Vulnerabilities / Threats
2/25/2013
07:28 PM
Connect Directly
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%
Repost This

Google Security Vulnerability Allowed Two-Step Verification Bypass

Researchers at Duo Security detailed an attack that could have allowed a hacker to hijack a user's Google account

Google has fixed a security hole that permitted attackers to potentially bypass the company's two-step verification feature and take over user accounts.

RSA Conference 2013
Click here for more articles.

According to Duo Security, the vulnerability rested in the way application-specific passwords (ASPs) were used for applications that do not support logins using two-step verification. Designed with an eye towards improving account security, two-step verification provides users with a special code via text message or phone call when they attempt to log on to their Google account. The user will then have to enter that code as well in order to log in.

"Generally, once you turn on 2-step verification, Google asks you to create a separate Application-Specific Password for each application you use (hence “Application-Specific”) that doesn’t support logins using 2-step verification," blogs Adam Goodman, principal security architect at Duo Security. "Then you use that ASP in place of your actual password. In more-concrete terms, you create ASPs for most client applications that don’t use a web-based login: email clients using IMAP and SMTP (Apple Mail, Thunderbird, etc.); chat clients communicating over XMPP (Adium, Pidgin, etc.), and calendar applications that sync using CalDAV (iCal, etc.)."

In recent versions of Android and ChromeOS, Google has included in their browser an auto-login mechanism for Google accounts, explains Goodman. After the user's device is linked to a Google account, the browser will let the user utilize the device's existing authorization to skip Google's web-based sign-on prompts.

Before a patch was issued last week, this auto-login worked for even the most sensitive parts of Google's account setting portal, including the "Account recovery options" page where someone can add or edit the email addresses and phone numbers to which Google would send password-reset messages.

This means an ASP, for example, can link an Android device to a Google account and with that linked device access the account's recovery options and gain full control, he adds.

"We think it’s a rather significant hole in a strong authentication system if a user still has some form of 'password' that is sufficient to take over full control of his account," blogs Goodman. "However, we’re still confident that — even before rolling out their fix — enabling Google’s 2-step verification was unequivocally better than not doing so."

A successful attack would require first stealing a user's ASP, which could theoretically be accomplished via malware or a phishing attack.

Google declined to comment on the vulnerability. However, Duo Security CTO Jon Oberheide notes that there is more that could be done to limit the privileges of individual application-specific passwords.

"In this specific case, it would be better if a user could create an application-specific password that was actually specific to an application or to a subset of data within your Google account," he says. "For example, you could create an ASP that was limited to the GTalk application. Therefore, if an attacker captured that ASP, they would only be able to access your GTalk account instead of having full access to your Google account and associated services. Alternately, an ASP (or similar access token) could be created that allowed an external service to interact with a specific document with your GDrive, without giving full access."

"While these fine-grained access controls are ideal, they're likely hard for Google to implement given how intertwined their various services are," he says. "More importantly, maintaining an appropriate level of granularity while making it understandable by your Average Joe user is a significant challenge. [The] bottom line is that two-factor authentication is hard to get right in complicated identity ecosystems. Even Google makes mistakes."

Have a comment on this story? Please click "Add Your Comment" below. If you'd like to contact Dark Reading's editors directly, send us a message.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Mark Sitkowski
50%
50%
Mark Sitkowski,
User Rank: Apprentice
2/27/2013 | 11:25:16 PM
re: Google Security Vulnerability Allowed Two-Step Verification Bypass
If only Google were to adopt an authentication system that didn't rely on passwords, none of this could ever happen.
It is perfectly possible to authenticate users with an approach which permits them to have their username and password stolen (by malware, spy cameras, network snoopers or whatever) and still not allow the criminal to access the account. Without biometrics, two-factor authentication or any other user-hostile methods. Works for banks, maybe it'll work for Google.
melvey941
50%
50%
melvey941,
User Rank: Apprentice
2/26/2013 | 1:17:48 AM
re: Google Security Vulnerability Allowed Two-Step Verification Bypass
I had a hunch this was the case. -Š Well, educated guess - based on knowing-Šfine-grained control is likely hard for Google to implement and support.
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Cartoon
Current Issue
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2012-3946
Published: 2014-04-24
Cisco IOS before 15.3(2)S allows remote attackers to bypass interface ACL restrictions in opportunistic circumstances by sending IPv6 packets in an unspecified scenario in which expected packet drops do not occur for "a small percentage" of the packets, aka Bug ID CSCty73682.

CVE-2012-5723
Published: 2014-04-24
Cisco ASR 1000 devices with software before 3.8S, when BDI routing is enabled, allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service (device reload) via crafted (1) broadcast or (2) multicast ICMP packets with fragmentation, aka Bug ID CSCub55948.

CVE-2013-6738
Published: 2014-04-24
Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in IBM SmartCloud Analytics Log Analysis 1.1 and 1.2 before 1.2.0.0-CSI-SCALA-IF0003 allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via an invalid query parameter in a response from an OAuth authorization endpoint.

CVE-2014-0188
Published: 2014-04-24
The openshift-origin-broker in Red Hat OpenShift Enterprise 2.0.5, 1.2.7, and earlier does not properly handle authentication requests from the remote-user auth plugin, which allows remote attackers to bypass authentication and impersonate arbitrary users via the X-Remote-User header in a request to...

CVE-2014-2391
Published: 2014-04-24
The password recovery service in Open-Xchange AppSuite before 7.2.2-rev20, 7.4.1 before 7.4.1-rev11, and 7.4.2 before 7.4.2-rev13 makes an improper decision about the sensitivity of a string representing a previously used but currently invalid password, which allows remote attackers to obtain potent...

Best of the Web