[…]

The short version of the latest drama is this: data stolen from Twitter more than a year ago found its way onto a major dark web marketplace this week. The asking price? The crypto equivalent of $2. In other words, it’s basically being given away for free. The hacker who posted the data haul, a user who goes by the moniker “StayMad,” shared the data on the market “Breached,” where anyone can now purchase and peruse it. The cache is estimated to cover at least 235 million people’s information.

[…]

According to multiple reports, the breach material includes the email addresses and/or phone numbers of some 235 million people, the credentials that users used to set up their accounts. This information has been paired with details publicly scraped from users’ profiles, thus allowing the cybercriminals to create more complete data dossiers on potential victims. Bleeping Computer reports that the information for each user includes not only email addresses and phone numbers but also names, screen names/user handles, follower count, and account creation date.

[…]

The data that appeared on “Breached” this week was actually stolen during 2021. Per the Washington Post, cybercriminals exploited an API vulnerability in Twitter’s platform to call up user information connected to hundreds of millions of user accounts. This bug created a bizarre “lookup” function, allowing any person to plug in a phone number or email to Twitter’s systems, which would then verify whether the credential was connected to an active account. The bug would also reveal which specific account was tied to the credential in question.

The vulnerability was originally discovered by Twitter’s bug bounty program in January of 2022 and was first publicly acknowledged last August.

[…]

 

Source: 200 Million Twitter Users’ Data for Sale on the Dark Web for $2

Last week, just before Christmas, LastPass dropped a bombshell announcement: as the result of a breach in August, which led to another breach in November, hackers had gotten their hands on users’ password vaults. While the company insists that your login information is still secure, some cybersecurity experts are heavily criticizing its post, saying that it could make people feel more secure than they actually are and pointing out that this is just the latest in a series of incidents that make it hard to trust the password manager.

LastPass’ December 22nd statement was “full of omissions, half-truths and outright lies,” reads a blog post from Wladimir Palant, a security researcher known for helping originally develop AdBlock Pro, among other things. Some of his criticisms deal with how the company has framed the incident and how transparent it’s being; he accuses the company of trying to portray the August incident where LastPass says “some source code and technical information were stolen” as a separate breach when he says that in reality the company “failed to contain” the breach.

He also highlights LastPass’ admission that the leaked data included “the IP addresses from which customers were accessing the LastPass service,” saying that could let the threat actor “create a complete movement profile” of customers if LastPass was logging every IP address you used with its service.

Another security researcher, Jeremi Gosney, wrote a long post on Mastodon explaining his recommendation to move to another password manager. “LastPass’s claim of ‘zero knowledge’ is a bald-faced lie,” he says, alleging that the company has “about as much knowledge as a password manager can possibly get away with.”

LastPass claims its “zero knowledge” architecture keeps users safe because the company never has access to your master password, which is the thing that hackers would need to unlock the stolen vaults. While Gosney doesn’t dispute that particular point, he does say that the phrase is misleading. “I think most people envision their vault as a sort of encrypted database where the entire file is protected, but no — with LastPass, your vault is a plaintext file and only a few select fields are encrypted.”

Palant also notes that the encryption only does you any good if the hackers can’t crack your master password, which is LastPass’ main defense in its post: if you use its defaults for password length and strengthening and haven’t reused it on another site, “it would take millions of years to guess your master password using generally-available password-cracking technology” wrote Karim Toubba, the company’s CEO.

“This prepares the ground for blaming the customers,” writes Palant, saying that “LastPass should be aware that passwords will be decrypted for at least some of their customers. And they have a convenient explanation already: these customers clearly didn’t follow their best practices.” However, he also points out that LastPass hasn’t necessarily enforced those standards. Despite the fact that it made 12-character passwords the default in 2018, Palant says, “I can log in with my eight-character password without any warnings or prompts to change it.”

LastPass’ post has even elicited a response from a competitor, 1Password — on Wednesday, the company’s principal security architect Jeffrey Goldberg wrote a post for its site titled “Not in a million years: It can take far less to crack a LastPass password.” In it, Goldberg calls LastPass’ claim of it taking a million years to crack a master password “highly misleading,” saying that the statistic appears to assume a 12 character, randomly generated password. “Passwords created by humans come nowhere near meeting that requirement,” he writes, saying that threat actors would be able to prioritize certain guesses based on how people construct passwords they can actually remember.

