Slashdot Mirror


RSA's Servers Hacked

Khopesh writes "EMC subsidiary RSA was the victim of 'an extremely sophisticated cyber attack' which resulted in the possible theft of the two-factor code used by their SecurID products." The Boston Herald has a short article on the intrusion. Update: 03/17 23:54 GMT by T : Reader rmogull adds "With all the hype that's sure the explode over this one, we decided to do a quick write-up to separate fact from speculation."

172 comments

  1. Ouch by the+linux+geek · · Score: 3, Insightful

    These guys aren't like HBGary - RSA basically invented huge portions of modern cryptography. I'm interested in seeing the specifics on how this happened.

    1. Re:Ouch by dAzED1 · · Score: 4, Funny

      likely a soft hack. Insider, or simply seducing an engineer with a cute girl.

    2. Re:Ouch by vux984 · · Score: 1

      Meh, I'm still unconvinced that the "extremely sophisticated attack" might be code for the "login to the company vpn was the same as his dog's name, which he posted on facebook..."

      Or maybe a secretary who knew the passwords to the system got bribed...

      An "Advanced Persistent Threat" really doesn't mean much when you break it down.

      Most security breaches aren't all that sophisticated technically, and I'm cynical that they are making it sound much more impressive than it really was to try and preserve their credibility.

    3. Re:Ouch by MrEricSir · · Score: 2

      But do Ron Rivest, Adi Shamir, and Len Adleman have anything to do with RSA the company nowdays? I know they invented some algorithms which bare the name RSA, but that doesn't mean they have (or ever had) anything to do with the day to day operations of RSA the company.

      --
      There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
    4. Re:Ouch by the+linux+geek · · Score: 1

      Well, they founded it. That kind of involves involvement with the day-to-day ops.

    5. Re:Ouch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you're implicating Anonymous, a girl who hangs out on 4chan and watches anime is not capable of seducing anybody.

    6. Re:Ouch by SethJohnson · · Score: 2

      Meh, I'm still unconvinced that the "extremely sophisticated attack"

      That used to be a good assumption to make until the steps required to manufacture the stuxnet worm were revealed.

      The penetrator likely has eyes on a very specific secondary target, and grabbing this information was a preliminary step.. Imagine the resources that could have been applied. I'm betting physical access was required at RSA.

      Seth

    7. Re:Ouch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Does persistent mean that security has been breached for months, and they only found out now?

    8. Re:Ouch by dfcamara · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Hacking systems very rarely involves breaking cryptography. It's bad reputation for their sys admins but not so for their cryptography experts.

    9. Re:Ouch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      He didn't say "hippopotamus".

    10. Re:Ouch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't insult Queen Boxxy, you heathen !

    11. Re:Ouch by interkin3tic · · Score: 2

      a girl who hangs out on 4chan and watches anime is not capable of seducing anybody

      I'm pretty sure that first part, "girl" qualifies as "capable of seducing" at least a few engineers.

    12. Re:Ouch by bughunter · · Score: 1

      OK, well we're talking about crypto engineers, so only the 'girl' condition is essential, not the 'cute' condition.

      --
      I can see the fnords!
    13. Re:Ouch by russotto · · Score: 5, Funny

      OK, well we're talking about crypto engineers, so only the 'girl' condition is essential, not the 'cute' condition.

      It's also essential she not call herself "Eve". The crypto guys catch onto that one immediately.

    14. Re:Ouch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Geek2Geek did RSA.

    15. Re:Ouch by msauve · · Score: 2

      So, by your definition, Henry Ford is still involved with day-to-day operations of the Ford Motor Company?

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    16. Re:Ouch by the+linux+geek · · Score: 1

      MrEricSir said "doesn't mean they have (or ever had) anything to do with the day to day operations." Ford did indeed have things to do with the day-to-day operations of Ford Motor at one point.

    17. Re:Ouch by Cramer · · Score: 1

      I think you've underestimated the male demographic that, well, hangs out on 4chan and watches anime. "come here and f*** me" would work 99.999% of the time. :-)

    18. Re:Ouch by jd · · Score: 1

      That explains the zombies.

      --
      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)
    19. Re:Ouch by MichaelKristopeit413 · · Score: 0, Insightful

      Hacking systems very rarely involves breaking cryptography.

      until now.

    20. Re:Ouch by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      OK, well we're talking about crypto engineers

      We're also talking about "crypto" girls.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    21. Re:Ouch by swb · · Score: 1

      Henry was actually the defacto leader of the company well into the 1930s, more than 30 years after the founding of Ford.

      Thus, by your logic, it makes sense that R, S, & A would be involved in RSA's business.

    22. Re:Ouch by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      I think you've underestimated the male demographic that, well, hangs out on 4chan and watches anime. "come here and f*** me" would work 99.999% of the time. :-)

      No, it wouldn't work, because if a girl ever said that to one of them, it would be over before it started. Then their biggest concern would be hiding their underwear from their moms.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    23. Re:Ouch by ffreeloader · · Score: 1

      But do Ron Rivest, Adi Shamir, and Len Adleman have anything to do with RSA the company nowdays? I know they invented some algorithms which bare the name RSA, but that doesn't mean they have (or ever had) anything to do with the day to day operations of RSA the company.

      How do the algorithms created by RSA's founders expose RSA?

      --
      "while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude." de Tocqueville
    24. Re:Ouch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. Much to their credit, unfortunately.

    25. Re:Ouch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You notice that they talk of "RSA, an EMC company" - Rivest, Shamir, and Adelman probably sold their company (maybe to EMC, maybe to someone who sold it to EMC).

      Besides, they invented the algorithm/s which became famous, and the company was created to exploit said algorithms. They certainly gave their initials to the algorithm, and thence to the company, but they may have been nothing but figureheads in the company.

      BTW: I recall with amusement the T-shirts that the company gave out at a conference when the patent on RSA was expiring ("RSA - it's just an algorithm") - it looked like someone was regretting naming the company after the algorithm :)

    26. Re:Ouch by JustOK · · Score: 1

      He used to work Tuesdays and alternate Fridays in the cafeteria, mostly on the side dish line.

      --
      rewriting history since 2109
    27. Re:Ouch by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 1

      Follow the white rabbit...

      --
      Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
    28. Re:Ouch by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 1

      Does this mean I need a new authenticator for my WoW account? Crap. Those guys over at SusanExpress (free keylogger with every purchase!) must really be sophisticated now, that they have the elliptical functions needed to generate my RSA code in real time. And me with 4 level 85's to feed...

      --
      Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
    29. Re:Ouch by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 1

      Persistent means it isn't a one-time shot; something more involved than a crime-of-convenience.

    30. Re:Ouch by GrumpySteen · · Score: 1

      a girl who hangs out on 4chan and watches anime is not capable of seducing anybody.

      Really? Meet Allison Harvard

      Granted, she's better known as creepy-chan (and she's a wee bit less seductive in that persona, but that doesn't negate the other image. It just makes the morning after a lot scarier.

    31. Re:Ouch by Sulphur · · Score: 1

      You notice that they talk of "RSA, an EMC company" - Rivest, Shamir, and Adelman probably sold their company (maybe to EMC, maybe to someone who sold it to EMC).

      Besides, they invented the algorithm/s which became famous, and the company was created to exploit said algorithms. They certainly gave their initials to the algorithm, and thence to the company, but they may have been nothing but figureheads in the company.

