Red Hat Security Advisory 2024-1802-03 - An update for unbound is now available for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.8 Extended Update Support.

    The following advisory data is extracted from:https://access.redhat.com/security/data/csaf/v2/advisories/2024/rhsa-2024_1802.jsonRed Hat officially shut down their mailing list notifications October 10, 2023.  Due to this, Packet Storm has recreated the below data as a reference point to raise awareness.  It must be noted that due to an inability to easily track revision updates without crawling Red Hat's archive, these advisories are single notifications and we strongly suggest that you visit the Red Hat provided links to ensure you have the latest information available if the subject matter listed pertains to your environment.- Packet Storm Staff====================================================================Red Hat Security AdvisorySynopsis:           Important: unbound security updateAdvisory ID:        RHSA-2024:1802-03Product:            Red Hat Enterprise LinuxAdvisory URL:       https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2024:1802Issue date:         2024-04-15Revision:           03CVE Names:          CVE-2024-1488====================================================================Summary: An update for unbound is now available for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.8 Extended Update Support.Red Hat Product Security has rated this update as having a security impact of Important. A Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) base score, which gives a detailed severity rating, is available for each vulnerability from the CVE link(s) in the References section.Description:The unbound packages provide a validating, recursive, and caching DNS or DNSSEC resolver. Security Fix(es):* A vulnerability was found in Unbound due to incorrect default permissions,allowing any process outside the unbound group to modify the unbound runtimeconfiguration. The default combination of the \"control-use-cert: no\" option witheither explicit or implicit use of an IP address in the \"control-interface\"option could allow improper access. If a process can connect over localhost toport 8953, it can alter the configuration of unbound.service. This flaw allowsan unprivileged local process to manipulate a running instance, potentiallyaltering forwarders, allowing them to track all queries forwarded by the localresolver, and, in some cases, disrupting resolving altogether.To mitigate the vulnerability, a new file\"/etc/unbound/conf.d/remote-control.conf\" has been added and included in themain unbound configuration file, \"unbound.conf\". The file contains twodirectives that should limit access to unbound.conf:    control-interface: \"/run/unbound/control\"    control-use-cert: \"yes\"For details about these directives, run \"man unbound.conf\".Updating to the version of unbound provided by this advisory should, in mostcases, address the vulnerability. To verify that your configuration is notvulnerable, use the \"unbound-control status | grep control\" command. If theoutput contains \"control(ssl)\" or \"control(namedpipe)\", your configuration isnot vulnerable. If the command output returns only \"control\", the configurationis vulnerable because it does not enforce access only to the unbound groupmembers. To fix your configuration, add the line \"include:/etc/unbound/conf.d/remote-control.conf\" to the end of the file\"/etc/unbound/unbound.conf\". If you use a custom\"/etc/unbound/conf.d/remote-control.conf\" file, add the new directives to thisfile. (CVE-2024-1488)For more details about the security issue(s), including the impact, a CVSSscore, acknowledgments, and other related information, refer to the CVE page(s)listed in the References section.Solution:https://access.redhat.com/articles/11258CVEs:CVE-2024-1488References:https://access.redhat.com/security/updates/classification/#importanthttps://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264183

Red Hat Security Advisory 2024-1802-03

Red Hat Security Advisory 2024-1801-03 - An update for unbound is now available for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9.0 Extended Update Support.

    The following advisory data is extracted from:https://access.redhat.com/security/data/csaf/v2/advisories/2024/rhsa-2024_1801.jsonRed Hat officially shut down their mailing list notifications October 10, 2023.  Due to this, Packet Storm has recreated the below data as a reference point to raise awareness.  It must be noted that due to an inability to easily track revision updates without crawling Red Hat's archive, these advisories are single notifications and we strongly suggest that you visit the Red Hat provided links to ensure you have the latest information available if the subject matter listed pertains to your environment.- Packet Storm Staff====================================================================Red Hat Security AdvisorySynopsis:           Important: unbound security updateAdvisory ID:        RHSA-2024:1801-03Product:            Red Hat Enterprise LinuxAdvisory URL:       https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2024:1801Issue date:         2024-04-15Revision:           03CVE Names:          CVE-2023-50387====================================================================Summary: An update for unbound is now available for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9.0 Extended Update Support.Red Hat Product Security has rated this update as having a security impact of Important. A Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) base score, which gives a detailed severity rating, is available for each vulnerability from the CVE link(s) in the References section.Description:The unbound packages provide a validating, recursive, and caching DNS or DNSSEC resolver. Security Fix(es):* bind9: KeyTrap - Extreme CPU consumption in DNSSEC validator (CVE-2023-50387)* bind9: Preparing an NSEC3 closest encloser proof can exhaust CPU resources (CVE-2023-50868)* A vulnerability was found in Unbound due to incorrect default permissions,allowing any process outside the unbound group to modify the unbound runtimeconfiguration. The default combination of the \"control-use-cert: no\" option witheither explicit or implicit use of an IP address in the \"control-interface\"option could allow improper access. If a process can connect over localhost toport 8953, it can alter the configuration of unbound.service. This flaw allowsan unprivileged local process to manipulate a running instance, potentiallyaltering forwarders, allowing them to track all queries forwarded by the localresolver, and, in some cases, disrupting resolving altogether.To mitigate the vulnerability, a new file\"/etc/unbound/conf.d/remote-control.conf\" has been added and included in themain unbound configuration file, \"unbound.conf\". The file contains twodirectives that should limit access to unbound.conf:    control-interface: \"/run/unbound/control\"    control-use-cert: \"yes\"For details about these directives, run \"man unbound.conf\".Updating to the version of unbound provided by this advisory should, in mostcases, address the vulnerability. To verify that your configuration is notvulnerable, use the \"unbound-control status | grep control\" command. If theoutput contains \"control(ssl)\" or \"control(namedpipe)\", your configuration isnot vulnerable. If the command output returns only \"control\", the configurationis vulnerable because it does not enforce access only to the unbound groupmembers. To fix your configuration, add the line \"include:/etc/unbound/conf.d/remote-control.conf\" to the end of the file\"/etc/unbound/unbound.conf\". If you use a custom\"/etc/unbound/conf.d/remote-control.conf\" file, add the new directives to thisfile. (CVE-2024-1488)For more details about the security issue(s), including the impact, a CVSSscore, acknowledgments, and other related information, refer to the CVE page(s)listed in the References section.Solution:https://access.redhat.com/articles/11258CVEs:CVE-2023-50387References:https://access.redhat.com/security/updates/classification/#importanthttps://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2263914https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2263917https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264183

Red Hat Security Advisory 2024-1801-03

Microsoft has stumbled through a series of major cybersecurity failures over the past few years. Experts say the US government’s reliance on its systems means the company continues to get a free pass.

When Microsoft revealed in January that foreign government hackers had once again breached its systems, the news prompted another round of recriminations about the security posture of the world’s largest tech company.

Despite the angst among policymakers, security experts, and competitors, Microsoft faced no consequences for its latest embarrassing failure. The United States government kept buying and using Microsoft products, and senior officials refused to publicly rebuke the tech giant. It was another reminder of how insulated Microsoft has become from virtually any government accountability, even as the Biden administration vows to make powerful tech firms take more responsibility for America’s cyberdefense.

That state of affairs is unlikely to change even in the wake of a new report by the Cyber Safety Review Board (CSRB), a group of government and industry experts, which lambasts Microsoft for failing to prevent one of the worst hacking incidents in the company’s recent history. The report says Microsoft’s “security culture was inadequate and requires an overhaul.”

Microsoft’s almost untouchable position is the result of several intermingling factors. It is by far the US government’s most important technology supplier, powering computers, document drafting, and email conversations everywhere from the Pentagon to the State Department to the FBI. It is a critical partner in the government’s cyberdefense initiatives, with almost unparalleled insights about hackers’ activities and sweeping capabilities to disrupt their operations. And its executives and lobbyists have relentlessly marketed the company as a leading force for a digitally safer world.

These enviable advantages help explain why senior government officials have refused to criticize Microsoft even as Russian and Chinese government-linked hackers have repeatedly breached the company’s computer systems, according to cybersecurity experts, lawmakers, former government officials, and employees of Microsoft’s competitors.

These people—some of whom requested anonymity to candidly discuss the US government and their industry’s undisputed behemoth—argue that the government’s relationship with Microsoft is crippling Washington’s ability to fend off major cyberattacks that jeopardize sensitive data and threaten vital services. To hear them tell it, Microsoft is overdue for oversight.

**A History of Breaches and Controversy**

Microsoft has a long track record of security breaches, but the past few years have been particularly bad for the company.

In 2021, Chinese government hackers discovered and used flaws in Microsoft’s email servers to hack the company’s customers, later releasing the flaws publicly to spark a feeding frenzy of attacks. In 2023, China broke into the email accounts of 22 federal agencies, spying on senior State Department officials and Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo ahead of multiple US delegation trips to Beijing. Three months ago, Microsoft revealed that Russian government hackers had used a simple trick to access the emails of some Microsoft senior executives, cyber experts, and lawyers. Last month, the company said that attack also compromised some of its source code and “secrets” shared between employees and customers. On Thursday, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) confirmed that those customers included federal agencies, and issued an emergency directive warning agencies whose emails were exposed to look for signs that the Russian hackers were attempting to use login credentials contained in those emails.

These incidents occurred as security experts were increasingly criticizing Microsoft for failing to promptly and adequately fix flaws in its products. As by far the biggest technology provider for the US government, Microsoft vulnerabilities account for the lion’s share of both newly discovered and most widely used software flaws. Many experts say Microsoft is refusing to make the necessary cybersecurity improvements to keep up with evolving challenges.

Microsoft hasn’t “adapted their level of security investment and their mindset to fit the threat,” says one prominent cyber policy expert. “It’s a huge fuckup by somebody that has the resources and the internal engineering capacity that Microsoft does.”

The Department of Homeland Security’s CSRB endorsed this view in its new report on the 2023 Chinese intrusion, saying Microsoft exhibited “a corporate culture that deprioritized both enterprise security investments and rigorous risk management.” The report also criticized Microsoft for publishing inaccurate information about the possible causes of the latest Chinese intrusion.

The recent breaches reveal Microsoft’s failure to implement basic security defenses, according to multiple experts.

Adam Meyers, senior vice president of intelligence at the security firm CrowdStrike, points to the Russians’ ability to jump from a testing environment to a production environment. “That should never happen,” he says. Another cyber expert who works at a Microsoft competitor highlighted China’s ability to snoop on multiple agencies’ communications through one intrusion, echoing the CSRB report, which criticized Microsoft’s authentication system for allowing broad access with a single sign-in key.

“You don't hear about these types of breaches coming out of other cloud service providers,” Meyers says.

According to the CSRB report, Microsoft has “not sufficiently prioritized rearchitecting its legacy infrastructure to address the current threat landscape.”

In response to written questions, Microsoft tells WIRED that it’s aggressively improving its security to address recent incidents.

“We are committed to adapting to the evolving threat landscape and partnering across industry and government to defend against these growing and sophisticated global threats,” says Steve Faehl, chief technology officer for Microsoft’s federal security business.

As part of its Secure Future Initiative launched in November, Faehl says, Microsoft has improved its ability to automatically detect and block abuses of employee accounts, begun scanning for more types of sensitive information in network traffic, reduced the access granted by individual authentication keys, and created new authorization requirements for employees seeking to create company accounts.

Microsoft has also redeployed “thousands of engineers” to improve its products and has begun convening senior executives for status updates at least twice weekly, Faehl says.

The new initiative represents Microsoft’s “roadmap and commitments to answer much of what the CSRB report called out as priorities,” Faehl says. Still, Microsoft does not accept that its security culture is broken, as the CSRB report argues. “We very much disagree with this characterization,” Faehl says, “though we do agree that we haven’t been perfect and have work to do.”

