shut down their VPN access for awhile until they've changed them all and modified the configurations of some large number of VPN clients.'"

      Don't they need the defendant to do this? When he refuses surely they will claim more damages.

    19. Re:Ah HA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Childs' defense attorney has got to be happy about this.

      "Your Honor.. I would like to direct the Court's attention to Exhibit A; the mere existence of which proves our case..."

      LMFAO

    20. Re:Ah HA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The password shown to the court by the DA are the paswords taken from Terry Child's computer. The password are for average users to acess the city's VPN.

      The passwords given to the mayor are more than likely the admin password to servers and routers.

    21. Re:Ah HA! by Cramer · · Score: 1

      Any one of the other thousands of CCIE's wandering the globe. How about the Cisco consultants on-site making sense of the mess? And then there's every one of his coworkers as character witnesses.

      If I were in SF, I'd volunteer, pro-bono.

    22. Re:Ah HA! by penguinbrat · · Score: 1

      i realize they use a encrypted key along with the password, but still...

      First thing that comes to mind, is if the user is that lax on passwords, I would presume to think that the rest of thier system would be just as insecure, and that magic key is not very far away...

    23. Re:Ah HA! by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      One way you would get those passwords is if, as a responsible admin, you attempted to crack those passwords - and succeeded.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    24. Re:Ah HA! by OBeardedOne · · Score: 1

      "wow, bad passwords, no wonder the guy was worried, using dictionary words is like not having a password as far as hackers are concerned, same deal with identical user/pass combos. i realize they use a encrypted key along with the password, but still..."

      Can someone please elaborate on why "dictionary words" for passwords are so bad? I can understand that a hacker can do a dictionary attack and ultimately guess the password but how is it that the systems protecting the network allow this to happen? My bank, for instance, blocks my account if I enter the wrong password three times and I have to call the bank to reset it. Doesn't this stop a dictionary attack in its tracks? If not, why not? And if it does, I don't understand why more systems don't use similar protection measures. As far as I'm concerned the use of dictionary words as passwords isn't the problem, the problem is with the security systems themselves.

    25. Re:Ah HA! by loraksus · · Score: 1

      In my own humble opinion, then SF DA's office is full of idiots.

      Or fuckup political appointees (just like the majority of the IT department), but the two aren't mutually exclusive.

      --
      1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
    26. Re:Ah HA! by Joker1980 · · Score: 1

      I guess they don't teach politicians good IT security policy. Color me surprised.

      You right to not be surprised, they don't teach politicians "GOOD" policy's full stop, i don't see why security should be the exception

      --
      Well, Bart, your uncle Arthur used to have a saying: "Shoot 'em all and let God sort 'em out."
    27. Re:Ah HA! by Joker1980 · · Score: 1

      Bullshit, if ur responsible for a network (especially a critical network) then YOU are responsible for it, not HR not the users not anybody but you. If the shit hits the fan the admins are the first ones management look at.

      --
      Well, Bart, your uncle Arthur used to have a saying: "Shoot 'em all and let God sort 'em out."
    28. Re:Ah HA! by Volante3192 · · Score: 1

      And yet, that same management is riding our ass the whole time wanting more and more access. We don't give them rights, they just whine more and more. We do, they fuck things up, and they blame us.

      It's a no-win situation and They. Never. Learn. (Plus, they sign our paychecks...)

    29. Re:Ah HA! by Anonymous+Cowpat · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      For all we know, the password Childs gave to the Mayor was the password to some sort of password vault or truecrypt volume on his work PC, in which they have magically found this list. The whole case reaks of spin, lies, bluff, double bluff and FUD. Perhaps we hould stop going to see the media circus on this one and wait until the end of the show.
      (Yeah, ok I live in Britain, where law enforcement will happily shoot an unarmed man on the tube and then feed the public at least 3 lies about the incident in 24 hours, which the press rapidly lap up. Where the press also spent 3 weeks in a shocked daze that the Portugese police wouldn't tell them every detail of on ongoing inquiry like the British police do. Forgive me if I'm cynical about the one-sided information that law enforcement types tend to give the press about an investigation long before the fat lady has even arrived at the opera house.)

      --
      FGD 135
    30. Re:Ah HA! by revengance · · Score: 1

      Of course. The standard password is either password or an empty password.

    31. Re:Ah HA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      using dictionary words is like not having a password as far as hackers are concerned

      As far as authentication is concerned, a dictionary word isn't all that bad a password, as long is it's not too obvious. All good authentication systems allow a lockout policy and a timeout between attempts. Also, any good implementation will flag activity indicative of a brute force hacking attempt. I personally would like to see more complexity, but since users are just going to stick "99" on the end of their kid's name, it doesn't really matter.

    32. Re:Ah HA! by Joker1980 · · Score: 1

      Very very true. im lucky i recently started a job where IT controls IT, its amazing how smoothly things run. I was certain i was gonna leave the profession before i got this job, however today for the first time in years im actually enjoying being an admin. Its been years since i thought of myself as a valued member of a team yet im actually in a position that management actually listen to me and the department as a whole. for example we recently took on a a junior desktop support guy and even he has had policy's introduced simply because they work, compare that to my last place where its seemed like management policy was to not only ignore but do the opposite of what we recommended

      --
      Well, Bart, your uncle Arthur used to have a saying: "Shoot 'em all and let God sort 'em out."
    33. Re:Ah HA! by MadnessASAP · · Score: 1

      No it's still a bad idea, perfect example: at my high school all logins were handled through an NT domain with Kerberos. By bringing in my own laptoip and hooking it into the network I was able to execute an ARP Spoof on the login server and sniff password hashes off the network and students and teachers would login. I then had the ability to brute force those passwords as fast or as slowly as I wanted too, and guess what? A dictionary attack left me with a nice handful of teacher passwords which gave me access to all the Network shares, the E-Mail system and the Markbook system.

      I also discovered that the default teacher password was weaker then the default student password(5 numeric vs 4 alpha)

      So long story short, never assume that somebody needs to access your server to break a password.

      AC Because of mod points.

      --
      I may agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to face the consequences of saying it.
    34. Re:Ah HA! by Nazlfrag · · Score: 1

      If a hacker can get a copy of the encrypted passwords he can launch his dictionary attack offline, taking as many attempts as he wishes. Generally a hacker won't be using the front door to get into a system, making the locks there fairly useless. He might sniff the encrypted passwords from the network, use a compromised account to simply download them from the disk or have a trojan collect them, there are many indirect ways.

      The reasoning that dictionary words are terrible security is because a brute force attack (the simplest type) goes from needing billions of attempts to a few hundred thousand at most.

    35. Re:Ah HA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem with using dictionary words is that they're an unnecessary point of weakness when trying to secure defense in depth. For example, you can try repeat guessing the password if the system allows you. Also, if the password file is poorly protected, you can subject it to a rainbow attack by comparing the password hashes to a file of pre-computed hash functions generated from commonly used passwords, which include dictionary words.

    36. Re:Ah HA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Never mind that!

      Where can I download these passwords?

    37. Re:Ah HA! by Dan541 · · Score: 1

      I want to see them aswell.

      It's not a security issue if the passwords are not disclosed.

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    38. Re:Ah HA! by johannesg · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Bad IT policy, or bad users? IT is sadly not as much a dictatorship as we'd like. If enough users whine, it ends up being policy that passwords get lax. These users "are too important to have to come up with complex passwords incorporating at least 3 different character types in 8 or more characters"

      Make password policies too complex, users just write them down. Frying pan, fire...welcome to IT.

      Of course! Take my PC at work: I am required to use a different password every six months, and it has to be long and contain three different character types. And after ten minutes of inactivity, my PC automatically locks the screen. Great security, right?

      Except... Outsiders cannot physically get into the office, and the PC cannot be reached from the internet, so the only potential source of hackers are my colleagues. And since all data is kept on network disks anyway, and since those are accessible to everyone in the office, what's the f'ing point!? All it does is make my fingers contort several times per day to enter an impossible password, even though "12345" would offer the exact same level of protection!

      So yes, I have only limited respect for password policies. You'll find my PC password on the yellow post-it on the left monitor. That way my colleagues can check my mail when I'm not there. It makes me feel a whole lot better that important mails will not go missed during my absence...

    39. Re:Ah HA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > My bank, for instance, blocks my account if I enter the wrong password three times and I have to call the bank to reset it.

      Meaning that every idiot can make it impossible for you to ever again use you bank account online.
      Depending on the environment, such a policy can be _far_ more costly than even no password at all.

    40. Re:Ah HA! by DingerX · · Score: 1

      So, does this mean IT admins are going to add a few sites to the list of undesirable crackz/warez/p4sswordz addresses?

    41. Re:Ah HA! by The+FNP · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Alright, from TFA, these are departmental passwords, they are for VPN access, and a source who may be knowledgable about the case says this is something a Net Admin would normally have on their PC. Let's look at his job, he is the Network Admin. He's responsible for making sure everybody can access the network. Therefore, it should be his job to keep this document so that he can provide the users(of the proper departments) with their proper access credentials.

      This proves nothing, except that the DA and the city IT may be functionally retarded, and that security probably is a horrible nightmare in SF.

      --The FNP

    42. Re:Ah HA! by Pvt_Ryan · · Score: 1

      ...

      At the next corut hearing:

      Childs' Lawyer: "I rest my case your honor."

    43. Re:Ah HA! by crath · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Therefore, it should be his job to keep this document so that he can provide the users(of the proper departments) with their proper access credentials.

      There are NO circumstances under which one user should possess another user's password; not even an Administrator. The only exception to this rule ever allowed is when the account is first created: when a one-time use password is assigned by the Administrator; however, in a world-class IT infrastructure (such as an enterprise like the city of SF can afford to implement) an application creates and assigns a random password and then communicates it to the user via secure means (with no person seeing or having access to that password).

    44. Re:Ah HA! by OnlineAlias · · Score: 3, Informative

      Your comment is true, and so few IT organizations actually understand what you have said. However, these are "phase one" passwords. These particular passwords are the ones that allow a system to communicate with the network to even begin the process of authenticating a user. Any good admin must have these, as it is the admin that creates them and they cannot be changed after the fact. If you change one, you will have to go through and rebuild the certificate on the other device that is requesting access.

      Interestingly, the DA is exposing the network even more than people know. Since this is essentially a defense in depth strategy, a lot of times the secondary password measures put in place (ie, authenticating the users) are weaker and more hackable. As admins know the first phase one measure is in place, the second one usually isn't as strong or monitored as well. After all, it isn't usually subject to brute force attacks.

      Now San Fransisco's weakest and most sensitive set of passwords are subject to brute force attacks in a free-for-all on the internet. Since there are so many passwords published, quite possibly the attacks could be from multiple vectors to multiple edge devices. Seems the DA is either wildly incompetent (by virtue of not getting high end consulting advice on this subject) or has some legal reason to ensure the network is hacked. Either way, yikes.

    45. Re:Ah HA! by nabsltd · · Score: 1

      There are NO circumstances under which one user should possess another user's password; not even an Administrator.

      For VPN (particularly the Cisco VPN client), this isn't 100% true.

      The story says these are "departmental passwords", and Cisco VPN has the concept of "group authentication" that drops you into a group of VPN users. To completely connect, you need the group name, the group password, your username, and your password. Where I am, you get the group name and password as part of the admin install of the client, which places it into the connection profile. So, I "know" the same password as a lot of other people (the ones in my group).

      It is stored in the connection profile as obfuscated, but it can't be a hash, as it has to be sent as the original when connecting. And, there are utilities that can reverse the obfuscation in a fraction of a second. But, because of the multiple factors, it's not really a large risk, because you have to match up the user with the right group, and then get the user password right. The Cisco VPNs I connect to use an RSA key for the user password, and if that's the case here, it's not a big deal at all to release this info.

      So, if these "departmental passwords" are just Cisco VPN group usernames and passwords, it's not much of an issue, as it's pretty easy to get access to them, unless they force their users to memorize them as well as their personal password.

    46. Re:Ah HA! by OnlineAlias · · Score: 1

      "it's pretty easy to get access to them..."

      You obviously understand these systems well. However, in order to gain access to them one would have to be in possession of a city computer or device. Now everyone in the world (literally) has access to them, an order of magnitude larger group to have to worry about.

    47. Re:Ah HA! by blane.bramble · · Score: 1

      OK, the basic reason why dictionary words are bad is this: traditionally for Unix systems, in order for systems to allow users to authenticate, the password file had to be readable by the users. This meant any valid user account could grab the *entire* list of encrypted passwords. Now all you had to do was run a list of dictionary words through the known encryption routine and compare the encrypted result with the versions in the password file - if you get a match you know the password for that user.

    48. Re:Ah HA! by The+Spoonman · · Score: 1

      Yuh-huh, tell that to ENI. My company just started using them to manage a healthy lifestyles-type thing. When I called them because I couldn't log in (turns out their site is completely fucked and doesn't support Firefox), the CSR AND someone identified to me as an IT Support rep was able to read my password back to me. But, that's ok, they're only housing my personal medical information there. It's not like there's laws protecting that kind of thing...

      Oh, wait, there are...and when I brought it up to my HR, I was told they were satisfied with ENI's privacy procedures ("our employees are told not to discuss personal, private information") and to fuck off. so, I filed a complaint with the DHHS under HIPPA. Doubt I'll ever hear anything, but fuck 'em, I'm already looking to relocate.

      --
      Which is more painful? Going to work or gouging your eye out with a spoon? Find out!
      http://www.workorspoon.com
    49. Re:Ah HA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why does Great Value microwave bacon claim 2.1oz/59g on the front, and 4.23oz/120g on the nutrition value label?.

      Because a computer virus has infected your brain and is doubling the numbers.

    50. Re:Ah HA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If Mayor Gavin Newsom is the only person you can trust, you're royally screwed from the start. I thoroughly enjoy every problem San Francisco has. What a bunch of fucktards!

    51. Re:Ah HA! by Volante3192 · · Score: 1

      You are aware that more incidents of data theft and sabotage come from internal sources, right?

      Outside hackers and crackers are NOT the primary worry of IT: it's protecting employees from each other. So if one of your colleagues goes to the dark side and uses your account for nefarious purposes, don't come crying to us.

  2. Suddenly Childs seems quite normal by 99luftballon · · Score: 4, Funny

    If this is the level of fuckwittage he had to deal with while in his job I'm not surprised he locked others out.

    1. Re:Suddenly Childs seems quite normal by ScrewMaster · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah. It must've been a tough call, though, because he didn't really have the authority to do that, but on the other hand, if he hadn't, the buffoons running that department would caused the city even more grief.

      Sounds more like he should have gotten a reward or a medal or something. It's funny, but this is a case of a citizen protecting a government from itself, not the other way around.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    2. Re:Suddenly Childs seems quite normal by teal_ · · Score: 1

      He's like a vigilante!

    3. Re:Suddenly Childs seems quite normal by John+Hasler · · Score: 4, Insightful

      > ...he didn't really have the authority to do that...

      You don't know what he did. You only know what the aforementioned "fuckwits" allege that he did.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    4. Re:Suddenly Childs seems quite normal by LaskoVortex · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If this is the level of fuckwittage he had to deal with while in his job I'm not surprised he locked others out.

      As you are well aware, bureaucracy is ruled mostly by idiots. They are put into places of power with the bureaucracy for precisely this reason. Their idiocy makes them less threatening. Once arriving there, being idiots, they are suspicious of anyone smarter. They especially do not like their own idiocy shoved in their face with the constant superior intellect of those who may happen to come along. Now these idiots can do stupid things, like enter passwords into public record or fire talented sys admins, but they will not get in trouble. Why? Because its better to do the wrong thing because you are stupid than it is to do the right thing that some idiot made against the rules one time.

      --
      Just callin' it like I see it.
    5. Re:Suddenly Childs seems quite normal by actionbastard · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "...because he didn't really have the authority to do that..."
      But his supervisors and everyone in his department knew he was the only one -the 'go to' guy- that really had the in-depth knowledge to figure out problems and make stuff work. If they let him do that without objection or questioning his reasons, they gave their tacit approval to allow him to operate in the fashion that he did.

