Slashdot Mirror
The 'World's Worst' Smart Padlock Is Even Worse Than Previously Thought (sophos.com)
Last week, cybersecurity company PenTest Partners managed to unlock TappLock's smart padlock within two seconds. They "found that the actual code and digital authentication methods for the lock were basically nonexistent," reports The Verge. "All someone would need to unlock the lock is its Bluetooth Low Energy MAC address, which the lock itself broadcasts." The company also managed to snap the lock with a pair of 12-inch bolt cutters.
Today, Naked Security reports that it gets much worse: "Tapplock's cloud-based administration tools were as vulnerable as the lock, as Greek security researcher Vangelis Stykas found out very rapidly." From the report: Stykas found that once you'd logged into one Tapplock account, you were effectively authenticated to access anyone else's Tapplock account, as long as you knew their account ID. You could easily sniff out account IDs because Tapplock was too lazy to use HTTPS (secure web connections) for connections back to home base -- but you didn't really need to bother, because account IDs were apparently just incremental IDs anyway, like house numbers on most streets. As a result, Stykas could not only add himself as an authorized user to anyone else's lock, but also read out personal information from that person's account, including the last location (if known) where the Tapplock was opened.
Incredibly, Tapplock's back-end system would not only let him open other people's locks using the official app, but also tell him where to find the locks he could now open! Of course, this gave him an unlocking speed advantage over Pen Test Partners -- by using the official app Stykas needed just 0.8 seconds to open a lock, instead of the sluggish two seconds needed by the lock-cracking app.
Today, Naked Security reports that it gets much worse: "Tapplock's cloud-based administration tools were as vulnerable as the lock, as Greek security researcher Vangelis Stykas found out very rapidly." From the report: Stykas found that once you'd logged into one Tapplock account, you were effectively authenticated to access anyone else's Tapplock account, as long as you knew their account ID. You could easily sniff out account IDs because Tapplock was too lazy to use HTTPS (secure web connections) for connections back to home base -- but you didn't really need to bother, because account IDs were apparently just incremental IDs anyway, like house numbers on most streets. As a result, Stykas could not only add himself as an authorized user to anyone else's lock, but also read out personal information from that person's account, including the last location (if known) where the Tapplock was opened.
Incredibly, Tapplock's back-end system would not only let him open other people's locks using the official app, but also tell him where to find the locks he could now open! Of course, this gave him an unlocking speed advantage over Pen Test Partners -- by using the official app Stykas needed just 0.8 seconds to open a lock, instead of the sluggish two seconds needed by the lock-cracking app.
It's almost like hiring people straight out of college for pennies (or getting free interns) for your startup is a bad idea.
Just make it a social networking program. You log in, everybody sees your data. They're already half way to being FaceBook. Social is where it's at. Nobody wants real security. They want companionship. This company could be perfectly positioned to combine a new kind of security with a new kind of social network. They could call it Social Security.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
Some locks are for that. Others are designed to force the bad guy to make noise or hang around looking suspicious long enough to get caught. No lock is absolutely PROOF against unauthorized access.
Another purpose of a lock is to remove plausible deniability. It's hard to say you didn't know you were trespassing if you had to pick or break a lock to get in.
Same for safes. The crappy ones talk about how they keep people out with absolute security. The good ones talk about how long it will take the bad guy to get in (as they inevitably will if they're determined).
But locks that can be opened through actions indistinguishable from legitimate access are totally worthless.
Yeah, that is exactly how it works. An actual VC will have the money to hire an expert to review a company's product before investing.
Otherwise they would just be throwing money away at someone with a good marketing video... .which is exactly what kickstarter is.
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust