Archive

Posts Tagged ‘trust’

Site Review – LinkedIn – Part 2

September 18th, 2009 Josh No comments

As a followup to my previous post on LinkedIn, I would like to recount a story that a friend told me the other day.  I was visiting with Adam Steen of 25 Connections. Adam's business is knowing people, and he knows pretty much everyone in the Des Moines business world. If you need a connection in this area, Adam is the guy to go to.

As with many of us in the small business world, he uses LinkedIn to help manage his contacts. However, his business is all about personal connections. This is great for his business, but does introduce a new type of attack that I had not previously considered.

Several months ago, Adam met someone who works in the financial industry. After a pleasant first meeting, he received a LinkedIn connection request. As we all do, he accepted the connection and thought no more of it. Then, last week, Adam got a call from a friend of his who informed him that this connection was using LinkedIn to call Adam's friends and set up appointments. Of course, he accepted this appointments because the person knew Adam trusted him. After all, if Adam says someone's good to work with, they usually are. However, Adam didn't actually vet the connection. Instead, the attacker was using social engineering to make it appear as though he had. Once the appointment was made, Adam's friend found himself sitting through one of the most uncomfortable high-pressure sales situation he had ever experienced.

So, how did this attack work?

First of all, it is entirely dependent on the nature of the social networking site.  If the site is configured to allow your contacts to see one another, you have to consider whether the individuals to whom you are connecting are worth this level of trust.

Secondly, the attack is only useful if the connections are generally trustworthy. If Adam's name hadn't meant anything to the person being called, the appointment wouldn't have been set up and the attack would have been foiled.

Third, if you have a number of close personal contacts who know you but not each other, and you use a social network that allows your friends to see one another, you may be vulnerable.

Now, in Adam's case, he was able to identify the untrustworthy individual and remove him from his network. Since this particular variant was based on personal contact, the removal of the personal connection foils it. However, it would be trivial to make such an attack far more malicious. An attacker could forge an email from the trusted link that carries a malicious attachment or link. The target then, thinking that the message came from someone very trustworthy, would be fooled into running the code, allowing the attacker to get whatever information they wanted.

So, how do you protect yourself... and more importantly, your contacts?

Think about who you're connecting to and if you get a request from a friend of a friend, make sure that it's legitimate. This could be as simple as picking up the phone and calling the purported shared link. (Odds are that you don't talk often enough anyway.)  Also, if you are in the habit of connecting people to one another, try to connect them at the same time. I find that it's easiest to send an email to yourself and copy them both on it. That way, they get one another's address, see that you are vetting them both and you have a copy of the connecting email should you need it later. This also makes it more likely that someone who bypasses the process would be more likely to be caught, as it would seem more unusual from the start.

This may be a good time to review your contacts and make sure that they're really what they should be.

Tags: ,

Related posts

Categories: Business Security Tags: ,

Mythic Monday – Cupid, Psyche and Detection

March 9th, 2009 Josh No comments

So I was relaxing last night reading a bit of Lucius Apuleius, and got to the story of Cupid and Psyche.  Like many myths that have grown over the ages, this one is terribly long and complex, but I think we only have to look at the first part to learn the important lesson.

Leaving out all the important mythological bits about Venus being jealous and controlling love and Cupid's arrows having a similar, but subtly different power, let's get right to the point where Cupid and Psyche are living together.  Cupid and Psyche love one another (mostly due to certain arrow errors early in their acquaintance), but Cupid doesn't want Psyche to know who he is, or it'll upset his mom (Venus). Therefore, the rule is "Cupid gets to sleep with Psyche every night, but she's not allowed to know who he is". The second rule is "Cupid gets to abandon Psyche during daytime." Though I may not personally agree with the rule, the point is that a security rule was in place.

Of course, this being a mythological tale, I'm sure that it shall surprise no one to learn that Psyche decides to spy on Cupid as he sleeps. She wanted to know that he wasn't a snake (hey, who wouldn't?), and lights a lamp (or candle, variations differ). Then, as would be expected, a drop of oil (or wax) falls on Cupid who wakes up and flies off, leaving her bereft. The reason being that "love cannot exist with suspicion".

So, what we have here is a story where a rule was in place, the rule was violated and consequences occurred. By now, we as an industry are pretty good at making security rules. We're harden systems, put up firewalls and write policy. We have all sorts of rules.  Examples:

  • No personal email at work
  • Only administrators may access production systems
  • No wireless connections allowed, this includes 802.11*, cellular devices and FM radio
  • All passwords must be a 48 characters long, contain a mix of upper case and lower case characters, numbers, punctuation and ǝpoɔıun

But, how good are we at checking that the rules are being followed? How often do you check firewall logs?  Do you regularly review which users have which permissions?  Do you scan for rogue wireless access points?  Do you run regular password audits?

Despite how stupid we may think Cupid's rule may have been, he had a detection system in place, and was alerted to the spying.  Thus, he was able to take action.  Though I personally would have used a light-triggered system instead of waiting for my flesh to be burned, his system worked for him and he was able to enforce policy.

Can you?

Tags: , ,

Related posts

Categories: Mythology Tags: , ,