      --
      Sig this!
    6. Re:Suddenly Childs seems quite normal by Cramer · · Score: 1

      Not necessarily without question, but obviously with little power to actually stop him. Even with other admins, it comes down to a race -- whoever gets in first to lock everybody else out wins. (that was actually part of my Nortel Passport training class :-))

    7. Re:Suddenly Childs seems quite normal by Cramer · · Score: 1

      they gave their tacit approval to allow him to operate in the fashion that he did

      right up to when they fired him.

    8. Re:Suddenly Childs seems quite normal by banished · · Score: 1

      As you are well aware, bureaucracy is ruled mostly by idiots. They are put into places of power with the bureaucracy for precisely this reason. Their idiocy makes them less threatening.

      You mean like the ones that will be running "universal" health care?

    9. Re:Suddenly Childs seems quite normal by greyhueofdoubt · · Score: 2, Insightful

      >>bureaucracy is ruled mostly by idiots

      There is a common saying wrt management/bureaucracy/gov't jobs:

      "In a Hierarchy Every Employee Tends to Rise to His Level of Incompetence"

      And the corollary:

      "In time, every post tends to be occupied by an employee who is incompetent to carry out his duties; work is accomplished by those employees who have not yet reached their level of incompetence"

      This is known as the Peter Principle. It is a deviously simple concept with far-ranging consequences: Every employee will eventually be promoted to a position ONE level above their competency. And they will stay there instead of being demoted or fired; that's just the way it works.

      I have worked for the state and fed gov't for the past 7 years and I can attest to the profound accuracy of the Peter Principle. What you need to remember when dealing with superiors is that the higher people get promoted, the greater the chance that you are dealing with someone who is genuinely incompetent. They may not be a bad person, but they are no longer qualified to hold their job. So don't take things too personally when you are ordered shut down the company's most profitable center or paint cartoon bulldogs on fighter jets.

      Stay in school and eat lots of fiber and someday you, too, will be promoted one level above your competence.

      -b

      --
      No offense, but I've stopped responding to AC's.
    10. Re:Suddenly Childs seems quite normal by cthulu_mt · · Score: 1

      Terry Childs: Arrest me; I am the Batman.

      --
      Virginia is for lovers. EVE is for griefers.
  3. Then the users will change them right back by Homer's+Donuts · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Then the users will change them right back to what they were.

    Where I used to work, you had to change your password every month. After you changed it three times, you could it back to the original.

    So people just changed their password 4 times.

    1. Re:Then the users will change them right back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like you have to use a shitty system. Real systems prevent duplicates, or even similar patterns. It can be a real pain.

    2. Re:Then the users will change them right back by Volante3192 · · Score: 1

      Real systems involve users calling up every few months complaining they forgot their password when they end up changing it...

    3. Re:Then the users will change them right back by clang_jangle · · Score: 5, Funny

      I used to work in an office which was a complete free-for-all. Once I had some code I needed to test on a Windows machine (mine was Linux), and I saw that (let's call him) "John", who had a Windows box was away from his desk. Just on a hunch, I sat down and typed his username, and entered "password" for the password (literally). Poof, I was in! So I did my little test thing and was about to log off, when "John" appeared, smiling. He said, "Oh thank God you got my login, I've been locked out of the system all day because I can't remember my password! What is it?" It was perhaps the only time in my life I actually knew what it meant to "be at a loss for words"

      --
      Caveat Utilitor
    4. Re:Then the users will change them right back by Timothy+Brownawell · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Sounds like you have to use a shitty system. Real systems prevent duplicates, or even similar patterns. It can be a real pain.

      ...since real systems also only store a hash instead of the plaintext password, how do they know it's similar?

    5. Re:Then the users will change them right back by Chris+Burke · · Score: 4, Funny

      It was perhaps the only time in my life I actually knew what it meant to "be at a loss for words"

      I can believe it. I imagine I would have stared at him blankly for just long enough to realize he wasn't kidding before I had an aneurysm.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    6. Re:Then the users will change them right back by AJWM · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Are you sure this guy hadn't called support to have his password reset? Because "password" sounds like something they might reset it to, and unlikely for someone to forget.

      --
      -- Alastair
    7. Re:Then the users will change them right back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Simple - require the user to enter their most recent password in order to change it for the "regular" changes. You can't look 3-4 in the past for similar passwords but you *can* look one back. Then require administrative approval to do more then one password change a week or something.

    8. Re:Then the users will change them right back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can one up you. The "boss" where I worked had us set "password" as the password on all production boxes before shipping them to customers. Of course these customers set them up and didnt change the password.

      I was laid off and within a week of being laid off ~8 (I forgot the exact number) were "rooted" and I was the prime suspect. I forwarded the emails where I had brought up the concerns about "password" to my former boss's boss. Surprisingly somehow that guy left and I was offered his position (which I declined).

    9. Re:Then the users will change them right back by Cramer · · Score: 1

      I see you've used EDS hosted systems as well :-) Back when I did, it was an unwritten part of the manual... find a word the system will accept and add a number to the end (1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, ...)

    10. Re:Then the users will change them right back by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      how do they know it's similar?

      I have no idea how it is really done, but if I were implementing such a beast I would create a bunch of "similar" passwords and store their hashes as well. Then just make sure that the new hashes don't match any of the old hashes.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    11. Re:Then the users will change them right back by Cramer · · Score: 1

      That calls for a full on BOFH moment... (loud enough for the entire floor to hear) "What kind of f***ing moron cannot remember he set his password to PASSWORD?!" (turn. walk away.)

    12. Re:Then the users will change them right back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They check when the password

    13. Re:Then the users will change them right back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not an expert in crypto, so I may say some stupid things... But the basic idea is that password hashes are made using algorithms with known properties for their output.

      For similarity, I'd guess that each of those functions is defined such that

      abs ( hash(original) - hash(new) ) = Z
      And you know that your hash function is such that
      if Z = 0, the passwords are equal; if 0 Z = 30, for example, the passwords are 90% equal; and 30 Z = 80 , the passwords are 50% equal, etc.

      This allows you to know if the passwords are similar or not, without having to store the cleartext version.

    14. Re:Then the users will change them right back by MadnessASAP · · Score: 1

      Nope any hashing algorithm worth its salt(pun?) is terrifically divergent on even the slightest change to the input. Here's an example for MD5:
      md5 "password": 5f4dcc3b5aa765d61d8327deb882cf99
      md5 "passwore": a826176c6495c5116189db91770e20ce
      md5 "pbssword": 65add8adcd26ea1af12b05f67fd50b97

      As you can see the similarity of the inputs does not create a similarity in the outputs.

      --
      I may agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to face the consequences of saying it.
    15. Re:Then the users will change them right back by phorm · · Score: 1

      Nothing wrong with setting the boxes passwords to "password" or something easy-to-remember. I would just make damn sure to set the password to expire after the very first login. Allows the client to login easily, and forces them to implement security on their end.

  4. IN A COURT EXHIBIT?!?!?!? by seanadams.com · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I had my doubts at first, but this makes it abundantly clear that Childs was right . More right than any of us might have imagined when this spin-doctored story first came out.

    In hindsight he took totally reasonable, prudent measures to protect incompetent city officials from themselves. Who knows how they got into that situation, but I won't blame him for anything in light of this, and I sincerely hope a jury wouldn't either.

    He should first collect damages himself, and then initiate a class action suit against the city on behalf of all their residents. Maybe put the DA in jail for criminal negligence - in fact I'd venture a guess that he's mentally defective enough to file the charges himself.

    1. Re:IN A COURT EXHIBIT?!?!?!? by seanadams.com · · Score: 1

      he's mentally defective enough

      er.. make that "she"

    2. Re:IN A COURT EXHIBIT?!?!?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have to be honest, keeping passwords to yourself is putting the business at risk.

      I can understand not sharing them with a dim witted manager, but there should be at least of other decent engineer he could trust. Every good admin has a plan B. What if he got hit by a bus?

      I'm sure the network was N+1, I dont see how this is any different. ..just my two cents..

    3. Re:IN A COURT EXHIBIT?!?!?!? by loraksus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The problem is the jury will be filled with people who are clueless about computers, as the DA will remove anyone who has even the slightest knowledge of network security.

      Not really "jury of your peers", but everyone unofficially agrees juries composed of dumbasses make trials nice and quick. Anyways...

      As for Kamela's dumbass move? Prosecutors in the USA enjoy virtual immunity, even something as stupid as she did won't result in any repercussions - at least in the court systems - once script kiddies get a hold of the passwords, it ought to be fun.

      To put it in perspective, the media whore Nifong - who intentionally and maliciously continued the prosecution on the innocent duke team got a whopping day in jail and a minor fine. Yes, there are also civil remedies, but civil remedies sort of pale in comparison to the power a prosecutor can wield via the court system - namely that of imprisonment and even death.

      --
      1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
    4. Re:IN A COURT EXHIBIT?!?!?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And he feels that disclosing the passwords would cause immense damage to the people of San Francisco.

      I suggest a new medal be fashioned in his honour, awarded to a shining example of a government employee putting the people before bureaucracy.

    5. Re:IN A COURT EXHIBIT?!?!?!? by TubeSteak · · Score: 1

      To put it in perspective, the media whore Nifong - who intentionally and maliciously continued the prosecution on the innocent duke team got a whopping day in jail and a minor fine.

      You must not have followed the news.
      Nifong was disbarred by the NC State Disciplinary Hearing Commission.

      And he filed for bankruptcy in an attempt to wipe out the multi-million dollar civil suits against him.
      It didn't work and his assets are being auctioned off to repay his debts.
      http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/local&id=6229784

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    6. Re:IN A COURT EXHIBIT?!?!?!? by loraksus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      His assets, at, IIRC $244,000 pale in comparison to what was spent on the defense ($3 million?)

      As for disbarment? Big deal. He conspired with the DNA lab to illegally conceal exculpatory evidence in the case via a malicious prosecution because allegedly "he thought it would be great advertising for his re-election."

      His actions in that case also cast a shadow on every successful prosecution and undermined the legal system (rightfully so IMHO)

      I personally don't care about that particular case, but it clearly shows the level of immunity prosecutors possess. Near the end, everyone knew what he did, why he did it, everyone despised his actions, but his punishment was still a sick pathetic joke.

      I don't consider disbarment a punishment in cases of malicious prosecutorial misconduct - a disbarment should be a given in cases such as this. Felony charges and hard time should be "punishment"

      Oh... and Nifong can get his license back in 2012.

      --
      1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
  5. The real question is... by ActionDesignStudios · · Score: 4, Funny

    Does anyone have a torrent of these alleged usernames and passwords?

    1. Re:The real question is... by BUL2294 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Now, how long until scan of the username/password document shows up on the court's website as a form of public disclosure??? It wouldn't surprise me if the moronic DA forgot to ask for the exhibit to be sealed...

      --
      Windows 3.1x calc: 3.11 - 3.10 = 0.00
    2. Re:The real question is... by Zymergy · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      I bet a fat box of PrOn one of the passwords is "12345"...

    3. Re:The real question is... by NeuroManson · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but it's in a password protected RAR file. Please sign up for an account at hahaha.fbi.gov in order to obtain a password.

      --
      Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
    4. Re:The real question is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      in b4 a "torrent" of lame "that's the same as my luggage" jokes.

    5. Re:The real question is... by Zwicky · · Score: 1

      Could you post a direct link to that torrent pls-kthx!!seven!!

      --
      "Three eyes are better than one" -- Lieutenant Columbo
  6. More evidence... by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1, Insightful

    ... that Childs made the right decision after all. The prosecution is making his case for him!

  7. Wow. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    At least the VPN codes shouldn't be that important. What possible damage can somone do VPNing into a network that has probably been completely obliterated by now?

    1. Re:Wow. by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      At least the VPN codes shouldn't be that important. What possible damage can somone do VPNing into a network that has probably been completely obliterated by now?

      I'm guessing here (of course I didn't RTFA, not that I anticipate it being in there), but I'd assume that they use an RSA dongle or some such meaning that just having the password wouldn't be enough.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    2. Re:Wow. by Cramer · · Score: 1

      Given it's a Cisco shop, I would concur. Having the vpngroup password (used for isakmp) will get you nowhere without additional authentication. "x-auth" in cisco-ese. That can be handed off to whatever backend system via RADIUS or TACACS+. (we passed users through to novell, but I've setup systems to pass through to securid.)

  8. top 5 list by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    The top 5:

    password
    admin
    root
    guest
    t3rrych1lds1337haxx0r

  9. Dang! by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 5, Insightful

    AH HA! See, Childs was right , he is the only competent one!

    Dang! You beat me to posting about it.

    Wasn't part of Childs' point that password security in the S.F. government was lax and that divulging the big one in a way that would spread it around was dangerous to the network?

    Given that the configurations on the routers weren't saved, the first guy to use that password on them had better be DARNED careful to get them recorded before changing anything or he's likely to break the network big time. So handing it to an administrator, who will hand it to several people, any of whom might leak it, could cause the net to come crashing down.

    If all they'll let him do for a handoff is hand off the passwords, I can see how a prima donna BOFH would want to hand the big one directly to his successor, who would then spend the next week carefully recording the configs as-running before making changes or sharing the password with less-skilled delegates.

    Not that it's right. But looks to me like the city is making his point for him - which his lawyer should use in a counter-argument at the bail hearing. B-)

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    1. Re:Dang! by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      Given that the configurations on the routers weren't saved,

      Huh, wuh? Where did you get that from? All I read was that they were not written to flash on the router. That doesn't mean they weren't written to an encrypted file on a tftp server (and can be written out again with admin privs). Bollox up the router? Reboot it and you are back to normal.

      Now I haven't seen explicit confirmation that the configs were tftp'able, but unless Childs is some sort of rainman of router configurations there is no way that even he could have managed more than a small handful of them without keeping the configurations stored somewhere - there is just too much configuration info not to keep the configs stored somewhere.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    2. Re:Dang! by Darkk · · Score: 1

      Given that the configurations on the routers weren't saved,

      Now I haven't seen explicit confirmation that the configs were tftp'able, but unless Childs is some sort of rainman of router configurations there is no way that even he could have managed more than a small handful of them without keeping the configurations stored somewhere - there is just too much configuration info not to keep the configs stored somewhere.

      He may have stored them either on a USB flash drive or if he is smart some tftp server somewhere on the net encrypted of course.

      Enterprise Cicso router is very complicated piece of equipment so it is essential to have a copy of the configuration file somewhere as backup.

      Hell, even the cheapo Linksys router got a nice backup feature.

    3. Re:Dang! by Cramer · · Score: 1

      Enterprise Cicso router is very complicated piece of equipment so it is essential to have a copy of the configuration file somewhere as backup.

      Complex HARDWARE, yes. Complex configuration, maybe. The software (IOS) is pretty much identical from the smallest device to the biggest. From the command line, a Cisco 12000 looks (functionally) just like a 2501. Generally speaking, big routers have big configs, but that's not always true. For example, the config on my 1760 is 19472 bytes. The config on the office 2851 is 2861 bytes -- 16491 when it was standing in for the pix. (I'd include realworld ISP configs, but that machine has a dead power supply :-()

    4. Re:Dang! by penguinbrat · · Score: 1

      It would be classic, in this particular case, for some hacker out there in the world, to hack into the system (with the provided passwords of course) and do something extremely lame and pointless like getting the trains to run backwards at the top of the hour or something for a few minutes - just something to make the point that security is there for a freak'n reason...

    5. Re:Dang! by walshy007 · · Score: 1

      this has been covered before, they were saved, to files on his box, which he could then restore remotely if needed. then when discussed with a colleague he was successfully convinced that writing to flash was a good idea. link is in one of the prior /. articles.

    6. Re:Dang! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well you best hope you've memorized all those bytes while I wipe the configs on your routers. Oh whats that you say? You haven't remembered all those bytes or even all those config settings? Or you don't feel like reentering all of them? Well that's alright then because we have these handy backups here that we keep around for just such an occasion.

      I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make here, that you don't need to backup configurations on enterprise router? That the actual size of a configuration file is indicative of the configurations complexity?

      AC because of mod points

    7. Re:Dang! by Cramer · · Score: 1

      The point is: Just because it's a huge router doesn't mean it has a huge complex configuration.

      Ultimately, the complexity is a matter of who's messing with it. If you know nothing about BGP, then any real-world-meaty BGP setup would qualify as complex.

