Re: Bank Exploit

[Bob Radvanovsky <rsradvan () unixworks net>]

Uh...OK.  So, maybe the doctor analogy wasn't such a good idea.  ;)

And 'yes', the security, homeland security and critical infrastructure protection industries are NOT regulated (and 
even if they are, it isn't as much as, say, the medical or financial industries).  So, 'yes', we do have a bit of a 
dilemma.  

BTW, there is a growing movement to regulate security professionals throughout the U.S. (and perhaps, the entire 
world).  If that happens, you, as a security professional, will be required to be certified in your area of expertise, 
registered with your local state or province, and licensed with your federal or national government.  It's only a 
matter of time...  :((

-rad

----- Original Message -----
From: Jason Thompson [mailto:securitux () gmail com]
To: Jax Lion [mailto:jv4l1n4 () gmail com]
Cc: Bob Radvanovsky [mailto:rsradvan () unixworks net], Scott Race [mailto:srace () jdaarch com], Warren V Camp 
[mailto:wcamp () cox net], securityz () delahunty com, security-basics () securityfocus com
Subject: Re: Bank Exploit


> Not sure.. It would be good if there was such a thing, and the
> community were able to offer assistance to businesses and institutions
> which is in everyone's best interest. Unfortunately in our case the
> doctor is usually accused of creating the disease just because he
> found it.
>
> -J
>
> On 7/27/07, Jax Lion <jv4l1n4 () gmail com> wrote:
> > In the case of doctors, if the disease is the deadly and communicable
> > one - they should follow up with the CDC who would then follow up and
> > find all who are infected or at least interacted with that individual
> > and possibly quarantine and contain.  Remember the TB patient who was
> > prevented from flying back to the US?
> >
> > In our case - who is our CDC?
> >
> > --------
> > On 7/26/07, Bob Radvanovsky <rsradvan () unixworks net> wrote:
> > > Ahhhh....but therein lies one of the biggest and most debated
> issues/problems -- when (as a security professional) should I 'do the right
> thing'?
> > > Some might argue, "OK, you're receiving a paycheck from your client.  Do
> they want the world to know that they have a vulnerability?"  If ABC is your
> client, and you've signed an NDA, legally, you can't approach EFG, perhaps
> even if you wanted to.  Ethically, you are 'honor bound' to divulge to EFG;
> civilally, you may be 'legally bound' to ABC.
> > > One (possible) way out of this mess might be to:
> > >
> > > (1) Have ABC acknowledge that EFG has vulnerabilities.
> > > (2) Have ABC acknowledge that you, as a security professional, are NOT
> legally bound to divulging into to EFG.
> > > (3) That you will not be prosecuted, either civil or criminally.
> > > (4) Have an ABC officer sign-off on the document.
> > >
> > > The problem stems from what happens if ABC *refuses* to oblige in
> signing said document.  If there are criminal ramifications, do you notify
> the FBI or DOJ?  Legally, ABC could come after *YOU* afterwards.  So could
> the federal government.  In some circumstances, if you were simply hired to
> perform "X" function for ABC and found "X" for ABC and "Y" for EFG, reveal
> only what you were requested to perform.  If you have significant amounts of
> data on EFG's vulnerabilities, it may be simply be better to destroy the
> findings.  Again, you were requested ONLY to perform "X" for ABC.  You
> weren't requested to perform "Y" for EFG.  ;)
> > > As a professional, you need to abide by what other professionals do. 
> Would your doctor do the same if he conducted a test and found out that you
> and your wife (or girlfriend) had the same (or similar) disease (if
> communicable)?  The fact is, the doctor is honor-bound up to a point; same
> goes with legal notification.  A doctor, depending on the circumstances may
> -- or may not -- notify your spouse or girlfriend of the disease.  Legally,
> they may or may not have to -- again, depending on the circumstances.  The
> same may hold true here.
> > > -rad
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Jax Lion [mailto:jv4l1n4 () gmail com]
> > > To: Scott Race [mailto:srace () jdaarch com]
> > > Cc: Warren V Camp [mailto:wcamp () cox net], Jason Thompson
> [mailto:securitux () gmail com], securityz () delahunty com,
> security-basics () securityfocus com
> > > Subject: Re: Bank Exploit
> > >
> > >
> > > > In a scenario where you have been hired to test company ABC, in the
> > > > process you discovered that there is vulnerability in company EFG.
> > > >
> > > > You inform company ABC of your findings, but should you inform company
> > > > EFG what you have discovered?
> > > >
> > > > If company EFG is a client of company ABC, company ABC might* choose
> > > > not to divulge the finding to company EFG due to reasons of their own.
> > > >
> > > > As a security professional, do you have an obligation to inform
> > > > company EFG of the finding, even though you were not hired to test?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----
> > > >
> > > > On 7/26/07, Scott Race <srace () jdaarch com> wrote:
> > > > > Obviously there are many ways to look at this one.
> > > > >
> > > > > The bottom line is you have discovered a security hole that the bank
> > > > should
> > > > > be aware of.  Your letting the bank know will benefit them, but at
> cost
> > > > for
> > > > > your services. Will they think you are looking out for them, or will
> they
> > > > > think you are just trying to justify a job?
> > > > >
