The Little Geeni

Law enforcement recently has been following the general tide of government and public service groundswell by seeking computing solutions in the Linux direction. Particularly in law enforcement, their needs match well with open source software. They have to work lean on a taxpayer’s budget, and open source is free or low cost. They need top security, and Linux is still the highest-scoring operating software in official government assessments. They need mission-critical reliability, and Linux is so stable, it doesn’t just outrank the competition in stability – it makes the competition disappear!

Some recent examples of law enforcement agencies finding a solution in open source:

* Kent Police have lowered the cost of running their major criminal investigations system by a factor of 90% using Novell Linux Open Enterprise Server. The migration to Novell enabled Kent to scale up their Holmes II investigation system to work on larger projects with a broader scope – something they’d never been able to do before. They were also able to run it on their cheapest hardware they could find, thanks to Linux’s light requirements. A new policing operating system, named Genesis, is now being tested for scalability on Linux servers.

* Delivery of the first Linux systems to the West Yorkshire police force could see police forces throughout England and Wales unanimously switching to Linux desktops in a new pilot scheme. The deployment is taking place under a contract awarded by the UK Police IT Organization. If successful, it will lead to over 60,000 desktops deployed. In West Yorkshire alone, the installed base is around 3,500, and a spokesman reckoned that the savings from this would be around one million pounds per year!

* The New South Wales Police department is currently undertaking a major upgrade to its information infrastructure, made necessary due to the increasing volume of data handled by the force, and they’re switching to Linux systems to handle the load. Because the Linux systems are proving so reliable, they are looking forward to the higher capacity network more efficiently archiving and transmitting data stored as evidence, such as surveillance videos and audio material.

* Scottish police forces have also developed a Linux-based system for ensuring that they comply with the Freedom of Information Act legislation, an act which is intended to facilitate ‘open government’ by allowing the public to request access to government data. Since open source and open information go hand in hand, the system has scaled easily and saved tons of labor. The force doesn’t have to worry about proprietary media formats interfering with the public’s ability to access the data, and the efficiency of the Linux system allows a lot of manual tasks to be automated where they couldn’t before. The system is literally returning officers to the streets because it has saved everyone so much work.

* Police in the city of Munich have switched 14,000 of their department computers from Microsoft’s Windows operating system to Linux. The motivation for the decision was to make the government less dependent on one information technology supplier, and to save money while increasing capabilities. One technology analyst even compared the break-through migration to the fall of the Berlin wall, referring to the oppressive requirements of dealing with a proprietary software company’s agenda.

That government feels friendly with open source should come as no surprise. Traditionally, the Internet has been 80% Linux and Unix-based systems since its creation. The first Internet services were started and maintained by government providers, who used Unix system’s built-in multitasking features and excellent speed to create a fast, reliable network. Linux, a modern version of that Unix ideal, has already established itself as the leading system for server-room deployment, but now the effects are beginning to trickle down to the desktop user level and workstation deployments, where they are discovering that Linux systems have workspace-ready features built in which other commercial operating systems are just now beginning to discover and implement.

Furthermore, Linux systems come with the guarantee that because they are open source, no commercial company can restrict their usage in the future. A platform ported to Linux can stay on Linux, without support dying out and constant upgrades creating problems down the road.

Finally, the inherent security of the Unix computing model guarantees the effectiveness of Linux without the worries over security problems. Because there are in effect no viruses which can infect a Linux system known, and no critical security exploits found in the systems even by government security standards, departments are also considering Linux as a measure to protect our national data under concerns over national security and the terrorist threat in our modern times.

Linux Career, Computer, Enforcement, Linux, Police, Systems

People have always debated on which gaming consoles are able to offer the better quality and performance: computers or consoles like Xbox 360, Nintendo Wii and the others. Today, a lot of gamers say that console systems fare a lot better because of the plug and play concept and the overall ease of use. Now, if you are contemplating on which one to buy and use, here are a couple of the advantages and disadvantages of computer and console gaming systems.

The first aspect would be in the game installation. A good thing about the Xbox, Nintendo and Sony console systems is that it can just be simply plugged and then played on. You need not worry about waiting for a long time just to install a small 5-gigabyte video game on your hard drive with possible compatibility issues. This would be where console systems would have the edge over computer gaming systems.

Next would be the quality of the effects and graphics. A lot of people say that the graphics of computer games are still far better than those of console systems like PlayStation and Xbox. This is because the graphics cards of computers such as ATI and GeForce have large video RAMs that allow games to have much sharper images that run a lot faster.