    8. Re:Dang! by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      Complexity isn't all there is to it. Just the amount of configuration data required is enough to make any competent admin maintain config files somewhere. Hand typing even just 20 lines per router each time they reboot, even if they are all very trivial obvious lines, is just unreasonable.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    9. Re:Dang! by Cramer · · Score: 1

      Says you. And me. And the rest of the sane admins on Earth. But not this nut. If you understand your network, you can rebuild the config should it ever be lost. But your first job is to make sure it's never lost.

      In case you've missed it, this guy is nuts. Certified. Bonkers. Insane. A happy meal shy of a happy meal.

    10. Re:Dang! by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      But not this nut.

      I have seen absolute zero evidence that Childs did not keep encrypted config files on tftp servers. Please feel free to link to a credible report that says otherwise.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  10. Being paranoid doesn't mean you're wrong by pembo13 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Even if the sysadmin referred to as 'Childs' was a paranoid schizophrenic, does not mean he wasn't right.

    --
    "Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
    1. Re:Being paranoid doesn't mean you're wrong by tnk1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I don't think anyone who has ever worked for the government, or even seen government in action doubted that Childs was right. I think that everyone was wondering why he'd sit in jail to bring to light something that's already obvious.

    2. Re:Being paranoid doesn't mean you're wrong by AllIGotWasThisNick · · Score: 1

      I think that everyone was wondering why he'd sit in jail to bring to light something that's already obvious.

      See this previous response here. More or less, some people have values/ethics and try to appreciate (in advance) the outcomes of their potential actions.

    3. Re:Being paranoid doesn't mean you're wrong by bugs2squash · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes, but being right means you're not paranoid

      --
      Nullius in verba
    4. Re:Being paranoid doesn't mean you're wrong by Adambomb · · Score: 1

      Yes, but being right means you're not paranoid

      Not for that specific reason at least. It's like how some of us do not suffer from insanity.

      We do enjoy every minute of it.

      --
      Ice Cream has no bones.
    5. Re:Being paranoid doesn't mean you're wrong by tnk1 · · Score: 1

      Whistleblowing does not give you the right to hold anything hostage to get your point across. A detailed letter to the City Council and Mayor, with perhaps a release to the media would have accomplished his ethical duties.

      I sincerely hope that you are not suggesting that the ACM Code of Ethics demands that I lock down my network and hosts to a single password, and remove the capability to restore access, just because I feel that my boss and colleagues are incompetent and I want people to listen to me. In no way, shape or form did he have the authority to do that, other than his de facto control of the system. Beyond the fact that the network may have failed catastrophically while he was holding out, an admin abusing the trust of their employers in that way undermines the trust any employer has in their admins. And that helps no one.

      It would have been nice if he had appreciated (in advance) his effect on other professionals in his field and the added bullshit that they will need to deal with just to make a company or government comfortable again that their admins won't cost them thousands of dollars in lost whatever just because he has hammered it straight into their tiny thick skulls that not only can we fuck them over whenever we want to, but some of us will.

    6. Re:Being paranoid doesn't mean you're wrong by AllIGotWasThisNick · · Score: 1

      I sincerely hope that you are not suggesting ...

      Not at all. I'm merely suggesting that it is possible his sitting in jail wasn't about showing the government is incompetent or screwed; it's quite possible his concern was in fact, about minimizing harm.

      Since neither of us, I don't think, are familiar enough with the facts either way, I couldn't make any claim as to why he actually did it -- just that there are possible alternative explanations than the one you'd suggested that "everyone" wondered about.

    7. Re:Being paranoid doesn't mean you're wrong by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      Once you're fired as a sysadmin, you're pretty much SOL if you want to find another job in the field. He probably figured - IMO correctly - that being exonerated and then to turn around and file a civil suit, winning millions, would be the only likely way to both have enough to live on at a similar comfort level again, and/or to work in the field.

      It's just a shame that he probably will not get a "jury of his peers", but a bunch of idiots who know not thing one about computing. He'll be fucked. :(

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
  11. "Free Terry Childs" T-Shirts by peterofoz · · Score: 3, Interesting

    So who will be the first to print up and sell t-shirts to support Terry Childs? Perhaps they can also print the SF VPN usernames and passwords on the back. Design suggestions welcome.

    1. Re:"Free Terry Childs" T-Shirts by Achromatic1978 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Huh? What? It's not his network. He's not some kind of hero. Yeah, there are other idiots in the world, but seriously, anyone seeing Childs as some kind of champion of security is sadly, sorely mistaken.

    2. Re:"Free Terry Childs" T-Shirts by kv9 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Huh? What? It's not his network. He's not some kind of hero. Yeah, there are other idiots in the world, but seriously, anyone seeing Childs as some kind of champion of security is sadly, sorely mistaken.

      what more proof do you need? this action demonstrates he was right. it's not "his" network but I'm pretty sure he was in charge of its security. he tried to keep it secure, for what are now obvious reasons, and he got thrown in jail for it.

    3. Re:"Free Terry Childs" T-Shirts by AllIGotWasThisNick · · Score: 1
      Are you familiar with the ACM code of ethics? Section 1.2, Verbatim:

      1.2 Avoid harm to others.

      "Harm" means injury or negative consequences, such as undesirable loss of information, loss of property, property damage, or unwanted environmental impacts. This principle prohibits use of computing technology in ways that result in harm to any of the following: users, the general public, employees, employers. Harmful actions include intentional destruction or modification of files and programs leading to serious loss of resources or unnecessary expenditure of human resources such as the time and effort required to purge systems of "computer viruses."

      Well-intended actions, including those that accomplish assigned duties, may lead to harm unexpectedly. In such an event the responsible person or persons are obligated to undo or mitigate the negative consequences as much as possible. One way to avoid unintentional harm is to carefully consider potential impacts on all those affected by decisions made during design and implementation.

      To minimize the possibility of indirectly harming others, computing professionals must minimize malfunctions by following generally accepted standards for system design and testing. Furthermore, it is often necessary to assess the social consequences of systems to project the likelihood of any serious harm to others. If system features are misrepresented to users, coworkers, or supervisors, the individual computing professional is responsible for any resulting injury.

      In the work environment the computing professional has the additional obligation to report any signs of system dangers that might result in serious personal or social damage. If one's superiors do not act to curtail or mitigate such dangers, it may be necessary to "blow the whistle" to help correct the problem or reduce the risk. However, capricious or misguided reporting of violations can, itself, be harmful. Before reporting violations, all relevant aspects of the incident must be thoroughly assessed. In particular, the assessment of risk and responsibility must be credible. It is suggested that advice be sought from other computing professionals. See principle 2.5 regarding thorough evaluations.

    4. Re:"Free Terry Childs" T-Shirts by LaskoVortex · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Huh? What? It's not his network. He's not some kind of hero. Yeah, there are other idiots in the world, but seriously, anyone seeing Childs as some kind of champion of security is sadly, sorely mistaken.

      Way to back that up with cold hard reasoning. Oh wait, you didn't. On second look, I can see that you just spewed an emotional appeal meant to make you look righteous and perhaps glean some karma from the deal. Here, let me give a counter-argument with the same level of "insight" (and with exclamation points and the obligatory "Period." ending to boot):

      Chids is a champion of security! Anyone who thinks otherwise is sorely mistaken! He was trying to help because of all the idiots he is dealing with. Period.

      --
      Just callin' it like I see it.
    5. Re:"Free Terry Childs" T-Shirts by Achromatic1978 · · Score: 1

      I think that 'steadfastly refusing to allow ANYONE any access to the administration of a system that is no longer your responsibility to maintain, and indeed you are no longer permitted access to, based solely on your subjective belief that they are incapable of running it to a standard of security you think worthy' causes more 'harm' than otherwise.

    6. Re:"Free Terry Childs" T-Shirts by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      We really don't know what the hell was going on. Maybe he's just a nutjob, maybe he perceived the request for the information as inappropriate and that it was the social precursor to a potential technical attack on the network. Until we know what his argument is even, why don't you just wait until you actually know something?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    7. Re:"Free Terry Childs" T-Shirts by AllIGotWasThisNick · · Score: 1

      I think that 'steadfastly refusing to allow ANYONE any access to the administration of a system that is no longer your responsibility to maintain, and indeed you are no longer permitted access to, based solely on your subjective belief that they are incapable of running it to a standard of security you think worthy' causes more 'harm' than otherwise.

      No doubt you think that. Others, however, see that their responsibility for preventing harm to others by their own actions or inactions does not suddenly end just because some genius decides "You're Fired!".

    8. Re:"Free Terry Childs" T-Shirts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know, but I imagine being brought into your boss and his bosses office and told to give them the access passwords would be a fairly reasonable request. I think claims that it was 'social engineering' are quite a bit of straw-grasping.

    9. Re:"Free Terry Childs" T-Shirts by Naughty+Bob · · Score: 1

      Design suggestions welcome.

      What about a catchy slogan? Perhaps-

      "Won't somebody think of the Childs?"

      --
      "Be light, stinging, insolent and melancholy"
    10. Re:"Free Terry Childs" T-Shirts by leoofborg · · Score: 1

      So who will be the first to print up and sell t-shirts to support Terry Childs?

      Perhaps they can also print the SF VPN usernames and passwords on the back.

      Design suggestions welcome.

      I know what you're thinking of: the Perl camel. Same deal, you need a mascot.

      Easy one: Make the mascot a horse's ass or a jackass.

      --
      --- See you at the Tannhäuser Gate.
    11. Re:"Free Terry Childs" T-Shirts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'll just write over my "Reiser is Innocent!" T-shirt.

      Which is a cross-out over "Free Kevin!"

    12. Re:"Free Terry Childs" T-Shirts by deniable · · Score: 1

      Have an arrow and "I'm with Terry Childs boss."

      or "Terry Childs was right about you."

    13. Re:"Free Terry Childs" T-Shirts by STrinity · · Score: 1

      If Childs had died in a car accident, the city would be completely unable to access their network. That's not security.

      --
      Les Miserables Volume 1 now up with my reading of
    14. Re:"Free Terry Childs" T-Shirts by auweia · · Score: 1

      I've thrown together one of the few photos of Terry against a backdrop of the SF fiber network here http://www.flickr.com/photos/9640932@N04/sets/72157606386153323/ got one of the t-shirts on the way already

  12. There is bright future... by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 2, Funny

    I can see that there is a bright future in the cluestick market...

  13. Password sniffing by FlyingBishop · · Score: 2, Interesting

    They seem to be operating under the assumption that Childs was sniffing passwords. Which judging from the case is just stupid. Why would anyone sniff passwords that they had absolute control of? He was sniffing unencrypted messages over the network. Even sans the unrestricted power over the network, I can't imagine Childs has any use for those passwords. Or anyone else for that matter.

    1. Re:Password sniffing by drinkypoo · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Why would anyone sniff passwords that they had absolute control of?

      That's a very stupid question.

      You sniff them to see if they are sniffable.

      Passwords normally aren't stored in plaintext, so you can't just check the passwords against your dictionary to see if they are bad. He might also have been testing to see if, or gathering evidence to prove that, the VPN system they were using was inherently insecure. There are in fact several other reasons I could come up with, but I think we can already see that you are not competent to contribute to this conversation, and that anyone who would hire you as a network administrator is an idiot, too.

      "Unrestricted power" is a myth. Many of us don't want to know your passwords, and the system is designed in such a fashion that we're not supposed to be able to know what they are (without installing keyloggers or something) so that you don't have to worry about us impersonating you.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Password sniffing by Opportunist · · Score: 2, Informative

      Accusing an administrator of password sniffing is usually pretty dumb, unless you're dumb enough to use the same password internally and for private, external applications. A top level admin has access to all your files if he wants to, without your password. Because (drumroll) he can simply log in as administrator with the according privileges. I.e. ALL privileges to view ALL files and do with them what he pleases. At least technically, legally you can have his hide, depending on contract.

      I spent a few years as the security head honcho of a bank auditing company. It amazed and puzzled me to no end what people considered "secret" or, the more paranoid ones, what they thought I'd do.

      Here's a secret for you C?Os out there: If you do not trust your admin, fire him. He knows more about the system than you do and he usually has pretty much total access to everything. He can read your files and if he wants to, your correspondence. If you do not have faith in his integrity and do not trust him, fire him and hire one you do trust. Because one thing stands and cannot be changed: You have to trust your administrator. If you don't, get rid of computers or start digging into the matter so you can do it yourself.

      Here's another secret: We usually don't snoop. We got better things to do. Like, keeping your machines running and fixing yours when you managed to FUBAR it (again). Few admins play the "I know something about my boss and that breaks his neck" game.

      Unless you give us reason to. Basically, if we do something like that, it's for defense.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    3. Re:Password sniffing by Nazlfrag · · Score: 1

      Unless you give us reason to. Basically, if we do something like that, it's for defense.

      Or, you know, for some light entertainment. Generally you're spot on though, most admins thrive on a challenge and snooping or getting your own back using the network is just too easy to be enjoyable. I much prefer practicing my offline hacking skills if and when they're needed.

    4. Re:Password sniffing by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Not only that. It also makes your life as an admin a whole lot easier if you don't snoop.

      Not snooping on your coworkers builds trust. People who trust you will more readily admit when they did something wrong. Especially when you get creative in your error report and don't rat on them. You have no idea how many work hours I saved because usually I wrote "network error" instead of "user stupidity" when a file had to be recovered from tape. Because finding the error took less than a minute (provided the person could speak at a halfway decent speed). Nobody stalled, nobody told the oldest lie in the IT world (i.e. "nothing!"), and after a while people came to me "proactively" when they were about to do something stupid, to ask whether it would be a good idea. E.g. when trying to install some game on their company laptop...

      In the long run, not snooping on them made my work with them a lot smoother. You are never the target of mobbing, and depending on your moral standards, you can even use the head secretary (usually the person with the real power in a company, and also the core figure of any mobbing) to get rid of unwanted coworkers. When it's time for layoffs, you'll find execs fighting for you instead of against you, since they fear some other admin might actually report their stupidity instead of blaming the network or simply Windows for whatever goes wrong.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    5. Re:Password sniffing by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      Though, I'm glad this has come up: it's something I'll be adding to all future contracts, whether for permanent or contract employment: Caimlas shall have the permission of $organization to sniff passwords, perform intrusion detection, and other tasks which are commonly construed as hostile, provided said actions are employed within the duties of his job description.

      (Or something similar.)

      I just realized that something similar to that was not in any past contracts, and really needs to be in the future given the (previously perceived to be impossible) possibility of being prosecuted for performing one's job duties.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
  14. VPWhat? by cez · · Score: 1
    Well...declining to comment on the matter...

    Erica Derryck, a spokeswoman for the DA's office, declined to comment on the matter. The mayor's office, which supervises DTIS, did not return messages seeking comment for this story

    To change the passwords, the city will have to reconfigure the VPN software running on every PC that connects remotely, which it has not yet done, the source said.

    Because noone knows wtf they are talking about? Certainly the issue can be contained immediately by cutting VPN access as was mentioned, but even entering in new credentials for everyone wouldn't take that long... oh wait the configuring of each remote client? What does that mean, typing in the new password for these people with VPN access to their network? I deal with VPNs all the time, if they don't have a client they can manage and one that needs personal configuration because the password was compromised, they don't have the right client...even a web based sslvpn would be an improvement from what they are using

    Some of the passwords would benefit from a change because they are identical to the VPN log-in name or extremely easy to guess.

    ...or not using.

    --
    Walk with Music;
    1. Re:VPWhat? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      You're assuming that the people left in that office can manage the basics ... Childs himself didn't seem to think so. That's why he locked them out.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    2. Re:VPWhat? by Cramer · · Score: 1

      I see you've never used the Cisco VPN Client.

    3. Re:VPWhat? by loraksus · · Score: 1

      oh wait the configuring of each remote client? What does that mean

      It means that these "passwords" are group names + passwords, etc, inside of PCF files, which is how the cicso vpn client saves connection data (i.e. IP address of router, other settings, etc)

      If every single remote workstation / laptop needs to be configured, it is due to changes in this - since most users have no clue how to change it / are unable to change it.

      User authentication is separate from this and is typically not saved (you can do it, but it involves making a file read only during connection, etc, etc)

      As for this "evidence", it's bullshit - any sysadmin has a number of VPN profiles on their PC / laptop.
      Of course, it was "shiny" enough for the judge in this case to keep bail at 5 million. Shame a first year community college student wasn't at the hearing to try and clarify.