      BTW: I recall with amusement the T-shirts that the company gave out at a conference when the patent on RSA was expiring ("RSA - it's just an algorithm") - it looked like someone was regretting naming the company after the algorithm :)

      Rename it Cockes then.

    32. Re:Ouch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the trust condition would not be met.

      the 4chan male demographic demands proof in the form of posted tits.

    33. Re:Ouch by macs4all · · Score: 1

      OK, well we're talking about crypto engineers, so only the 'girl' condition is essential, not the 'cute' condition.

      And, if you're talking about Alan Turing, the 'girl' condition is not only non-essential, it is a liability.

      Just sayin'...

    34. Re:Ouch by davester666 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, no password is safe if she can get to 7 in prime numbers...

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    35. Re:Ouch by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      He used to work Tuesdays and alternate Fridays in the cafeteria, mostly on the side dish line.

      Who - Shamir or Adleman?

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    36. Re:Ouch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and if it was over before it started, he would need to go to change his pants, leaving a console unprotected for a while

    37. Re:Ouch by Linker3000 · · Score: 1

      Any veg you like, as long as it's black-eyed peas

      --
      AT&ROFLMAO
    38. Re:Ouch by hey! · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's also essential she not call herself "Eve". The crypto guys catch onto that one immediately.

      She fooled them by spelling her nick backwards.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    39. Re:Ouch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you mean re-invented. The algorithms were known to GCHQ already.

    40. Re:Ouch by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      If you're implicating Anonymous, a girl who hangs out on 4chan and watches anime is not capable of seducing anybody.

      Hey speak for yourself man. Some of us get a semi at just the thought of such a woman.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    41. Re:Ouch by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Hey that's just getting the easy one out ;)

      True story: A cop spots a guy riding a sportbike at warp factor 5 down an empty highway at night and pulls him over. The guy on the sportbike pulls over immediately. The cop asks him why he was going so fast. The biker responds that a woman told him she's drinking a bottle of wine naked and if he gets there before she finishes, he can do whatever he wants to her. The cop told the biker to "try to take your time" and let him go.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    42. Re:Ouch by hesaigo999ca · · Score: 1

      Probably some student on an internship, added a usb key to the drive which compromised the machine, which propagated, then sent a signal to the cc and was sent back another bit of code to bypass firewalls altogether and get downloads happening. Other then that, it is impossible (properly configured)....to burn unto a cd or download unto a usbkey from their pcs over there. So how do you getthe files there, they have been alll but blocked off from the internet with firewalls, so someone from the inside had to disable the firewalls, and because I do not think anyone would have gotten in on purpose to do this cyberhacking, I think it was done as an accident or mistake, like someone carrying a usbkey thinking it would work, and not working like they thought but was still able to propagate sh*t through by mistake.

      Unless they got hacked from the outside, and then I would have to say, we are all NOT safe at this point, as these guys are the mecha of cyber security and encryption.

    43. Re:Ouch by vux984 · · Score: 1

      I actually agree on both your points (that rsa was a preliminary target, and that physical access was required...). But that doesn't make it a sophisticated attack.

      Indeed the fact that physical access was probably required points directly towards a low tech attach involving some old fashioned "social engineering".

    44. Re:Ouch by tehcyder · · Score: 0

      Hey that's just getting the easy one out ;)

      True story: A cop spots a guy riding a sportbike at warp factor 5 down an empty highway at night and pulls him over. The guy on the sportbike pulls over immediately. The cop asks him why he was going so fast. The biker responds that a woman told him she's drinking a bottle of wine naked and if he gets there before she finishes, he can do whatever he wants to her. The cop told the biker to "try to take your time" and let him go.

      I'm deffo trying this the next time I get pulled over for speeding. Makes a change from the old "I was speeding to visit my dear sick mother in the hospital" gag.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    45. Re:Ouch by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Don't cry wolf, imagine if a cop says "Uh-huh, yeah I've heard that one before" and some guy loses his chance to get laid. It could be YOU! Can you imagine the soul-crushing horror? No, we must respect and preserve the sanctity of this excuse, for all mankind.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    46. Re:Ouch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I think you mean re-invented. The algorithms were known to GCHQ
      > already.

      So they say...desperately trying to prop up their image as uebercool and smarter than the rest of us. I call shenanigans.

    47. Re:Ouch by RoFLKOPTr · · Score: 1

      and some guy loses his chance to get laid. It could be YOU!

      No it couldn't. Your jedi mind tricks do not work on me.

    48. Re:Ouch by wwphx · · Score: 1

      Oooh! Double Rot-13 encryption! Clever, these hackers.

      --
      When you sympathize with stupidity, you start thinking like an idiot.
  2. Crap, crap, crap by pedantic+bore · · Score: 3, Funny

    I can imagine how this is going to play out when the IT folks at my company find out about this. They'll panic, revoke all the SecureID cards, and then no more working from home until something much more complicated, unreliable, and probably requiring Windows7 is found to replace it.

    Crap!

    --
    Am I part of the core demographic for Swedish Fish?
    1. Re:Crap, crap, crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Are you talking about SecurID smartcards? If so then the hackers wouldn't have any advantage against those. Those use standard PKI and the private key is protected in hardware on each person's specific card.

      What got stolen was the code used in those SecurID tokens. You know those key-fob things that stay in sync based on time and generate a new token every x number of seconds. However, even if the hackers got the algorithms for how that works it still wouldn't help them because the algorithm again uses a set of private data (keys) for each installation. The hackers would have to get that data along with the algorithm they presumably have now.

      In short, this probably means that security will be unaffected. The only difference is now some people know exactly how the time based key fobs work. Which you could figure out anyway if you disassembled the RSA server software. Pretty much what RSA said.

    2. Re:Crap, crap, crap by Shikaku · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Explain that to his manager.

      I'll bet $1337 that GP's scenario will occur anyway.

    3. Re:Crap, crap, crap by jd · · Score: 3, Funny

      Explanations are futile. The CEOs have already been assimilated.

      --
      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:Crap, crap, crap by Cramer · · Score: 1

      Well, that and the serial number of the FOB you want to clone. which you can get off the FOB or out of the server's database. (and the user's PIN. and login ID.)

    5. Re:Crap, crap, crap by znerk · · Score: 2

      What got stolen was the code used in those SecurID tokens. You know those key-fob things that stay in sync based on time and generate a new token every x number of seconds.

      It's a conspiracy to hack my WoW account!

      --
      This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
    6. Re:Crap, crap, crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, because we all know hacking RSA compromises Vasco's security tokens

    7. Re:Crap, crap, crap by ildon · · Score: 1

      The real question on everyone's mind: Is my WoW authenticator safe????

    8. Re:Crap, crap, crap by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      It's going to be interesting to see how the 'customer support' section of Blizz handles the people posting this 300 times.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    9. Re:Crap, crap, crap by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 1

      ildon says> You are in violation Blizz loot rules must update your details or account suspend immediate. Click BlizzUpdate.com to update account details.

      --
      Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
    10. Re:Crap, crap, crap by bloodhawk · · Score: 1

      since when did wow authenticators stop using Vasco and start using RSA?

    11. Re:Crap, crap, crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, because we all know hacking RSA compromises Vasco's security tokens

      IT DOES NOT???
      Oh my god. The months of preparation. The expensive dinners with the admin. The hack, the cryptoanalysis, the subterfuge!!
      ALL FOR NOTHING!!!
      My gooooooold!