The third one would be the overall performance of the video games. You probably already know that the game’s performance is directly affected by your computer’s quality. When we talk about the quality of the computer, this would mean the amount of RAM, the size of the hard drive, CPU, the video card and the drivers. Obviously, the better your computer’s specifications are, the better your game would be. However, computer games are more prone to viruses as well as missing and corrupted files and slow speed because of a cluttered hard drive. This would be where console systems are better as they rarely have performance issues.

As for the game availability, computer systems seem to have the edge, as not all PC games are available in other console systems.

Computer Games Computer, Console, Gaming, Systems

Every system that exists on this planet needs a requirement. No matter how many or how big the requirement is, it is essential to comply with the requirements to full realize its potential or to just simply make it work. In science, a system may require any factor affecting it. For example, for a plant to complete its photosynthesis, it must collect carbon dioxide from its surrounding.

This idea is also true in computer gaming. In video games, the peripherals or the devices that you are going to use must meet the requirements set by the game. These requirements are primarily on the capacity of your device; say a console, to perform tasks and to read the game set for by the programmer.

Compatibility also has something to do with computer requirements. The idea behind this is the simple fact that a game can be played with compatible device which can play perfectly the said software. For instance, the video resolution of a program may differ according to the monitor that a gamer may use. With requirements, the user may know which monitor can possibly display good video.

Why set a minimum requirement for a certain console in line with the game? All game programs are innovated in the highest technology environments. When they are incompatible with the hardware devices, chances are that the operation of such game may be greatly affected. These minimum requirements are neither for the game producer nor for the console maker. These are actually for the consumer, in the case of computer video game, for the gamer to have the best possible output from a combination of right game the right system requirement.

Requirements are actually computer specifications that each device must possess. Basically, each game may require certain specifications to the device they must be played with. The game may require the following from the computer:

- Processor Speed – the speed for the processor is one of the crucial system requirements a certain game may ask your computer to possess. This said speed will determine how fast your computer will act or execute a decision. Since, games are all executable programs, speed of the processor is very important. Processor speed has a unit of megahertz (MHz) and gigahertz (GHz). The unit megahertz are smaller unit than gigahertz. More precisely, a gigahertz is equal to a thousand megahertz. High-speed processors can run any game equal to its speed and lower but slower processors may not run games with higher speed requirements.

- Random Access Memory – this is commonly known as the internal memory or plainly memory of the computer. This memory helps store some data immediately needed by the processor. Most of the computer machines available in the market has preset RAM equivalent to 64MB. Most games may require RAM equal to this. However, there are game programs that require higher RAM like 126MB. This is not something to worry about because RAM can be upgraded with higher memory capacity.

- VRAM – this stands for Video Read Access Memory. The ability of your computer to display good resolution games depends on the VRAM. This memory works with the video card. Video cards are like processors however it is only focused on feeding the monitor with visual commands. The VRAM is a temporary memory that saves all graphical information that will be later on fed to the video card and the processor.

- Disc Capacity – refers to the capacity of the hard drive to store files and information. Disc space is also measured and uses the unit megabytes (MB) just like the VRAM and the RAM. The higher the disc space, the more games that you can store and play in your computer. Like the RAM, disc memory capacity may also be upgraded. One can even have higher memory that can be measured in gigabyte (GB).

- CD-ROM drive speed – not all the games that are installed in your pc may no longer require a disc. Most game companies upgrade computer game programs using discs. This are later added in the game specs by means of reinstalling it in the computer. The faster the CD-ROM is the faster the installation will be. Every now and then, you will use the CD-ROM not just in playing games but also in ensuring copyright protection and the like. Just like other requirements, the CD-ROM speed can perform its duty well to game programs that has equal speed requirement or slower.

Computer Games Computer, Game, Requirements, Running, Systems

As with any other year, in 2008 network and systems administrators will have to face challenges which will tax their ability to adequately protect corporate networks. Experience shows that maintaining and improving on security is never easy; hackers, malware creators, spammers, malicious insiders and other, mostly unpredictable, elements all add up to the factors which tend to give these network security professionals many a sleepless night.

Various 2008 threat predictions have already hit headlines. Some mention VOIP and virtualization , others mention malware evolution and Facebook widgets that will be used to distribute malware; However, facts and figures indicate that the challenges faced in 2008 will not stem from technology itself; for in its nature technology is a neutral element that can either be used in a good or in a bad way. The biggest threat for 2008 is the same threat to businesses that has been around for the last 200,000 years – the Human Being himself!. Human beings, their weaknesses, fallacies and inquisition can all be exploited to wreck havoc within organizations.