**A Security Revenue ‘Addiction’**

Microsoft has earned special enmity from the cybersecurity community for charging its customers extra for better security protections like threat monitoring, antivirus, and user access management. In January 2023, the company touted that its security division had passed $20 billion in annual revenue.

“Microsoft has shifted to looking at cybersecurity as something that's meant to generate revenue for them,” says Juan Andrés Guerrero-Saade, associate vice president of research at security firm SentinelOne. His colleague Alex Stamos recently wrote that Microsoft’s “addiction” to this revenue “has seriously warped their product design decisions.”

These tensions exploded into the open in early 2021, as Congress and the new Biden administration scrambled to understand Russia’s far-reaching SolarWinds hacking campaign.

After breaching government networks through SolarWinds software, Moscow’s operatives fooled Microsoft’s cloud platform into granting them expansive access. Because most agencies weren’t paying for Microsoft’s premium service tier, they didn’t have the network activity logs necessary to detect these intrusions. Lawmakers were outraged that Microsoft was charging the government extra for such a basic feature, and Biden administration officials spent the next two and a half years privately urging Microsoft to make log data free for all customers. Microsoft finally agreed to do so last July—eight days after announcing yet another major hack, this one discovered by an agency paying for log data.

Microsoft won’t say if it plans to make other premium security features free for all of its customers. “We continue to raise the built-in security of our products and services to benefit customers,” Faehl says.

Asked about experts’ arguments that Microsoft’s strategy of profiting off of cybersecurity is incompatible with a security-first mindset, Faehl says, “We would disagree with that characterization.”

**A System That’s Everywhere**

Microsoft’s dominance has prompted concerns that it represents a single point of failure, concentrating America’s technology dependence in such a way that hackers could easily sabotage essential services by targeting one company’s products.

Few services better illustrate the government’s overwhelming dependence on Microsoft—and an area where some experts say a more diversified approach would be safer—than email. A former US cybersecurity official who works at one of Microsoft’s competitors predicts that an attack crippling Microsoft’s email platform would significantly reduce the government’s ability to operate.

Warnings about a Microsoft “monoculture” date back two decades, but the idea is now attracting new attention from policymakers.

“The US government’s dependence on Microsoft poses a serious threat to US national security,” says US senator Ron Wyden. “The government is effectively stuck with the company’s products, despite multiple serious breaches of US government systems by foreign hackers caused by the company’s negligence.”

Last Monday, Wyden announced draft legislation that would set a four-year deadline for the federal government to stop buying collaboration technology like Microsoft Office that critics say doesn’t integrate well with competing services.

Reducing the government’s reliance on a single vendor wouldn’t just benefit the government, experts say. It would also spread the attack risk across more companies, taking some of the pressure off of Microsoft to protect such a vast portfolio of systems. The giant target on Microsoft’s back makes it a magnet for cybercriminals and government hackers, which helps explain its outsize number of breaches.

The government’s reliance on Microsoft also entrenches a sense of familiarity with its products that cements its places in federal networks. While some agencies are exploring alternatives to Microsoft, most of them are sticking with what they know—largely because it’s easier than switching to an alternative platform, the former cyber official says.

Microsoft denies making it difficult for customers to switch to or incorporate competitors’ products. “Our competitors often stoke subjective complaints about ‘compatibility,’” Faehl says, but “we hear this more from the vendors of some third-party products” than from customers trying to use them.

Regardless, experts say, the upshot is clear: The government is dependent on Microsoft, robbing it of the leverage needed to push back on the company’s practices.

**Working the Refs**

Microsoft isn’t counting on its market dominance alone to defang government oversight. Since its antitrust battles with the government in the 1990s, the company has crafted a sophisticated public policy strategy that combines earnest calls to protect cyberspace with omnipresent participation in government initiatives.

“Microsoft is by far the slickest operation out there in tech when it comes to these issues,” says Andrew Grotto, a former senior White House cyber official who now leads Stanford University’s Program on Geopolitics, Technology, and Governance and consults for some of Microsoft’s competitors. “They learned this lesson 25 years ago and have been applying it ever since.”

Microsoft’s threat intelligence team, which knows more about malicious cyber activity than virtually any other company and most governments, regularly publishes research about cyber threats and collaborates with law enforcement on operations to dismantle hackers’ infrastructure. The company also helps fund groups like the CyberPeace Institute, which advocates for a safer internet and helps defend nongovernment organizations from hackers. And it has positioned itself as a helpful partner to policymakers who want to take on cyber issues but don’t know where to start, sometimes providing lawmakers with draft legislative language.

With its market dominance and political savvy, Microsoft has ensured that officials almost never publicly criticize it, experts say.

“The government's uncomfortable saying bad things about Microsoft because they're fully committed to them,” says Mark Montgomery, senior director of the Center on Cyber and Technology Innovation at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a think tank.

The Biden administration has spoken grandly about wielding the government’s formidable contracting power to force companies to improve their security. But with Microsoft, that leverage is nonexistent, experts say. “There is no realistic chance that the government will wholesale cancel its contracts with Microsoft,” Paul Rosenzweig, a cyber consultant and former DHS policy official, says in an email.

Microsoft disputes this argument. “The idea that the government is too dependent on Microsoft is at odds with reality,” Faehl says.

The government’s lack of leverage means federal officials never use the kind of blunt language found in the CSRB report when discussing Microsoft, even when they insist on speaking to reporters anonymously. The result is a remarkable display of government deference to Microsoft.

After Chinese hackers broke into government email systems and eluded agencies not paying for Microsoft’s premium security features, a senior official at CISA acknowledged that Microsoft’s business model was “not yielding the sort of security outcomes that we seek,” but they declined to directly rebuke Microsoft, instead sticking to talking points about productive conversations with the company.

