Home page logo
/

fulldisclosure logo Full Disclosure mailing list archives

Re: Google Accounts Security Vulnerability
From: "Thor (Hammer of God)" <thor () hammerofgod com>
Date: Sat, 19 May 2012 17:28:50 +0000

I tried, and it didn't work (couldn't repro).

None of this matters - if you have username and password, you can check mail via POP3 or IMAP.   Last time I checked, 
that was "by design."   If anyone is saying this is some sort of vulnerability because someone "happens across your 
username and password" then they are in the wrong business.

Michael - for you to make these claims, get Google involved, and post their replies here but refuse to give them your 
username (which will be on every email you send out) so they can troubleshoot is really a waste of time.

Your initial point of "even the big companies with teams of security experts have security vulnerabilities" seems to 
shrink a bit when they illustrate concern with the issue yet you refuse to provide the simplest of information.   I not 
sure what other expectations one would have of an organization.

[Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: 
TimSig]

Timothy "Thor"  Mullen
www.hammerofgod.com
Thor's Microsoft Security Bible<http://www.amazon.com/Thors-Microsoft-Security-Bible-Collection/dp/1597495727>


From: full-disclosure-bounces () lists grok org uk [mailto:full-disclosure-bounces () lists grok org uk] On Behalf Of 
Dan Kaminsky
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2012 1:03 PM
To: Michael Gray
Cc: full-disclosure () lists grok org uk
Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] Google Accounts Security Vulnerability

Surely you can create a sock puppet for debugging purposes.
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 11:43 AM, Michael Gray <mgray () emitcode com<mailto:mgray () emitcode com>> wrote:

I'm not interested in providing that information. You can reproduce it without knowing my user name.
On May 17, 2012 8:45 AM, "Mike Hearn" <hearn () google com<mailto:hearn () google com>> wrote:
If you provide the name of the account you're logging in to, we can go
take a look what's happening.

On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Michael Gray <mgray () emitcode com<mailto:mgray () emitcode com>> wrote:
Regardless of how you say it works, I can bypass it every time it would
seem. Again, by using the method in my original post. It's likely you have a
bug if this isn't the functionality you're after.

I appreciate the statistics but they mean little to me.

Thank you for taking the time to respond. I hope my suggestions and findings
will assist you in correcting these issues

On May 17, 2012 5:51 AM, "Mike Hearn" <hearn () google com<mailto:hearn () google com>> wrote:

I understand your concerns, however they are not valid. You can be
assured of the following:

1) We do not see this system as a replacement for passwords. If we
block a login the user is notified and asked if it was them, if it
wasn't we ask them to pick a new password. In very high confidence
cases we will immediately force the user to choose a new password,
because passwords are still the first line of defense.

2) We do not see this system as a replacement for 2-factor
authentication. However the reality is that the vast majority of our
users do not use 2-factor authentication and this is unlikely to
change any time soon. 2SV imposes a significant extra burden on the
user such that despite heavy promotion many users refuse to sign up,
and of those that do, many choose to unenroll shortly afterwards.
Therefore we also provide this always-on best effort system as well.

3) In fact it is very effective at stopping the large, botnet driven
types of attacks we see on a daily basis and so saying it doesn't add
any security is wrong. Since going live the system has successfully
defended tens of millions of users who have a compromised password. A
single unrepresentative data point based on one account isn't enough
for you to judge the utility of the system, whereas we can clearly see
the stopped campaigns (and drop in number of attempts).

That said, if you have friends and relatives who use Google and you'd
like to to make them more secure, by all means encourage them to set
up two-factor authentication.



--

Mike Hearn | Senior Software Engineer | hearn () google com<mailto:hearn () google com> | Account security team

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]