Internet Banking Security Assessment Considerations

Aug 05, 2008 in Banking and EFTPoS, Security

I was asked some time ago what sort of things may be considered when looking at .

Below is a list of things which could be considered. It was just a brain dump and as such may not be complete.

Don’t underestimate the value of standard for your infrastructure, website configuration,  database engine configuration/, and /QA environments.

Some thoughts:

  • Many don’t lock accounts after X failed logins, this is normally done for good customer service, but leaves the system .

- And all the other things expected for a session (forced changes, aging, etc))
- Tools such as may be use to brute force authenticated sessions.

  • Many allow session sequence numbers to be incremented, allowing an authenticated user to view other customer session.

- These may be side, client side, cookie based, etc.
- Get someone to check the methodologies and the code being used.
- Database query strings can be placed into test entry fields, allowing table dumps to browser.
- Check all pages served are secure and contain user flags.

  • Customer may not be segregated, this needs to be checked.
  • Customer should not reside on the .
  • databases / system should not reside on the webserver.
  • The databases should reside on a private/semi-private .

- A different segment to the main system.

  • Webserver should be dual homed or equivalent (some VLAN techniques are good)

- Separate private and public cards, monitoring/backup/administration
- Infrastructure set-up to explicitly deny inbound/outbound ports, private IP & monitoring escaping from the .

  • At all segregation points ensure rules are in place which appreciates the traffic though that point.
  • All customer where possible should be sourced from a secure back-end database.

- This may be a . i.e. no the main system.
- This usually allows for transactions to appear real time to the customer.
- Many transactions may be batched in reality. (internal or external to the )

  • Ensure suitable rules have been set-up on firewalls.

- There should be inbound and outbound rules on firewalls and filtering routers.

  • Don’t allow any infrastructure on the front end to allow remote administrative connections. (, etc.)

- Use the serial console port to connect to a or back-end terminal .

  • Look for the segregation / of online customer content from main systems
  • Services not used by the system are active

- These should be disabled.

  • Port scan of the supporting infrastructure (routers /switches) and (s).

- Investigate the reasons for all open ports.

  • Don’t use the main gateway for trusted partner (clearing / RAS / etc.)
  • Do all that standard IIS checks and NT checks (Sample scripts, change management, methodologies, etc.)
  • Ensure denial of service precaution have been taken into account for all infrastructure and equipment.
  • Check the adequacy of the escalation procedures used.

- Look for real-time monitoring and alerting.
- Look for responsibility matrix.
- Look for ownership of issues.

  • Consider upstream carrier(s) (denial of service, IP spoofing, hacking, etc)
  • Consider social engineering of customer, administrative, partner accounts / systems / infrastructure.

- Helpdesk procedures and policies and/or alternate technologies (Caller ID, Gateway IP, etc.).

  • Use dynamic passwords where possible (SecureID, TACACS, etc.).
  • Use encrypted tunnelling where needed (, Firewall 1, etc)
  • Consider looking at other customer methods to enhance existing methods.

- cert, IP address locked to account, etc.
- Consider use of or CVN for issued cards.

  • Consider how passwords are distributed /changed for customers.

- Plain email, telephone, etc.
- Can passwords be changed online?

  • Is additional used between sections of the services once authenticated?
  • Consider what the customer has to once authenticated.

- Look at , RTGS, inter- transfers, to cards, etc.
- If an attacker does get in, what can the do?

  • Use techniques to ensure pages, customer details are not cached at , or client system.

- These are flags that can be set within pages.
- Normally SSL is cached, but some proxy vendors have been playing with techniques to do so.
- Caching of SSL pages on the client system can be turned on on some browsers.
- May banks use a (or similar) applet for all customer interaction, restricting all caching issues.

  • Ensure paper based and on-line liability clauses are available are address all effected areas.
  • Ensure within the customer sign-up process liability is reduced.

- I’ve seen statements like “use this system at your own risk, responsibility for any liability or claim will NOT……”
- Not very customer focused, but that’s what their legal department recommended.

All of the above can effect the and/or operation of an on-line system.