In fact, despite Microsoft’s yearslong defiance of CISA’s high-profile push for companies to be “secure by design,” CISA has steadfastly refused to criticize Microsoft’s failures. When Microsoft finally bowed to pressure and made logs free last July, CISA director Jen Easterly said she was “extremely pleased with Microsoft’s decision.”

The former cyber official finds the government’s meekness remarkable. “When their own emails are stolen, they don’t seem to push back on the vendor who is the cause of that.”

The White House’s National Security Council declined to comment for this story. In a statement, Eric Goldstein, CISA’s executive assistant director for cybersecurity, says his agency “has a robust partnership with Microsoft and will continue to collaborate in many areas,” while also continuing to “impress upon all technology companies the urgency of developing products that are secure by design so that consumers can trust the safety and integrity of the technology that they use every day.”

Microsoft’s Faehl says his company is “committed to secure by design and secure by default.”

**Forcing Change**

The CSRB report on Microsoft’s cloud breach calls for dramatic changes to the company’s security culture. According to many experts, it’s time for the government to find its spine and compel those changes.

“Big, powerful companies in general don’t change their behavior unless they’re incentivized to do so,” Stanford University’s Grotto says.

The CSRB report recommends tough new requirements for cloud providers like Microsoft, including periodic security reviews after they receive federal contracts. Experts say those requirements could shift corporate incentives in favor of better security.

Microsoft seems to realize that its recent breaches have sparked a public relations crisis. “We expect and welcome fair scrutiny,” says Faehl. “As an industry leader we must be accountable for the security of our products and services.”

At the same time, he says, Microsoft “wouldn’t mind seeing some scrutiny” of its competitors who “seek to sow fear, uncertainty and doubt about our position as a way to seek advantage for their own products.”

Taking on Microsoft would also be a way for the Biden administration to live up to the principles in its National Cybersecurity Strategy, which prioritizes shifting the burden of cybersecurity onto large, well-resourced tech vendors. “They make the point … that this balance needs to shift,” Grotto says. “The question now is, ‘Okay, what does administration do with that diagnosis?’”

There are signs that the administration is heeding this advice. During a briefing with reporters on Thursday about the possibility that Russian operatives stole government secrets through their latest Microsoft hack, Goldstein said that CISA and other agencies are “are working closely with Microsoft, in alignment with the recommendations of the Cyber Safety Review Board, to drive further progress in Microsoft’s improvement plans with their broader security culture and enterprise.”

In the meantime, experts say, the status quo allows Microsoft to shirk responsibility for problems that it is uniquely capable of resolving.

“No harm comes from doing nothing, at least not to these companies,” Guerrero-Saade of SentinelOne says. “And that’s what’s going to destroy us.”

The US Government Has a Microsoft Problem

Plus: Apple warns iPhone users about spyware attacks, CISA issues an emergency directive about a Microsoft breach, and a ransomware hacker tangles with an unimpressed HR manager named Beth.

After months of delays, the US House of Representatives voted on Friday to extend a controversial warrantless wiretap program for two years. Known as Section 702, the program authorizes the US government to collect the communications of foreigners overseas. But this collection also includes reams of communications from US citizens, which are stored for years and can later be warrantlessly accessed by the FBI, which has heavily abused the program. An amendment that would require investigators to obtain such a warrant failed to pass.

A group of US lawmakers on Sunday unveiled a proposal that they hope will become the country’s first nationwide privacy law. The American Privacy Rights Act would limit the data that companies can collect and give US residents greater control over the personal information that is collected about them. Passage of such legislation remains far off, however: Congress has attempted to pass a national privacy law for years and has thus far failed to do so.

Absent a US privacy law, you’ll need to take matters into your own hands. DuckDuckGo, the privacy-focused company famous for its search engine, now offers a new product called Privacy Pro that includes a VPN, a tool for having your data removed from people-search websites, and a service for restoring your identity if you fall victim to identity theft. There are also steps you can take to wrench back some of the data used to train generative AI systems. Not all systems out there offer the option to opt out of data collection, but we have a rundown of the ones that do and how to keep your data out of AI models.

Data collection isn’t the only risk associated with AI advancements. AI-generated scam calls are becoming more sophisticated, with cloned voices sounding eerily like the real thing. But there are precautions you can take to protect yourself from getting swindled by someone using AI to sound like a loved one.

Change Healthcare’s ongoing ransomware nightmare appears to have gotten worse. The company was originally targeted by a ransomware gang known as AlphV in February. But after the hackers received a $22 million payment early last month, a rift appeared to grow between AlphV and affiliate hackers, who say AlphV took the money and ran without paying other groups that helped them carry out the attack. Now, another ransomware group, RansomHub, claims it has terabytes of Change Healthcare’s data and is attempting to extort the company. Service disruptions caused by the ransomware attack have impacted healthcare providers and their patients across the US.

That’s not all. Each week, we round up the privacy and security news we didn’t cover in depth ourselves. Click the headlines to read the full stories, and stay safe out there.

The streaming video service Roku warned customers Friday that 576,000 accounts had been compromised, a breach it discovered in the midst of its investigation of a far smaller-scale intrusion that it dealt with in March. Roku said that rather than actually penetrating Roku’s own network through a security vulnerability, the hackers had carried out a “credential-stuffing” attack in which they tried passwords for users that had leaked elsewhere, thus breaking into accounts where users had reused those passwords. The company noted that in less than 400 cases, hackers had actually exploited their access to make purchases with the hijacked accounts. But the company nonetheless reset users’ passwords and is implementing two-factor authentication on all user accounts.

**Apple Notifies Users of Mercenary Spyware Infections**

Apple sent notices via email to users in 92 countries around the world this week, warning them that they had been targeted by sophisticated “mercenary spyware” and that their devices may be compromised. The notice stressed that the company had “high confidence” in this warning and urged potential hacking victims to take it seriously. In a status page update, it suggested that anyone who receives the warning contact the Digital Security Helpline of the nonprofit Access Now and enable Lockdown Mode for future protection. Apple didn’t offer any information publicly about who the hacking victims are, where they’re located, or who the hackers behind the attacks might be, though in its blog post, it compared the malware to the sophisticated Pegasus spyware sold by the Israeli hacking firm NSO Group. It wrote in its public support post that it’s warned users in a total of 150 countries about similar attacks since 2021.