      No, I will NOT give up!
      Watch out, Vasco! I'm not finished yet! All the WoW gold WILL BE MINE HA HA HA HA HA!!

    12. Re:Crap, crap, crap by makomk · · Score: 1

      What got stolen was the code used in those SecurID tokens. You know those key-fob things that stay in sync based on time and generate a new token every x number of seconds. However, even if the hackers got the algorithms for how that works it still wouldn't help them because the algorithm again uses a set of private data (keys) for each installation.

      The original SecurID algorithm was actually leaked years ago thanks to someone reverse-engineering one of their soft tokens, and emulators for it that can be used if you have the appropriate per-token key are already publicly available. If RSA feel the need to post a press release now, they must be worried something further has happened. Bear in mind that the shared secret is generated and loaded onto the token prior to shipping by a department within RSA - customers can't load their own key material on - so depending on how exactly that process is set up, the attacker may have been able to obtain the keying material required to allow them to clone SecurID tokens.

    13. Re:Crap, crap, crap by Linker3000 · · Score: 1

      "You know those key-fob things that stay in sync"

      Oh, are they suposed to stay in sync? I thought the regular drift was a 'security feature'

      (Meh - we use Yubikeys: http://www.yubico.com/yubikey)

      --
      AT&ROFLMAO
    14. Re:Crap, crap, crap by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      Of course, the solution to this is to just randomly generate all the keys as pairs, load one key onto the fob, and the other key into a database for dissemination. The private key doesn't get retained at all, and should not be generated in a deterministic fashion.

      Ideally the fob generates both and exports the public key so that the private one never leaves the chip it originated on.

      If that process is followed then getting the contents of every hard drive owned by RSA doesn't let you compromise a single fob.

      Of course, such a process doesn't let the CIA back-door RSA installs, or whatever, and provides no mechanism for key recovery. The latter shouldn't be necessary in any sane implementation (other ways to handle this). The former is a feature or a bug depending on your perspective.

    15. Re:Crap, crap, crap by galego · · Score: 1

      >> However, even if the hackers got the algorithms for how that works it still wouldn't help them because the algorithm again uses a set of private data (keys) for each installation. The hackers would have to get that data along with the algorithm they presumably have now.

      True enough ... but people do dumb/lazy/forgetful things with key files all the time. They have to traverse it from one server to another etc. and leave a copy on a desktop, file share or the like (they intended to delete it when they were done, but some other thing came up and got their attention). Maybe they use a copy of production in a lower-security environment (test/dev). Happens all the time.

      --

      Que Deus te de em dobro o que me desejas

      [May God give you double that which you wish for me]

    16. Re:Crap, crap, crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The algorithm was already known. Given the key that they supply with the fob, you have been able to write your own for ages. I knocked up a PAM module a decade ago to replace the tentacled monster that their authentication engine was under Solaris.

      Most likely this is one or more of: Info on their authentication engine, their RNG that creates the keys, or they've been stupid enough to keep hold of copies of the key for each fob.

    17. Re:Crap, crap, crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And it's not like the algorithm used in the SecurID tokens is a secret, they've all been AES for several years now.

    18. Re:Crap, crap, crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why was this modded funny? This is an insightful comment and a lot of us are concerned about the reaction of PHBs

    19. Re:Crap, crap, crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can imagine how this is going to play out when the IT folks at my company find out about this. They'll panic, revoke all the SecureID cards, and then no more working from home until something much more complicated, unreliable, and probably requiring Windows7 is found to replace it.

      Congratulations, pedantic bore, you were quoted in this article! :)

      http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/222559/after_rsa_breach_are_securid_tokens_in_jeopardy.html

    20. Re:Crap, crap, crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      RSA also have a mapping from that [token #, private key] pair that gets distributed to clients with the tokens. The mapping needs to be loaded into their SecurID server software so that it can also calculate what number should be on the token at any given time. Are you sure it wasn't this mapping file that was stolen?

      Having access to that mapping file would make it a lot easier for an attacker to hijack a token. I would assume that the algorithm is already compromised, meaning that to hijack a customer's secure login, all that an attacker with access to this DB would need, would be the serial number of the token (and that's printed on the outside of it), and the passphrase/pin number associated with it (which with a bit of surveillance or social engineering should be pretty easy to get too).

    21. Re:Crap, crap, crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      However, even if the hackers got the algorithms for how that works it still wouldn't help them because the algorithm again uses a set of private data (keys) for each installation.

      Without knowing the actual algorithm being used in SecurID tokens, I can say that knowledge of the algorithm is supposed to be completely safe if all of the security of the system rests in the key.

      For a practical example of why this may be a problem: DES had some of it's algorithmic parameters requested/altered by the NSA to A) Make the cipher harder to break (S-Boxes) B) Make the cipher easier to break (48 bits instead of 64 bits). Nothing so direct might have been stolen in this case from RSA, but original design documents of any algorithm could reveal weaknesses or flaws between the design and the implementation that would not otherwise be visible. Especially with the transistor density available to chip makers today, knowing where to look can be valuable in itself.

    22. Re:Crap, crap, crap by pedantic+bore · · Score: 1

      Congratulations, pedantic bore, you were quoted in this article! :)

      http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/222559/after_rsa_breach_are_securid_tokens_in_jeopardy.html

      Yow!

      I better bookmark this. Annual performance reviews are coming up in a few months!

      --
      Am I part of the core demographic for Swedish Fish?
    23. Re:Crap, crap, crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The algorithm used to generate the token code is already known: It is AES-128. Reflections on Security

    24. Re:Crap, crap, crap by makomk · · Score: 1

      Of course, the solution to this is to just randomly generate all the keys as pairs, load one key onto the fob, and the other key into a database for dissemination. The private key doesn't get retained at all, and should not be generated in a deterministic fashion.

      The trouble is that the RSA tokens use symmetric crypto, so the organisations deploying them need to be given a copy of the key loaded onto the token in order to actually validate the one-time codes it generates. There's no way around this without redesigning the entire scheme, and even then it's probably not possible to design in a way that avoids this problem.

  3. RSA by MarkRose · · Score: 1, Redundant

    Real Secure? Ahahaha

    --
    Be relentless!
  4. Let me guess... by leapis · · Score: 2

    They didn't have a two factor authentication process around accessing their source code.

    1. Re:Let me guess... by abulafia · · Score: 2
      That was my first thought.

      Probably a simpler attack than that, but still a pretty fucking serious hit for a company/brand that depends on rep as much as RSA does.

      --
      I forget what 8 was for.
    2. Re:Let me guess... by jd · · Score: 1

      Likely. The most common cyber-attack is via social engineering, but social engineering is only effective if there's a single point of failure that can be attacked.

      --
      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)
    3. Re:Let me guess... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let me guess... They didn't have a two factor authentication process around accessing their source code.

      If the cryptography is done correctly, that shouldn't matter for anything other than the specific variable initialization that has the value of the private key. The idea behind a secure ciphersystem is that you should be able to give the attacker everything but the private key and the plaintext, and the attacker still should be unable to break the code in any reasonable timeframe.