      --
      1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
    4. Re:VPWhat? by cez · · Score: 1
      Thanks for the clarification... never used the Cisco VPN client, we run a Nortel shop. While configuration changes such as those you mention on Group / Policies I can see being a pain for a normal users to re-configure on their end (if they have too!? The point of groups and policies is for central control!).

      ...I was asking myself why do they need to? Sure, they stupidly (or not?) released this information, because as you say it was so shiny and makes one go ohhh and ahhhhh...however, I'm wondering if there's some other agenda for re-organization that is being pushed...its not like they are changing their public facing IPs...I can't imagine their policies were that strict to begin with if they had similar login / passwd combos. To me it seems they are complaining about all the work they need to do because Childs has correctly, albeit unlawfully pointed out how mis-managed and ass backwards secure the city of SF was to begin with.

      Is there no push for the cisco client or runtime scripts that can do this if needed to hardcode something on their end?

      bah, probably just over-analyzing a dog and pony show. But I do need to brush up on my cisco ;{

      --
      Walk with Music;
    5. Re:VPWhat? by loraksus · · Score: 1

      No push within the app, as far as I know, but it's a simple file in a known location, so you should be able to replace it with a logon script, although it may take a bit of fine tuning to get the "users are members of what group?" thing down.

      You can tweak the group rights centrally (or at least on the router), but user connecting will still need to "log onto the group" if that makes any sense.

      It sounds like the city is just trying to find something, anything and hope it will stick.

      This may be a bit too cynical, but it's looking more and more like the DA purposefully released the group keys to the public (yay for prosecutorial immunity) so they can justify the charges.

      --
      1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
  15. I so wish the guy held out by iminplaya · · Score: 1

    He gave up his only bargaining chip, and he's still locked up.

    --
    What?
    1. Re:I so wish the guy held out by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Not really ... he was still trying to do his job. When it became apparent that he was being sold out, he capitulated: the network is no longer his problem. Let the rest of the city's "experts" deal with the functioning network that he left to them: it'll be interesting to see if they can cope.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    2. Re:I so wish the guy held out by iminplaya · · Score: 1

      ...the network is no longer his problem.

      But being locked is a much bigger problem. And there he is. The old adage holds truer than ever: Trust no one. I would have demanded my immediate release and a written statement that all charges are dropped and no further action would be taken against me, or you get nothing. Let's see them cope with that. Basically, now he's screwed.

      --
      What?
    3. Re:I so wish the guy held out by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      Uh, no. The network is still very much his problem, because now they're free to fuck it up and try to blame it on him.

      The network was his only proof of innocence (or lack of wrong doing), and now it has been contaminated with their access. As it's a criminal case, it's akin to passing around a murder weapon to a crowd of people before prints are taken.

      Childs may not have been perfect in his practices (and IMO he wasn't close - no "bus insurance", apparently), but he doesn't appear to be the malicious, insidious type as evidenced by his performance. On the other hand, that is exactly what the city has done to him: treated him maliciously with no quarter.

      IMO, at the very greatest the only thing the city should've been able to leverage against him was a civil suit. But because the city is, well, a city (ie government) they're abusing their power to bend him over the barrel.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
  16. HA... Build Slowly.. HAHA.. ok.. HAHAHA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    Maybe this guy wasn't so crazy after all...

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  17. Passwords can be TOO strong. by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I attended a lecture some years ago by a Microsoft employee who was high up in their security structure.

    He started his speech by asking the audience, "Passwords and policies should be made as strong and secure as possible, right?"

    A show of many hands.

    He said, "Wrong! It is possible for a password policy to be TOO secure. Let me give you an example. It is possible to set up a security policy in NT that requires a password of at least 8 characters, which must also be mixed case, have at least one numerical digit, and at least one non-alphanumeric character, and which will require a change of password every week."

    "As soon as you implement that policy, users will write their password on a post-it note, stick it to their monitor, and replace it with a new one every week. So you see, a password policy CAN be too secure for your own good."

    1. Re:Passwords can be TOO strong. by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      > As soon as you implement that policy, users will write their password on a post-it note,
      > stick it to their monitor, and replace it with a new one every week.

      Which, for some threat models, can be an entirely reasonable thing to do.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    2. Re:Passwords can be TOO strong. by Ninja+Programmer · · Score: 2, Funny

      I attended a lecture some years ago by a Microsoft employee who was high up in their security structure.

      [...]

      "Wrong! It is possible for a password policy to be TOO secure. Let me give you an example. It is possible to set up a security policy in NT that requires a password of at least 8 characters, which must also be mixed case, have at least one numerical digit, and at least one non-alphanumeric character, and which will require a change of password every week."

      "As soon as you implement that policy, users will write their password on a post-it note, stick it to their monitor, and replace it with a new one every week. So you see, a password policy CAN be too secure for your own good."

      This, by the way, *IS* the policy used internally at Microsoft.

    3. Re:Passwords can be TOO strong. by rossz · · Score: 1

      We have this policy where I'm currently working (without the change-it-weekly madness). I'm trying to get the policy relaxed slightly to something reasonable.

      --
      -- Will program for bandwidth
    4. Re:Passwords can be TOO strong. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      This, by the way, *IS* the policy used internally at Microsoft.

      I know. I'm posting this from one of their servers right now.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:Passwords can be TOO strong. by LaminatorX · · Score: 2, Interesting

      For a client database too which I am the sole admin, I change my password on a monthly basis in a sequence based on the product of two formulas.

      The formulas are in two places, my head and a sealed envelope in the company safe. I realize someone could crack the maths if they had enough old passwords and time, but if I get hit by a car tomorrow, my boss could unseal the envelope and calculate this months password.

    6. Re:Passwords can be TOO strong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To bad he didn't visit my workplace/employer.

      The current password policy is:

      -14 characters (because Windows can't enforce/check at the 15 character requirement).
      -2 uppercase, 2 lowercase, 2 special characters, 2 numbers.
      -No account auto-unlock
      -2 Failure Attempts
      -No passwords used last 24 times
      -60 Day max password age
      -1 day min password age

    7. Re:Passwords can be TOO strong. by QuestorTapes · · Score: 1

      Even even worse policy: the passwords are long, random strings of complex characters, auto-generated -for- the users monthly.

      This has all the disadvantages of the example, plus eliminating any possibility that the conscientious, intelligent employee can create one that meets the requirements and can still be remembered.

    8. Re:Passwords can be TOO strong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is exactly what happens where I work. Since we began using 8 character complex passwords to access the network, our line staff write down them down because they find them hard to remember. (And IT gets overwhelmed with having to continually reset numerous accounts every two months) They generally put them in their purse or wallet, right where any family member, friend, or pickpocket can find them. BTW, I do not work in IT but I understand their frustration.

  18. I'd love to see the list... by religious+freak · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I've got to say voyeuristically looking at other people's passwords can be pretty entertaining sometimes. I know I've had a few passwords I wouldn't care to have other people know.

    --
    If you can read this... 01110101 01110010 00100000 01100001 00100000 01100111 01100101 01100101 01101011
    1. Re:I'd love to see the list... by nobodyman · · Score: 1

      A few months back I changed my LDAP password to "I drink your milkshake!". On one hand, it was easy to remember while still being very secure (despite those words being in a dictionary, I'd wager it's still immune from a dictionary attack).

      On the downside, whenever I signed on to our application to run a demo the users would see 23 "*" characters in the password field and then look at me like I suffered from acute paranoia (they're probably right, but still, it's embarrassing).

      Eventually I changed it to something shorter. Not that it was hard to remember, but because during initial sign-on (before morning coffee) I would invariably fat-finger one of the 23 keypresses.

    2. Re:I'd love to see the list... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I used to use passwords such as "cockmaster2" and "assface3" for things that I didnt really care if they were cracked but if someone asked me for the password I would be redfaced and say "I really would rather not tell you".

      (BTW the spellchecker redlined the 2 passwords until I added a number. Perhaps it was checking for strength?)

      Captcha: lavatory

    3. Re:I'd love to see the list... by Anpheus · · Score: 1

      Don't worry, I've had 30+ character passwords before. But they're either passphrases or pronounceable strings.

    4. Re:I'd love to see the list... by religious+freak · · Score: 1

      Many of our systems restrict us to a password no longer than 8 chars (mainframe). Always struck me as pretty retarded.

      --
      If you can read this... 01110101 01110010 00100000 01100001 00100000 01100111 01100101 01100101 01101011
    5. Re:I'd love to see the list... by greyhueofdoubt · · Score: 1

      It's funny that you mention that. When I deploy overseas I write up a list of websites with usernames/passwords and that goes in a tamper-evident envelope for my parents. It's stuff like banking and stocks that my parents would need to access if I died or something. So anyways, each time this happens I invariably find at least one or two that I need to go change before I write up the list in order to make it 'parent-friendly' and make me seem like a fine upstanding citizen instead of a darkly cynical asshole.

      Oh look honey, his password at etrade was 1L0v3puPp13z! I'm so proud of our dead son!

      -b

      --
      No offense, but I've stopped responding to AC's.
    6. Re:I'd love to see the list... by 4g1vn · · Score: 1

      Binary to Decimal 118 114 32 97 32 103 101 101 107

  19. This is the tip of the iceberg by xenophrak · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This is unfortunately par for our fine DA. Kamala Harris has proven herself to be an incompetent tool more often that I'd like to hear.

    She has angered many San Franciscans by refusing to prosecute violent criminals, and lately, found to have been lax towards the city's worst crime of the year...the murder of a father and his two sons in the Mission by a suspected illegal alien due to the city's stupid sanctuary law.

    She should be dragged out, tarred, whipped and ejected from the city, never to return.

    --
    Contrary to popular belief, life is not a bitch. It is far far worse.
    1. Re:This is the tip of the iceberg by Dusty101 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Amusingly, the Finnish word "kamala" means "ghastly, frightful".

    2. Re:This is the tip of the iceberg by Mauzl · · Score: 2, Funny

      A father and his two kids were killed by illegal aliens?

      Sounds like a case for Mulder and Scully!

  20. Makes me glad I live in the one place ... by Nutria · · Score: 2, Funny

    that has more sense than San Francisco: Louisiana!

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    1. Re:Makes me glad I live in the one place ... by rossz · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ouch! That was a cruel comparison.

      I'm not saying you are incorrect.

      I live about 30 minutes outside of San Francisco. What's frightening about The City is the people who live there assume everyone who criticizes them are ignorant hillbillies.

      --
      -- Will program for bandwidth
    2. Re:Makes me glad I live in the one place ... by Nimey · · Score: 1

      At least you didn't say Florida. That would have called for pistols at dawn.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    3. Re:Makes me glad I live in the one place ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm from Florida you insensitive clod!

  21. So in one fell swoop by falcon5768 · · Score: 1

    The DA both PROVED they where wrong in locking him up, AND completely and utterly ruined their case.....all i can say is WOW.

    --

    "Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."

    1. Re:So in one fell swoop by Chris+Burkhardt · · Score: 1

      The DA both PROVED they where wrong in locking him up, AND completely and utterly ruined their case

      Isn't proving they were wrong in locking him up the same thing as ruining their case?

      --
      "And there be unix which have made themselves unix for the kingdom of heaven's sake." - Matt. 19:12
    2. Re:So in one fell swoop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not if it the proof comes after the conviction - especially if the judges decide it's not enough (or meeting certain semi-arbitrary limitations, such as within a certain time period) to require a dismissal or retrial. DAs aren't there to find out the truth, and accidentally revealing the truth that someone is innocent doesn't necessarily ruin their case.

    3. Re:So in one fell swoop by Chris+Burkhardt · · Score: 1

      [...] and accidentally revealing the truth that someone is innocent doesn't necessarily ruin their case.

      Yes it does. Revealing that someone is innocent while trying to prove they are guilty is exactly ruining the case against the person. Unless you're judging the quality of a case by its outcome. But that's a poor criterion for judging the quality of a case; one which only an attorney would accept :-p

      --
      "And there be unix which have made themselves unix for the kingdom of heaven's sake." - Matt. 19:12
  22. Likely Typical Reaction: by theshibboleth · · Score: 0, Troll

    Show me exactly where these "secret" usernames and passwords are... Give me an exact hyperlink! I need them for my... project... and I'm too lazy to rtfa!

  23. They wern't using a one way hash? by HaeMaker · · Score: 1

    One way hash passwords have been around FOREVER. I can't believe how stupid this is.

  24. An idiot playing a semantic game. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    A policy requiring users to commit impossible feats of memory isn't "strong" or "secure" in the first place.

    He got people to agree with something obvious, then tried to make them feel stupid by redefining the words he used to make what they agreed with into something ridiculous.

    What a fucking asshole. Sounds like MS, all right.

    1. Re:An idiot playing a semantic game. by techno-vampire · · Score: 4, Informative

      No, he wasn't an asshole. He had a very good point that has just gone over your head. To elucidate, if you add too many requirements to user's passwords they can't remember them and need to write them down. Once you get to that point, the passwords aren't strong any more and you've created a security hole by trying to avoid one. There's a limit on how much you can expect the average user to remember when it comes to passwords; go past that and their passwords get less, not more secure.

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
    2. Re:An idiot playing a semantic game. by spinkham · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I agree with the grandparent, he's just being an ass.
      He's using the word "secure" in the original question in a very narrow way. Of course a password policy must be human-centric as well as containing enough randomness to not be brute forced or attacked easily through rainbow tables.
      There's education in teaching users how to select strong and yet memorable passwords, and when it's OK to write them down at least partially in your wallet or strong encrypted password store.
      He's being an ass because he's asking a complex question, then telling everyone they're wrong and giving a simple smug answer. You can be right and still be an ass. ;-)

      An aside is the fact that we rely on passwords too much. Dual factor authentication for internal business use is relatively cheap and easy to set up in windows and linux for login, for ssh, etc. I'm genuinely surprised more people outside of the military don't use it.

      --
      Blessed are the pessimists, for they have made backups.
    3. Re:An idiot playing a semantic game. by jd · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you install S/KEY or OPIE on your UNIX or Linux box to manage logins, you will be presented with a random challenge string. You then plug that challenge string and your (relatively simple) password into a one-time pad password calculator, which tells you what to type into the login prompt. Voila: An easy-to-remember password that cannot be cracked by simple lookup tables. As close to perfectly secure as you're likely to get (meeting the criteria in the actual question) without being complex for the user.

      Post-it notes aren't a bad solution, if the physical area is secure against unauthorized access, so long as the user is aware of the fact that their account is communal within that area. Which, for a private office, isn't a fatal problem. The cleaners are still a potential vulnerability, but the cleaners have far easier access to all of your personal notes, which are likely to have far more valuable information than your account.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    4. Re:An idiot playing a semantic game. by spinkham · · Score: 1

      Note to moderators: I'm not calling anyone on this forum an ass.. Please read the context before moderating. The ass in question is a security trainer. I know how such people work and think, as I am one.. I might also be an ass, but that's a seperate issue ;-)

      --
      Blessed are the pessimists, for they have made backups.
    5. Re:An idiot playing a semantic game. by Normal+Dan · · Score: 1

      I think what AC was saying is if policies are such that you must write your passwords down, then the policies themselves are not very secure.

      Passwords and policies should be as strong and secure as possible. Depending on what you mean by strong and secure.

      --
      A unique way to learn a language: http://languageloom.com
    6. Re:An idiot playing a semantic game. by spinkham · · Score: 1

      Software one time password generators are cool, but smartcards are more secure, more functional, and more convenient for the end user.
      Smartcards at minimum store a private key and use public key crypto on the card itself for authentication. You can use this in PAM for login and single sign on through local authenticators, LDAP, or Kerberos. You can use it as a RSA ssh key for remote login, as a client side SSL cert, as your credentials for S/MIME, etc..
      The largest deployment at the moment is the US military, with their CAC system.
      Check out http://www.opensc-project.org/ and http://www.linuxnet.com/ for some of the linux oriented projects. Fedora is also leading the charge in the linux world through integration to their directory services and crypto consolidation. However, you can get it to work everywhere with some general geekery. ;-)

      --
      Blessed are the pessimists, for they have made backups.
    7. Re:An idiot playing a semantic game. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's using the word "secure" in the original question in a very narrow way.

