Dropbox Authentication: Insecure By Design
An anonymous reader writes "Dropbox can be very useful, but you might be a little surprised to learn that by copying one file from a computer running the application, an attacker can access and download all of your files without any obvious signs of compromise. Normal remediation steps after a compromise such as password rotation, system re-image, etc will not prevent continued access to the compromised Dropbox. Derek Newton, a security researcher that published this finding yesterday, discusses the security implications of this by-design security authentication method on his blog."
There is a significant difference between a service I find useful for embedding photos on web forums, or similar things, and one I'd store my plain text tax forms on.
"Sacrifice for the good of The State" - The State
But, according to the summary up there, this one survives password changes. That's really the gotcha. It sounds like they are using something similar to the SSH authentication keys. http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=ssh-keygen&sektion=1
But, they really need to implement a way to reset the key files and force you to restart the authentication cycle.
Ubuntu One uses OAuth, which should have a sensible means of expiring tokens.
And seeing the sibling poster - obligatory extra SPAAAAM! Ahem... U1 is currently cheaper than Dropbox, being a buck fifty per GB per year, rather than the 2 bucks per GB that Dropbox charge, and you can get extra storage in smaller increments, so if you need 60GB you'll only need to shell out $90 per year for 3x20GB packs, not $200 for the 100GB account on Dropbox. The downside is that the service isn't quite as good as Dropbox ; their Windows client is less mature than their Linux client, it doesn't AFAICT have LAN syncing, or delta compression. The upside is that you could view it as supporting something important to you, if that has value in your personal catalogue. And it's cheaper for the same volume of storage.
Note this requires an attacker to already have access to the config.db, i.e. one must have physical access to the machine and already be logged in as a privileged user or owner of the config.db.
Caveat Utilitor
Actually I find Dropbox to be very useful for things like ebooks and technical PDFs.
I can access them from my desktop, iPhone, iPad, wherever.
And so can I! Thanks for putting those up there, by the way, it doesn't work if everyone leeches.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Then they did it wrong.
Truecrypt encrypts your data with a key. This key is encrypted with ANOTHER key (your password). You can change your password and it will reencrypt the encrypted key, without having to reencrypt all of your data.
- For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat
That's a gross oversimplification. A better one-line summary is:
"If someone gets access to your Dropbox credentials, they have permanent access to your files, even if you change your password."
That last bit is what the article is about.
"They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
Note this requires an attacker to already have access to the config.db, i.e. one must have physical access to the machine and already be logged in as a privileged user or owner of the config.db.
No it doesn't. It requires an attacker to create their own config.db file and guess the hostID. How long is that HostID and how is it generated?
--
JimFive
Please stop using the word theory when you mean hypothesis.