Other things to consider:

  • External and of the application.
  • Ownership and management of the /applications
  • Publishing points for new content (internal/private/trusted or )
  • Topology of front end.  i.e. document should be in place and managed appropriately.
  • Are limited AP tests performed whenever changes are made to the ? i.e. integrated AP into Change management process.
  • Database . Is it buffered or is it live to the core systems.
  • What facilities are provided? Direct + + + ……. Consider different scenarios for your depending on the feature.
  • What other services are shared within the segment that the service is running. Can this be used to compromise the site. eg. different /business/ organisations with differing strategies/profiles.
  • Consider all external supporting services within you AP. Look at internal/external poisoning opportunities, mail , etc. What IPS’s do they use has the any opportunity to systems or supporting services which may affect .
  • Depending on the size of the , many organisation do not use the same groups for infrastructure and the application. As a result external connections to the infrastructure may be provided for an external organisation to administer the infrastructure.
  • Look at the business and user methods and paths (client side certs, secure ID, SMART , etc). Consider two factor and modern user methods. eg. what is your favourite food in addition to normal usernames and passwords. Do system administration staff use dynamic passwords (secureID, etc)?
  • See if the application sends email to users which may contain interesting information.
  • Better to the application can generally be gained after to the system. i.e. get an legitimate account on the system. I have found that some sample/administration screens have been restricted to authenticated users only.
  • Consider social engineering the Help desk to have an account reset.

Financial Transaction Processing

Jul 02, 2008 in Banking and EFTPoS

I have been recently working inside one of the larger Banks in .
Through this work I have been looking at the controls and surrounding the of and cards around the Asia Pacific.

I get perform many and systems assessments.
Over the years I have always considered the of the as one of the key considerations.

Until yesterday I had never seen an or tools. I think some scripted use of these tools could be very interesting.
The site hziggurat29.com

Many of the other tools on this site are also very unique and worth a look.
Big thanks to ziggurat29 for providing such awesome tools.

As many of these sites are of this nature are difficult to find and often seem to vanish over the years, I have chosen to replicate the the from this page and provide local copies on the files.
It is worth periodically visiting the ziggurat29 site every now and again to see if any additional tools have been posted.

One of the more extraordinary files is the Atalla Module ()  and for (simulation) tools. So I wonder if and are shaking in their boots. Some how I don’t think so. ;-)

——– ziggurat29 ———

These are all Windows command-line utilities (except where noted); execute with the -help option
to determine usage.

DUKPT Decrypt (<- the actual file to download)

This is a that will Encrypted Blocks that have been produced via the triple- method.  I used this for testing the output of some Pad software I had created, but is also handy for other debugging purposes.

VISA PVV Calculator (<- the actual
file to download)

This is a that will compute and verify Values that have been produced using the .  It has a bunch of auxiliary functions, such as verifying and fixing a PAN (Luhn ), creating and encrypting blocks, decrypting and extracting PINs from encrypted blocks, etc.

VISA CVV Calculator (<- the actual file to download)

This is a that will compute Values that have been produced using the .  MasterCard CVC uses the , so it will work for that as well.  It will compute , CVV2, CVV3, iCVV, CAVV, since these are just variations on service code and the
format of the expiration date.  is simply comparing the computed value with what you have received, so there is no explicit function.

Atalla AKB Calculator (<- the actual file to download)

This is a that will both generate and Atalla AKB cryptograms.  You will need the plaintext MFK to perform these operations.  When decrypting, the MAC will also be checked and the results shown.

BogoAtalla (<- the actual file to
download)

This is an Atalla (or simulator).  This software (simulation) of the well-known Atalla Module () that is used by banks and processors for cryptographic operations, such as verifying/translating blocks, authorising transactions by verifying
/CSC numbers, and performing key exchange procedures, was produced for testing purposes.  This implementation is not of the complete HP Atalla command set, but rather the just
portions that I myself needed.  That being said, it is complete enough if you are performing acquiring and/or issuing functions, and are using more modern schemes such as and , and need to do generation, , and translation.

This runs as a listening socket and handles the native Atalla command set.  I have taken some liberties with the error return values and have not striven for high-fidelity there (i.e., you may get a different error response from native ), but definitely should get identical positive
responses.  Some features implemented here would normally require purchasing premium commands, but all commands here implemented are available.  Examples are generating values and encrypting/decrypting plaintext values.

BogoAtalla for Linksys (<- the actual file to download)

This is the Atalla ported to Linux and build for installation on an OpenWRT system.  Makes for a really cheap ($60 USD) /test device.

 

Local Files

bogoatalla002
atallaakbcalc
bogoatalla_10-1_mipsel
dukptdecrypt
visacvvcalc
visapvvcalc

Bluetooth

Mar 24, 2008 in Bluetooth

Source

This article is about the wireless specification. For King Harold , see Harold I of Denmark

is an industrial specification for wireless personal area networks (PANs).

provides a way to connect and exchange information between devices like personal digital assistants (PDAs), mobile phones, laptops, PCs, printers and digital cameras via a secure, low-cost, globally available short range radio frequency.

lets these devices talk to each other when they come in range, even if they’re not in the same room, as long as they are within 10 metres (32 feet) of each other.

