I was once at a conference on security and a guy from NASA told the story of
how they wrote their own virus and put it on a floppy labeled something
about sex, naked women or something like that, and within a few days it was
on almost every computer in the place.... I have never understood the
fascination with naked people and porn and such that most women appear to
have . . . . lol


John Harvey

-----Original Message-----
From: ProFox [mailto:profox-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf Of Ted Roche
Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2013 11:27 AM
To: profox@leafe.com
Subject: Re: [NF] How Can Passworded Zip Files be Dangerous?

On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 12:49 PM, Ken Dibble <krdib...@stny.rr.com> wrote:

>
> Well yeah, I actually did that exact Google before I sent this message.
> It's people's reasoning that I don't understand.
>

I thought you would :). It's people in dead-end, low-wage, low-morale work
whose job it is to open files sent in by random people and punch in
invoices, hours worked, or orders into systems are the perfect target for
this kind of targeting. Or clueless guys who get the email, "Here's those
pictures of that beautiful girl I promised you, " perhaps spoofed to look
like a buddy's email. Or gullible people. Or people too rushed who get
caught by accidental oversight.


> What are the odds that the recipient actually had a recent 
> conversation about a file with a person chosen at random by a bot to put
in the "From"
> field of that email? And then the person told the recipient that s/he 
> was going to send the file in a zip archive. I mean really?
>

Well, maybe one in a million? But divide those long odds by the cost - zero
- to send the message, and the potential earnings - bazillions - if you can
compromise yet another machine to add to the botnet.

And this assumes a random, phishing attack, and not a spear-phishing attack
specifically targeting a user. If you want the clerk in a accounting to open
a file, you spoof an email from the VP by name citing discussions with her
boss, again by name, that "he was the one to get this project done, and it
needed to be done ASAP!"


> This is what I mean about risk-benefit analysis. Organizational 
> "security experts" have taken to blocking all zip file attachments, 
> and even have resorted to forcing people to use a file drop to pick up 
> attachments instead of allowing them to come in with an email.
>

For some of my clients email accounts, 85% or more of the email is spam,
most of it obvious garbage, but some of it fairly sophisticated social
engineering, "eBay reciepts" or "VISA declined your payment" that trick
fairly savvy people into opening it. And again, the economics are such that
it is nearly free to send a million of these emails, and anyone you catch
puts money in your pocket.


> If you just tell people not to open any attachment that they don't 
> know exactly what it is, you've achieved the same level of security 
> without inconveniencing anybody or spending any extra money.
>

And if you tell people they should always have protected sex, AIDS
infections would stop tomorrow.

In theory, theory and practice have the same outcome. In practice, not so
much.

--
Ted Roche
Ted Roche & Associates, LLC
http://www.tedroche.com


--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
---

[excessive quoting removed by server]

_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/119401ceb703$769404c0$63bc0e40$@shelbynet.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Reply via email to