Re: [Tails-dev] Ethtool sysctl.conf hardening per Cryptostorm

2015-07-07 Thread Daniel Kahn Gillmor
Hi!  thanks for reporting this.  I'm afraid i find this report rather
breathlessly scary-sounding but short on concrete details that i can
understand.  It's possible i'm just ignorant.  Please enlighten me.
Specific requests for clarification follow.

On Tue 2015-07-07 11:15:15 -0400, Dr. Killswitch, D.V.M. wrote:

 Briefly, a long time ago CPUs were much less capable and it made sense to
 offload portions of the TCP/IP stack to network cards. These offloads have
 been correlated with Duqu Bet's injection phase, 

If your goal is to disable TCP offload engines[0] because of concerns
about their vulnerability to firmware modification, please just say so
directly.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TCP_offload_engine

Is this attempting to address anything other than a malicious TOE?

Your proposed patches modify all sorts of settings, all over the
networking layer, many of which do not appear to be related to TOE.

Maybe you could separate those out so we can discuss them individually?

 as I recall it had to do with the ability to sneak a 302 redirect into
 a TCP stream.

Presumably this is done directly in the offload engine's firmware, not
done remotely -- a remote attack could just modify the TCP stream
itself.  The choice of injection seems arbitrary.  your report is
confusing because it mixes things at the application layer (302 redirect
is an HTTP-ism) with things at the transport layer (TCP).

 Once the ethtool parms and sysctl are put into play, it filters out a
 great deal of trouble.

concretely, please state what trouble is being addressed here.

If the trouble is specifically one possible channel of traffic
injection attack for potentially malicious NIC firmware, then it would
be clearer to leave it at that and provide a narrowly-targeted changeset
that explicitly disables TOE.

OTOH, given that the actual NIC hardware should see nothing but streams
to and from the Tor guard node, it's hard to see how a TCP-layer
injection of anything (much less a 302 redirect) is a risk for users of
Tails.

 There are some before/after pcaps, I have not inspected them
 personally.

Can you provide pointers?

 There is another complication concurrent with the ability to do 302
 redirects - there are apparently a lot of odd glyph sets and weird css
 flying around - intrusion payloads being injected mid-stream. The front
 page for the Agora dark net market was found to vary greatly depending on
 how one approached it, then the troubles spread to most of the other
 markets.

again, if these payloads (of whatever form) are being injected by a
malicious TCP offload engine, i'm not sure that makes any sense as an
attack on a system whose only external physical network traffic is to
its chosen Tor guard node.  can you explain?

--dkg


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Tails-dev mailing list
Tails-dev@boum.org
https://mailman.boum.org/listinfo/tails-dev
To unsubscribe from this list, send an empty email to 
tails-dev-unsubscr...@boum.org.

Re: [Tails-dev] Ethtool sysctl.conf hardening per Cryptostorm

2015-07-07 Thread Dr. Killswitch, D.V.M.
Intrigeri,

PJ is the one who has wrestled with stuff and who came up with the ethtool
parameters and the sysctl.conf. I've copied him on this, and I will make
sure this information gets conveyed to TAILS development in an orderly
fashion.

Briefly, a long time ago CPUs were much less capable and it made sense to
offload portions of the TCP/IP stack to network cards. These offloads have
been correlated with Duqu Bet's injection phase, as I recall it had to do
with the ability to sneak a 302 redirect into a TCP stream. Once the
ethtool parms and sysctl are put into play, it filters out a great deal of
trouble.

There are some before/after pcaps, I have not inspected them personally.
There is another complication concurrent with the ability to do 302
redirects - there are apparently a lot of odd glyph sets and weird css
flying around - intrusion payloads being injected mid-stream. The front
page for the Agora dark net market was found to vary greatly depending on
how one approached it, then the troubles spread to most of the other
markets.

This is a summary of what I know, I'll be reading the list daily, happy to
do whatever leg work is needed to better describe the problem, confirm the
solution(s), etc.

 -ks



On Mon, July 6, 2015 9:06 pm, intrigeri wrote:
 Hi,


 Dr. Killswitch, D.V.M. wrote (06 Jul 2015 15:07:40 GMT) :

 Here are the parameters used for ethtool and the descriptions after
 came from a system where I applied this.

 Is there any documentation available that explains the advantage and
 drawbacks of each such setting?

 Cheers,
 --
 intrigeri



___
Tails-dev mailing list
Tails-dev@boum.org
https://mailman.boum.org/listinfo/tails-dev
To unsubscribe from this list, send an empty email to 
tails-dev-unsubscr...@boum.org.


Re: [Tails-dev] Ethtool sysctl.conf hardening per Cryptostorm

2015-07-06 Thread intrigeri
Hi,

Dr. Killswitch, D.V.M. wrote (06 Jul 2015 15:07:40 GMT) :
 Here are the parameters used for ethtool and the descriptions after came
 from a system where I applied this.

Is there any documentation available that explains the advantage and
drawbacks of each such setting?

Cheers,
-- 
intrigeri
___
Tails-dev mailing list
Tails-dev@boum.org
https://mailman.boum.org/listinfo/tails-dev
To unsubscribe from this list, send an empty email to 
tails-dev-unsubscr...@boum.org.