There was an article published on Threat Post this past week regarding a German security researcher that used a new feature of the Amazon.com EC2 cloud computing environment to crack SHA1 password hashes. I am sure a lot of you are asking yourselves, “So what? This is just another Chicken Little warning that come out all of the time.” I would agree with you that publications use highly threatening headlines to hype these sorts of articles to attract readers. But if you read these articles closely, ignoring the hype factor and think through the concepts that they are discussing, you can understand the threat they might bring to your environment.
The thing that caught my eye about this threat is that it cost the researcher less than an hour of their time and a whole $2.10 to crack six character length 160-bit SHA1 hashes. Even more disconcerting was that all of the necessary hardware and software was readily available through the EC2 service. And if the researcher had desired, they could have used even more GPUs to shorten the time to crack these hashes. Granted, the researcher only cracked 14 of these hashes, but what if those hashes were to one or more administrator accounts?
I am sure a lot of you are now saying, “Yeah, but, this is all theory and not a ‘real’ threat.” No doubt about it. I too have been known to toss out my famous, “In theory, theory works,” at this point. But the only way to determine if the research really is a real threat is to read the article or research paper and then determine if the threat can truly be applied in the real world. Based on what I have read about this threat, I would say that there is a great potential for misuse of this EC2 service for all sorts of encryption attacks, not just SHA1 hashes.
A lot of you are now probably pointing to the fact that these were all six character long items that were hashed. I would agree but then also point out that they were 160-bit hashes, not less than 128-bit. A lot of security professionals mistakenly believe that if they get hashes or encryption above 128-bit, that everything is secure. However, the number of bits is not the only factor; there is also the strength of the key used. If the key is not very long or is easy to guess, then it does not matter how many bits are used by the algorithm.
A lot of security professionals blow off threats because they just assume that if they are scanning regularly that any new threat will be caught by their scanning. Unfortunately, scanning only looks for vulnerabilities to devices based on known attack vectors, not a threat like this one. This threat comes into play with any encrypted data or transmissions that an attacker can come across and may or may not have a lot to do with vulnerabilities.
You can argue that because you scan and you comply with the PCI DSS and do not have any vulnerabilities of CVE 4 or higher, you are therefore secure. However, as any network security professional that conducts penetration testing will attest, vulnerabilities with a CVE of less than 4 can be put together and used to compromise a network. So, just because you do not have any vulnerabilities of CVE 4 or higher, does not necessarily mean that you are secure.
The real threat here is that should an attacker be able to get a hold of your encrypted data or data flows, they can just load it up and use Amazon.com’s EC2 cloud to attempt to break the encryption. As a result, all of those claims over the years by security pundits that attackers would have to have access to supercomputers have apparently been realized with the advent of cloud computing.
But again, this is all theory, right? You wish. Even more shocking was a tidbit tucked away in the article. There is a site entitled WPACracker.com that offers a 400 CPU cluster of computers and 284 million word dictionary and promises to crack WPA passwords on an average of 20 minutes for $17. As a result, all of you relying on WPA to secure your wireless should be considering upgrading to WPA2 as soon as you can.
The next thing that rolled through my mind is what if some enterprising individual decided to conduct some “research” for themselves by using the Berkley Open Infrastructure for Network Computing (BOINC) platform? This is the platform that runs SETI@home, Einstein@home and other worthwhile scientific research projects that need lots of computing power. Based on the BOINC home page, that would put the potential of over 4,000 teraflops at the command of our “researcher.” However, like all things technology based, our enterprising researcher would need to find a potential vulnerability in BOINC and leverage that to gain access to all of that computing power. Either that or make their research project look enticing to the BOINC user population so that they add that workload to their systems. But given that BOINC is open source, it is also possible that attackers could create their own BOINC network for the purposes of cracking encryption. I could imagine botnets being put to this purpose.
This whole threat plays out best when the attacker has inside access to an organization’s network and data. Reading the latest reports from Verizon Business Services and Trustwave, the majority of breaches have an inside component, so it is not too farfetched that an insider would have access. So, if you are not monitoring your network and sensitive data and not strictly controlling access to your data, then it is anyone’s guess as to whether or not someone has taken your data and is now attempting to decrypt it.
If you learned anything at all from this post is the fact that attackers are leveraging cloud computing just like the rest of us. The unfortunate aspect is that attackers are leveraging the cloud to continue their questionable and sometimes illegal activities. And in so leverage this new technology, the potential that they are successful is only going to go up.