Human Overconfidence

History shows that we tend to rely too much on the claims which operating system vendors and business software vendors make. New systems sell themselves as being more secure and more fail-safe than their predecessors. While this is undoubtedly true, one must remember that at every release of each operating system and business software throughout the years vendors have all made the same claim, over and over again, year after year. This has never. However. deterred hackers and other malicious individuals from researching and executing attacks against newer systems.

A case in point is Microsoft Windows Vista, which by end 2007, will hit the 10% market share, with a projected 30% adoption rate expected by end 2008. Microsoft Windows Vista does not only equate to a new operating system, it also equates to a new user expierience. While this system is much more secure than its predecessors, its users are still the same as before, and therefore they are the path of least resistance to the average network environment exploit. Through social engineering, security features such as the new user access control can be easily circumvented, duping users in installing software which is insecure or tainted with malware.

Humans’ misplaced trust

Trust should be earned and not automatically afforded. Dangers to business do not only lie outside of the business perimeters; recent history shows that insider attacks to businesses cost as much, if not more, than attacks originating from the outside. Insiders have their own advantages for they have an intimate knowledge of your network and its inner workings. In 2008, an ever increasing proliferation of portable storage and communication devices (iPods, USB drives, USB WiFi cars, etc) will highly facilitate data theft, logic bombs and other forms of sabotage that can throw your business back to the Stone Age. Yet again, while it might be easy to put the blame on such devices it’s not these devices that are at fault; once again, technology is a neutral entity. The main fault here is the use made of such devices – banning them will simply not work because you simply cannot rely on voluntary compliance, supervision is too laborious, the devices can be easily concealed and you’ll just create dissent.

Human lack of knowledge

When it comes to network security, ignorance in neither bliss nor excuse. In 2008, a lack of basic security principles and a lack of knowledge in the trends that malware, spyware, spam and other malware are taking will greatly contribute to the downfall of network security. This most often is due to lack of time or resources to research security principles and trends; an issue that translates into a firefighting approach to network security: reacting to incidents after being hit.

This is, once again, a human issue. Malware does not evolve on its own, in a vacuum. The reason why malware evolves is greed – Hackers and other malicious individuals today create targeted attacks not to create havoc but for financial gain. Targeted exploits that attempt to address the inquisitive human nature to make them click on a tainted link will become more and more commonplace. This makes them much more dangerous than ever before, making the issue of lack of knowledge even more critical. Limiting human inquisitiveness through a blanket ban on access to resources will also backfire since it will create both dissent and boredom, all of which hamper productivity.

Human gullibility

Being gullible does not only make you the butt of jokes but also exposes you to myriad network security threats. In 2008, targeted email spam will continue in its evolution with newer and novel attempts to breach network defenses using social engineering. These will extend beyond email and attempt to, for example, compromise VOIP infrastructures through denial of service attacks, SIP vulnerabilities and Spit (Spam Over Internet Technology) attacks. In 2008, an increase in the number of attacks targeted at specific individuals or businesses is also expected, and it is highly plausible that the perpetrators of such attacks will use social engineering to gain access to confidential information that enables them to gain access to your systems.

As with malware, social engineering attempts at exploiting human gullibility evolve for financial gain. No one will be calling anyone up asking for passwords; more subtle methods such as targeted attacks on social networking sites (myspace, facebook, etc) where users are duped in exchanging personal information for virtual goods empower hackers and other malicious individuals to gain unauthorized access to networks.

Conclusion

In 2008, network and security administrators will have to wear more hats than ever before and employ all sorts of defenses against attacks directed at the human nature – overconfidence, trust, lack of knowledge and gullibility will all be decisive factors in how successful network security will be. More than ever before it will be a question of managing the risks that humans pose to businesses; for even if the risks humans pose are the same risks as before, the motivation behind attacks in 2008 is changing and becoming much more dangerous. The best way to defend infrastructures from potential threats is for administrators to implement methods to:

• Monitor the user’s activity 24 x 7 x 365

• Control access to network resources

• Safeguard all the business information

• Backup all communications to, from and within the business

• Enact technological barriers that permit device use according to a clear and defined policy.

• Train network resource users in both network security and information disclosure policies.

In 2008, systems administrators will have to find the fine balance that suits and encourages the human inquisitive nature – without becoming the dreaded medieval Inquisitors!

