Attacks/Breaches
12/21/2010
02:48 PM
Connect Directly
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Gawker Details Missteps Behind Security Breach

The Gnosis group apparently faced few defenses in what it called a revenge attack on the prominent online media property.

How did Gawker, a leading media property, get hacked, resulting in more than 1.3 million of its users' accounts getting publicly released and uploaded to file-sharing Web sites?

A group known as Gnosis said it came gunning for Gawker, according to Mediaite. "It took us a few hours to find a way to dump all their source code and a bit longer to find a way into their database," said the group.

Apparently, the attackers faced few defenses in what it described as a revenge attack.

An internal memo from Gawker Media CTO Thomas Plunkett to employees suggests as much, tracing the ease of the exploit to Gawker's poor security preparation. "On several fronts -- technically, as well as customer support and communication -- we found ourselves unprepared to handle this eventuality," said Plunkett's memo, which Jim Romenesko reprinted on the Poynter Web site.

According to Plunkett, the attackers exploited a vulnerability in its Web site source code. But Gawker had no processes in place to deal with that scenario and wasn't monitoring for signs of attack.

"The tech team should have been better prepared, committed more time to perform thorough audits, and grown our team's technical expertise to meet our specific business needs," said Plunkett.

Web sites affected by the breach included Gawker, Gizmodo, Jalopnik, Jezebel, Kotaku, Lifehacker, Deadspin, io9, and Fleshbot.

By late last week, Gawker said it had regained control of all systems, including Google Apps. Plunkett said all Web site code had been reviewed for known vulnerabilities, that they had been addressed, and that a more extensive code audit was also underway.

Gawker has also implemented a new security policy, which precludes sharing sensitive information on the company wiki or via chat software. In addition, it enabled SSL for Google Apps, and will require anyone who needs to access sensitive information stored in Google Apps to use two-factor authentication.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
Partner Perspectives
What's This?
In a digital world inundated with advanced security threats, Intel Security seeks to transform how we live and work to keep our information secure. Through hardware and software development, Intel Security delivers robust solutions that integrate security into every layer of every digital device. In combining the security expertise of McAfee with the innovation, performance, and trust of Intel, this vision becomes a reality.

As we rely on technology to enhance our everyday and business life, we must too consider the security of the intellectual property and confidential data that is housed on these devices. As we increase the number of devices we use, we increase the number of gateways and opportunity for security threats. Intel Security takes the “security connected” approach to ensure that every device is secure, and that all security solutions are seamlessly integrated.
Featured Writers
White Papers
Cartoon
Current Issue
Dark Reading's October Tech Digest
Fast data analysis can stymie attacks and strengthen enterprise security. Does your team have the data smarts?
Flash Poll
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2013-4594
Published: 2014-10-25
The Payment for Webform module 7.x-1.x before 7.x-1.5 for Drupal does not restrict access by anonymous users, which allows remote anonymous users to use the payment of other anonymous users when submitting a form that requires payment.

CVE-2014-0476
Published: 2014-10-25
The slapper function in chkrootkit before 0.50 does not properly quote file paths, which allows local users to execute arbitrary code via a Trojan horse executable. NOTE: this is only a vulnerability when /tmp is not mounted with the noexec option.

CVE-2014-1927
Published: 2014-10-25
The shell_quote function in python-gnupg 0.3.5 does not properly quote strings, which allows context-dependent attackers to execute arbitrary code via shell metacharacters in unspecified vectors, as demonstrated using "$(" command-substitution sequences, a different vulnerability than CVE-2014-1928....

CVE-2014-1928
Published: 2014-10-25
The shell_quote function in python-gnupg 0.3.5 does not properly escape characters, which allows context-dependent attackers to execute arbitrary code via shell metacharacters in unspecified vectors, as demonstrated using "\" (backslash) characters to form multi-command sequences, a different vulner...

CVE-2014-1929
Published: 2014-10-25
python-gnupg 0.3.5 and 0.3.6 allows context-dependent attackers to have an unspecified impact via vectors related to "option injection through positional arguments." NOTE: this vulnerability exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2013-7323.

Best of the Web
Dark Reading Radio
Archived Dark Reading Radio
Follow Dark Reading editors into the field as they talk with noted experts from the security world.