**CISA Warns Federal Agencies to Look Out for Russian Hackers Stealing Emails**

April continues to be the cruelest month for Microsoft—or perhaps Microsoft’s customers. On the heels of a Cybersecurity Review Board report on Microsoft’s previous breach by Chinese state-sponsored hackers, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) published a report this week warning federal agencies that their communications with Microsoft may have been compromised by a group known as APT29, Midnight Blizzard, or Cozy Bear, believed to work on behalf of Russia’s SVR foreign intelligence agency. “Midnight Blizzard’s successful compromise of Microsoft corporate email accounts and the exfiltration of correspondence between agencies and Microsoft presents a grave and unacceptable risk to agencies,” CISA said in the emergency directive. As recently as March, Microsoft said that it was still working to expel the hackers from its network.

**When a Ransomware Hacker Calls a Victim Company’s Front Desk**

As ransomware hackers seek new ways to bully their victims into giving in to their extortion demands, one group tried the novel approach of calling the front desk of the company it had targeted to verbally threaten its staff. Thanks to one HR manager named Beth, that tactic ended up sounding about as threatening as a clip from an episode of _The Office_.

TechCrunch describes a recording of the conversation, which a ransomware group calling itself Dragonforce posted to its dark-web site in a misguided attempt to pressure the victim company to pay. (TechCrunch didn’t identify the victim.) The call starts like any tedious attempt to find the right person after calling a company’s publicly listed phone number, as the hacker waits to speak to someone in “management.”

Eventually, Beth picks up and a somewhat farcical conversation ensues as she asks that the hacker explain the situation. When he threatens to make the company’s stolen data available for “fraudulent activities and for terrorism by criminals,” Beth responds “Oh, ok,” in an altogether unimpressed tone. She then asks if the data will be posted to “Dragonforce.com.” At another point, she notes to the increasingly frustrated hacker that recording their call is illegal in Ohio, and he responds, “Ma’am, I am a hacker. I don’t care about the law.” Finally, Beth refuses to negotiate with the hacker with a “Well, good luck,” to which the hacker responds, “Thank you, take care.”

Roku Breach Hits 567,000 Users

Wondering whether changing your SSN is an option. Read here what you need to qualify for a new SSN and what you need to get one.

After seeing their Social Security Number (SSN) leaked in the AT&T breach, some US citizens are wondering if and how they can change their SSN.

The good news is that even though it’s a challenging process, it is possible. But if you’ve ever had to abandon an email address that you used for years, imagine all of the hassle that came with that, and then imagine it being about 10 times worse. Governments, your employer, and everyone else that identifies who you are by your SSN will have to be notified. And since it doesn’t happen very often, most of them will not have a streamlined process in place. It will take a lot of time and effort to set every record straight.

All that said, this process is not impossible, and in some cases, it is worth the effort.

**When do I qualify?**

The first obstacle will be to qualify for a change of your SSN in the first place. You will have to show that you:

*   Are the victim of identity theft. Importantly, even if this is true, the US government requires that you first have “attempted to fix problems resulting from the misuse,” but that you’re still encountering issues because of your original SSN. If someone is using your Social Security number for work purposes, you report it to the Social Security Administration (SSA) first. If someone is using your number to open lines of credit, you’ll need to go to identitytheft.gov to report it and establish a recovery plan. If those options didn’t help, then you can apply for a new SSN.
*   Were issued a duplicate number or you and a family member have sequential numbers that are causing problems.
*   Are facing a serious threat to your safety, like severe harassment, abuse, or potential life endangerment.
*   Have religious or cultural objections to the particular number you received. You’ll need to provide documentation from the group you belong to that affirms your objection.

**Where do I start?**

The first step is to contact your local Social Security office. Under normal circumstances, you will have to pay them a personal visit after making an appointment. They will perform all the required checks and assist you in drafting a statement explaining why you need a new number, and fill out an application for a new SSN.

You will need to bring:

**Evidence of your age**. This is usually a birth certificate, but in some cases, alternatives are allowed, such as a US hospital record of your birth, a religious record established before age 5 showing your age or date of birth, a passport, or a final adoption decree showing the birth information taken from the original birth certificate.

**Evidence of identity.** A US passport, US driver’s license or state-issued non-driver identity card satisfy this requirement. Alternatives that may be accepted are a US military identity card, a certificate of naturalization, employee identity card, a certified copy of medical record, health insurance card, Medicaid card, or school identity card/record.

**Evidence of US citizenship or immigration status**. A US birth certificate or US passport are standard for this requirement. Accepted alternatives may be Consular Report of Birth, Certificate of Citizenship, or Certificate of Naturalization.

For all these documents, US citizens will need to show original documents (or documents certified by the issuing agency).

US immigrants requesting a new SSN will need to provide **evidence of immigration status** by showing an unexpired document issued by Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and additional documents if you are an international student or exchange visitor.

And you will need to provide **evidence for the reason you need a new SSN**.

**Aftermath**

Once you have successfully changed your SSN, here is a non-exhaustive list of entities that need to be informed:

*   The IRS.
*   Your employer.
*   Your bank. 
*   Your school.
*   Your student loan provider.
*   Your Medicare or Medicaid provider.
*   Any primary care doctors or specialists with your medical records.
*   Third-party insurance companies.

What you will not have achieved is also important to know. A Social Security number change doesn’t erase your financial history. So, a new SSN doesn’t absolve you of any debts you have, rectify your credit history, or repair a bad credit score.

**We don’t just report on threats – we help safeguard your entire digital identit**y

Cybersecurity risks should never spread beyond a headline. Protect your—and your family’s—personal information by using identity protection.