    4. Re:Let me guess... by lgw · · Score: 1

      Social engineering can be effective against systems with multiple redundant safeguards - it just takes multiple successful attacks. Fool enough of the people enough of the time, and they'll unlock any door you need unlocked.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    5. Re:Let me guess... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The most common cyber-attack is via social engineering

      [citation needed]

      Personally I'd be willing to bet that the most common cyber-attack is via Windows XP exploits that were fixed over five years ago and stupid admins still haven't applied the patches.

    6. Re:Let me guess... by Noughmad · · Score: 1

      Probably most common for random people's computers, but high-profile targets (such as computer security companies) usually have their systems secured.

      --
      PlusFive Slashdot reader for Android. Can post comments.
  5. Can someone please... by s0litaire · · Score: 1

    ... pass the popcorn. This might get interesting. ^_^

    --
    Laters Sol "Have you found the secrets of the universe? Asked Zebade "I'm sure I left them here somewhere"
    1. Re:Can someone please... by jd · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I doubt it. The McEliese cryptosystem from 1978 is immune to attack even by quantum computers, whereas current quantum cryptography has already been broken and can be sampled without detection (if the sample rate is about the same as the noise in the system), but highly secure facilities are investing in QC, not McEliese. Why? Because nobody really cares that much, not at that level. Once you pass a certain point, people become far more vulnerable than technology, so improving the technology won't help security. All it might do is attract funding, which is why QC is so good - fully buzzword-compliant - and old tech that's superior is bad.

      --
      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)
    2. Re:Can someone please... by s0litaire · · Score: 1

      So you're all out of buttered popcorn then??

      --
      Laters Sol "Have you found the secrets of the universe? Asked Zebade "I'm sure I left them here somewhere"
    3. Re:Can someone please... by jd · · Score: 4, Funny

      I salted the popcorn and it ROT13ed.

      --
      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:Can someone please... by s0litaire · · Score: 1

      Bazinga!
      well played sir!!

      --
      Laters Sol "Have you found the secrets of the universe? Asked Zebade "I'm sure I left them here somewhere"
    5. Re:Can someone please... by ratnerstar · · Score: 1

      McEliese isn't "immune to attack even by quantum computers," it's immune to one specific form of quantum cryptanalysis.

      --
      Just because you sold your soul to the devil that needn't make you a teetotaler. --The Devil and Daniel Webster
    6. Re:Can someone please... by iris-n · · Score: 5, Informative

      Oh come on!

      This is so wrong that I can't believe you're not malicious.

      As your own article admits, there's nothing that stops a quantum algorithm that breaks McEliese being invented tomorrow. There's not even evidence that such an algorithm is unlikely to exist. That's why McEliese is worthless and nobody pays attention to it.

      When you say QC has been broken, you're probably referring to the implementation of BB84 by IdQuantique that was broken by the norwegian quantum hackers. They themselves say that QC is not broken: http://www.iet.ntnu.no/groups/optics/qcr/

      It was only a particular implementation that was broken, not even a particular protocol. That's because it can't be broken. Of course there is not such a thing as perfect security, but BB84 (and other protocols) is based on sound principles, and we have numerous proofs (yes, mathematical proofs) of security for various scenarios.

      --
      entropy happens
    7. Re:Can someone please... by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 1
      Ahh, sweet nerdishness returns; that forum of high geekery that was the Slashdot of yore has returned.

      Welcome back, facts.

      --
      Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
    8. Re:Can someone please... by jd · · Score: 1

      Given that no flaw in the algorithm is known and that the strength increases more rapidly with key length than standard pki (also in the article), there is substantial evidence that no such algorithm will exist (as the article also states).

      --
      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:Can someone please... by Pinky's+Brain · · Score: 1

      MitM breaks QC, always will ... no matter how many assumptions are added to the contrary.

    10. Re:Can someone please... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have a "mathematical proof of security" for something that's based on unprovable physical laws, and which has in fact been hacked in the real world? I'll give you $0.000002 for the paper it's written on. Obviously they forgot the implications of the "weakest link" theorem.

    11. Re:Can someone please... by Haeleth · · Score: 1

      Um, surely the whole point of QC is that it is not vulnerable to MitM, because you can't intercept the key exchange without changing it?

      Please explain why I should believe a random Slashdotter on this, rather than the legions of physicists and mathematicians who have published peer-reviewed academic papers that disagree with you.

    12. Re:Can someone please... by iris-n · · Score: 1

      What I call evidence is information-theoretical evidence. For example, if there's a quantum algorithm for breaking McEliese then P = NP. That's not true, because McEliese is not NP-Complete. But if it were, it would be a very strong evidence indeed.

      Currently, we can not prove any classical cryptosystem secure, because we haven't proved that P != NP; that's way everybody accepts just good evidence.

      --
      entropy happens
    13. Re:Can someone please... by iris-n · · Score: 1

      Could you please expand on that?

      MitM is exactly what QC is designed to withstand; in a nutshell the attacker can't gain information about the message without also destroying it, because of fundamental properties of quantum measurement. And no, he can't learn the message and then retransmit it.

      --
      entropy happens
    14. Re:Can someone please... by Fnord666 · · Score: 1

      Of course there is not such a thing as perfect security...

      I guess that depends on what your definition of perfect security includes. I consider OTPs to be perfect security. Without the key it is simply not possible, even with brute force, to determine the correct cleartext from any given ciphertext. Every possible cleartext with the same length is equally likely.

      --
      'The tyrant will always find pretext for his tyranny.' - Aesop's Fables
    15. Re:Can someone please... by Pinky's+Brain · · Score: 1

      The MitM doesn't intercept the key exchange, the MitM will be the opposing partner for key exchange to both Bob and Alice (pretending to be the other). That's why he is the man in the middle. He cuts the lines (QC has two communication channels) and builds two complete circuits instead of one. To "prevent" this from happening QC protocols begin with the assumption that there is an authenticated plain text channel (or broadcast without the potential for a MitM, but that won't be technically feasible most of the time). Of course in practice an attacker won't respect assumptions ...

      So to get truly secure QC you have to actually make the assumption a reality ... but how? PKI is obviously not an option for authentication :) Now there are some technical countermeasures, but there is no mathematical guarantee for MitM being impossible or even hard.

    16. Re:Can someone please... by jd · · Score: 1

      We can prove one-time pads (about as classical as you can get - anything more classical would have involved Ancient Greece) as being perfectly secure.

      We can prove certain algorithms as quantum-insecure (RSA, for example).

      The key length that was established as vulnerable was about 19 kilobits, but a 64 kilobit key - aside from being too large for any existant quantum computers - isn't even close to being attackable.

      Although P = NP isn't proven/disproven in the general case, there was a recent paper which proved P = NP for a narrow set of problems. However, that isn't necessarily a problem. If you have a problem solvable in exponential or double exponential time, then P = NP won't help as that is purely a study of polynomial-time problems and exponential time is (a) different and (b) worse for the attacker.

      --
      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)
    17. Re:Can someone please... by sulliwan · · Score: 1

      NP-Complete only tells you that (if P != NP) there is no general polynomial algorithm for solving your problem. However, if the best exponential algorithm is able to, on average, break your crypto in a few minutes, then it's still not a very secure crypto system, even though it is based on an NP-Complete problem. What you are looking for in cryptography, is that the fastest you can solve a certain problem is, on average, about the same as a brute-force search. This condition can be met even if it turns out that P = NP. If the best polynomial algorithm for solving your problem is only marginally faster than a brute-force search, then your crypto system can still be considered secure.