      No, its a very common way. Sounds like you have no idea just how many idiots there are dictating security policies, especially in government areas. I haven't seen changes required every week, but I have seen them required every 30 days at a site where people routinely have 3-4 different accounts on physically separate networks. Such sites have effectively forced their users to use easily guessable passwords because the users have to essentially guess their passwords themselves.

    8. Re:An idiot playing a semantic game. by jd · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I knew of the military system - I was a contractor for the US navy (SPAWAR) when they first introduced it. Nice idea, but the implementation at the time was lousy. I hope they've improved. You're right that smartcards are superior, especially if a lot of work can be decentralized. Wish they'd be used more. Readers aren't very common (yet). That and the problem of generating strong enough keys are the two main reasons the Mondo smartcard never took off in England as an alternative to credit/debit cards, despite better security and better privacy.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    9. Re:An idiot playing a semantic game. by Cramer · · Score: 1

      Decades ago, NCSU used to do that crap for access to the academic mainframe ("ACS"). Guess what? Almost every programmable calculator on campus (in an engineering school that's a lot of them) had the pad routine on it. (at least many of those in my circle did.) I recall at least one TN3270(?) macro for calculating the pad and filling it in. So, the challenge was next to useless.

      (BTW, with appropriate access to ACS one could rewrite their transcripts. So the people you want to keep out the most are local to the system and thus aware of the pad -- and the ability to answer it.)

    10. Re:An idiot playing a semantic game. by spinkham · · Score: 1

      Note I didn't say uncommon, I said narrow. The referenced speaker is "clubbing baby seals" as one of my professors liked to call it. He asked a simple question with an obvious answer, and then reframed the question to make his (non-obvious) answer correct. Some would see it as a good way of getting people to challenge their assumptions, I see it as being a dick and abusing your authority.
      A much better way to frame the topic is to discuss specific ways that passwords can be attacked and thus more or less secure, ways to make secure passwords that humans can remember, ways to securely manage passwords without simply remembering them, not "do you think passwords should be secure? You're wrong, I'm right. Ha ha ha!" That's clubbing baby seals, and it's a crappy way to interact with your audience.
      BTW, I work as an security consultant and trainer, and am very acutely aware of what passes for security in most companies and the US government.

      --
      Blessed are the pessimists, for they have made backups.
    11. Re:An idiot playing a semantic game. by MadnessASAP · · Score: 1

      In a properly designed system the pad calculator would include a private key shared with the auth server and create the password using the data presented and the private key.

      --
      I may agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to face the consequences of saying it.
    12. Re:An idiot playing a semantic game. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, this was the point the other AC was referring to, and then he explained why the MS guy told it in an asshole manner.

      The point being that defining the policy the way he did was not making it more secure. Thus it is not an example of making something TOO-secure, but of making something less secure. It doesn't invalidate his premises: the password policy should be made as strong and secure as possible. His example made the password policy so strong it became insecure. Nobody in the audience agreed to making the password policy insecure, he redefined secure to mean insecure, which is utter nonsense.

    13. Re:An idiot playing a semantic game. by tkinnun0 · · Score: 1

      Note I didn't say uncommon, I said narrow. The referenced speaker is "clubbing baby seals" as one of my professors liked to call it. He asked a simple question with an obvious answer, and then reframed the question to make his (non-obvious) answer correct.

      The obvious answer is obviously wrong, because there is no limit on how strong and secure one can make one's passwords and policies (e.g. 500 characters from base64 in equal amounts without patterns changed every 10 minutes). The limit has always been the usability of the resulting system, which seems to be forgotten all too often.

    14. Re:An idiot playing a semantic game. by spinkham · · Score: 1

      "Strong and secure" has more variables then simply "long and random". That was the presenters point, and I'm not arguing with it. I'm just saying the rhetorical methods he used to make it are mean-spirited, in an "I'm better-then-you" kind of way.
      The obvious answer is right, passwords should be as secure as possible, but secure must take into account the ease of use for the human as well as length, character set, and randomness.
      Once again, I'm not disagreeing with the point the presenter made, just saying the way he made it makes him kind of a jerk.

      --
      Blessed are the pessimists, for they have made backups.
    15. Re:An idiot playing a semantic game. by budgenator · · Score: 1

      Maybe if you don't have to write them down they are to weak. The real issue isn't how secure the password is but how well the password is secured. Obviously a sticky note on the monitor is not enough, as well as a biometric that locks you out for 2 weeks because you cut your finger is too much, somewhere between the two extremes will be the appropriate sweet-spot for any given situation. What most people are confused about is thinking a weaker password being kept in the mind vault is more secure than a stronger password kept in a physical vault; the reality is the mind vault is subject to vulnerabilities than a physical container isn't.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    16. Re:An idiot playing a semantic game. by greyhueofdoubt · · Score: 1

      I was getting ready to post about dual factor systems in response to your post and then I read your last lines. I guess I'll just second what you said; despite the tin-hatters objections about physical security, an access card with 1 (one) password for nearly everything is far more secure- both physically AND bitwise- than my folded-up post-it that contained all seventeen UN/passwords that I needed in order to do my job. I'm now down to 7 or 8 passwords, but they are used infrequently. In fact, some of them are used so infrequently that I need to reauthenticate the account via email when I do need it, so I don't know why I even write the passwords down.

      Anyways, my point to the paranoid among you:
      -You will not need to write down your 7-10 digit numerical password if that is the only one you use, and you use it often
      -If you lose your card, it is useless without the password
      -You cannot brute-force the military CAC card login; it has a 3-strikes policy*
      -etc.

      *I should mention that the 3-strikes wrong password policy is a great way to get back at the assholes who leave their WinXP workstations logged in with their CAC still in the card reader ("this workstation can only be logged out by user Stupid.Ass or an administrator"). Remove card, insert card. Type nonsense, press enter. Repeat two more times. Instant 15-minute support call to get access back.

      --
      No offense, but I've stopped responding to AC's.
    17. Re:An idiot playing a semantic game. by techno-vampire · · Score: 1
      he password policy should be made as strong and secure as possible

      No. Not as strong as possible, as strong as practical. The security trainer was showing that it's possible to make your policy so strong it was impractical, and that's what weakened the passwords.

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
    18. Re:An idiot playing a semantic game. by tkinnun0 · · Score: 1

      The obvious answer is right, passwords should be as secure as possible, but secure must take into account the ease of use for the human as well as length, character set, and randomness.

      I think you're confusing how secure a password is and how secured a password is. IOW, how hard a password is to guess and how it is stored when it is not used. Machines have no trouble using 512-, 1024- or 2048-bit secret keys let alone much shorter passwords, so in that vein, how long a secret key would you consider to be as secure as possible?

    19. Re:An idiot playing a semantic game. by spinkham · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Please reference the title of this thread. We're way out in the weeds now, and arguing about semantics.
      Here's how I see it, and you're welcome to disagree.
      It appears you're defining secure as simply strength, which includes randomness, length, and character set.
      I'm defining secure as, well, secure, taking in account at minimum both strength and human usability factors.
      Security == strength + usability.
      Strength is a subclass of secure.
          Length is a subclass of strong.
          Randomness is a subclass of strong.
          Character set is a subclass of strong.
      Human usability is a subclass of secure.
          Memorability is a subclass of human usability.
          Length is a subclass of memorability.
          Randomness is a subclass of memorability.
      There is overlap the characteristics of strength and usability, which is why password policies are hard to get "right".

      It's all semantics. I disagree with your assertion that putting secure in the past tense for human usability factors makes sense, but at least you're defining your words.
      This whole discussion started by saying that a instructor who was making a valid point through using poorly defined terms was being a dick.
      I think in this thread I have sufficiently made my point, you're welcome to have the last word if you like, but I'm done here. ;-)

      --
      Blessed are the pessimists, for they have made backups.
    20. Re:An idiot playing a semantic game. by Joe+Snipe · · Score: 1

      What a dick method for getting the last word.

      --
      Sometimes, life itself is sarcasm...
  25. Another interesting thing came out in the filing. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 4, Insightful

    According TFA, the thing about his not saving the configs to flash is a CLAIM by the city, not something confirmed by Childs.

    So how do they KNOW that, if they don't have the passwords? Did they try rebooting some network boxes and have them not come up? (If so, how is it that the net is still running...)

    This is looking more and more like a pointy-haired-boss SNAFU than logic-bomb job-insurance/revenge sabotage.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  26. mod parent interesting - spending karma here ... by unity100 · · Score: 1

    ... to help you weed out useful comments dammit.

  27. All of your passwords by LM741N · · Score: 1

    are belong to us. Or something like that. its only slightly funny to me any more. A Simpsons reference is always more appropriate.

  28. Password policies by Enderandrew · · Score: 1

    And then you reset their password and make then pick a new one.

    Password policies shouldn't be draconian. For instance, changing them frequently isn't likely to help much. I'd rather people have a secure password that they don't write on paper, and keep for a year, rather than force them to change their password every two months and encourage users to write their password down so they remember it.

    --
    http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    1. Re:Password policies by Cramer · · Score: 1

      When are people ever going to learn such overly heavy handed, draconian password policies, in fact, DO NOT improve password security? The more complex a password must be, the less secure it will actually be because the users have to be able to remember it. What I've seen time and time again... people pick poor/weak passwords acceptable to the system and then they write them down and stick it on the edge of their monitor.

    2. Re:Password policies by budgenator · · Score: 2, Funny

      what morons, everybody know the only secure place for your password sticky note is the underside of your keyboard

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
  29. NEVERMIND! by HaeMaker · · Score: 1

    Read TFA... I think they were the VPN Group passwords, i.e. the PSK for the IPSec connection. They still would have to auth after they connected.

    Strange they would have a different password per user, unless they were hardware VPN clients.

    1. Re:NEVERMIND! by rahvin112 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It's government. To think like government in implementing something like VPN you have to conceive a solution that involves the user not having to do anything (other than maybe push a button) and this includes anything other than a standard login box. Second you have to implement this in a way that the user themselves can go home and implement this solution without any site help from anyone and zero technical knowledge. (you don't send an IT person to a State Employees home, that's asking from some kind of lawsuit). Fourth the solution must be as expensive as possible, support some local business (preferable if the business owner is connected politically with one of the local leaders) and require very few extra hours from the already overworked staff.

      What does that result in? Hardware VPN boxes plugged into the network router, with the users computer plugged directly into the VPN box. Costs a lot, requires pre-configuration of the box but should require no site visits, idiots can usually successfully plug in boxes with phone support only and any reconfiguration likey requires the box to be brought back into the office as the VPN keys on the boxes are likely hard coded into a configuration on the VPN device. Likely a turn key solution so you have a hefty support contract and the vendor would likely assist with deployment and any reconfiguration resulting in a nice contract fee for reprogramming all the boxes.

      My guess is some VPN box provider is going to be doing a service call on every box and netting themselves some nice profit under their support agreement.

    2. Re:NEVERMIND! by masdog · · Score: 1

      There could have been different groups for different departments or divisions. Its safe to assume that some departments had their own domains or child domains with different VPN or password policies, and with Cisco, you need to have to have a different group for each domain or child domain to Auth against.

    3. Re:NEVERMIND! by adri · · Score: 1

      You mean, like _CISCO_ ?

      (Cisco offer precisely the above btw.)

  30. Uhoh by FST · · Score: 1

    My account details are on there. I hope no one breaks my account or

    --
    46487 466780 252994 376409 96920 39622 205366 244315 622115 512361 668040 63608 259203 955314 811176 652718 166330 23922
  31. Network not destroyed by Hanzie · · Score: 3, Insightful
    No, his network hadn't been hammered while he was gone. That's the amazing part. The news reports were quite clear that everything worked while he was in jail.

    It'll be fun to see what happens, now that he's been removed from the loop.

    --
    ********* sig: If you don't like the law, get filthy stinking rich, and buy a better one.
    1. Re:Network not destroyed by megaditto · · Score: 1

      It's not his network, it's the city's network. It's the equivalent of you being stupid enough to lock your house one day, and me "helped" you by installing new locks (and keeping the keys).

      And what would happen if he got hit by the bus? He configured things without recovery passwords, bootstrap code, console access, or even saving router settings to flash.

      I suspect millions' worth of hardware would have been bricked after a trivial event like a faulty power supply or a new device installation. Am I wrong with my guess? (I am not an IT person)

      --
      Obama likes poor people so much, he wants to make more of them.
    2. Re:Network not destroyed by Anonymous+Cowpat · · Score: 1

      imagine that you commission someone to produce a painting for you. The physcial work itself is yours. The copyright is yours (assume it's a work for hire), but no-one in ordinary parlance would refer to it as 'your painting'.

      The Hardware may belong to the city, as may the schematics (if they exist), but it's still his network in as much as he deserves to be recognised as its creator, though this confers no legal rights upon him.

      --
      FGD 135
  32. Post Category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Clearly posting this in the Entertainment category was a perfect fit.

  33. No wonder Childs refused to release them by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    Not only is it true that the IT people there are incompetent, but so are the SFPD and the attorneys in the case.

    Next thing you know they'll be surprised when they find out the real problem is somebody else has been stealing them blind every time they leave the cash registers in the parking ticket division unlocked while they go to lunch ...

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  34. Re:Another interesting thing came out in the filin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So how do they KNOW that, if they don't have the passwords? Did they try rebooting some network boxes and have them not come up

    'I was wondering about that as well. I hope Childs' lawyer immediately subpoena's the router logs to make sure that the city doesn't wipe the configs in order to save face and frame Childs.

  35. Read The Article by mysidia · · Score: 1

    Posting these passwords in public creates a security risk, although the passwords are not enough to give a criminal access to the city's VPN. The passwords are so-called "phase one" passwords, and must be combined with a second password to access the network, the source said.

    In other words, they have published the group authentication details.

    Once the public has had a chance to view the evidence, the network's security will be reduced. But a third party needs also an individual personal username and password to login.

    Changing all these authentication details on their VPN concentrator and then on each and every VPN client, is an administrative nightmare.

    Some VPN clients may be other routers/concentrators (departments that need secure channels with other office branches)

    Employees of the city may have VPN clients installed on multiple computers (i.e. workstations and laptops).

    Typing something different when they login is not what it is done. The VPN client will have to be reconfigured after the credentials are changed on the server, in order to log back in, so it's (NUMBER OF WORKSTATIONS, Routers, etc) not merely (NUMBER OF PEOPLE).

  36. So if Childs is tried by a jury of his peers by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 0, Troll

    And those peers are knowledgeable network and security people, how many BILLIONS do you think they'll award Childs for the prudent actions he took that the incompetent fools in the SF government violated once they forced him to release the passwords?

    I think I'd pencil it in at five billion US dollars (that's about 100 million EU, for those of you with real currencies) ...

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    1. Re:So if Childs is tried by a jury of his peers by Qzukk · · Score: 1

      Sadly, "peers" doesn't mean what we wish it did, and one of the questions during voir dire will almost certainly be "have you ever worked as a network administrator before?" with an affirmative answer as grounds for dismissal from the jury pool.

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    2. Re:So if Childs is tried by a jury of his peers by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

      So long as they keep all the lawyers and police officers off the jury, it should be fair.

      Wonder how long before they release the ATM pin numbers and SS numbers for the jury, though ...

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    3. Re:So if Childs is tried by a jury of his peers by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 1

      We need to get some real IT guys on the jury not PHB IT guys.

    4. Re:So if Childs is tried by a jury of his peers by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      So, what you say is that being actually able to grasp the subject of a case is not only not a reason to be part of the jury but actually a reason to be removed from it?

      What should I base my judgement on if I don't even have the foggiest idea what's being tried? Whose tie looks better on him?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    5. Re:So if Childs is tried by a jury of his peers by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 1

      I was saying don't put PHB who mange IT and don't know much about it in the jury but put the real IT techs, admins and so on in there.

  37. This IS San Francisco After All by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Top Five Passwords:

    Filthy_Sanchez

    Sant0rum

    D1esel_Dyke

    3$Bill

    C0ttager

  38. Don't blame me by mrbah · · Score: 1

    I voted for Harvey Dent.

  39. I use OpenVPN by Darkk · · Score: 1

    My Debian based router uses OpenVPN that uses certificates for authentication. It can also use a RADIUS server to verify the actual user.