 How to change your Social Security Number 

Ubuntu Security Notice 6730-1 - It was discovered that Apache Maven Shared Utils did not handle double-quoted strings properly, allowing shell injection attacks. This could allow an attacker to run arbitrary code.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----  
Hash: SHA512

==========================================================================  
Ubuntu Security Notice USN-6730-1  
April 11, 2024

maven-shared-utils vulnerability  
==========================================================================

A security issue affects these releases of Ubuntu and its derivatives:

- - Ubuntu 22.04 LTS  
- - Ubuntu 20.04 LTS  
- - Ubuntu 18.04 LTS (Available with Ubuntu Pro)  
- - Ubuntu 16.04 LTS (Available with Ubuntu Pro)  
- - Ubuntu 14.04 LTS (Available with Ubuntu Pro)

Summary:

maven-shared-utils could be made to run programs if it received  
specially crafted input.

Software Description:  
- - maven-shared-utils: A collection of Maven utility classes.

Details:

It was discovered that Apache Maven Shared Utils did not handle double-quoted  
strings properly, allowing shell injection attacks. This could allow an  
attacker to run arbitrary code.

Update instructions:

The problem can be corrected by updating your system to the following  
package versions:

Ubuntu 22.04 LTS:  
  libmaven-shared-utils-java      3.3.0-1ubuntu0.22.04.1

Ubuntu 20.04 LTS:  
  libmaven-shared-utils-java      3.3.0-1ubuntu0.20.04.1

Ubuntu 18.04 LTS (Available with Ubuntu Pro):  
  libmaven-shared-utils-java      3.3.0-1ubuntu0.18.04.1~esm1

Ubuntu 16.04 LTS (Available with Ubuntu Pro):  
  libmaven-shared-utils-java      0.9-1ubuntu0.1~esm1

Ubuntu 14.04 LTS (Available with Ubuntu Pro):  
  libmaven-shared-utils-java      0.4-1ubuntu0.1~esm1

In general, a standard system update will make all the necessary changes.

References:  
  https://ubuntu.com/security/notices/USN-6730-1  
  CVE-2022-29599

Package Information:  
  https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/maven-shared-utils/3.3.0-1ubuntu0.22.04.1  
  https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/maven-shared-utils/3.3.0-1ubuntu0.20.04.1  
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEETB/nIDy9nvCSgAUj3gXQmO/Tr3wFAmYYcLwACgkQ3gXQmO/T  
r3yYcRAAgdreHC0o+VtyTJL/jorqqs7vKGZv4qC0XhaP69STRNtlSR4rG4I9wRqm  
BOhmBVLJylEtxfAxiWrnag5N04CBR12nr/Shk+JCm06e/5ROnu9LYiCoMowORZzy  
Nnlu82qRmCwvnL9iSWzI4wnArDehMVniOCMmWNCfpa6/UXoh1gVCjikRAWRlBOAv  
uA0KrR0cNwJ90G5wuB59zqxoUPZBf+AVCkjXYSv5WbWTvLrZbz8zhmKvc8kqu1OL  
0D05mwH5kxXuhapZ8kBqapytjP+GmuRjHFI7kk+3yhPul2J0JDcNGO99lOZ2lUfz  
IXk1S/XQTt2aEhdoanrpI6lVXcVHA0yr5I03bFEDg8D1BwZRm29KBrH2wsHdpN6J  
XWIHfaHR7kYfDVsm9kpc72b7jv/aDD66vPsI/W3A/2QttpwpjwXgZSc2Mtx/WE+T  
O5/b0jtpNrwHHYLigE2PYMPaRPjxtxhQ7qnd6FccNQl9+fOrKw9NHBAu0r5s4jlI  
cU9d47W/mdEcM3y5OuSe8lN6rtHsvnjaQxuuO5lCLKIOpohi7YyyaU5aHGXns34P  
FnImexzC8YxRvbR5ku/4ZgOAcPv9kC0wMDiC7rggqLGlhsohoca1wXG2TRIsinx5  
fRFjffvqcF6bbfyjWIKKZaM4y1QmhX3+Eth77QEqLb0InJAWDp4=  
=P4zw  
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Ubuntu Security Notice USN-6730-1

Red Hat Security Advisory 2024-1787-03 - An update for squid is now available for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7. Issues addressed include buffer over-read, denial of service, and null pointer vulnerabilities.

    The following advisory data is extracted from:https://access.redhat.com/security/data/csaf/v2/advisories/2024/rhsa-2024_1787.jsonRed Hat officially shut down their mailing list notifications October 10, 2023.  Due to this, Packet Storm has recreated the below data as a reference point to raise awareness.  It must be noted that due to an inability to easily track revision updates without crawling Red Hat's archive, these advisories are single notifications and we strongly suggest that you visit the Red Hat provided links to ensure you have the latest information available if the subject matter listed pertains to your environment.- Packet Storm Staff====================================================================Red Hat Security AdvisorySynopsis:           Important: squid security updateAdvisory ID:        RHSA-2024:1787-03Product:            Red Hat Enterprise LinuxAdvisory URL:       https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2024:1787Issue date:         2024-04-11Revision:           03CVE Names:          CVE-2023-46724====================================================================Summary: An update for squid is now available for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7.Red Hat Product Security has rated this update as having a security impact of Important. A Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) base score, which gives a detailed severity rating, is available for each vulnerability from the CVE link(s) in the References section.Description:Squid is a high-performance proxy caching server for web clients, supporting FTP, Gopher, and HTTP data objects.Security Fix(es):* squid: denial of service in HTTP header parser (CVE-2024-25617)* squid: denial of service in HTTP request parsing (CVE-2023-50269)* squid: Buffer over-read in the HTTP Message processing feature (CVE-2023-49285)* squid: Incorrect Check of Function Return Value In Helper Process management (CVE-2023-49286)* squid: NULL pointer dereference in the gopher protocol code (CVE-2023-46728)* squid: Denial of Service in SSL Certificate validation (CVE-2023-46724)For more details about the security issue(s), including the impact, a CVSS score, acknowledgments, and other related information, refer to the CVE page(s) listed in the References section.Solution:https://access.redhat.com/articles/11258CVEs:CVE-2023-46724References:https://access.redhat.com/security/updates/classification/#importanthttps://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247567https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2248521https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2252923https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2252926https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2254663https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264309

Red Hat Security Advisory 2024-1787-03

Red Hat Security Advisory 2024-1784-03 - An update for gnutls is now available for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8. Issues addressed include an information leakage vulnerability.

