'clear'에 해당되는 글 3건

  1. 2009.09.04 SQL Vulnerability Leaves Passwords In The Clear, Researchers Say by CEOinIRVINE
  2. 2008.12.24 Life In A Recession by CEOinIRVINE
  3. 2008.12.06 What Would Keynes Do? by CEOinIRVINE

SQL Vulnerability Leaves Passwords In The Clear, Researchers Say

With no patch forthcoming from Microsoft, Sentrigo launches workaround for flaw

Sep 02, 2009 | 05:02 PM

By Tim Wilson
DarkReading

A vulnerability in Microsoft SQL Server could enable any user with administrative privileges to openly see the unencrypted passwords of all other users, researchers said today.

Researchers at database security vendor Sentrigo say that in SQL Server 2000 or 2005, administrators can view all of the passwords used since the server went online by reviewing its process memory. Under SQL Server 2008, the problem has been partially fixed, but an administrator with local access and a simple debugger could still view the passwords, Sentrigo says.

The vulnerability is most likely an insider threat because it requires administrative privileges, says Slavik Markovich, CTO of Sentrigo. However, it is also possible for a hacker to take advantage of the flaw by exploiting SQL injection, he says.

The flaw may not directly affect the data in the database, since an administrator would have access to that data already, Slavik says. But many people reuse their passwords for other applications, and it is possible that the vulnerability might lead to the compromise of other users' work or personal accounts.

"Worst case, it might lead to one administrator stealing bank account data from another administrator," Slavik says. "People are not supposed to reuse their passwords, but it's a reality that they do."

The Sentrigo researchers found the vulnerability last September and informed Microsoft, Slavik says. However, after nearly a year of discussion, Microsoft has indicated that it considers the issue to be "minor" and has no plans to issue a specific patch, he says.

"We did not agree with Microsoft's classification of this vulnerability as a minor issue, and felt that it was in the best interest of SQL Server users to make the vulnerability public and provide a utility to remove the passwords from memory," Sentrigo says. "If we discovered this information, there is a high likelihood others [who may not be as ethical] could find it as well and abuse it."

Sentrigo feels that the vulnerability is a danger because so many users employ the same passwords for multiple applications, and because so many breaches are engineered by privileged users and administrators.

"Many applications are deployed with administrative privileges," Sentrigo observes. "Hackers using a simple SQL injection vulnerability can now access administrative passwords, which may be used to penetrate other systems on the network, escalating the breach. This is even worse in the case of SQL Server 2000 and 2005, where this can be done remotely.

"Since Microsoft doesn't have immediate plans to fix this vulnerability, we felt that the knowledge regarding its existence -- together with a free utility to repair it -- should be available to the public sooner than later," Sentrigo says.

One well-known security researcher, who requested anonymity, disagrees. "This seems like a nonissue," the researcher says. "Anyone with the ability to read process memory would also have the ability to just hook the authentication code and capture passwords that way. For once, Microsoft is right to ignore it."

Sentrigo acknowledges that administrators have the authority to reset passwords, but "there is a big difference between being able to reset a password to either a system-generated password which the administrator would not see (or to a password the administrator chooses) and actually seeing a user's personal password," the researchers say. "The latter involves much greater risk, including access to additional systems the password may be used on, potentially enabling access to user's private data, such as bank or brokerage accounts."

The Sentrigo fix, which the company has dubbed Passwordizer, replaces the password data with asterisks, making it impossible for administrators to read the passwords in memory. The utility is available now for free and works on any version of SQL Server.

Have a comment on this story? Please click "Discuss" below. If you'd like to contact Dark Reading's editors directly, send us a message.

'Hacking' 카테고리의 다른 글

Regarding Online Game Security  (0) 2009.10.02
Flaw In Sears Website Left Database Open To Attack  (0) 2009.09.04
Penetration Testing Service  (0) 2009.09.04
URL Encoding  (0) 2009.06.10
Hacking with Javascript 2005.FEB.  (0) 2009.06.09
Posted by CEOinIRVINE
l

Life In A Recession

Business 2008. 12. 24. 03:14

Some people say recessions are inevitable; others say they are healthy, necessary to clean out the system and clear the way for the next expansion. Finally, while many blame greedy capitalists for pushing things too far, there are some who believe that the current recession is something we deserved (or earned) because so many lived beyond their means.

No matter what you believe, recessions are never fun. Beneath all the statistics and data are real people facing real challenges. The unemployment rate, now 6.7%, is headed to about 8% by late 2009. In the fourth quarter, real gross domestic product will drop the most since the brutal recession of 1981-1982, when, over the course of only two years, Paul Volcker reversed 20 years of inflationary monetary policy.