    Since it's just few users I don't bother with the RADIUS server and each user have his / her own certificate that is unique. So if the person is no longer around I can just disable that certificate in the router. In corporate world nothing should be deleted so least I can show in my router that the certificate is indeed disabled as opposed to simply delete it.

  40. Cashed or Cached Creditials by c0d3r · · Score: 1

    Wooo Hoo!!! Cashed.. or uhm cached credentials.. I can see crackers using their patterns for decryption schemes. Also, who knows if these passwords are used elsewhere.

  41. These are group passwords in IPSEC profiles by colinmcnamara · · Score: 5, Informative

    From the referenced article - "The passwords are so-called "phase one" passwords, and must be combined with a second password to access the network, the source said. " 99% chance they are using some form of Cisco device as their VPN concentrator (most like a VPN3030, ASA or 7200 series router). If they are these passwords (one per group) are in what is called a pcf file in every employees computer that is allowed to connect. Heck, if you use a Cisco vpn it is on your computer in the following location - C:\Program Files\Cisco Systems\VPN Client\Profiles . The group pass is encrypted with weak encryption that is commonly cracked to allow linux laptops to connect using vpnc. You can do it on the web here - http://www.unix-ag.uni-kl.de/~massar/bin/cisco-decode

    The thing is, this group password's primary use is to segregate users into different buckets. E.G contractors may have on password, with different authentication methods, while permanent employees are in a different bucket, with their own authentication methods. The key thing, is that once this first password is provided, the end user still has to provide a unique username and password to gain access. So in effect, having the group password alone is meaningless.

    On top of that, I frankly would not be surprised or peeved if a network engineer had possession of PCF files for the network he is responsible for. What is next? Is the DA going to try to prosecute him for having diagrams and configs of the network he is managing on his laptop?

    --
    Colin McNamara - CCIE #18233 "The difficult we do immediately, the impossible just takes a little longer"
    1. Re:These are group passwords in IPSEC profiles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Having done some recent work with making a Linux IPSec VPN work the "Cisco way" so we didn't have to shell out lots of cash for a Cisco VPN appliance, I'm almost fairly certain that once the group keys/PSKs are compromised, you might as well have broken in to the network. Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that the PSK is used to encrypt the VPN traffic, which means that having the PSK is enough to decrypt it and read the phase 2/XAUTH passwords, as well as any other traffic sent over the VPN tunnel.
      And it would be expected for a top-level admin to have access to these group keys since presumably he generated them in the first place for users to use....
      --ywlke

  42. RTFA by Estanislao+Mart�nez · · Score: 5, Informative

    Why did the DA even have access to these passwords? Why were they not in hash form? Did Child's have anything to do with that part?

    From the article:

    The passwords, discovered on Childs' computer, pose an "imminent threat" to the city's computer network, according to the court filing. Childs could use the names and passwords to "impersonate any of the legitimate users in the City by using their password to gain access to the system," the motion against the bail reduction states.

    So, in answer to your questions: probably because the police found them as a result of their investigation, because Childs allegedly kept them in plaintext, and yes, allegedly, Childs had plenty to do with it.

    Do you have any other questions? Perhaps the article answers them.

    1. Re:RTFA by GaryOlson · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Do you have any other questions?

      Why are these introduced in a bail hearing? Is he going to sell them to buy a plane ticket to a non-extradition country? Could he use a network access password to arrange travel as a third party and avoid prosecution?

      These login/passwords were found on his office computer. How the hell do you think he is going to access this computer even if he is free on bail? Something tells me he will have a very hard time obtaining this data.

      --
      Every mans' island needs an ocean; choose your ocean carefully.
    2. Re:RTFA by Anonymous+Psychopath · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They aren't worried about releasing him on bail with what they know Child's knows. They are worried about what they don't know that he knows. Perhaps the copy of the password file found on his office PC is not the only copy? How could you know that he doesn't have it on a USB key in a safe deposit box or something along those lines. I wouldn't want him where I couldn't keep an eye on him until everything he had access to (and probably everything I didn't think he had access to) had undergone a complete audit.

      --

      Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.

    3. Re:RTFA by masdog · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Do they even know what those "usernames" and "passwords" are for? Did they check any documentation or did they just assume that the list was a list of individual users and passwords that Childs could use to wreck havoc?

      After reading the article, it seems like the list consists of Cisco VPN group names and pre-shared keys, not usernames and passwords. To someone who isn't familiar with the technology, it would look like a username and password, and I'm sure they are counting on the technological ignorance of the Judge and the general public to keep up this charade.

      It will be interesting when this thing finally goes to trial. The city is probably going to end up eating its words.

    4. Re:RTFA by loraksus · · Score: 0, Troll

      The city is probably going to end up eating its words.

      They won't. The prosecutor, in an attempt to not look like a Nifong will throw out every juror who doesn't have 12:00 blinking on their VCR.

      Then it's the standard "dazzle them with bullshit", "experts whose testimony is either due to incredible incompetence or intentional malice and just happens to favor the prosecution" and rhetoric that infects courtrooms these days.

      The judge won't know a TCP packet from an operating system and neither will the jury, unless they lie during jury selection.

      --
      1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
    5. Re:RTFA by forand · · Score: 3, Insightful

      See the problem with what you are saying is that you are assuming he is guilty. While that may seem obvious to you and I, that is not, nor should be, how the court views things. His bail is obviously being set because of fears he could do more instead of fears he will flee his prosecution which is the intent. If they fear he may commit more crimes they should place him in prison without bail and state as much. As it is they are just playing with the law to get what they want without asking for it directly.

    6. Re:RTFA by Anonymous+Cowpat · · Score: 2, Interesting

      maybe it's a bluff. Now that they've put them in the public record, they can go to the judge and say "we KNOW he has access to this username\password list, because we just made it available to him, so you can't let him out incase he uses it to damage the network". Which would be very slimy indeed, but then they're lawyers, slimey is their modus operandi.
      On another note, isn't the POINT of the 8th amendment to stop bail deliberately set so high that the person being held cannot hope to post it? (which seems to be what the DA here wants)

      --
      FGD 135
    7. Re:RTFA by masdog · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Jury selection cuts both ways - while Kamala can drop every juror that has some technical knowledge, the defense can drop anyone who can't program their VCR or turn on a computer.

    8. Re:RTFA by TubeSteak · · Score: 2, Informative

      On another note, isn't the POINT of the 8th amendment to stop bail deliberately set so high that the person being held cannot hope to post it? (which seems to be what the DA here wants)

      Bail is considered excessive in relation to the crime alleged, not to the means of the defendant, even though the means of the defendant is considered when setting bail.

      In other words, your inability to afford bail is not one of the defining characteristics of "excessive bail".

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    9. Re:RTFA by budgenator · · Score: 1

      There is usually a limit to the number of jurors that can be drop for no reason

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    10. Re:RTFA by sjames · · Score: 1

      That's not a situation for bail, that's a perfectly normal event any business's IT department needs to be able to deal with when an employee leaves for any reason.

      Of course, the usual procedure for that is not publishing the passwords into the public record.

      Bail is not an IT procedure. Using it to shore up a bad security situation is an abuse of the justice system.

    11. Re:RTFA by Anonymous+Cowpat · · Score: 1

      As far as I can tell, in California computer tampering is worth 16 months imprisonment. 3 counts = 48 months. How can any crime which could net him only 4 years imprisonment be so serious as to warrant $5m bail?

      The point of bail is to have the accused put enough cash on the line that it becomes worth his while not to try and flee, it's not there so that if he does flee the state doesn't 'go home empty handed'. Thus it should be dependednt on the ability of the accused to pay. Wikipedia doesn't say much about the case law and how SCOTUS has interpreted it, so I won't say that you're wrong, just that I hope you're wrong and that you ought to be wrong.

      --
      FGD 135
    12. Re:RTFA by dbIII · · Score: 1

      I have the passwords of all my ftp users for several innocent reasons. The above horror over passwords is most likely fishing about in the bottom of the barrel for anything to make him look like a criminal worth spending large amounts of money to catch and imprison instead of a monumental stuffup.

    13. Re:RTFA by loraksus · · Score: 1

      The thing is, there is a limited number of "without cause" exclusions each side can use - and given the fact that there are more people who don't know than people who do, the jury will be skewed as I've mentioned previously.

      --
      1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
  43. Only in SanFransicastan by gelfling · · Score: 1

    Information wants to be freeeeeeee like dirt and hippies and gay pride parades!!!!

    1. Re:Only in SanFransicastan by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      Nah, info wants to be free like Hydrogen

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
  44. For everyone who thinks Childs was right by Zakabog · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Does anyone realize that the passwords would have never been given to the DA's office if it wasn't for his actions? The passwords would then not be part of public record. Do you think the person at the IT office would have made the list of passwords public if Childs left gracefully?

    Someone at the the DA's office is the incompetent person in this case, but that does not validate his locking out of everyone competent enough to take care of the system (the people that would have replaced him at the IT department.)

    1. Re:For everyone who thinks Childs was right by Enderandrew · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The fact that the passwords could be harvested in the first place is problematic. I'm a SysAdmin and I should never have access to anyone else's passwords.

      Passwords should be encrypted and non-visible. This is standard practice.

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    2. Re:For everyone who thinks Childs was right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're not much of a sysadmin if you don't periodically run a password cracker to test for weak passwords on your systems, and the stuff they found was pretty weak (username an passwords the same)

      It shouldn't have been on his home computer, but if he's the workaholic type it's not surprising. I don't know a sysadmin alive that doesn't have that kind of work material on their home computers.

    3. Re:For everyone who thinks Childs was right by CorporateSuit · · Score: 1

      The first line of your post should warrant you as unfit to vote, raise children, or attend school in the United States. Just reading it almost caused me to suffer a brain aneurism. Voltaire himself would take back his historic advocacy of free speech if he were here, reading your post. The founding fathers would blot out the first amendment in an unholy mixture of tears, ink, and blood simply to purge the future of this gross abomination of recorded [lack of] thought. Gah! Now I need to punch something!

      --
      I am the richest astronaut ever to win the superbowl.
    4. Re:For everyone who thinks Childs was right by ronabop · · Score: 1
      Known challenge-response keys are not the same as a final encrypted signature/key exchange.

      Think of it as having caller ID on a traditional modem, where caller ID technology can be (and has been) spoofed: the first layer of challenge only response gets you to... the second layer. The first layer, by itself, filters out a massive number of brute-force war-dialer script-kiddy attacks before they can even *make* it to the second layer.

      Since over-doing car analogies is popular here, I'll go with "garage door". Garage doors are very easy to hack (see: crowbar), but they still don't get you access into a car once inside a garage. It's called layered defense.

      Yes, layered defense is still penetrable, but there's a pretty well proven argument/reason reason for the layers.

    5. Re:For everyone who thinks Childs was right by Enderandrew · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No a real SysAdmin doesn't violate good security practices by installing password crackers and checking people's passwords. Those SysAdmins should be instantly fired.

      A good SysAdmin has password rules in place to make people select good passwords to begin with.

      Our standard policy is 3 character types, 8 characters or more, and can't repeat last 12 passwords.

      "I don't know a sysadmin alive that doesn't have that kind of work material on their home computers."

      If their was a SysAdmin working for me that had password lists of my users on his home computer, not only would I fire him, I'd press charges.

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    6. Re:For everyone who thinks Childs was right by Enderandrew · · Score: 1

      We're not talking about that here. And regardless, I'd encrypt even that.

      Each user had a unique password in this system, even though it had to be used in addition to another component.

      Our base VPN login requires a username, a unique password and a keyfob. After you pass that, we run a host checker to make sure you're connecting from company equipment. We then require domain credentials.

      Every step of that is encrypted, and never should anyone in the IT department know anyone's passwords.

      Our IS department is seperate, and their job is to ensure everyone is following security procedures. One day I get a call from one of our IS gals who needs access to her email, but didn't bring her laptop home. She asked if I could bring up her mailbox. I said we disabled that feature, and I could not bring up her exchange box. (I believe our exchange admin could still do this, but we told everyone that no one could).

      Next she proceeds to offer me her domain credentials so I can log into her account and pull up her email.

      I immediately stop her and tell her I don't want her password. She insists I log in as her because she immediately needs her email.

      I reset her account, pick a password of my choosing, and read her email to her over the phone at her insistence, and then immediately reset her password again. I told her that she can then pick a new password at her next login, but NEVER should I know her password.

      I wasn't sure if she was possibly testing me, or if the supposed security expert didn't even follow good security practices.

      Kevin Mitnick had it right. The biggest security hole is people.

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    7. Re:For everyone who thinks Childs was right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are a sysadmin, so of course you have access to everyone's passwords, if you ever really wanted them. If you don't know that, you must not know your job very well.

    8. Re:For everyone who thinks Childs was right by masdog · · Score: 1

      These aren't standard passwords for users. They are Cisco VPN Groupnames and Pre-Shared Keys that are used in Stage 1 of VPN authentication. The network admin or engineer should have those documented.

    9. Re:For everyone who thinks Childs was right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No a real SysAdmin doesn't violate good security practices by installing password crackers and checking people's passwords. Those SysAdmins should be instantly fired.

      Dude, your pompous, self-righteous attitude makes me believe that you're either a pointy-haired management clown, or what guys in my group call a "Barney". Either way, what you define as a "real" admin is, IMO, an absurd projection of what your anal retentive imagination thinks an admin should be.

      Our standard policy is 3 character types, 8 characters or more, and can't repeat last 12 passwords.

      Pfft. Big whoop. I'm supposed to be impressed? You can still have weak passwords with that scheme.

      If their was a SysAdmin working for me that had password lists of my users on his home computer, not only would I fire him, I'd press charges.

      Har, har. Press charges? For what? If the word "security" is mentioned in any way in an admin's job description that will provide cover for use of legitimate security accessment methods like pen-testing, which, ohbytheway, includes password cracking. At most, you could use it as grounds for dismissal if there is a stated company policy prohibiting its use. But charges? Tch, only if you can prove the passwords were used for malicious intent. It's called mens rea. Look it up sometime, whydontcha?

      JFC, "It's been 1 hour, 20minutes since you last successfully posted a comment" are any other poor AC's waiting this long between posts, or is it just me /. hates?!

    10. Re:For everyone who thinks Childs was right by skeeto · · Score: 1

      Do you think the person at the IT office would have made the list of passwords public if Childs left gracefully?

      From Child's point of view I think it goes like this: if he left gracefully something worse might have happened.

    11. Re:For everyone who thinks Childs was right by fostware · · Score: 1

      How long since you've been at the coalface?

      I have plenty of users who pick passwords like login:"enderandrew" password:"Enderandrew1" and next month it'll be "Enderandrew2".

      Once a month, we run a crack using user's names and details dictionary from the HR system (jumbled to not disclose specific information) and do a 30-minute run. If you're password is cracked in the first 5 minutes you'll get a personal (low key) visit, anything found after that is cert-signed email requesting a change of password to something not using such identifiable data.

      We also talk to staff every six months about different password strategies, like passphrases with numbers in between some words

      --
      "We know what happens to people who stay in the middle of the road. They get run over." - Aneurin Bevan
    12. Re:For everyone who thinks Childs was right by loraksus · · Score: 1

      It's also standard practice for sysadmins to keep around cisco vpn profiles (i.e. pcf files)

      Which is what Kamela the retarded DA exposed.

      See this post

      --
      1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
    13. Re:For everyone who thinks Childs was right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty sure username are rarely of the form NicknameFirstname.

      Normally they would be of the form FirstnameLastname: so andrewwiggin

      although they may be FirstornicknameLastname resulting in enderwiggin.

      Further, I would expect a password of "xenocide" for an account named enderandrew.

    14. Re:For everyone who thinks Childs was right by Enderandrew · · Score: 1

      Our password rules allow dictionary words, but username variations aren't allowed.

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    15. Re:For everyone who thinks Childs was right by Enderandrew · · Score: 1

      "Har, har. Press charges? For what?"

      Often a story runs across Slashdot about company documents leaked because a laptop was lost. Ideally all laptop HDDs would be encrypted from here on out, but we have a company policy that we replace laptops in the 5-6 year range. New laptops today we encrypt HDDs, but it will be 5-6 years before all are encrypted.