  6. time for new laws! by swell · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is just the opening that lawmakers need to promote panic and obliterate resistance to their 'protective legislation', which will surely be filled with special interest items buried in legalese.

    --
    ...omphaloskepsis often...
    1. Re:time for new laws! by thestudio_bob · · Score: 1, Funny

      Quick! Flip the internet kill switch!!!!

      --
      The real Sig captains the Northwestern. This one captains /.
    2. Re:time for new laws! by jd · · Score: 1

      It's doubtful any new law could be passed given the current paralysis (especially as the Tea Party can't make any money off an Internet law), but I'd have no objection to a law mandating strong crypto be used for all traffic on the Internet, where "strong" should be defined in relative terms so that it's never obsoleted as technology progresses.

      --
      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)
  7. Once the hackers are caught the headline can be... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ,,,RSA's Hackers Served

  8. It has to be a "sophisticated attack" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Otherwise RSA looks pretty dumb but if they label it "extremely sophisticated" even it it isn't people then give the company pass. Perhaps it was. Perhaps it wasn't and without additional information we won't know.

  9. Source code wouldn't matter. by John+Meacham · · Score: 1

    Accessing the source code wouldn't be helpful, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HOTP

    What would be dangerous is if they stole the serial# secret initializer mapping, or the key to decode the mapping if it is algorithmic. Then you can reproduce any key with just its public serial #.

    --
    http://notanumber.net/
    1. Re:Source code wouldn't matter. by hAckz0r · · Score: 1

      My belief the danger is if the hackers get a chance for a man-in-the-middle attack they can do deep packet inspection of the SSL wrapped authentication session and grab the key-fob one time pad, put that into their magic decoder ring database generated from the source algorithm and then guess the next sequence to be generated. They may have to snoop several sessions to guess the seed used inside the fob, but with today's cloud computing throughput it seems doable to me. Once they have the seed and the current timing from a session or two then they could generate their own values to authenticate their own session. Certainly not easy, but then Nation States will spare no expense to do what they think they need to do.

    2. Re:Source code wouldn't matter. by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 1

      What would be dangerous is if they stole the serial# secret initializer mapping, or the key to decode the mapping if it is algorithmic.

      Or discovered a flaw in the implementation.

    3. Re:Source code wouldn't matter. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      sounds great! how do I fund your startup?

    4. Re:Source code wouldn't matter. by makomk · · Score: 1

      Or, more interestingly, a flaw in the dongle hardware itself. The initial version of the SecurID dongle used an unspecified 4-bit calculator microprocessor, probably built on a fairly ancient process with nice big features and not exactly designed for security. They were basically relying on security by obscurity, hoping that no-one could figure out enough about the unusual microcontroller to be able to extract the code and keys from it. The newer version created after they depleted their supply of the original processor may be more secure, but I'm not sure.

  10. Oh no! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does this mean my WoW account is vulnerable!?

  11. They have a big development center in Bangalore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wonder if they'll fess up as to which RSA office was hacked.

  12. Good non hype link, now do that for more stories by Drakino · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Would be nice if more stories here included a non hyped, rational explanation of the situation. Definitely appreciated the writeup from securosis.

    The recent Android browser vs iOS browser test could have used one, since the test was flawed, and there is a rational explanation for the difference between Mobile Safari and 3rd party apps tapping WebKit.

    Same for all the hyped stories out of Japan causing people to run for iodine tablets on the west coast of the US.

    In general I've become so skeptical of anything these days due to the echo chamber of the internet bouncing around hyped, panicked stories with no followup.

  13. LOL by Konster · · Score: 1

    From one of the links,

    "RSA states they are communicating directly with customers with hardening advise."

    LOL@that. What's their advice? To call 916.459.4727 and set up an appointment?

    1. Re:LOL by Wingman+5 · · Score: 1

      You are not RSA's customer, people like Blizzard and PayPal are their customers. You are a customer of their customers.

    2. Re:LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >people like Blizzard [blizzard.com] are their customers

      What? That explains it. I guess the Blizzard authenticators were too successful at stopping Warcraft account hijacks so the hijackers took matters into their own hands.

    3. Re:LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which you end up being their customers anyways and your account compromised as a result.

    4. Re:LOL by TuomasK · · Score: 1

      Actually, many here work for ISPs and other companies that host RSA services.

      --
      The truth or interpretation..
    5. Re:LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are not RSA's customer, people like Blizzard and PayPal are their customers. You are a customer of their customers.

      Blizzard and PayPal are VASCO customers. More likely US govenement agencies are RSA customers.

  14. Re:Good non hype link, now do that for more storie by ZDRuX · · Score: 1

    Oh ok, so I guess the Surgeon General saying you should buy Iodide pills as a precaution is baloney and he's nothing but a big conspiracy theorist. The story

    --
    The magical number is: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
  15. Re:Good non hype link, now do that for more storie by Shikaku · · Score: 1

    Fear is good for business. I'm not advocating this is a good thing, however.

    In the recent nuclear accident caused by Japan's tsunami, iodine tablet sales soared as you said. War brings up the sales of weapons obviously, both government and consumer (home defense and all that). Fear of robbery/previous example also aids business for security systems. Swine flu tanked pork prices; OK, that wasn't good for businesses but even swine flu infected pork was safe if cooked to FDA standards, and boy did I enjoy all that cheap pork.

    The list goes on...

  16. Separate the fact from speculation? by 2Bits · · Score: 1

    I was expecting a better job from securosis, but then, the first paragraph got right into speculation:

    According to the announcement, RSA was breached in an APT attack (we don’t know if they mean China, but that’s well within the realm of possibility) and material related to the SecureID product was stolen.

    I stopped reading right there.

    1. Re:Separate the fact from speculation? by jd · · Score: 1

      At the moment, my bet is that RSA are sitting very tight on the facts and a press statement of "RSA said that they were hacked" would not make for much of an article.

      --
      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)
    2. Re:Separate the fact from speculation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes it would. In fact it would make a much better article than the one with all the wild speculation. Just the facts, mam.

      The reason is most people are quite bad at reading comprehension and have lousy memory. They can't remember what their source said exactly and thus fact and fiction get mixed up into a meaningless jumble. And they make their own conclusions as well and sum it all up. And then you have multiple news sources, all laced with incredible amounts of FUD and all kind of nutty conspiracy theories which is very much worse than having one, short, to-the-point writeup of what actually happened.

  17. Argument by DaMattster · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This is precisely why security products should be open sourced. The fact that RSA was compromised and some data (potentially alogrithms) on the RSASecureID was obtained, nullifies any F.U.D. that open source is less secure. If these algorithms had been out in the open, there would be no reason to panic because the development community would have access to the very source code and vulnerabilities addressed rapidly. Now the intruders have the keys to the castle and the only entity that can address the ensuing vulnerabilty is EMC.

    1. Re:Argument by neonsignal · · Score: 2

      While I agree with your argument that scrutiny of algorithms leads to better security, the issue here is that private seeds may have been obtained by those who broke into the systems. Even in an open source security scenario, there still has to be private information (such as the private keys used for signing).

    2. Re:Argument by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If these algorithms had been out in the open, there would be no reason to panic because the development community would have access to the very source code and vulnerabilities addressed rapidly.