But it is not just the speed of the collapse that is so scary; it is that our current generation has little experience with economic pain. Between 1965 and 1982, the U.S. economy was in recession one out of every three years, inflation hit double digits and the unemployment rate peaked at 10.8%.

Since 1982, the U.S. has been in recession just one out of 16 years, the unemployment rate bottomed at 3.8% in early 2000 and then at 4.4% in early 2007. In other words, a wobbly economy today feels much worse to the average American and politician than it did 30 years ago.

So we have a real schizophrenia today. People are going to the mall for holiday shopping, parking hundreds of yards away and waiting in long lines to check out. But then these same people go to parties and argue about whether the Obama economic stimulus plan should be $500 billion or $1 trillion. It feels so bad that President Bush is justifying his economic intervention by saying that "I've abandoned free-market principles to save the free-market system."

What's important to recognize is that even at the bottom of the current recession, sometime in mid-2009, the living standards of the typical American will still be amazingly high. In fact, even an aggressive contraction in real GDP will leave per-capita real GDP above 2005 levels.

Now, we did not have 8% unemployment back in 2005, but that kind of jobless rate is not unusual for recessions. The unemployment rate peaked at only 6.3% in the recession early this decade but peaked at 7.8%, 10.8%, 7.8%, and 9% in each of the previous four recessions, respectively, dating all the way back to the 1973-1975 recession.


'Business' 카테고리의 다른 글

Play Clean With Wash Sale Rule  (0) 2008.12.24
Stumbling Giants: EA And Take-Two  (0) 2008.12.24
Company of the Year: Nasdaq  (0) 2008.12.24
No Happy Holidays For U.S. Housing  (0) 2008.12.24
Smart Tax Moves To Make Right Now  (0) 2008.12.22
Posted by CEOinIRVINE
l

What Would Keynes Do?

Business 2008. 12. 6. 03:21

What Would Keynes Do?

The government should spend on stuff, not on bad assets.

pic

Every day that goes by makes clearer the parallels between the current financial crisis and the one that led to the Great Depression. Then, as now, the core problem was one of deflation, or falling prices. But fixing it will require more than just low interest rates. This was the key insight of British economist John Maynard Keynes, whose theories finally explained how to end the Great Depression. They may be the key to solving today's crisis as well.


The Great Depression was so deep and prolonged for many reasons. Herbert Hoover stupidly signed the Smoot-Hawley Tariff, which crippled international trade and finance, and imposed one of the largest tax increases in American history in 1932, which was exactly the wrong medicine at the wrong time. Franklin D. Roosevelt at least understood that deflation was at the root of the problem, but he thought artificially raising the price of gold and preventing businesses from cutting prices and wages by law was the solution. In fact, it prevented the economy from adjusting, which made the situation worse.

What few people understood at the time was that the Federal Reserve was primarily responsible for the deflation and the only institution that could have done anything about it. As we now know, the Fed's tight monetary policy brought on a financial crisis that began with the stock market crash in 1929. Smoot-Hawley was also a factor, but it wouldn't have been capable of inducing such a crisis if Fed policy hadn't already put financial markets in a fragile condition.

In its initial stages, the Fed might have been able to prevent a full-blown depression by being a lender of last resort. It should have been aggressive about buying every financial asset it could lay its hands on and created as much money as necessary to do so. But it didn't. Instead, it was passive and, as the value of financial assets collapsed, banks closed and vast amounts of wealth simply vanished.

The money simply disappeared, because there was no federal deposit insurance in those days. According to research by economists Milton Friedman and Anna Schwartz, the nation's money supply fell by one-third between 1929 and 1933, which induced a 25% fall in price levels over that period.

As prices fell, businesses were forced to sell goods for less than they cost to produce. They couldn't cut costs easily because that meant reducing wages, which workers naturally resisted. Layoffs were the only way to cut costs, but this meant workers didn't have any income with which to buy goods, since there was no unemployment compensation either. This created a downward spiral that proved very difficult to stop.

The decline in wealth also reduced spending, and the fall in prices had the effect of magnifying debts. Debtors were forced to repay loans in dollars worth 25% more than those they borrowed in the first place. Farmers, who are perpetually in debt, were especially hard hit. In effect, if they took out loans that were worth X number of bushels of wheat and were forced to repay them with the same number bushels, they needed 25% more bushels to repay.



Posted by CEOinIRVINE
l