> > > > > It's all about communicating your INTENTION (as with everything in
> life
> > > > for
> > > > > that matter).
> > > > >
> > > > > Approaching it like "I have hacked you, now pay me to fix it" is
> like
> > > > > ransom.
> > > > >
> > > > > If your intention is to help them, you need to clearly communicate
> that to
> > > > > them, with the risk that they don't understand, in which case you
> need to
> > > > be
> > > > > ready to seriously explain in way they understand (we don't know
> your
> > > > boss,
> > > > > so only you know the way to communicate this).
> > > > >
> > > > > As with all jobs, it comes down to communication.  I've always felt
> a good
> > > > > IT professional needs to cultivate both techincal skills AND people
> > > > skills.
> > > > > So, it's up to you. Can you communicate in a way they can understand
> and
> > > > > TRUST?  If so, go for it.  If you are not confident then I would not
> > > > suggest
> > > > > you hold off.
> > > > >
> > > > > ________________________________
> > > > > From: listbounce () securityfocus com on behalf of Warren V Camp
> > > > > Sent: Wed 7/25/2007 2:32 PM
> > > > > To: Jason Thompson; Jax Lion
> > > > > Cc: securityz () delahunty com;
> > > > > security-basics () securityfocus com
> > > > > Subject: Re: Bank Exploit
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > This does not sound good. On the surface it appears that a "good"
> hacker
> > > > > wants to tell the bank that he/she has see evidence of "bad" hackers
> on
> > > > > their system and that the "good" hacker wants to sell consulting
> services
> > > > to
> > > > > the bank.   The "good" hacker could be in just as much trouble as
> the
> > > > "bad"
> > > > > hackers.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ---- Jax Lion <jv4l1n4 () gmail com> wrote:
> > > > > > So Jason - what happened to your collegue?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > IMHO - I don't think option 2 is a good idea.  Questions will come
> up
> > > > > > such as - how did you discover the vulnerability in the first
> place.
> > > > > > What were you doing... and it all goes downhill from there.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I don't agree with keeping quiet either...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Is there a medium where we can report the "accidental discoveries"
> > > > > > without risk of prosecution?  Like a hot tip line with the FBI or
> > > > > > something.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 7/25/07, Jason Thompson <securitux () gmail com> wrote:
> > > > > > > Risky... is this person a security professional?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This has happened to one of my colleagues before as well. There
> are
> > > > > > > two solutions that are possible:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 1) Do not reveal this or tell anyone about it. Leave it be. As
> there
> > > > > > > is this heightened sense of urgency among banks to thwart
> potential
> > > > > > > attackers the person could be in trouble with the bank for
> simply
> > > > > > > discovering the issue. It really all depends on the person he or
> she
> > > > > > > deals with there. Not saying it would hold up in court, it
> likely
> > > > > > > wouldn't, but anyone who has the ability to find exploits is
> generally
> > > > > > > regarded in a dim light by those who are uneducated on the
> subject.
> > > > > > > 2) Notify the bank's incident response team / security staff,
> OFFER a
> > > > > > > non-disclosure agreement to them saying that you will not
> disclose
> > > > > > > this to anyone regardless of what actions the bank decides to
> take on
> > > > > > > their vulnerability, and state that this was discovered by
> accident
> > > > > > > and that he or she simply wants to notify them about the issue
> and IS
> > > > > > > NOT seeking ANY SORT of compensation. If they are notified and
> it
> > > > > > > follows with the statement 'I would be willing to help consult
> you on
> > > > > > > the solution for a small compensation' it instantly becomes
> extortion
> > > > > > > and this person will likely be thrown in jail.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I am not a lawyer by any means, I am simply speaking from past
> > > > > > > experiences and what I have seen happen to those who did things
> the
> > > > > > > right way and the wrong way.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Solution 2 is a lot easier if your friend's client works in
> > > > > > > information security and holds federal clearances and security
> > > > > > > designations. Real ones, not Cisco or something :)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -J
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 25 Jul 2007 13:34:29 -0000, securityz () delahunty com
> > > > > > > <securityz () delahunty com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > Friend of mine (not me, really) is working with a client of
> his who
> > > > > claims to have inadvertently discovered a few web exploits of
> several
> > > > > financial institutions.  Does anyone have any insights as to how
> this guy
> > > > > could bring these to the attention of the organizations involved
> without
> > > > > being seen as a hacker?  His minimal goal is to help the
> institutions,
> > > > > optimally he would like to consult to help them rectify the issues.
> > > > > > > > thx
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Steve
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Warren V. Camp, CPA, CISA, CDP