      Ummm, no. The algorithms are actually known. The number that appears on an RSA token depends on 3 things:

      - the algorithm (publicly known)
      - the current time (publicly known)
      - the seed record for that token (not known)

      I suspect that someone stole a bunch of seed records from RSA, which allows an attacker to create duplicate tokens.

    3. Re:Argument by DaMattster · · Score: 1

      While I agree with your argument that scrutiny of algorithms leads to better security, the issue here is that private seeds may have been obtained by those who broke into the systems. Even in an open source security scenario, there still has to be private information (such as the private keys used for signing).

      Good point, but I think the community can react faster to re-secure the data than the giant, monolithic, and bureaucratic non-sense that RSA is. Many times, large enterprise moves at a glacial pace.

    4. Re:Argument by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, this is why patents are evil. The SecurID is covered by patents, so no other company can provide a similar product. The result is a single point of failure (i.e. the ability of RSA/EMC to secure the required secrets) that is common to every hardware token user.

  18. Re:Good non hype link, now do that for more storie by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

    The Internet has an echo chamber? Can you imagine how loud it will get in here with all of the people on the Internet?! I'm running to the store to get ear plus right now before I suffer irreparable damage! I advise all concerned Internet citizens to head to your local stores for earplugs as we work together to avert this crisis of international proportions, lest we face the case where all of our heads explode as the sound becomes more than we can take.

    And, above all, remain calm.

  19. WoW two factor authentication?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hi can anyone confirm that this means my Blizzard authenticator is at risk? I use two-factor authentication to login to WoW and it protects my guild bank and all my assets! Were these Chinese attacks were directed against WoW players specifically?

  20. I KNOW WHO DID IT!!! by abednegoyulo · · Score: 1

    Blame it on HER --> http://xkcd.com/343/

  21. RSA Servers Hacked... What, again? by Arbition · · Score: 1

    I'm fairly sure that this has happened before. I remember seeing screen caps of their website being hacked. It is interesting, that in spite of this, RSA should still find itself vulnerable to cyber attack. I would make comments about past attempts being benign, but that would be supposition on my behalf.

  22. Lemme Guess by andydread · · Score: 1

    China is behind this one too. They have been relentless lately when it comes to espionage. Corporate etc.

    1. Re:Lemme Guess by dweller_below · · Score: 1

      China is behind this one too.

      Prior Chinese attacks against USU governments, corporations and infrastrusture have been covered up or downplayed. The US government doesn't want to offend the Chinese. The US Corporations don't want to lose the Chinese markets. There is a little talk now and then, but it is regarded as isolated incidents. Even Google's loud public protests and the later WikiLeaks disclosures keep being downplayed as unimportant past history.

      At my institution, the attacks have been unending. A week-long break around the 20th Anniversary of the Student Uprising and then again during the Olympics.

      If RSA (with the government's help) determine that China is responsible, then we will probably have to wait for another whistleblower to find out. The likely response in that event will be to cover it up again.

      I suspect that the Chinese have a bit of a conundrum. They have created a monster. Thousands of people trained to attack IT infrastructure. Even if they wanted to stop, you can't just lay them off. They need to eat. They have a marketable skill. They are going to attack something. Maybe the Chinese could get away with killing them all. But if the choice is continuing to attack the West or destroying their valuable tool, it's going to take a LOT to want to destroy their attack capability.

      I used to worry how we would deal with all the US torturers created during the glory days of Gitmo. But that problem will be a piece of cake compared to the problems we will face if we follow the example of the Chinese. Disposing of nukes will be easy compared to disposing of intelligent, talented, skilled destroyers of IT.

      Miles

    2. Re:Lemme Guess by thoughtsatthemoment · · Score: 1

      Even if they wanted to stop, you can't just lay them off. They need to eat. They have a marketable skill. They are going to attack something.

      Or they can write books about cyber attacks and make a fortune?

      Disposing of nukes will be easy compared to disposing of intelligent, talented, skilled destroyers of IT.

      If you write the title for every slashdot article, the readsership would double in no time.

  23. Re:Good non hype link, now do that for more storie by 1729 · · Score: 1

    Oh ok, so I guess the Surgeon General saying you should buy Iodide pills as a precaution is baloney and he's nothing but a big conspiracy theorist.

    Yes, it's baloney, though I doubt she is a conspiracy theorist.

  24. I can't wait for the e-mails! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't use SecureID, but I can imagine how this will play out. News and hype will make the general public aware. They will know their passwords may need to be changed - but don't really know how. There will be millions of e-mails sent out

    "This is the RSA, you may be at risk, please send us your current password (to verify your identity) and the new password you would like to use. We apologize for the inconvenience. PS: There is a bank in Nigeria that has $1,000,000 USD deposited into an account in your name. With your password, please send $1,000 USD for the fees to release this money."

  25. Re:Good non hype link, now do that for more storie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Damn, I wish I had mod points for that...

  26. Re:Good non hype link, now do that for more storie by weicco · · Score: 1

    people to run for iodine tablets on the west coast of the US.

    Well, I could (almost) understand people's worry on west coast of the US but people are hoarding iodine tablets here in Finland too! Pharmacies have already sold their stocks.

    --
    You don't know what you don't know.
  27. Re:Good non hype link, now do that for more storie by Drakino · · Score: 1

    For California residents near the two nuclear plants (of which I am), it makes sense as a precaution. Flyers were even sent in the mail about it last spring, offering free tablets to stash in emergency kits. But this is all for being prepared in case of a local disaster, not one hundreds of miles across a vast ocean.

    Something tells me the surgeon general hasn't been properly briefed on the situation, especially considering her comments about being unaware that people are stocking up. Yes, it's bad, but it's not at a scale where anyone should be concerned on the western US coast. There are already people not only buying the tablets, but making use of them. Doing so brings zero benefit, but can cause side effects, some far more harmful then any potential risk from Japan.

  28. But But But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even if some sort of Back Door or Man IN the Middle attack was established, how would this play out?

    They would use code to achieve the pin? meh, wouldn't they be better off getting the the pin for RSA Server, kind of tough anyway...
    As by the time the user logged on they changing digits would be, well, changed... Even if a new pin mode was entered, I don't see how this attack is possible.

    Certainly redirected web pages would catch the users eyes? Maybe? In the form of pop up blocker or Invalid Certificate?

    Oh wait, Have Algorithm, insert false digits, run code on GPU's, have key logger(Payload from Trojan) grab the pin, crack the digits, profit.

    Damn, suddenly I can see this happening. Time to find a new system for secured access.

    PS I wanna punch the guy who did this if it was anyone other than a Trusted source doing a security audit. Unlikely.

  29. Re:Good non hype link, now do that for more storie by IchBinEinPenguin · · Score: 1

    In general I've become so skeptical of anything these days due to the echo chamber of the internet bouncing around hyped, panicked stories with no followup.

    I keep hearing about that thing, but I don't believe it really exists.