      So first off, don't have needlessly secure, sensitive data on a company laptop away from the office.

      Next, there is zero excuse to have that data on your home computer. It breaches the contracts you sign with our company.

      Finally, people's individual passwords should never be accessible by you.

      If you have my employees passwords on your home computer, yes I would file charges against you in a heartbeat.

      Test me. Unlike you, I'm not posting AC, and yes that was a real challenge. Feel free to try and take me up on it. I know my security, and I will prosecute.

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    16. Re:For everyone who thinks Childs was right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Often a story runs across Slashdot about company documents leaked because a laptop was lost

      Yet, nobody ever gets prosecuted for losing the data do they? I know companies have been fined for failing to disclose breaches and notify affected parties, but so far I don't believe anyone who has lost a laptop containing sensitive data that they did not already have authorized access to has been punished by the justice system.

      Next, there is zero excuse to have that data on your home computer. It breaches the contracts you sign with our company

      Go on and post the pertinent sections from your employment contract that prove your assertion. I've never seen that particular stipulation in a contract that I've signed. I've seen plenty of sysadmin policy statements that outline requirements to keep company data confidential, but never a policy that would inhibit me from keeping work product on my pc or laptop in order to perform my duties as a sysadmin. Generally, if I've got a need to have it, I've got permission to have it.

      If you have my employees passwords on your home computer, yes I would file charges against you in a heartbeat.

      Yeah, and then I'd sue your ass for filing false charges.

      Test me. Unlike you, I'm not posting AC, and yes that was a real challenge. Feel free to try and take me up on it. I know my security, and I will prosecute.

      You don't know shit. I don't know what you do for a living, but I'm sure that it has nothing to do with system administration. Or, at least, I hope for the sake of your employer it doesn't, because you just explicitly authorized me to do penetration testing on your systems, jackass. Not only that, but you made your challenge in a public forum, meaning that anyone could pwn your ass now (which won't be me, unless you pay me $$$$), and you would hardly be in position to file charges for it.

      I wonder if your employer knows just what reckless twit he's got working for him.

    17. Re:For everyone who thinks Childs was right by Enderandrew · · Score: 1

      We make people sign a pretty lengthy computer usage policy that specifically stipulates taking company data outside the company is theft.

      Then we have a pop-up reminding people of these policies regarding computer usage at the login screen.

      We have billing information that is sensitive. We have payroll information that is sensitive. We have personal records that are sensitive. Our client list is sensitive. And our advertisers send us their fliers about two weeks before it gets put into a paper, and often these include sensitive data. Our advertisers go nuts when that data is leaked early.

      Stealing company data is theft, and there is plenty of precedence for judges upholding that.

      Again, feel free to test the waters of data theft and see where it gets you. We'll see which one of us is the idiot.

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    18. Re:For everyone who thinks Childs was right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We make people sign a pretty lengthy computer usage policy that specifically stipulates taking company data outside the company is theft.

      Again, post the actual legalese from your company documents/contracts, or otherwise you just spouting generalities in the hopes that no one notices that your ignoring my calls for proof.

      Stealing company data is theft, and there is plenty of precedence for judges upholding that.

      Thanks for the clarification, Captain Obvious. Unfortunately for you, the issue isn't "stealing passwords", but whether admins that have responsibility for securing their companies network infrastructure are authorized to employ tools to detect weaknesses in their systems, and access the risk of those weaknesses. Password crackers are just one tool of many that help a sysadmin with carrying out his security duties. That is most assuredly not "stealing passwords" and is covered under exceptions to state and federal computer/network crime laws.

      We have billing information that is sensitive. We have payroll information that is sensitive. We have personal records that are sensitive. Our client list is sensitive. And our advertisers send us their fliers about two weeks before it gets put into a paper, and often these include sensitive data. Our advertisers go nuts when that data is leaked early.

      OK, now you're wandering off into non sequitur la-la land. Again, is this drivel supposed to convince me, or anyone else reading this thread that you are an actual system administrator? You just keep repeating banal generalities here.

      Again, feel free to test the waters of data theft and see where it gets you. We'll see which one of us is the idiot.

      Wow, soliciting a criminal act over the internet. I thinks there's federal law covering that. I'm almost sure there's some kind of usage policy which prohibits it. Care to post the name of your employer and a number where he can be reached? Someone should warn him that one of his employees is engaging in reckless behavior (pretty sure that's against policy too) an thus creating a liability for his company.

      Oh, and if you decide to respond --which I know you will because you're one of those idiots who thinks that having the last word means "I win!" -- try to post something which bolsters your credibility and is not generalized BS. Right now, I don't think any real sysdmins reading your posts believe that you do system administration for a living. Hmm. That is, unless you work for.....OMG! YOU'RE SAN FRANCISCO'S IT MANAGER!! YOU'RE THE ONE THAT CHILDS DIDN'T TRUST!

      Of course, it all makes sense now.

    19. Re:For everyone who thinks Childs was right by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      Nonsense, as evidenced by the chain of events.

      Those passwords were given to the DA by someone, likely someone in the IT department. That illustrates a fatal lack of judgment and competence in the IT department, which was basically Childs' position to begin with.

      And what does the actions of these idiots (SF IT and DA) have to do with Childs' guilt?

      IMO the fact that Childs locked everyone else out could very well have been done as simple pragmatism or proper administration procedures. Maybe he pruned access lists when he noted everyone and their sister in the office had access (years ago)? Maybe nobody else ever even had access to begin with. Maybe his manager was the only other person with a password at one point, and he was an incompetent idiot who kept fucking things up, so Childs revoked it and the manager made no mention of it (or didn't even know until later)?

      There are a lot of plausible (and depending on how fucked the environment is, reasonable) reasons why others would not have the passwords. As for not disclosing hte password after the fact, well... that makes sense to me, too, when you feel you've been wronged in your termination. The password is part of your position's role, and as youve been relinquished from said role, the password goes with you, IMO. Companies need to make a consensus for how to deal with this sort of thing before they go firing important people - preferably by not firing important people willy-nilly, and treating them properly.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    20. Re:For everyone who thinks Childs was right by Enderandrew · · Score: 1

      If I don't post our 49-page computer use policy, then I'm full of shit? Let me say, I can care less what AC trolls think.

      I'm only responding to point out that you can't seem to follow a conversation.

      1 - You insist that often the usernames and passwords are the same. I respond directly by saying we don't allow any variation of your name in the password, and then you act confused in regards to password rules. If you can't keep up, I'm not going to explain things to you over and over again.

      2 - You insist any real admin cracks their users passwords. Checking for vulnerabilities does not mean seeing users passwords, nor keeping a list of them. You seriously need to read up on security policies and procedures.

      3 - You seem to think that being an admin means you have free reigns to try and hack your own system. You obviously have never worked as an admin for any sizable company.

      4 - You suggest any real admin keeps vital company data on his home computer. Again, this is ridiculous. For one, only company hardware touches our network, including VPN access. We don't even allow you to check company email from personal computers. All business related computer use must be performed on company owned hardware. Secondly, sending sensitive company data outside the network is grounds for termination. Keeping a list of passwords on your home computer is a double whammy given that an admin should NEVER see users passwords.

      I can say that in my career, I have never once had my employer lose data on any system I oversaw. When I interviewed for my current employer, I was asking them the questions, such as their backup strategies, data retention policies, security policies, disaster recovery policies, etc.

      They weren't up to snuff in my book, and they still aren't. Some improvements have been made, but we've also got to continue to make improvements.

      Most suits have little to no understanding when it comes to these sorts of things. They are normally only assuaged by security theater that often does more harm than good, but don't want to deal with necessary policies to provide actual security.

      At the end of the day, I know I'm good at my job. I've never lost data, and I don't ever plan to. I don't need to post AC or hide, because I can backup my statements.

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    21. Re:For everyone who thinks Childs was right by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      Sounds to me like you're the kind of shitty person who it really sucks to be employed under.

      Using a password cracker to test against your password databases is simply good practice. A 'good password policy' only goes so far: you can, and will, still have poor passwords. Firing someone for this is, well, amateur at best.

      It's like assuming anyone who owns a gun intends to shoot someone, or anyone who owns a car is guilty of vehicular homicide. Just, no.

      Now, the password lists at home situation... that I completely agree with you on, given certain circumstances (he may just be working from home - and exercising poor judgment, in which case a reprimand might suffice). But as an employer, you sure as hell better not have a way to determine this (outside of direct permission), or you're just as guilty (if not more so) of the things you'd be accusing your employer of, with no actual proof of wrongdoing.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    22. Re:For everyone who thinks Childs was right by Enderandrew · · Score: 1

      The last shop I worked for was a major Fortune 500 company, and they were BIG. They had issues with the IT staff constantly spying on people with VNC hiding the systray icon) and such.

      When we have grounds, we would investigate users. If someone was accused of something, we'd check their email and such.

      Even worse, we had IT users who would change people's passwords and log into users' accounts.

      Some people will abuse the system. Not everyone, but some people will. This is just ONE reason why SysAdmins should never see user's passwords.

      The second big one, is that you should always train your users to never give out their password to anyone, ever, for any reason. People tell me all the time, "you're in IT, I can give you my password" and then you wonder why people fall for phishing scams.

      They are trained to believe that certain people have a right to their password, and it is safe to give it out.

      Kevin Mitnik will be the first to tell you, that is your largest security hole right there. Compromising employees to gain access is the easiest and most dangerous means of compromising a system.

      SysAdmins should encourage good security practices in their users. That means we have to follow those practices ourselves.

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
  45. The reason for password disclosure by Hanzie · · Score: 5, Informative
    from TFA --

    The username/password combos were apparently functioning sets. The DA is saying they found them on Child's own computer. The DA is all in a tizzy because Child's could then use these accounts to sneak into the system and cause mischief without getting tracked back.

    Right. The only guy in the world with God level access to this network needs fake usernames/passwords so he can 'cause mischief'?

    Give me a fucking break. I can think of many reasons for him to have those combos on his personal system.

    1. He's checking to see what naughtiness has already happened with those accounts
    2. He's got accounts so he can log in with a lower level of access and see what's accessible
    3. These are usernames/password combos that he sniffed off the network, during routine security testing.
    4. These are people with accounts that have had some kind of trouble, and he's got them so he can attempt to diagnose problems linked to user level access.
    5. It's a list of post-it pad's he's seen while walking around at work, and he'd been planning to inform the users to change their passwords.
    6. They're the output list of a password security checker.

    Apparently the less than brilliant DA's office is unaware that the GOD level admin has the ability to do anything at all on the network and REMOVE ALL TRACES IN THE LOGS afterwards. It's trivial, when you're the one who runs the tattletales.

    Dear DA office: IF YOU LOOK HARD YOU'LL UNDOUBTEDLY FIND EVIDENCE TRACY EAVESDROPPING ON THE NETWORK SNIFFING AND ATTEMPTING TO ILLEGALLY PENETRATE THE SYSTEM. IT'S PART OF HIS JOB, MORONS. IF YOU KEEP BRINGING THIS CRAP UP, YOU'LL ONLY LOOK STUPIDER.

    Keep this up, and Nifong will have company in the 'worlds dumbest DA's club'

    --
    ********* sig: If you don't like the law, get filthy stinking rich, and buy a better one.
    1. Re:The reason for password disclosure by Anonymous+Psychopath · · Score: 4, Insightful

      from TFA --

      The username/password combos were apparently functioning sets. The DA is saying they found them on Child's own computer. The DA is all in a tizzy because Child's could then use these accounts to sneak into the system and cause mischief without getting tracked back.

      Right. The only guy in the world with God level access to this network needs fake usernames/passwords so he can 'cause mischief'?

      Give me a fucking break. I can think of many reasons for him to have those combos on his personal system.

      1. He's checking to see what naughtiness has already happened with those accounts

      They should have (but maybe do not) procedures for suspicious accounts. If they don't Childs should have created and documented one.

      He's got accounts so he can log in with a lower level of access and see what's accessible

      More reasonable, but 150 of them? That doesn't seem plausible.

      These are usernames/password combos that he sniffed off the network, during routine security testing.

      Possibly, but why did he need to keep a copy of the password file? If his goal was to uncover security vulnerabilities, it isn't necessary to keep the credentials uncovered.

      These are people with accounts that have had some kind of trouble, and he's got them so he can attempt to diagnose problems linked to user level access.

      It is not standard nor best practice to ask a user for their password, ever. If you need to access their account, you use admin privs to change their password, do whatever needs to be done, then ask the user to change it themselves when you no longer need access to their account.

      It's a list of post-it pad's he's seen while walking around at work, and he'd been planning to inform the users to change their passwords.

      You need the user's name for that. Not their login ID and password. Also, the number of passwords in the file makes this implausible.

      They're the output list of a password security checker.

      I think this one is redundant. While it is best practice to examine the security of your own network, it is not common nor reasonable to keep an archive of usernames/passwords uncovered.

      Apparently the less than brilliant DA's office is unaware that the GOD level admin has the ability to do anything at all on the network and REMOVE ALL TRACES IN THE LOGS afterwards. It's trivial, when you're the one who runs the tattletales.

      Dear DA office: IF YOU LOOK HARD YOU'LL UNDOUBTEDLY FIND EVIDENCE TRACY EAVESDROPPING ON THE NETWORK SNIFFING AND ATTEMPTING TO ILLEGALLY PENETRATE THE SYSTEM. IT'S PART OF HIS JOB, MORONS. IF YOU KEEP BRINGING THIS CRAP UP, YOU'LL ONLY LOOK STUPIDER.

      Keep this up, and Nifong will have company in the 'worlds dumbest DA's club'

      I think you should examine the well-documented, published, and logical security & administration best practices. Keeping a password list on a PC is a great way to compromise your network. If it turns out that these are, indeed, valid user security credentials, Childs doesn't appear to know the first thing about information security.

      --

      Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.

    2. Re:The reason for password disclosure by grasshoppa · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      GOD level access, huh? Think a little highly of ourselves, do we?

      Wait, is that you, Childs?

      --
      Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
    3. Re:The reason for password disclosure by dreamchaser · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It is not standard nor best practice to ask a user for their password, ever. If you need to access their account, you use admin privs to change their password, do whatever needs to be done, then ask the user to change it themselves when you no longer need access to their account.

      Actually that IS standard practice...but for desktop techs, not admins. I often have to admonish people for this, but it's quite a common practice to get the user's password so as to facilitate service. It certainly isn't a best practice, but it's a common one and in most cases it inconveniences the user far less.

    4. Re:The reason for password disclosure by skatedog · · Score: 2, Insightful

      and yet another reason why username/password is one of the poorest "security" measures in place for any level of access to sensitive systems. I am certain of one thing, system admins the world over will look back on our primitive username/passwords and laugh. Just another argument for RSA SecurID or biometrics or smart cards.

      --
      "skate the web"
    5. Re:The reason for password disclosure by loraksus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      7. Cisco PCF files w/ the group names, etc, filled in.

      That's probably what this is, and the increasingly desperate prosecutor is trying to find things that can be used to dazzle the jury.

      --
      1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
    6. Re:The reason for password disclosure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only universally valid argument against the plaintext passwords is that a stolen computer would allow others to access the credentials. That's the argument they should have used. Child should have kept the credentials encrypted (or hashed, but I'm assuming these were a product of a security audit).

    7. Re:The reason for password disclosure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Actually, "GOD" is no longer regarded as highest level of access. The new highest level of access is "Paris", as in Paris Hilton. Why? Well who else in the universe thinks more highly of themselves than Paris?

    8. Re:The reason for password disclosure by remmelt · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Please, no biometrics. I can change my password/smart card/whatever else quite easily, but I can never change my iris or fingerprints or what have you.

    9. Re:The reason for password disclosure by defaria · · Score: 0

      In no way at all is this standard nor acceptable practice in any company I've been associated with. My standard answer when anybody, I repeat anybody, asks for my password is "I'd tell you but then I'd have to kill you". Some times they chuckle but I'm as serious as a heart attack! I would never divulge my password to anybody under any circumstances whatsoever (even court order mind you). If you, as an administrator, cannot become another user then you don't know how to do your job. There's sudo, su or equivalent....

    10. Re:The reason for password disclosure by ehiris · · Score: 1

      If he's so smart and the best at keeping the network secure, why did he store passwords on his hard drive in clear text?

