480 likes | 621 Views
Introduction. Pieter hartel. Queensland hacker jailed for revenge sewage attacks. Russian hacker jailed for porn on video billboard. Engineers ignored the human element. Once a happy family dedicated to universal packet carriage. Keeping honest people honest with the netiquette.
E N D
Introduction Pieter hartel
Explosive growth of the Internet from 1995 .. 2005 Millions of Users Year
Certificate The binding of a public key and an identity signed by a certification authority
Server Generates key pair and keeps private key secret Sends public key to CA Encrypt message with private key CA CA signs & publishes public key User Obtain certificate Check CA signature Check revocation list Decrypt message with public key User “knows” that it is talking to the server. How does a certificate work? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZsWoSxxwVY
What went wrong? • 2001 Verisign • Offender claimed to be from Microsoft • Social engineering • 2 rogue certificates • Discovered by Verisign internal audit • 2011 DigiNotar • Offender(s) hacked the server • No anti virus and weak passwords • Hundreds of rogue certificates issued • Discovered by Iranian Gmail user
Additional issues • DigiNotar has been hacked before (2009) • Microsoft delayed patches for NL by week to prevent blackout • No backup certificates • There are hundreds of companies like DigiNotar (GlobalSign?) • False certificates still accepted by browsers that have not been patched... • DigiNotar now bankrupt.
How to deal with the human element? • Focus on the offender • Focus on the offence [Fel10a] M. Felson. What every mathematician should know about modelling crime. European J. of Applied Mathematics, 21(Special Double Issue 4-5):275-281, 2010. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0956792510000070
[Hec06] J. J. Heckman. Skill formation and the economics of investing in disadvantaged children. Science, 312(5782):1900-1902, 2006. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/428598a
Situational crime prevention focuses on the offence • A theoretical foundation. • A standard methodology based on action research. • A set of opportunity-reducing techniques. • A body of evaluated practice including studies of displacement.
1. Theoretical foundation • Routine Activity Approach • crime is likely to occur when a potential offender meets with a suitable target in the absence of a capable guardian. • Crime Pattern theory • crime is concentrated at particular places (hot spots), targets the same victims repeatedly (repeat victimisation), and selects hot products. • Rational choice perspective • criminals make a bounded rational choice judging risks and benefits. Specific event Every day life Society
2. Methodology: Action Research • collection of data about the nature of problem • analysis of the situational conditions • systematic study of means of blocking opportunities • implementation of the most promising means • monitoring of results and dissemination of experience. 4 5 2,3 1
3. A set of opportunity-reducing techniques. • http://www.popcenter.org/25techniques/
Increase effort • Harden targets • User training; Steering column locks and immobilizers • Access control • Two factor authentication; Electronic card access • Screen exits • Audit logs; Ticket needed for exit • Deflect offenders • Honey pots; Segregate offenders • Control tools & weapons • Delete account of ex-employee; Smart guns
Increase risks • Extend guardianship • RFID tags; Neighbourhood watch • Assist natural surveillance • Show were laptops are; Improve street lighting • Reduce anonymity • Caller ID for Internet; School uniforms • Utilise place managers • Intrusion detection; CCTV for on buses • Strengthen Formal surveillance • Lawful interception; Burglar alarms
Reduce rewards • Conceal Targets • Use pseudonyms; Gender-neutral phone directories • Remove targets • Turn bluetooth off when not in use; Removable car radio • Identify property • Protective chip coatings; Property marking • Disrupt markets • Find money mules; Monitor pawn shops • Deny benefits • Blacklist stolen mobiles; Speed humps
Reduce provocation • Reduce frustrations and stress • Good helpdesk; Efficient queues and polite service • Avoid disputes • Chat site moderation; Fixed taxi fares • Reduce emotional arousal • ???; Controls on violent pornography • Neutralise peer pressure • Declare hacking illegal; “Idiots drink and drive” • Discourage imitation • Repair websites immediately; Censor details of modus operandi
Remove excuses • Set rules • Ask users to sign security policy; Rental agreements • Post instructions • Warn against unauthorized use; “No parking” • Alert conscience • License expiry notice; Roadside speed display boards • Assist compliance • Free games if license is valid; Public lavatories • Control disinhibitors (drugs, alcohol) • User education; Alcohol-free events
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/ Remove excuses
4. A body of evaluated practice: Phishing... • Phishing is cheap and easy to automate • Gartner group estimates losses rose by 40% in 2008 • Phishers are hard to catch • Victims are gullible
Characters • Bob’s bank has website www.BOB.com • Customer Charlie has email address charlie@gmail.com • Phisher Phil buys www.B0B.com + bulk email addresses • Money Mule Mary works for Phil as “Administrative Sales Support - Virtual Office” • Rob is a “business relation” of Phil