    The following advisory data is extracted from:https://access.redhat.com/security/data/csaf/v2/advisories/2024/rhsa-2024_1784.jsonRed Hat officially shut down their mailing list notifications October 10, 2023.  Due to this, Packet Storm has recreated the below data as a reference point to raise awareness.  It must be noted that due to an inability to easily track revision updates without crawling Red Hat's archive, these advisories are single notifications and we strongly suggest that you visit the Red Hat provided links to ensure you have the latest information available if the subject matter listed pertains to your environment.- Packet Storm Staff====================================================================Red Hat Security AdvisorySynopsis:           Moderate: gnutls security updateAdvisory ID:        RHSA-2024:1784-03Product:            Red Hat Enterprise LinuxAdvisory URL:       https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2024:1784Issue date:         2024-04-11Revision:           03CVE Names:          CVE-2024-28834====================================================================Summary: An update for gnutls is now available for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.Red Hat Product Security has rated this update as having a security impact ofModerate. A Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) base score, which gives adetailed severity rating, is available for each vulnerability from the CVElink(s) in the References section.Description:The gnutls package provide the GNU Transport Layer Security (GnuTLS) library,which implements cryptographic algorithms and protocols such as SSL, TLS, andDTLS.This package update fixes a timing side-channel in deterministic ECDSA.Security Fix(es):* gnutls: vulnerable to Minerva side-channel information leak (CVE-2024-28834)For more details about the security issue(s), including the impact, a CVSSscore, acknowledgments, and other related information, refer to the CVE page(s)listed in the References section.Solution:https://access.redhat.com/articles/11258CVEs:CVE-2024-28834References:https://access.redhat.com/security/updates/classification/#moderate

Red Hat Security Advisory 2024-1784-03

By Waqas
Here's an updated list of five effective CAPTCHA plugins for WordPress that can help enhance the security of your website by preventing spam and bot activities:
This is a post from HackRead.com Read the original post: 5 Best CAPTCHA Plugins for WordPress Websites

As of 2024, the internet hosts over 1.89 billion websites, with approximately 835 million utilizing WordPress as their Content Management System (CMS). This represents about 43.3% of all websites globally.

Not only do these stats represent the expanding reach of the internet, but they also make WordPress a lucrative target for cybercriminals and spammers. While **WordPress security tips** are widely discussed to keep cybercriminals at bay, spamming is something not every website owner, especially newbies, is familiar with.

In this article, we will discuss five **CAPTCHA solutions** for WordPress and how a CAPTCHA plugin works.

Here’s an updated list of five effective CAPTCHA plugins for WordPress that can help enhance the security of your website by preventing spam and **bot activities:**

1.  **Captcha Plus**: This plugin offers multiple CAPTCHA (Completely Automated Public Turing test to tell Computers and Humans Apart) options, including image-based, math-based, and Google reCAPTCHA. It’s known for its high performance and ease of customization, although it may be a bit overwhelming for beginners.
2.  **Google reCAPTCHA**: Perhaps the most well-known, this plugin uses advanced technology to differentiate humans from bots without disrupting the user experience. It’s seamlessly integrated into your forms and is supported by major form builders like WPForms.
3.  **Really Simple CAPTCHA**: As the name suggests, this plugin keeps it straightforward. It’s not as feature-rich as others, but it’s highly effective at blocking spam and is compatible with many form plugins​.
4.  **hCaptcha**: Offers a robust bot detection system and comes in both free and pro versions. The pro version includes advanced features like custom challenge creation and detailed analytics. It integrates well with a variety of forms and page builders, making it a versatile choice​.
5.  **Securimage-WP**: Great for those who prioritize a balance between strong security measures and maintaining user-friendliness. It integrates easily with popular form plugins like Contact Form 7 and Gravity Forms​.

****Honorable Mention: Akismet Anti-spam: Spam Protection****

Although not a CAPTCHA plugin, **Akismet Anti-spam** is a plugin designed to protect websites, particularly those using WordPress, from spam. Developed by Automattic, the same company behind WordPress.com, Akismet works by filtering out spam comments and form submissions.

It uses automated algorithms and community feedback to identify and block spam, helping keep websites clean and free from unwanted content. Akismet effectively reduces the time and effort needed to moderate spam, allowing website owners to focus on creating and managing content rather than dealing with spammy submissions.

****How does a CAPTCHA plugin work****

A CAPTCHA plugin works by presenting a challenge to website users to verify that they are human and not automated bots. Typically, this challenge involves completing a task that is easy for humans to do but difficult for bots to replicate, such as identifying distorted text, selecting certain images, or solving a simple puzzle.

The plugin then validates the user’s response, allowing access to the website if the challenge is completed correctly. This helps prevent automated bots from engaging in activities such as spamming forms, creating fake accounts, or launching malicious attacks on the website including DDoS attacks.

1.  New AI tool aims to make CAPTCHA a thing of the past
2.  Facebook captcha wants users to upload a clear photo of them
3.  Proton CAPTCHA: Privacy-First CAPTCHA Defense Against Bots

5 Best CAPTCHA Plugins for WordPress Websites

The U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) said today it is investigating a breach at business intelligence company Sisense, whose products are designed to allow companies to view the status of multiple third-party online services in a single dashboard. CISA urged all Sisense customers to reset any credentials and secrets that may have been shared with the company, which is the same advice Sisense gave to its customers Wednesday evening.