  30. that's very good !i like ! Mobile phones have beco by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what you said maybe is true !but i think every thing has two sides ...we should see the whole effect of this matter !
    Mobile phones have become a necessary part and parcel of everyday life to facilitate mutual communication. In our online store, we sell cheap cell phones which are in high quality but at a low cost. Cheap phones can not only satisfy your communicative needs but also save your money. Replica cell phone is a kind of cheap phone which you can use as a wonderful gift-choice for anyone who wants to use wonderful products. Nowadays, everyone wants to have his or her own mobile phone which can be equipped with the latest technological advancements and whose systems can be easily updated. That is the very exact reason why we provide you desirable cheap phones at a relative low cost. Our store not only offers you the latest cheap phones but also guarantees reliable future after services. At this mobile phones shop , you also easily sort the products and get phones compared so that you can get what you desire, that is, cheap phones at low costs. We have been assuring that you can get cheap phones economically. Just have a look at our mobiles and hope you can get what you need.
    coach cell phone strap

  31. Are you sure about that? by Sloppy · · Score: 1

    RSA states they are communicating directly with customers with hardening advise.

    How do they know they're communicating directly with their customers? They're giving advice to someone, and their customers are receiving advice from someone, but ...

    --
    As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  32. Cyber nonsense by El_Muerte_TDS · · Score: 1

    "EMC cyber subsidiary RSA was the cyber victim of 'an extremely sophisticated cyber attack' which cyber resulted in the possible cyber theft of the two-factor cyber code used by their cyber SecurID cyber products."

    "Cyber" makes things sound more cool

  33. here's some unrequested speculation by SethJohnson · · Score: 2

    Here's a conspiracy theory:

    These attackers might have a more significant zero-day vulnerability at their disposal than the SecureID system. They might have used that to breach RSA. But with this other vulnerability available for their private use, the greatest risk is that it will be discovered by victims and rendered obsolete. Now that SecureID has been compromised in some ambiguous way, it allows the attackers to ply their original vulnerability against RSA customers with SecureID being the assumed entry-point.

    It is a theory.

    Seth

  34. Re:Good non hype link, now do that for more storie by SharpFang · · Score: 1

    Yeah, never attribute to malicious intent what can be attributed to stupidity and incompetence.

    --
    45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
  35. Re:Good non hype link, now do that for more storie by ZDRuX · · Score: 1

    Yes, it's baloney, though I doubt..

    Really? That's it?!.. This is your entire argument? Basically whatever I say is true because I said so... so there! Really, no effort at all put into any sort of coherent counter argument.

    I guess the fact that nuclear fall out from Chernobyl made to it the U.S. and Canada in about 11 (ref 3) days and covered almost all of Europe totally escaped you (ref 1). Or the fact that grains of sand from the Mongolian deserts make it over to the U.S. each year even though it is much farther than the eastern coast of Japan(ref 2). But God forbid people take precautions, that would be un-American I guess.

    If you're so against protecting yourself, at least do it for your children, or the people around you, don't be so self-fish.

    1. http://www.unscear.org/docs/JfigXI.pdf
    2. http://www.a-a-r-s.org/acrs/proceeding/ACRS2006/Papers/T-1_T3.pdf
    3. http://www.nyas.org/Publications/Annals/Detail.aspx?cid=f3f3bd16-51ba-4d7b-a086-753f44b3bfc1

    --
    The magical number is: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
  36. Re:Good non hype link, now do that for more storie by jerralb · · Score: 1

    (sarcasm) Right, because the Chernobyl release of radiation is equatable to Japan's fortified plants.
    Be careful that your apples don't get mutated to oranges.

  37. Re:Good non hype link, now do that for more storie by ZDRuX · · Score: 1

    If they're so fortified, where is the radiation coming from?! I guess they should just send everyone back to their homes.

    --
    The magical number is: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
  38. Re:Good non hype link, now do that for more storie by mr100percent · · Score: 1

    No, she's not a conspiracy theorist, but she sounds surprised by the question and obviously she'd emphasize more medical preparedness, despite the downside of causing a panic.

  39. Re:Good non hype link, now do that for more storie by gpuk · · Score: 1

    Yes, it appears to be baloney.

    Suggest you have a read of this:

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/03/14/fukushiima_analysis/

  40. extremely sophisticated cyber attack? by doperative · · Score: 1

    You mean someone opened an email attachment on their Windows computer?

  41. Re:Can someone please... [Mod parent to 5] by galego · · Score: 1

    >> Once you pass a certain point, people become far more vulnerable than technology, so improving the technology won't help security.

    BINGO!!

    --

    Que Deus te de em dobro o que me desejas

    [May God give you double that which you wish for me]

  42. Re:Good non hype link, now do that for more storie by jerralb · · Score: 1

    you should do some research on the radiation half-life of the Japan leaks vs Chernobyl before equating the two.
    now go find the announcement that initial radiation readings in california coming from japan are a billion times below health concerns.

    you've become a worry-wart dynamo. if only we could harness that energy as an alternative source.

  43. someone stole RSA securID token seeds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Token seeds are the initial codes that generate the one-time passwords according to a formula.

    With the token seeds, an attacker could create duplicate tokens.

    Normally, for login purposes RSA securID requires both a PIN (a short password) and the token number, so a duplicate token isn't normally enough to login.

    But still a big security problem. RSA is going to have to create & ship a whole bunch of new tokens.

    RSA's actions are also disappointing. They have provided no real information just a bunch of vague blah blah blah like use antivirus software, keep your systems patched & up to date, etc.

    And I suspect some customers will jump ship to Entrust tokens.

    1. Re:someone stole RSA securID token seeds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I mourn for all the other insightful most relevant posts which also die a cowards death. 1 accurate post in 169.
       
      If the mod system can not elevate a GEM like this, TO HELL WITH THE /. MOD SYSTEM!

  44. Email Announcement by Ara · · Score: 2

    Here's the email RSA sent out to actual customers yesterday:

    [header removed]
    Subject: RSA, the Security Division of EMC, urges critical actions for SecurID installations

    Dear RSA SecurCare® Online Customer,

    Summary:

    We have determined that a recent attack on RSA’s systems has resulted in certain information being extracted from RSA’s systems that relates to RSA’s SecurID two-factor authentication products. While at this time we are confident that the information extracted does not enable a successful direct attack on any of our RSA SecurID customers, this information could potentially be used to reduce the effectiveness of a current two-factor authentication implementation as part of a broader attack. RSA urges immediate action.

    Description:

    Recently EMC’s security systems identified an extremely sophisticated cyber attack in progress, targeting our RSA business unit. We took a variety of aggressive measures against the threat to protect our business and our customers, including further hardening of our IT infrastructure. We also immediately began an extensive investigation of the attack and are working closely with the appropriate authorities.

    Our investigation has revealed that the attack resulted in certain information being extracted from RSA’s systems. Some of that information is related to RSA’s SecurID two-factor authentication products. While at this time we are confident that the information extracted does not enable a successful direct attack on any of our RSA SecurID customers, this information could potentially be used to reduce the effectiveness of a current two-factor authentication implementation as part of a broader attack.

    We strongly urge immediate customer attention to this advisory, and we are providing immediate remediation steps for customers to take to strengthen their RSA SecurID implementations.

    Affected Products:

    The affected products are RSA SecurID implementations.

    Overall Recommendations:

    RSA strongly urges customers to follow both these overall recommendations and the recommendations available in the best practices guides linked to this note.

