Perimeter
2/9/2012
02:14 PM
Tom Parker
Tom Parker
Commentary
Connect Directly
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Between Source Code And Cyanide

What the Symantec source-code leak really means

With all of the talk about source-code theft, extortion attempts by a shadowy probably-Anonymous-affiliated group, and most importantly the Giants winning the Super Bowl, I thought I’d spend a moment to reflect on what the release of source code for PCAnywhere and, in all likelihood, a depreciated version of Norton Antivirus could mean for the average persistent threat.

Much of the commentary on the topic, specifically that relating to PCAnywhere, has downplayed the release, owing to the age of the stolen code and number of active users. While it is true that installations of PCAnywhere certainly do not seem to be as widespread as they once were, it is certainly still out there and remains utilized by large private and government organizations. Although I don’t consider the release of PCAnywhere source to be particularly severe, I do question why Symantec chose to advise users to cease use of the product after the release and not before. And what makes it so sure that the product is now safe? In any case, the question of Norton Antivirus may be a little complex.

Targeting security products (whether that be an IDS, firewall, or AV product) is hot business these days, and vulnerabilities in antivirus engines can be extremely valuable to attackers if it means they are now able to slip an email attachment or drive-by download that would have otherwise been caught onto the target's system.

Anyone that has ever worked with, or had anything to do with, any kind of software product company will know that while names, logos, and even the interface for a product may change over time, the code behind it all will not necessarily follow suit. Even in circumstances where a “complete rewrite” has been done, they seldom ever are, and even in extreme cases we all know that a certain amount of CTRL-C/V action is going to go down somewhere along the way.

Note that although at the time that this was written the source code for Norton Antivirus does not appear to have been made public, we can safely assume that the stolen code has been shared privately, amongst a closed community associated with the individual responsible for the original heist.

So what does this all mean? Well, for the high-end adversary, probably not a whole lot as you’re likely to already have a copy of the source code. And it’s likely to be a much more recent version. On the other hand, folks who do not have a few hundred Gs laying around for bribing the employee of a software vendor so he’ll cut you a DVD full of source code are likely to see this as something of an opportunity. Through the use of not-uncommon analysis tools, figuring out which code segments are shared between the compromised source and possible modern derivatives thereof is a relatively trivial and inexpensive task.

While many groups who may do such a thing have probably put Symantec products under the microscope before, source-code analysis often opens up a whole, new world of subtle bugs in hard-to-reach regions of code that may have previously gone unnoticed. While the world's most well-funded and sophisticated actors are unlikely to find the release of source code particularly exciting, this may provide an excellent opportunity for less well-resourced groups involved in organized crime (such as botnet herders) and acts of industrial espionage to get one up on a product that has in the past spoiled the fun.

Tom Parker is Chief Technology Officer at FusionX.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Sabrina
50%
50%
Sabrina,
User Rank: Apprentice
2/10/2012 | 6:55:04 AM
re: Between Source Code And Cyanide
Norton is not doing good after the source code leak and also many customers moved away from them-á
Georgeken
50%
50%
Georgeken,
User Rank: Apprentice
2/10/2012 | 5:22:39 AM
re: Between Source Code And Cyanide
pretty cool stuff mate.Symantec source code hack is spreading a lot .is that Norton AV performance is affected due to this hack?I am having this doubt from long before.
CPADEN000
50%
50%
CPADEN000,
User Rank: Apprentice
2/9/2012 | 10:41:51 PM
re: Between Source Code And Cyanide
Symantec-áanticipates that Anonymous will post the rest of the code they have claimed to have in their possession.-á So far, they have posted code for the 2006 versions of Norton Utilities and pcAnywhere. -áWe also anticipate that at some point, they will post the code for the 2006 versions of Norton Antivirus Corporate Edition and Norton Internet Security.-á As we have already stated publicly, this is old code, and Symantec and Norton customers will not be at an increased risk as a result of any further disclosure related to these 2006 products.
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
Title Partner’s Role in Perimeter Security
Title Partner’s Role in Perimeter Security
Considering how prevalent third-party attacks are, we need to ask hard questions about how partners and suppliers are safeguarding systems and data.
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2014-3409
Published: 2014-10-25
The Ethernet Connectivity Fault Management (CFM) handling feature in Cisco IOS 12.2(33)SRE9a and earlier and IOS XE 3.13S and earlier allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (device reload) via malformed CFM packets, aka Bug ID CSCuq93406.

CVE-2014-4620
Published: 2014-10-25
The EMC NetWorker Module for MEDITECH (aka NMMEDI) 3.0 build 87 through 90, when EMC RecoverPoint and Plink are used, stores cleartext RecoverPoint Appliance credentials in nsrmedisv.raw log files, which allows local users to obtain sensitive information by reading these files.

CVE-2014-4623
Published: 2014-10-25
EMC Avamar 6.0.x, 6.1.x, and 7.0.x in Avamar Data Store (ADS) GEN4(S) and Avamar Virtual Edition (AVE), when Password Hardening before 2.0.0.4 is enabled, uses UNIX DES crypt for password hashing, which makes it easier for context-dependent attackers to obtain cleartext passwords via a brute-force a...

CVE-2014-4624
Published: 2014-10-25
EMC Avamar Data Store (ADS) and Avamar Virtual Edition (AVE) 6.x and 7.0.x through 7.0.2-43 do not require authentication for Java API calls, which allows remote attackers to discover grid MCUser and GSAN passwords via a crafted call.

CVE-2014-6151
Published: 2014-10-25
CRLF injection vulnerability in IBM Tivoli Integrated Portal (TIP) 2.2.x allows remote authenticated users to inject arbitrary HTTP headers and conduct HTTP response splitting attacks via unspecified vectors.

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.