The **U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency** (CISA) said today it is investigating a breach at business intelligence company **Sisense**, whose products are designed to allow companies to view the status of multiple third-party online services in a single dashboard. CISA urged all Sisense customers to reset any credentials and secrets that may have been shared with the company, which is the same advice Sisense gave to its customers Wednesday evening.

New York City based Sisense has more than a thousand customers across a range of industry verticals, including financial services, telecommunications, healthcare and higher education. On April 10, **Sisense Chief Information Security Officer Sangram Dash** told customers the company had been made aware of reports that “certain Sisense company information may have been made available on what we have been advised is a restricted access server (not generally available on the internet.)”

“We are taking this matter seriously and promptly commenced an investigation,” Dash continued. “We engaged industry-leading experts to assist us with the investigation. This matter has not resulted in an interruption to our business operations. Out of an abundance of caution, and while we continue to investigate, we urge you to promptly rotate any credentials that you use within your Sisense application.”

In its alert, CISA said it was working with private industry partners to respond to a recent compromise discovered by independent security researchers involving Sisense.

“CISA is taking an active role in collaborating with private industry partners to respond to this incident, especially as it relates to impacted critical infrastructure sector organizations,” the sparse alert reads. “We will provide updates as more information becomes available.”

Sisense declined to comment when asked about the veracity of information shared by two trusted sources with close knowledge of the breach investigation. Those sources said the breach appears to have started when the attackers somehow gained access to the company’s Gitlab code repository, and in that repository was a token or credential that gave the bad guys access to Sisense’s Amazon S3 buckets in the cloud.

Customers can use Gitlab either as a solution that is hosted in the cloud at Gitlab.com, or as a self-managed deployment. KrebsOnSecurity understands that Sisense was using the self-managed version of Gitlab.

Both sources said the attackers used the S3 access to copy and exfiltrate several terabytes worth of Sisense customer data, which apparently included millions of access tokens, email account passwords, and even SSL certificates.

The incident raises questions about whether Sisense was doing enough to protect sensitive data entrusted to it by customers, such as whether the massive volume of stolen customer data was ever encrypted while at rest in these Amazon cloud servers.

It is clear, however, that unknown attackers now have all of the credentials that Sisense customers used in their dashboards.

The breach also makes clear that Sisense is somewhat limited in the clean-up actions that it can take on behalf of customers, because access tokens are essentially text files on your computer that allow you to stay logged in for extended periods of time — sometimes indefinitely. And depending on which service we’re talking about, it may be possible for attackers to re-use those access tokens to authenticate as the victim without ever having to present valid credentials.

Beyond that, it is largely up to Sisense customers to decide if and when they change passwords to the various third-party services that they’ve previously entrusted to Sisense.

Earlier today, a public relations firm working with Sisense reached out to learn if KrebsOnSecurity planned to publish any further updates on their breach (KrebsOnSecurity posted a screenshot of the CISO’s customer email to both LinkedIn and Mastodon on Wednesday evening). The PR rep said Sisense wanted to make sure they had an opportunity to comment before the story ran.

But when confronted with the details shared by my sources, Sisense apparently changed its mind.

“After consulting with Sisense, they have told me that they don’t wish to respond,” the PR rep said in an emailed reply.

**Update, 6:49 p.m., ET:** Added clarification that Sisense is using a self-hosted version of Gitlab, not the cloud version managed by Gitlab.com.

Also, Sisense’s CISO Dash just sent an update to customers directly. The latest advice from the company is far more detailed, and involves resetting a potentially large number of access tokens across multiple technologies, including Microsoft Active Directory credentials, GIT credentials, web access tokens, and any single sign-on (SSO) secrets or tokens.

The full message from Dash to customers is below:

“Good Afternoon,

We are following up on our prior communication of April 10, 2024, regarding reports that certain Sisense company information may have been made available on a restricted access server. As noted, we are taking this matter seriously and our investigation remains ongoing.

Our customers must reset any keys, tokens, or other credentials in their environment used within the Sisense application.

Specifically, you should:  
– Change Your Password: Change all Sisense-related passwords on http://my.sisense.com  
– Non-SSO:  
– Replace the Secret in the Base Configuration Security section with your GUID/UUID.  
– Reset passwords for all users in the Sisense application.  
– Logout all users by running GET /api/v1/authentication/logout\_all under Admin user.  
– Single Sign-On (SSO):  
– If you use SSO JWT for the user’s authentication in Sisense, you will need to update sso.shared\_secret in Sisense and then use the newly generated value on the side of the SSO handler.  
– We strongly recommend rotating the x.509 certificate for your SSO SAML identity provider.  
– If you utilize OpenID, it’s imperative to rotate the client secret as well.  
– Following these adjustments, update the SSO settings in Sisense with the revised values.  
– Logout all users by running GET /api/v1/authentication/logout\_all under Admin user.  
– Customer Database Credentials: Reset credentials in your database that were used in the Sisense application to ensure continuity of connection between the systems.  
– Data Models: Change all usernames and passwords in the database connection string in the data models.  
– User Params: If you are using the User Params feature, reset them.  
– Active Directory/LDAP: Change the username and user password of users whose authorization is used for AD synchronization.  
– HTTP Authentication for GIT: Rotate the credentials in every GIT project.  
– B2D Customers: Use the following API PATCH api/v2/b2d-connection in the admin section to update the B2D connection.  
– Infusion Apps: Rotate the associated keys.  
– Web Access Token: Rotate all tokens.  
– Custom Email Server: Rotate associated credentials.  
– Custom Code: Reset any secrets that appear in custom code Notebooks.

If you need any assistance, please submit a customer support ticket at https://community.sisense.com/t5/support-portal/bd-p/SupportPortal and mark it as critical. We have a dedicated response team on standby to assist with your requests.

At Sisense, we give paramount importance to security and are committed to our customers’ success. Thank you for your partnership and commitment to our mutual security.

Regards,

Sangram Dash  
Chief Information Security Officer”

Tag

#ssl