Slashdot Mirror


Bootkit Bypasses TrueCrypt Encryption

mattOzan writes with this excerpt from H-online: "At Black Hat USA 2009, Austrian IT security specialist Peter Kleissner presented a bootkit called Stoned which is capable of bypassing the TrueCrypt partition and system encryption. The bootkit uses a 'double forward' to redirect I/O interrupt 13h, which allows it to insert itself between the Windows calls and TrueCrypt."

11 of 192 comments (clear)

  1. Much as we hate TPM here on /. by Wrath0fb0b · · Score: 5, Interesting

    TFA has a very good point -- unless you (cryptographically) trust the components of your system all the way down to the hardware itself, you can get pwned by an attack like this. You can regularly do all-the-way-to-the-firmware scrubs of your machine as damage-control, but the only real prophylactic is some form of trusted computing.

    Of course, I'm not really dying to jump on the TPM bandwagon, given the sponsors, but it sure would be nice if there was an openly-audited trusted computing module.

    1. Re:Much as we hate TPM here on /. by Wrath0fb0b · · Score: 5, Informative

      http://lwn.net/Articles/144681/

      Linux has had kernel level support for TPM for a while but most F/OSS developers have an intrinsic aversion to the concept (as I said in the GP, the identity of the TPM principals doesn't exactly give me a lot of confidence) so it's not widely used as far as I can tell.

      A wonderful response from the F/OSS community would be to build a version of TrueCrypt that uses TPM to authenticate the BIOS and MBR against the known good versions.

    2. Re:Much as we hate TPM here on /. by Wrath0fb0b · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Unless the bios writes a kernel module that hooks into reads from /dev/sda and gives out false information for the first 512 (or whatever) bytes.

      You cannot possibly defeat malware that is running on the same level of privilege as your detection code.

    3. Re:Much as we hate TPM here on /. by poopdeville · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Because if you have a compromised BIOS, it could "read back" whatever you wanted to hear. Asking a hacked BIOS to read itself back to you is like asking a liar whether he is a liar -- it gets you no reliable information.

      Surely you jest.

      As to updating the BIOS in a TPM system, I imagine that the procedure would be like this: ...
      (3) On next boos, TPM raises an alert saying "BIOS has been replaced -- new bios hash XXXXXXX"

      If you think this scheme works, but the one above doesn't, I have a bridge to sell you. Where do you think this data to hash is going to come from? From the BIOS, which you claim is an unreliable source. Indeed, if you rig up a BIOS to return the same signature as your current one, and you can run step 2 with no step 3 or 4.

      --
      After all, I am strangely colored.
  2. Not a new thing or idea by pehrs · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I can't tell what's supposed to be interesting or spectacular about this. It's a standard rootkit with MBR support along with some special hooks for truecrypt. It won't let anybody read an encrypted truecrypt volume unless you enter the password... And if you do enter the password on an owned computer it's not like trucrypt is going to help you anywhere. If you unlock the volume any malware can grab all the data it wants through the usual calls and hooks. It doesn't seem especially advanced compared to many of the rootkits out there.

  3. Re:Do I need to prepare? by Wrath0fb0b · · Score: 5, Informative

    If you care about the privacy of your information then your PC had better be secured at least as well as you would secure your other valuables. If someone can gain physical access to your machine then it's effectively game over.

    But that's the entire point of System Encryption right there! Someone gains physical access to your machine and they still can't do squat to read the contents (short of beating you with a hose to get the password or spending serious supercomputer time). System Encryption was designed for precisely this application.

    This nice little trick here gives them a third option -- install malware at the BIOS level while leaving TrueCrypt unchanged so as to give you the illusion of safety while they read your mail/keystrokes/whatever. If I were the Border Patrol, I would consider a tool that automates the installation of this tool to be a very worthy investment.

    In short, he's exploiting the fact that encryption and authentication are two very different things. TrueCrypt can assure you that you data are unreadable without the key but cannot authenticate the MBR as being genuine. For that, you need some form of trusted computing, the mention of which never goes well.

  4. Ok I don't get it by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How does this, in any way shape or form, "break" Truecrypt? Now maybe I misunderstand how it works, since the information is not presented in a clear manner and the author is letting ego get in the way of good writing, but more or less it looks like he has a way to get in to the system at a low level. Ok, great, that does NOTHING to break the encryption. I see nothing in here about managing to get data out of a Truecrypt drive/volume without knowing the key. So what's the big deal?

    I mean yes, you could use said malware to log the password. Well guess what? If you've physical access to the system, you don't need software for that. A hardware keylogger would achieve the same thing, or maybe a camera over the shoulder or maybe a tempest attack. The point is if you have physical access to the system, there is little someone can do to keep you from bugging said system.

    What Truecrypt is intended to deal with is someone nabbing your system and getting data, and I see no break in that regard. If you encrypt your laptop's harddrive to ensure that nobody gets your data, and somebody steals you laptop, this doesn't help them. For it to help them they'd have to get your laptop, bug it, get it back to you such that you didn't notice, wait for you to use it, then steal it again so they could get the password.

    I just fail to see how this is news here. If there is something I'm missing, by all means I'd be interested in knowing.

    1. Re:Ok I don't get it by Wrath0fb0b · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How does this, in any way shape or form, "break" Truecrypt?

      It breaks the unspoken (and totally unwarranted & incorrect) assumption that TrueCrypt not only encrypts but also authenticates.

      This is not "breaking" TrueCrypt since they never claimed to authenticate the MBR/BIOS against this sort of attack. That's what's somewhat clever about it -- it doesn't attempt to smash the door open but rather attacks in a fashion that this particular security software was not designed to handle.

  5. Re:Do I need to prepare? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Giving someone physical access to your machine is the equivalent of losing it and recovering it later, and encryption was never about this case!

    Encryption is meant to prevent data release with such a loss, but does nothing much to guarantee integrity of the system after recovery. It does not provide a tamper-evident nor tamper-proof system, since tampering can occur outside the encrypted content. Also, encryption itself does not even provide tamper-proofing for the encrypted volume! It just makes it infeasible to inject known plaintext into the real filesystem, but someone can simply corrupt the ciphertext image and therefore corrupt the real filesystem. You would need additional checksums or other integrity-checks to actually detect such damage.

  6. Re:Do I need to prepare? by khayman80 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You're absolutely right. Strangely, none of those links led to Peter Kleissner's web page.

    Check out the comments. Some of the visitors are flaming him pretty hard, but he's just a kid with amazing skills and (understandably) very little historical knowledge. Luckily, Christian politely points out that his attack serves to "... alert many people who think they made their PC secure by installing TrueCrypt and still keep working with an admin account where they should not. You prove that a security policy is indispensable, because admin privileges will give malicious software the ability to tamper with the installed security software."