Computer Security 2008, Administrators, Concerns, Major, Network, Systems

Contents:

 •1       Introduction

•1.1  Abstract

•1.2  Background

  

  

•2       The Tactical Approach

•2.1  Vulnerabilities

•2.2  Methodology and Competition

    

•3       Information Discovery

•3.1  Personnel Discovery

•3.1.1        Search Engines

•3.1.2        Paterva’s Evolution

  

•3.2  Network Discovery

•3.2.1        Discovery Services

•3.2.2        Bounce Messages

•3.2.3        Virtual Hosting

•3.2.4        Outbound DNS

•3.2.5        Direct Contact

  

•3.3  Firewalls and IPS

•3.3.1        Firewall Identification

•3.3.2         IPS Identification

  

•3.4  Application Discovery

  

•3.4.1        Slow and Steady wins the Deface

•3.4.2        Finding Web Apps with W3AF

•3.4.3        Metasploit 3 Discovery Modules

 

•3.5  Client Application Discovery

  

•3.5.1        Browser Finger Printing

•3.5.2        Mail Client Finger Printing

  

•3.6  Process Discovery

  

•3.6.1        Trace Monitoring with IP  IDs

•3.6.2        Usages Monitoring with MS FTP

•3.6.3        Web Site Monitoring with HTTP

  

•4       Information Exploitation

  

•4.1  Introduction

  

•4.2  External Networks

  

•4.2.1        Attacking File Transfers

•4.2.2        Attacking Mail Services

•4.2.3        Attacking Web Servers

•4.2.4        Attacking DNS Servers

•4.2.5        Attacking Database Servers

•4.2.6        Authentication Relays

•4.2.7        Free Hardware

  

  

•4.3  Internal Networks

  

•4.3.1        Net BIOS Names

•4.3.2        DNS Servers

•4.3.3        WINS Servers

•4.3.4        Authentication Relays

  

•4.4  Trust Relationship

  

•4.4.1        NFS Home Directories

•4.4.2        Hijacking SSH

•4.4.3        Hijacking Kerberos

  

  

•5       Bibliography

  

  —————————————————————————————————————————-

  Introduction

 

•1.1            Abstract

Penetration testing often focuses on individual vulnerabilities and

 services. This paper introduces a tactical approach that does not

rely on exploiting known vulnerabilities. Using combination of

new to OLS and obscure techniques, we will walk through the

process of compromising an organization without the use of

Normal exploits code. Many of the to OLS will be made available

as new modules for the Meta spoilt Framework.

 

•1.2            Background

 I have been involved in security auditing and penetration testing for the one years. A common trend among security  is the use of the shelf software to automate the penetration test process. Tools like Nessus, Retina, and Core Impact have replaced manual audits and checklists at Many Organizations. While these to also do a great job of reducing the time and knowledge requirements of the penetration tester, their use can lead to a certain laziness among the security . Many valuable compromise vectors can be missed because they are not part of the banned pro duct. This paper is intended to shine some light on the more obscure and less-used techniques that the authors have depended on many years.

The exploit techniques listed in this paper depend solely on the configuration of  the target and the features of the target platform. No body will be dropped in in the normal sense, but many tips , tricks and interesting attacks will be cover .

  The Tactical Approach

 2.1 Vulnerabilities

 Vulnerabilities are transient. What is found one day may be patched on the next Security software and operating system improvements can make even simple vulnerabilities unusable for a penetration test Instead of treating a network like a list of vulnerabilities, an auditor should consider the applications,

The people, the processes, and the trusts. The key to gaining access is to use what is available to bring you closer to the next goal. Using this approach, even a fully-patched network will provide exploitable targets. Hacking is not about exploits. As many professional auditors know, only one or two real exploits may be used during the a penetration test. The rest of the time

Are spent obtaining passwords, abusing trust relationships, tricking authentication systems, and hijacking services to gain access to more systems A successful attack has everything to do with gaining access and control of data.

 •2.2            Methodology and Competition

  Any security test is a race against time. An auditor faces

competition from real attackers, internal and external, that are not

bound by the same scope and restrictions as themselves. For

example, as a business practice, a security test must not interfere

with production services or modify critical data. Attackers

are opportunists. Whether a server is hosted locally or on a third-

party is not a concern. Their only concern is gaining access to the

data and controls they seek. Anything the auditor does not test, he

must assume someone else will. In this case I want use software

 Testing known as well as the research news in the websites,

magazines, Books which is I mentioned in bibliography.

 

Computer Security Exploitation, Network, Security, Systems, Tactical