Slashdot Mirror


The Internet's Biggest Security Hole Revealed

At DEFCON, Tony Kapela and Alex Pilosov demonstrated a drastic weakness in the Internet's infrastructure that had long been rumored, but wasn't believed practical. They showed how to hijack BGP (the border gateway protocol) in order to eavesdrop on Net traffic in a way that wouldn't be simple to detect. Quoting: "'It's at least as big an issue as the DNS issue, if not bigger,' said Peiter 'Mudge' Zatko, noted computer security expert and former member of the L0pht hacking group, who testified to Congress in 1998 that he could bring down the internet in 30 minutes using a similar BGP attack, and disclosed privately to government agents how BGP could also be exploited to eavesdrop. 'I went around screaming my head about this about ten or twelve years ago... We described this to intelligence agencies and to the National Security Council, in detail.' The man-in-the-middle attack exploits BGP to fool routers into re-directing data to an eavesdropper's network." Here's the PDF of Kapela and Pilosov's presentation.

7 of 330 comments (clear)

  1. Scary Much? by creature124 · · Score: 5, Informative

    I find the thought of this genuinley scary. Correct me if I am wrong, but we would have to change the BGP protocol itself to fix this issue. That isn't going to happen anytime soon I reckon, so I guess there is nothing we can do but encrypt senstive transmissions and hope for the best.

  2. I archive the talk by stits · · Score: 5, Informative

    It was really cool, opened a lot of peoples eyes. Here is the archive, http://www.stits.org/fp/Defcon_16/. Please don't flood it and only download it if you will use the info. I also took a ton of photos: http://www.flickr.com/photos/stits/sets/72157606608859399/ Hope to see you all next year!

  3. Re:SSL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here's a link to information about the incident you mentioned:

    http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS01-017.mspx

  4. Re:Fun fun fud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    How serious? This could potentially render the entire Internet inoperable. For real. Anyone who knows anything about basic Internet protocols should be shitting themselves right about now.

    You obviously don't know the basics of Internet protocols then. Anyone who knows BGP basics knows this problem is inherent in current interdomain routing.

    This is not an attack that just anyone can pull off (unlike Dan's DNS vulnerability). You need possess a BGP peering relationship with a provider who doesn't filter the prefixes listed in the NLRI of a BGP update message, as well as any further upstream providers. A _very high_ bar to say the least.

    We're seen numerous accidental route leakages over the years and even some malicious hijacking of IP space for nefarious activity as noted in the presentation. Any significant hijacking for the purpose of MITM (hijacking for spam really isn't a priority for ISPs) would be tracked down instantly on the NANOG list and have severe peering repercussions for the offending ISP. Bumping the IP TTL isn't going to do squat for all the BGP anomaly detection systems continually monitoring the routing infrastructure (Renesys, PHAS, etc).

  5. Re:Fun fun fud by palegray.net · · Score: 5, Informative

    Sensitive government communications ride on networks that operate separately from the public Internet.

  6. Re:Fun fun fud by palegray.net · · Score: 5, Informative

    Why would someone in the White House use an insecure communications channel to send sensitive correspondence to a foreign official? End-to-end encryption is used in such situations.

    Information transmitted from government installations is compartmentalized according to its classification level. Unclassified systems don't reside on the same networks as those intended for classified purposes.

    I'm a Navy communications nerd; this is kinda what I do for a living.

  7. Re:SSL by dacut · · Score: 5, Informative

    They gave away Microsoft's private keys to someone who called them

    Not quite. Microsoft's private key wasn't compromised; their identity was stolen. The attacker convinced VeriSign to sign his certificate claiming to be "Microsoft Corporation." The whole point of PKI is to never transmit your private key, even to an authority like VeriSign. As usual, the technology is secure; it's the people running it who aren't.