    * We recommend customers increase their focus on security for social media applications and the use of those applications and websites by anyone with access to their critical networks.
    * We recommend customers enforce strong password and pin policies.
    * We recommend customers follow the rule of least privilege when assigning roles and responsibilities to security administrators.
    * We recommend customers re-educate employees on the importance of avoiding suspicious emails, and remind them not to provide user names or other credentials to anyone without verifying that person’s identity and authority. Employees should not comply with email or phone-based requests for credentials and should report any such attempts.
    * We recommend customers pay special attention to security around their active directories, making full use of their SIEM products and also implementing two-factor authentication to control access to active directories.
    * We recommend customers watch closely for changes in user privilege levels and access rights using security monitoring technologies such as SIEM, and consider adding more levels of manual approval for those changes.
    * We recommend customers harden, closely monitor, and limit remote and physical access to infrastructure that is hosting critical security software.
    * We recommend customers examine their help desk practices for information leakage that could help an attacker perform a social engineering attack.
    * We recommend customers update their security products and the operating systems hosting them with the latest patches.

    For RSA product-specific recommendations, please follow the links below to the Security Best Practices Guides for each product. If you are unable to access the files via RSA SecurCare, please contact support at:
    [removed]

  45. Re:Good non hype link, now do that for more storie by 1729 · · Score: 1

    Yes, it's baloney, though I doubt..

    Really? That's it?!.. This is your entire argument? Basically whatever I say is true because I said so... so there!

    Really, no effort at all put into any sort of coherent counter argument.

    I have no interest in arguing with hysterical idiots. That goes for anti-vacciners, truthers, birthers, moon-landing-hoaxers, and you.

    (And for what it's worth, since I wear a dosimeter, I really do know how much radiation I am exposed to.)

  46. I'm hoping for the last one by Tanman · · Score: 1

    If someone's gonna get fucked, might as well enjoy it.

  47. So, was their ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... Windows firewall breached??? :-)

  48. Re:Good non hype link, now do that for more storie by Drakino · · Score: 1

    Lets see, Chernobyl was an accident where the entire reactor blew open, and threw nuclear fuel all over the site. The building was also on fire for days, and the Russian government was trying to hide the accident until radiation detectors in Sweden detected a problem. Yeah, it spread a ton of really bad radiation and particles around because of it, and it was the worst nuclear power disaster in history, behind the disasters of intentionally setting off bombs.

    In Japan, only the outer containment buildings have blown up, and yes there is some damage to the inner building and reactors inside. The nuclear fuel is still well contained, even in the storage pools, isn't active at the levels the Chernobyl fuel was, and fires at the site have been short lived.

    Huge difference. And yes, as of today, a full week after the initial earthquake, and several days after spikes in radiation, very minute readable amounts have made it to the US. This radiation is not harmful in the quantities present, as it has long since dispersed, and doesn't contain any of the particles really dangerous to human health. Those iodide pills people are taking are still doing 0 good, but to present health risks for other reasons to those using them.

    Odds are today you will encounter more radiation by simply driving in the smog covered city, or walking by a microwave then you would from the incident in Japan. Radiation is a fact of life, and would be even if we didn't have any technology or industry. There is a difference between radiation and deadly radiation.

    And this whole panicked response from ZDRuX sadly proves my point about the echo chamber.

    If you want to do some honest research, instead of looking at the worst power disaster and extrapolating, start here:

    http://mitnse.com/page/2/ - Scroll to the bottom and read the oldest, then read the newer stories. It's constantly being updated, and has been a great source of non hyped, overreaction based news about the situation.

  49. Re:Good non hype link, now do that for more storie by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

    The reason it's baloney is that your thyroid can handle the amount of fallout you'd get, but your liver won't be able to sustain prolonged exposure to those levels of iodide.

    The reason the gp didn't back up his argument is that it's not an argument; it's an assumed (yes, assumed) fact, kind of like the effects of gravity, the effects of stepping in front of a moving train, and other daily occurrences. Sure, there are outliers, but when you realize what the iodide tablets are used for and how they affect you, you realize pretty quickly that it's pure baloney.

    IF Japan has a catastrophic meltdown, the Americas will have a few day's warning before the fallout hits. At THAT point, people in specific areas might want to consider having iodide pills on hand (they have an expiry date, so don't get them too soon). Remember that it could be months before one of the reactors suffers a meltdown, if any of them ever do. Also, the only one to really worry about is reactor 3, which contains plutonium. If this one goes, the fallout will definitely raise radiation levels for the foreseeable future (although probably about as much as sleeping beside a box of brasil nuts or carrying your cellphone in your pants pockets while away from a cell tower).

    I don't know if you noticed, but most people didn't start popping iodide pills after Chernobyl, and we're still here (and mutation levels, etc. haven't changed from before the disaster over most of the planet). You get more radiation from standing out in the sun than you got from Chernobyl fallout in most of the world -- and that disaster was significantly worse than the Japanese situation is ever likely to get to.

    Back to the topic: leaking the RSA data definitely increases risk, but it doesn't even compromise the keyfobs, let alone the full two-factor security process. What it DOES do is make all aspects of the two-factor process compromisable purely by going after a specific target (as they now have all the extra information not held by the target). Kind of like with the reactors: disaster is now possible, but not unavoidable. As long as the target's serial DB and issuing key are not compromised, two-factor is still as strong as it was before the breakin.

  50. Re:Good non hype link, now do that for more storie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You should hang more on thrusted sites, like slashdot. Oh, wait...

  51. Re:Good non hype link, now do that for more storie by ZDRuX · · Score: 1

    I have done research and have been showing you the evidence to support my arguments. You however, have done nothing of that sort. You say the radiation readings from Japan are a "billion" times lower than ones from Chernobyl, yet to fail to provide any evidence or explanation as to how you came to that conclusion so quickly, full well knowing the situation cannot be assessed so quickly after the tragic accident.

    Perhaps you'd like to tell us what exactly "below health concerns" is? Is it the same type of harmless radiation that the U.S. government said was present at the Three Mile Island nuclear facility? Because that "safe" radiation caused an increase in lung cancers all over the area in a span of SIX YEARS, and yet you come out nearly 2 weeks after a much bigger accident in Japan and declare everything is safe, but have zero proof.

    That's fine, I can see you're not here to actually present any credible proof or a coherent argument, you're just here to act cool because it's trendy to laugh in the face of possible danger (we don't know just how dangerous or not this "plume" will be). So you sir, have yourself a good day, and I really wish you are right and all the best to yourself and your family - I hope the plume misses all of us, and has no effect on anyone.

    http://ehpnet1.niehs.nih.gov/docs/1997/105-8/correspondence.html

    --
    The magical number is: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
  52. The Sky "might" be falling (and not from Japan) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    [quote]You are not RSA's customer, people like Blizzard [blizzard.com] and PayPal [paypal.com] are their customers. You are a customer of their customers.[/quote]

    This event drew my interest because my H's company is a customer, with a LARGE population of the US in their databases. Each of us being hacked before authenticators in WoW, I find it interesting that Blizzard/WoW were breached last year at this time (from China?)

    I seriously doubt this was social engineering, more like using Blizzard.net/Paypal etc., as discovery/practice/refinement. Let's hear it for privatization! I remember the talks and memos with DoD when NSA fought the likes of EMC2 having this kind of control. There are some things better left in the hands of the government...I think I'm going to grab a coffee can now and bury my savings in the dirt.

  53. Re:Good non hype link, now do that for more storie by 1729 · · Score: 1

    If you're so against protecting yourself, at least do it for your children, or the people around you, don't be so self-fish.
     

    http://hps.org/documents/kifactsheetbrief.pdf