Scenario • Phil sends Charlie a more or less credible email: From: helpdesk@BOB.com Dear customer, please renew your online banking subscription by entering your account details at www.B0B.com/renewal/ • Charlie believes it’s from his bank, clicks on the link provided and enters his credentials • Phil uses Charlie's credentials to log in to Charlie’s account and sends Charlie’s money to Mary • Mary transfers the money, untraceably, irreversibly to Rob
How can we use the 25 techniques to fight Phishing? • Increase the effort • Target Hardening : Train users to be vigilant • Control access to facilities : Control inbox & account • Reduce Rewards • Conceal targets : Conceal the email address • Disrupt markets : Control Mule recruitment • Remove Excuses • Post Instructions : “No phishing”
1. Target Hardening • Training: Anti-phishing Phil • http://cups.cs.cmu.edu/antiphishing_phil/new/
The message of the training • Ignore email asking to update personal info • Ignore threatening email • Ignore email from bank that is not yours • Ignore email/url with spelling errors • Ignore a url with an ip address • Check a url using Google • Type a url yourself, don’t click on it [Dow06] J. S. Downs, M. B. Holbrook, and L. F. Cranor. Decision strategies and susceptibility to phishing. In 2nd Symp. on Usable privacy and security (SOUPS), pages 79-90, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Jul 2006. ACM. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1143120.1143131
How well does training work? • 515 volunteers out of 21,351 CMU staff+stud. • 172 in the control group, no training • 172 single training, day 0 training • 171 double training, day 0 and day 14 training • 3 legitimate + 7 spearphish emails in 28 days • No real harvest of ID [Kum09] P. Kumaraguru, J. Cranshaw, A. Acquisti, L. Cranor, J. Hong, M. Blair, and T. Pham. School of phish: a real-word evaluation of anti-phishing training. In 5th Symp. on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS), Article 3, Mountain View, California, Jul 2009. ACM. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1572532.1572536
Good but could be better • On day 0 about 50% of participants fell • Constant across demographic • Control group remains constant • Single training reduces clicks • Multiple training reduces clicks more • People click within 8 hours of receiving the email(!) • Unfortunately: • Participants were self selected... • No indication that this reduces crime...
2. Control access to facilities (1) • The email addresses: • Few $ per million email addresses – too late • The mail service: • Client puzzles – different devices • The target’s inbox: • Spam filter – False positives & negatives • Signed email – Phisher will use this too • Reputation based filtering – Whose reputation? • Caller-id – Major changes in the Internet [Wid08] H. Widiger, S. Kubisch, P. Danielis, J. Schulz, D. Timmermann, T. Bahls, and D. Duchow. IPclip: An architecture to restore trust-by-Wire in packet-switched networks. In 33rd IEEE Conf. on Local Computer Networks (LCN), pages 312-319, Montréal, Canada, Oct 2008. IEEE. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/LCN.2008.4664185
2. Control access to facilities (2) • The target’s online banking site • Two factor authentication (TAN via SMS, gadget) [Wei08] T. Weigold, T. Kramp, R. Hermann, F. Höring, P. Buhler, and M. Baentsch. The Zürich trusted information channel - an efficient defence against man-in-the-Middle and malicious software attacks. In P. Lipp, A.-R. Sadeghi, and K.-M. Koch, editors, 1st Int. Conf. on Trusted Computing and Trust in Information Technologies (TRUST), volume 4968 of LNCS, pages 75-91, Villach, Austria, Mar 2008. Springer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-68979-9_6
11. Conceal targets • The victim’s email address • Use Disposable email address – Clumsy • The victim’s credentials • Fill the database of the phishers with traceable data [Gaj08] S. Gajek and A.-R. Sadeghi. A forensic framework for tracing phishers. In 3rd IFIP WG 9.2, 9.6/ 11.6, 11.7/FIDIS Int. Summer School on The Future of Identity in the Information Society, volume IFIP Int. Federation for Information Processing 262, pages 23-35, Karlstad, Sweden, Aug 2007. Springer, Boston. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-79026-8_2
14. Disrupt Markets • Money mule = target = victim • Credentials sell for pennies to the dollar • US Regulation E of Federal Reserve board • Only backend detection will protect against fraud [Flo10] D. Florêncio and G. Herley. Phishing and money mules. In IEEE Int. Workshop on Information Forensics and Security (WIFS), Article 31, Seattle, Washington, Dec 2010. IEEEE. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/WIFS.2010.5711465
20. Post Instructions • The bank’s website • Post notice that active anti phishing measures are being taken... – Do banks do this? Phishers will be prosecuted [Sog08] C. Soghoian. Legal risks for phishing researchers. In 3rd annual eCrime Researchers Summit (eCrime), Article 7, Atlanta, Georgia, Oct 2008. IEEE. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ECRIME.2008.4696971
?
Conclusions • Crime Science approach: • Gives a human perspective on all things technical • Might have come up with new ideas • Avoids experimental flaws • An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure [Har10] P. H. Hartel, M. Junger, and R. J. Wieringa. Cyber-crime science = crime science + information security. Technical Report TR-CTIT-10-34, CTIT, University of Twente, Oct 2010. http://eprints.eemcs.utwente.nl/18500/