Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Comments
FBI Seeks License To Hack Bot-Infected PCs
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
<<   <   Page 2 / 2
securityaffairs
50%
50%
securityaffairs,
User Rank: Ninja
5/12/2014 | 5:37:35 PM
Re: Criminally dumb
Feds agencies simply continue to do what they are already doing, hacking on internal and foreign systems, they are just searching for a plausible consensus, but I think this could not be accepted in the way it has been formulated in the US proposal. Think a foreign government that makes a similar proposal and authorize itself to hack US-based computers. Absurd!

 

 
Robert McDougal
100%
0%
Robert McDougal,
User Rank: Ninja
5/12/2014 | 4:57:33 PM
Re: Criminally dumb
Actually, I don't understand the purpose of investigating the actual compromised machines in the first place.  If I wanted to understand how this botnet functioned I would simply create a VM and purposefully infect it and then study it.  In that way you are better able to understand how the botnet works and monitor for communication coming from the owner of the botnet.

I see no value in remotely hacking into someones compromised machine when you can produce the same machine in a sandbox.
Lorna Garey
0%
100%
Lorna Garey,
User Rank: Ninja
5/12/2014 | 4:45:58 PM
Re: Criminally dumb
Extending that argument, how should the FBI distinguish a legitimate threat from some dumb schmuck in a botnet without looking at the data on the device in question? Chicken and egg, right?
Robert McDougal
100%
0%
Robert McDougal,
User Rank: Ninja
5/12/2014 | 4:29:10 PM
Re: Criminally dumb
Offensive security is acceptable if it is directed at a legitimate attacker.  However, at the heart of this proposal is this little nugget:
One change contained in the proposal would allow judges to sign warrants that authorize remote access by the FBI to search electronic storage media and to seize or copy electronically stored information if the location of the computer has been concealed through technological means, or for cases involving systems located in five or more districts -- for example, if they're being used as part of a botnet.

So, in actuallity we are discussing allowing the FBI the power to copy or seize data from innocent people.  Additionally, the FBI will then be able to use the "Plain View Doctrine" to bring charges against the people they hacked.

In my opinion, they should have the ability to remotely attack a legitimate threat but not members of a botnet.
Lorna Garey
100%
0%
Lorna Garey,
User Rank: Ninja
5/12/2014 | 4:12:30 PM
Re: Criminally dumb
Not sure anyone is arguing it's OK to sieze data unrelated to the attacks. Just as arguably the FBI is doing the company a favor if it checks botnets and finds that the owner is unaware, and notifies the company or individual. 

Offensive security is coming. This is a small step along that path. Better to make the attempt to regulate it with judicial checks than to drive it underground.
Robert McDougal
100%
0%
Robert McDougal,
User Rank: Ninja
5/12/2014 | 4:08:33 PM
Re: Criminally dumb
I have to disagree.  Many of these computers are infected because the owners are technological illiterate.  That fact doesn't make it ok for the FBI, or anyone else, to further hack into their computers and seize their personal data.

This is far too much power for the FBI to possess.  
Thomas Claburn
50%
50%
Thomas Claburn,
User Rank: Ninja
5/12/2014 | 3:35:54 PM
Re: Criminally dumb
I suppose there's something to be said for the FBI seeking permission. It's not much, but it's something.
Lorna Garey
0%
100%
Lorna Garey,
User Rank: Ninja
5/12/2014 | 3:31:57 PM
Criminally dumb
"Cue the potential for large numbers of innocent bystanders having their computers and cloud accounts searched by the FBI, despite facing no reasonable suspicion of having done anything wrong."

They allowed their computers to be sucked into botnets. How is it different from someone allowing through negligence a piece of physical property -- say an empty house --  to be used as a base for criminal activity?  
<<   <   Page 2 / 2


News
US Formally Attributes SolarWinds Attack to Russian Intelligence Agency
Jai Vijayan, Contributing Writer,  4/15/2021
News
Dependency Problems Increase for Open Source Components
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  4/14/2021
News
FBI Operation Remotely Removes Web Shells From Exchange Servers
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  4/14/2021
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win an Amazon Gift Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: "Elon, I think our cover's been blown."
Current Issue
2021 Top Enterprise IT Trends
We've identified the key trends that are poised to impact the IT landscape in 2021. Find out why they're important and how they will affect you today!
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2021-27400
PUBLISHED: 2021-04-22
HashiCorp Vault and Vault Enterprise Cassandra integrations (storage backend and database secrets engine plugin) did not validate TLS certificates when connecting to Cassandra clusters. Fixed in 1.6.4 and 1.7.1
CVE-2021-29653
PUBLISHED: 2021-04-22
HashiCorp Vault and Vault Enterprise 1.5.1 and newer, under certain circumstances, may exclude revoked but unexpired certificates from the CRL. Fixed in 1.5.8, 1.6.4, and 1.7.1.
CVE-2021-30476
PUBLISHED: 2021-04-22
HashiCorp Terraform&acirc;&euro;&trade;s Vault Provider (terraform-provider-vault) did not correctly configure GCE-type bound labels for Vault&acirc;&euro;&trade;s GCP auth method. Fixed in 2.19.1.
CVE-2021-22540
PUBLISHED: 2021-04-22
Bad validation logic in the Dart SDK versions prior to 2.12.3 allow an attacker to use an XSS attack via DOM clobbering. The validation logic in dart:html for creating DOM nodes from text did not sanitize properly when it came across template tags.
CVE-2021-27736
PUBLISHED: 2021-04-22
FusionAuth fusionauth-samlv2 before 0.5.4 allows XXE attacks via a forged AuthnRequest or LogoutRequest because parseFromBytes uses javax.xml.parsers.DocumentBuilderFactory unsafely.