The spec was first developed by Ericsson, later formalised by the Bluetooth Special Interest Group (SIG). The SIG was formally announced on May 20, 1999. It was established by Sony Ericsson, IBM, Intel, Toshiba and Nokia, and later joined by many other companies as Associate or Adopter members.

Table of contents

* 1 About the name
* 2 General information
o 2.1 Embedded
* 3 Features by version
o 3.1 1.0 and 1.0B
o 3.2 1.1
o 3.3 1.2
o 3.4 2.0
* 4 Future uses
* 5 concerns
* 6 profiles
* 7 See also
* 8 External links

About the name

The system is named after a Danish king Harald Blåtand (<arold Bluetooth in English), King of Denmark and Norway from 935 and 936 respectively, to 940 known for his unification of previously warring tribes from Denmark, Norway and Sweden. likewise was intended to unify different technologies like computers and mobile phones. The logo merges the Nordic runes for H and B.

General information

A typical mobile phone headset

The latest version currently available to consumers is 2.0, but few manufacturers have started shipping any products yet. Apple Computer, Inc. offered the first products supporting version 2.0 to end customers in January 2005. The core chips have been available to OEMs (from November 2004), so there will be an influx of 2.0 devices in mid-2005. The previous version, on which all earlier commercial devices are based, is called 1.2.

is a wireless radio standard primarily designed for low power consumption, with a short range (up to 10 meters [1], ) and with a low-cost transceiver microchip in each device.

It can be used to wirelessly connect peripherals like printers or keyboards to computers, or to have PDAs communicate with other nearby PDAs or computers.

Cell phones with integrated have also been sold in large numbers, and are able to connect to computers, PDAs and, specifically, to handsfree devices. BMW was the first motor vehicle manufacturer to install handsfree in its cars, adding it as an option on its 3 Series, 5 Series and X5 vehicles. Since then, other manufacturers have followed suit, with many vehicles, including the 2004 Toyota Prius and the 2004 Lexus LS 430. The car kits allow users with -equipped cell phones to make use of some of the ’s features, such as making calls, while the itself can be left in a suitcase or in the boot/trunk, for instance.

The standard also includes for more powerful, longer-range devices suitable for constructing wireless LANs.

A device playing the role of “master” can communicate with up to 7 devices playing the role of “slave”. At any given instant in time, can be transferred between the master and one slave; but the master switches rapidly from slave to slave in a round-robin fashion. (Simultaneous from the master to multiple slaves is possible, but not used much in practice). These groups of up to 8 devices (1 master and 7 slaves) are called piconets.

The specification also allows connecting two or more piconets together to form a scatternet, with some devices acting as a bridge by simultaneously playing the master role in one piconet and the slave role in another piconet. These devices have yet to come, though are supposed to appear within the next two years.

Any device may perform an “inquiry” to find other devices to which to connect, and any device can be configured to respond to such inquiries.

Pairs of devices may establish a trusted relationship by learning (by user input) a shared secret known as a “passkey”. A device that wants to communicate only with a trusted device can cryptographically authenticate the of the other device. Trusted devices may also encrypt the that they exchange over the air so that no one can listen in.

The protocol operates in the license-free ISM band at 2.45 GHz. In order to avoid interfering with other protocols which use the 2.45 band, the protocol divides the band into 79 channels (each 1 MHz wide) and changes channels up to 1600 times per second. Implementations with versions 1.1 and 1.2 reach speeds of 723.1 kbit/s. Version 2.0 implementations feature Enhanced Rate (), and thus reach 2.1 Mbit/s. Technically version 2.0 devices have a higher power consumption, but the three times faster rate reduces the times, effectively reducing consumption to half that of 1.x devices (assuming equal traffic load).

differs from Wi-Fi in that the latter provides higher throughput and covers greater distances but requires more expensive and higher power consumption. They use the same frequency range, but employ different multiplexing schemes. While is a cable replacement for a variety of applications, Wi-Fi is a cable replacement only for local area network . A glib summary is that is wireless USB whereas Wi-Fi is wireless Ethernet.

Many adapters are available, some of which also include an IrDA adapter.

Embedded

devices and modules are increasingly being made available which come with an embedded stack and a standard UART port. The UART protocol can be as simple as the industry standard AT protocol, which allows the device to be configured to cable replacement mode. This means it now only takes a matter of hours (instead of weeks) to enable legacy wireless products that communicate via UART port.