      It's seems like a pretty dumb thing to do.

  46. this guy will never work in IT again by TRRosen · · Score: 1
    No one will ever hire this guy for an IT position again!

    Of course thats because he will retire to a nice tropical island when he gets his settlement from the city!

    1. Re:this guy will never work in IT again by Darkk · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I wouldn't be too sure about that. He did a good job of running the network without issues. Just he got paranoid about his job.

      Just they won't hire him as the main network guy but will use him for experience long as the company keeps good record of the routers and passwords that is accessible by other network admins and audit those passwords every month.

    2. Re:this guy will never work in IT again by TRRosen · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Didn't read the whole post did ya?

    3. Re:this guy will never work in IT again by Darkk · · Score: 1

      Yes I read it but anything is possible these days.

  47. Nice spin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    His actions? You mean the ones his supervisors apparently approved of?

    The fact remains that the DA's office poses a greater risk to public safety than Childs apparently has.

    Personally, I think the DA ought to be brought up on terrorism charges, with far more bail than the $5 Million that Childs has been hit with.

    Ship her to Gitmo, while there's still a Republican administration in office.

    Turn about is fair play.

  48. Re:Ah HA! And, if he can rightfully sue, and win by davidsyes · · Score: 1

    If he can rightfully SUE and win BIG, then this will be

    CHILD's PLAY!

    --
    Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
  49. Re:Another interesting thing came out in the filin by bugs2squash · · Score: 4, Informative

    I've run networks where the router config did not fit into the flash. It had to be loaded from an external server.

    Not having the config in flash need not make the device a brick.

    --
    Nullius in verba
  50. Wrong... by Peter+Simpson · · Score: 1

    I worked for a company that had *exactly* that policy.

    My way of remembering passwords was to pick a word, take two consecutive letters of that word, represent them as their phonetic equivalents (A = alpha, B = bravo, etc.) and separate them with a symbol (I used "%" every month).

    Next month, take the next two letters in the word, when I got to the end, I'd use the first two letters again. By that time, the "no repeats" buffer had overflowed.

    Easy to remember, easy to create, never had any trouble.

    1. Re:Wrong... by Gnavpot · · Score: 1

      My way of remembering passwords was to pick a word, take two consecutive letters of that word, represent them as their phonetic equivalents (A = alpha, B = bravo, etc.) and separate them with a symbol (I used "%" every month).

      So anyone who knew your method would only have to test 28^2 passwords...

  51. no luggage joke? by sponga · · Score: 1

    The password was revealed to be 1..2..3...4
    cue..

    1. Re:no luggage joke? by tscheez · · Score: 1

      that's my password!!!

      you hax0rd my box!

      --
      Supplies!
  52. Video of Child day before he was arrested~:) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://youtube.com/watch?v=BcQ7RkyBoBc

  53. pretty obvious SF should return to typewriters. by swschrad · · Score: 2, Interesting

    that's the only technology anybody in the city with a title is capable of directing.

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
    1. Re:pretty obvious SF should return to typewriters. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem with typewriters is that they have more moving parts and more moving parts means an increased chance of unwanted touching, which in Sf is considered sexual assault.

  54. Re:Dang! OK, going on a limb here... by davidsyes · · Score: 2, Interesting

    But, years ago, after leaving IT, I was doing work on my department's portion of the intranet, and we at the time were using NetObjects Fusion (No, it wasn't Cold Fusion, and tho we had Front Phage, and a few other things, we for a while had NOF). I happened to have a packet sniffer because we were in Customer Support and used it to track broadcast packets going through our portion of the test LAN.

    One day, I suddenly could NOT remember my password, which sometimes happened after changing one of many of my own passwords. So, I hooked up the Lan Analyzer thingy to track my packets and look for MY OWN packets. I needed to work, and without my password I couldn't.

    Shockingly, NetObjects Fusion went out and sniffed the whole fracking NETWORK, and streamed user names and user password, unencrypted. The program designers must have been novices or fools. I began to panic, since I already knew the company had in it's employ one very quiet guy whose job it was was to sit in his cubicle and look at data streams and look for IP mischief. That made me feel he had an arsenal of tools and would find my group's app running on the corporate LAN. Heart racing, armpits sweating, I went straight to my director and told him everything. He said not to worry, and we agreed I should tell IT. I did, and shortly afterward, we ditched NOF.

    Apparently, IT didn't vet the program well enough, or the vendor failed to disclose it or outright lied and IT took it at that. Whatever the case, the moral is that any app can have scanners built into them even if for self-diagnostics, and any employee can intentionally or unwittingly loose a scanner onto the LAN, and end up with files they'd rather not have.

    For example, I once hooked up my company laptop running a fresh, NON-IT managed SuSE distro (this was 1999) and it scoured the servers (Unix and windows) and filled up my login screen with an icon and user name of OVER *400* employees and counting. I freaked out and yanked it from the LAN and IIRC, never again hooked up a Linux box directly to a LAN without permission.

    --
    Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
  55. Revealed! by nubsac · · Score: 1

    UID: TChilds Pwd: All your switches are belong to me

  56. Clearly this was a plot by Childs... by mkcmkc · · Score: 2, Funny

    to help the City of San Francisco look stupid.

    --
    "Not an actor, but he plays one on TV."
    1. Re:Clearly this was a plot by Childs... by urcreepyneighbor · · Score: 1

      SF doesn't need any help.

      --
      "The fight for freedom has only just begun." - Geert Wilders
  57. That was exactly my point! by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

    Why do you assume it went over my head?

  58. Thanks, modder! :o( by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1, Redundant

    For scoring my comment "redundant" even though it was one of the first few to appear here.

    Maybe try reading the post time in the future?

  59. I would have voted for the other candidate by joe_n_bloe · · Score: 1

    Except Kamala Harris ran unopposed.

    Look, okay, in in SF we're screwed up. Maybe it's a magnetic field or something.

    1. Re:I would have voted for the other candidate by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      It's the vapors and odors from all the goddamn hippies, I'd bet.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
  60. Apologies by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

    My filter was set too high. I did not see the post that was a reply to.

  61. What the DA uses for passwords (or should use)... by Newer+Guy · · Score: 1

    Idiot, moron, twit, retard, incompetant, tool, growup, fucktwit, iqof45

  62. Passwords? WTF? No strong auth (two factor)? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Passwords?
    Nobody uses just passwords...
    VPN's are only used with two factor strong authentication in the real world..

  63. ummm... by DragonTHC · · Score: 1

    isn't this exactly the kind of mismanagement and ignorance that the sysadmin was trying to protect against?

    The DA is an idiot. So are the rest of them.

    --
    They're using their grammar skills there.
  64. This is a p*ssing contest by fred133 · · Score: 1

    the first article I read regarding this talked about a "new security officer" that was hired.
    Personally I don't think much of security officers,usually they A/R's without any real abilities,they know just enough to be dangerous,and usually arrogant POS's.
    I think Childs wouldn't give any thing up to the new employee till he got a feel of this person's true ability.But the person just went over his head and started spreading doom and gloom till Mr. Childs was arrested.
    I yet to see this new security officer's name mentioned,gee wonder why that is....
    can you say "defamation of character" ??

    1. Re:This is a p*ssing contest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More than likely an ex cop who is just plain clueless to boot

  65. those in favor of municipal wifi take note by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All you commies who wanted municipal wifi take note, they can't even run their own networks, never mind one for the citizenry. Just like any program you put in to the hands of government to run, it turns in to a disaster.

    1. Re:those in favor of municipal wifi take note by drseuss9311 · · Score: 1

      afaik the network is currently up and running thanks to Childs

      and muni-wifi would be open (not VPN) so it takes almost no administration (at least zero security)

      and btw, what do commies have to do with anything?

      --
      ------ no thanks... I've quit
  66. DA is retarded by jackspenn · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well since the Constitution grants him the right of discovery, if that was the only copy, all Childs has to do is file a motion to see the evidence against him to obtain those usernames and passwords, plus because they were entered into a court record, if he or a friend were to launch an attack or whatever, he would have reasonable doubt given that any court clerk, judge, DA, case officer, police officer, citizen/group/reporter filing open record request, etc. can now see it. Better still if the system were hacked while he was in jail he could use it as defense saying "Hey, when I was running things the network remained secure, but as soon as I was removed it was compromised so how can the DA suggest to the jury that I was somehow putting the network at undo risk? The facts suggest otherwise. Just imagine how cool it would be to read on /. that this happened? Hum?

    Honestly the more I read about this the worse SF managers and the DA look. How dumb are they, I mean they are disproving their own case, if I were Childs' lawyer, I would ask this question to the DA in front of the jury "Just so I get this straight, because I am a simple man, you are telling us that this information was so confidential and put the city at so much risk that you publicized it yourself the same day that you made a statement about the dangers of Childs potentially releasing the information? Did you make sure the passwords and usernames were changed before doing so? Isn't it possible that the usernames alone being published could create a target point for hackers to work from? Allowing them to launch either DOS attacks if lockouts are set on thes accounts or to continually work on cracking passwords if no lockout is set? Do you even have the technical knowledge to understand the details of this case without you yourself putting the city at risk like you 'allege' my client has? If Childs put the city at risk by having it on his computer and deserves jail time, what punishment should you get for filing it into the court records? Didn't security concerns worry you? Where is the confirmation the passwords were updated or the account deactivated before you entered sensitive information with the court?"

    This is out of a comic stripe, SF is run by idiots. Childs is not the problem it is those that let him control everything so long as he did their work for them. Those are the people who should be on trial. It is a retarded DA that is 1). Putting city systems are risk for a prosecution and 2). Given the defense more ammunition.

    --
    Respect the Constitution
  67. His lawyer needs to jump on this by Legion303 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Your honor, my client did not feel comfortable giving sensitive system passwords to idiots. I'd like to enter prosecution's boneheaded public filing as Exhibit A."

  68. yeah, but DA knows what to do? by someone1234 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    They released ALL damn passwords in a public record.
    Anyone (who already has physical access to this network), which could be quite many people, could have various degree of access to the network.
    I'm sure hackers who already got a way to the network perimeter would like these passwords too.
    The ensuing chaos will prove he was right, sadly they will make him the scapegoat for it too, none will see (or admit) Childs was right.

    --
    Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
  69. They just proved his innocence. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He was right. They are stupid.

  70. Doesn't Surprise Me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is after all perhaps the most Liberal city in the United States. I am sure that privacy and security of the citizens public records ranks much lower on the scale than the government being able spy on its citizens. It is very important for the law enforcement to be able to determine who hasn't paid their water bill.

  71. OT:Moderation by ddrichardson · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Well said, there seems to be some really stupid moderation here recently. Do we really need the "redundant" moderation anyway?

    --
    A thistle is a fat salad for an ass's mouth...
    1. Re:OT:Moderation by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      Well, some smartass came around and marked THAT one as redundant, too. Just to prove he/she could, I guess.

    2. Re:OT:Moderation by windsurfer619 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, do we really need the redundant moderation anyways?

  72. Well, it is San Fransisco after all... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's plenty of poo stabbers with AIDS, but I don't know if they happen to also use Linux. Maybe they use the Fudge Packer distro.

  73. OpenVPN makes this simple by toby · · Score: 1

    Pre-shared X.509 certs, plus an optional pre-shared transport access key.

    That said, incredibly, I've seen some sysadmins email OpenVPN certificate/key pairs around. :-( In both cases, people who considered themselves security experts...

    If you aren't already using it, check OpenVPN out, it's wonderful.

    --
    you had me at #!
  74. ownership vs. responsibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Huh? What? It's not his network.

    Not in the legal sense, but he was in charge of it and was responsible and liable for anything that happened to it. It was his work and his design, and the sense of doing things correctly and properly is also important.

  75. When in doubt, go with "qwerty" by gatkinso · · Score: 1

    Or its old friend, "ytrewq".

    But there is the ever popular "qpwoeiruty"

    But I prefer "qwertie"

    --
    I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
  76. who cares. san francisco is full of fags and dikes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    who cares. san francisco is full of fags and dikes.

  77. Forgotten passwords by phorm · · Score: 1

    ... My first thought was that they were probably there so that when a user complains about a forgotten password they could be reminded of what it was, rather than changing it to something else that will be easily forgotten. I've been in plenty of places where the same users constantly can't login because of "system issues" when it's really a forgotten password.

    That being said, I don't keep user passwords on-hand, but if I did they would be in a secure encrypted file.

  78. The truth will prevail! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now the incompetent subordinates of Mr. Childs have some real work on there hands.
      Let's see if they can do it in a timely manner.If they have to call an outsider by 7/29, then that's an admission of incompetence as far as I'm concerned. That will have been an entire week to have done the deed. Yes, I count the weekend as work days because I work until the job is done.

  79. Re:Dang! OK, going on a limb here... by blueskies · · Score: 1

    NON-IT managed SuSE distro (this was 1999) and it scoured the servers (Unix and windows) and filled up my login screen with an icon and user name of OVER *400* employees and counting

    Just think if those icons had gotten loose!! You would have had some serious explaining to do. I always encrypt my icons with md5.

  80. Darned if you do. by Theopolis · · Score: 1

    When he said that they'll screw everything up, and refused to give them access, they put him in jail. Give them access (Just to say I told you so). When they screw it up, they'll still blame him for the problem.

  81. My thoughts by zork5555 · · Score: 1
    As a retired former Cisco Certified Network Engineer who used to work for a very large bank let me give you my thoughts on this fiasco:

    1. Any network guy who refuses to give his supervisors the passwords to the equipment should at least be fired forthwith and blacklisted from ever working as a network administrator ever again, no matter how incompetent he thinks his managers are.

    2. The fact that his managers even allowed this to happen in the first place is prima facie evidence IMO that they ARE raving incompetents.

    3. The DA is introducing into evidence as examples of "bad dealing" things that are part and parcel of being a network engineer. You network engineers out there need to be very worried.

    Back when I started in this business many moons ago, when knowing what VTAM, TCAM, SNA, and SDLC were, and knowing how to interpret Burroughs Poll and Select protocol was important, I was in a position to do sort of what this guy did, but I went out of my way to try to make sure my fellow workers and also managers knew what was up.

    In my last position, we engineers weren't even allowed to change the router and switch passwords. A security group did it and disseminated the new passwords via our managers.

    1. Re:My thoughts by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      [quote]1. Any network guy who refuses to give his supervisors the passwords to the equipment should at least be fired forthwith and blacklisted from ever working as a network administrator ever again, no matter how incompetent he thinks his managers are.[/quote]

      As far as I know, there is no actual evidence (I've seen none provided) that he actually denied the passwords to his managers. He prevented his coworkers (who shouldn't have had access, more than likely) yes, though that does not mean his superiors were likewise denied.

      Given their demonstrated level of incompetence, I'd say it's highly likely that they simply didn't think to ask for them, and after firing him, got told by someone else "hey, he had all the passwords and didn't share them with us" - and they went "oops".

      3. The DA is introducing into evidence as examples of "bad dealing" things that are part and parcel of being a network engineer. You network engineers out there need to be very worried.

      You can say that again! This has me really nervous, and any/all of my future contracts will have explicit stipulations to cover this kind of thing.

      I went out of my way to try to make sure my fellow workers and also managers knew what was up.

      Absolutely the best practice, bar none. However, when you're overworked and explaining particle physics to people who likely don't understand high school physics is going to be problematic, if not impossible. There are times when you just have to say "oh well" and do your job to the best of your ability, and try to mitigate and prevent problems - unfortunately, by treating your coworkers like the rest of the users to a large degree.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
  82. Passwords don't matter.... by Dinatius · · Score: 1

    ... if they can't get through the tubes!

  83. Yea that guy was indeed right by unity100 · · Score: 1

    at first i thought he was a nutjob, but judging from the EXTREMELY STUPID act D.A. just did, i think that the admin was totally right.

    unbelievable. disclosing all passwords to a VPN that contains sensitive information.

    it doesnt make any difference whether it is not accessible via internet. because there are A LOT of employees that can access that vpn and use those passwords. and its all the worse if they shut down the vpn until they change passwords - it will mean service disruption for many people due to work slowing down in whichever department that uses that vpn.

    no sir. if there is anyone that should be prosecuted, its that STUPID d.a.. i really mean it. really unbelievable.