Of course, a competitor’s word should probably be taken with a grain of salt, though Palant echos a similar idea in his post — he claims the viral XKCD method of creating passwords would take around 3 years to guess with a single GPU, while some 11-character passwords (that many people may consider to be good) would only take around 25 minutes to crack with the same hardware. It goes without saying that a motivated actor trying to crack into a specific target’s vault could probably throw more than one GPU at the problem, potentially cutting that time down by orders of magnitude.

Both Gosney and Palant take issue with LastPass’ actual cryptography too, though for different reasons. Gosney accuses the company of basically committing “every ‘crypto 101’ sin” with how its encryption is implemented and how it manages data once it’s been loaded into your device’s memory.

Meanwhile, Palant criticizes the company’s post for painting its password-strengthening algorithm, known as PBKDF2, as “stronger-than-typical.” The idea behind the standard is that it makes it harder to brute-force guess your passwords, as you’d have to perform a certain number of calculations on each guess. “I seriously wonder what LastPass considers typical,” writes Palant, “given that 100,000 PBKDF2 iterations are the lowest number I’ve seen in any current password manager.”

[…]

Source: The LastPass disclosure of leaked password vaults is being torn apart by security experts – The Verge

As smartphone manufacturers are improving the ear speakers in their devices, it can become easier for malicious actors to leverage a particular side-channel for eavesdropping on a targeted user’s conversations, according to a team of researchers from several universities in the United States.

The attack method, named EarSpy, is described in a paper published just before Christmas by researchers from Texas A&M University, Temple University, New Jersey Institute of Technology, Rutgers University, and the University of Dayton.

EarSpy relies on the phone’s ear speaker — the speaker at the top of the device that is used when the phone is held to the ear — and the device’s built-in accelerometer for capturing the tiny vibrations generated by the speaker.

[…]

Android security has improved significantly and it has become increasingly difficult for malware to obtain the required permissions.

On the other hand, accessing raw data from the motion sensors in a smartphone does not require any special permissions. Android developers have started placing some restrictions on sensor data collection, but the EarSpy attack is still possible, the researchers said.

A piece of malware planted on a device could use the EarSpy attack to capture potentially sensitive information and send it back to the attacker.

[…]

The researchers discovered that attacks such as EarSpy are becoming increasingly feasible due to the improvements made by smartphone manufacturers to ear speakers. They conducted tests on the OnePlus 7T and the OnePlus 9 smartphones — both running Android — and found that significantly more data can be captured by the accelerometer from the ear speaker due to the stereo speakers present in these newer models compared to the older model OnePlus phones, which did not have stereo speakers.

The experiments conducted by the academic researchers analyzed the reverberation effect of ear speakers on the accelerometer by extracting time-frequency domain features and spectrograms. The analysis focused on gender recognition, speaker recognition, and speech recognition.

In the gender recognition test, whose goal is to determine whether the target is male or female, the EarSpy attack had a 98% accuracy. The accuracy was nearly as high, at 92%, for detecting the speaker’s identity.

When it comes to actual speech, the accuracy was up to 56% for capturing digits spoken in a phone call.

Source: EarSpy: Spying on Phone Calls via Ear Speaker Vibrations Captured by Accelerometer

In a reminder of smart home security’s dark side, two people hacked Ring security cameras to livestream swattings, according to a Los Angeles grand jury indictment (according to a report from Bloomberg). The pair called in hoax emergencies to authorities and livestreamed the police response on social media in late 2020.

James Thomas Andrew McCarty, 20, of Charlotte, North Carolina, and Kya Christian Nelson, 21, of Racine, Wisconsin, hacked into Yahoo email accounts to gain access to 12 Ring cameras across nine states in November 2020 (disclaimer: Yahoo is Engadget’s parent company). In one of the incidents, Nelson claimed to be a minor reporting their parents for firing guns while drinking alcohol. When police arrived, the pair used the Ring cameras to taunt the victims and officers while livestreaming — a pattern appearing in several incidents, according to prosecutors.

[…]

Although the smart devices can deter things like robberies and “porch pirates,” Amazon admits to providing footage to police without user consent or a court order when it believes someone is in danger. Inexplicably, the tech giant made a zany reality series using Ring footage, which didn’t exactly quell concerns about the tech’s Orwellian side.

Source: Two people charged with hacking Ring security cameras to livestream swattings | Engadget

Amazing that people don’t realise that Amazon is creating a total and constant surveillance system with hardware that you paid for.