Features by version

1.0 and 1.0B

Versions 1.0 and 1.0B had numerous problems and the various manufacturers had great difficulties in making their products interoperable. 1.0 and 1.0B also had mandatory Device Address (BD_ADDR) in the handshaking process, rendering anonymity impossible at a protocol level, which was a major set-back for services planned to be used in environments, such as Consumerism.

1.1

In version 1.1 many errata found in the 1.0B specifications were fixed. There was added for non-encrypted channels.

1.2

This version is backwards compatible with 1.1 and the major enhancements include

  • Adaptive Hopping (AFH), which improves resistance to interference by avoiding using crowded frequencies in the hopping sequence
  • Higher speeds in practice
  • extended Synchronous Connections (eSCO), which improves voice quality of audio links by allowing retransmissions of corrupted packets.
  • Received Signal Strength Indicator (RSSI)
  • Host Controller () for 3-wire UART
  • to timing information for applications.

2.0

This version is backwards compatible with 1.x and the major enhancements include

  • Non-hopping narrowband channel(s) introduced. These are faster but have been criticised as defeating a built-in mechanism of earlier versions; however hopping is hardly a reliable mechanism by today’s . Rather, is based mostly on cryptography.
  • /multicast . Non-hopping channels are used for advertising service profiles offered by various devices to high volumes of devices simultaneously, since there is no need to perform handshaking with every device. (In previous versions the handshaking process takes a bit over one second.)
  • Enhanced Rate () of 2.1 Mbit/s.
  • Built-in quality of service.
  • Distributed media- control protocols.
  • Faster response times.
  • Halved power consumption due to shorter duty cycles.

Future uses

One of the ways may become useful is in Voice over IP. When becomes more widespread, companies may find it unnecessary to employ telephones physically similar to today’s analogue telephone . may then end up being used for communication between a cordless and a computer listening for and with an infrared PCI acting as a base for the cordless . The cordless would then just require a cradle for charging. would naturally be used here to allow the cordless to remain operational for a reasonably long period.

concerns

In November 2003, Ben and Adam Laurie from A.L. Ltd. discovered that flaws in lead to disclosure of personal (see http://bluestumbler.org). It should be noted however that the reported problems concerned some poor implementations of , rather than the protocol itself.

In a subsequent experiment, Martin Herfurt from the trifinite.group was able to do a field-trial at the CeBIT fairgrounds showing the importance of the problem to the world. A new called BlueBug was used for this experiment.

In April 2004, consultants @Stake revealed a flaw that makes it possible to crack into conversations on based wireless headsets by reverse engineering the PIN.

This is one of a number of concerns that have been raised over the of . In 2004 the first purported virus using to spread itself among mobile phones appeared for the Symbian OS. The virus was first described by Kaspersky Labs and requires users to confirm the installation of unknown software before it can propagate. The virus was written as a proof-of-concept by a group of virus writers known as 29a and sent to anti-virus groups. Because of this, it should not be regarded as a failure of either or the Symbian OS. It has not propagated ‘in the wild’.

In August 2004, a world-record-setting experiment (see also Bluetooth sniping) showed that with directional antennas the range of class 2 radios could be extended to one mile. This enables attackers to -devices from a distance beyond expectation.

uses the SAFER+ for authentication and key generation.

profiles

In order to use , a device must be able to interpret certain profiles. These define the possible applications. Following profiles are defined:

  • Generic Profile (GAP)
  • Service Discovery Application Profile (SDAP)
  • Cordless Telephony Profile (CTP)
  • Intercom Profile (IP)
  • Serial Port Profile (SPP)
  • Headset Profile (HSP)
  • Dial-up Networking Profile (DUNP)
  • Fax Profile
  • LAN Profile (LAP)
  • Generic Object Exchange Profile (GOEP)
  • Object Push Profile (OPP)
  • File Transfer Profile (FTP)
  • Synchronisation Profile (SP)

This profile allows synchronisation of Personal Information Manager (PIM) items. As this profile originated as part of the infra-red specifications but has been adopted by the SIG to form part of the main specification, it is also commonly referred to as IrMC Synchronisation.

  • Hands-Free Profile (HFP)
  • Human Device Profile (HID)
  • Hard Copy Replacement Profile (HCRP)
  • Basic Imaging Profile (BIP)
  • Personal Area Networking Profile (PAN)
  • Basic Printing Profile (BPP)
  • Advanced Audio Distribution Profile (A2DP)
  • Audio Video Remote Control Profile (AVRCP)
  • SIM Profile ()

Compatibility of products with profiles can be verified on the Bluetooth Qualification website.

See also

External links