Alarmed about Vista security? Black Hat researcher Alexander Sotirov speaks out

Summary: Earlier today I published a lengthy blog post questioning some of the sensationalist conclusions raised in press coverage of a paper presented by Alexander Sotirov and Mark Dowd at last week’s Black Hat Conference in Las Vegas. This afternoon, I received an e-mail from Sotirov, who says he was "horrified by the lack of understanding displayed by the tech press when they covered the paper." He agreed to a follow-up interview, in which we discussed Microsoft's reaction to their research, how Windows users should respond to this news, and how they conducted field research into whether girls really are impressed by browser memory protection bypasses.

Earlier today I published a lengthy blog post questioning some of the sensationalist conclusions raised in press coverage of a paper presented by Alexander Sotirov and Mark Dowd at last week’s Black Hat Conference in Las Vegas. (See Windows security rendered useless? Uh, not exactly...) As I noted in that post:

It’s a fascinating paper, rich in technical detail and hewing to the Black Hat tradition of providing clues that others can follow to discover, exploit, and ultimately fix vulnerabilities in widely used computer code. ...Unfortunately, most people who read about Sotirov and Dowd’s work didn’t bother to read the technical paper. Instead, they relied on quick summaries [that were] wildly inaccurate and hopelessly sensationalized.

This afternoon, I received the following e-mail from Alex Sotirov and am reprinting it with his permission:

Thanks for your blog post about our research. I was horrified by the lack of understanding displayed by the tech press when they covered the paper Mark and I presented at BlackHat. You rightly point out that the sky is not falling and the flaws are not unfixable. In fact, the next versions of Flash and Java will contain specific measures that limit the impact of the techniques we presented. We expect Microsoft to follow suit as well.

Exploitation is a cat and mouse game. The paper we presented puts the offensive side at a slight advantage, but it won't take long for the defenses to catch up. Our intention was always to nudge the software vendors into improving their defenses and I hope we will succeed.

I just got off the phone with Alex, who took time out of his busy schedule to answer a few follow-up questions:

What was the atmosphere like at Black Hat? How was your paper received by people in the audience?

Positive. A lot of people in the audience seemed to really like the paper. A lot of them came up and asked more questions afterward. Everybody who talked to me said it was pretty impressive.

Did you get any reaction from Microsoft?

Microsoft had contacted us before Black Hat. We had some conference calls and sent them an early draft a few weeks ago. In fact, they put us in touch with the people who designed the [memory protection] defenses [in Windows Vista] and sent us a few minor corrections. It was a very positive experience working with Microsoft. Our research is helping them learn where they need to focus their resources and where they need to improve. We did not take any of the vendors by surprise. Also through Microsoft, both Adobe and Sun were notified about the paper. We haven't spoken to them directly, but the Microsoft people have, I believe.

Is there any exploit code or proof of concept code available yet for the techniques you describe?

Well, we only gave the paper last week, so I doubt that anyone is using any of these techniques right now. What we presented is weaknesses in the protection mechanism. It still requires the attacker to have a vulnerability. Without the presence of a vulnerability these techniques don’t really [accomplish] anything. We used the ANI cursor vulnerability that had been patched. We chose this example because it worked on XP and Vista, but the example we used would not work [in the real world] because this issue was patched already.

Do you have any advice for Windows users today? Should they be alarmed?

As long as they follow standard security practices -- use antivirus products and other typical things that are good standard policy -- they shouldn't have anything to worry about. Our research is to some extent academic. The articles that describe Vista security as “broken” or “done for,” with “unfixable vulnerabilities” are completely inaccurate. One of the suggestions I saw in many of the discussions was that people should just use Windows XP. In fact, in XP a lot of those protections we're bypassing don't even exist. XP is even less secure than Vista in this respect. [What we established is that the security advantage of Vista over XP is not as great as [previously] thought. Vista is still very good at preventing vulnerabilities.

Your research focuses on weaknesses in browsers. Does the movement to doing more in the browser mean the danger is increasing?

Browsers are used more widely than they were five years ago. A lot more businesses rely on browsers now to do [everyday work]. Businesses could have blocked access to the web five years ago, but with widespread use of the web as an interface, the importance of the browser has increased. It’s a lot harder to tell people they cannot use a browser. The possibility of a vulnerability in the browser affects their security.

One last question. Your paper was entitled "How to Impress Girls with Browser Memory Protection Bypasses." In a blog post, your partner Mark Dowd said you were going to be conducting "ongoing research" on this subject in Las Vegas. Did you really flood your hot tub at Caesars Palace?

Uh… [pause] Yeah.

Thanks for your time.

You're welcome.

Topics: Microsoft, Browser, Operating Systems, Security, Software, Windows

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

125 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Nicely done

    I appreciate that you took the time to speak with the researcher who actually discovered the flaws.

    There are a couple of bloggers on ZDNET who always seem slant their "blogs" with grandiose claims against one platform or technology.

    I think when a person is reporting about something like a conference or technical seminar, the "report" isn't really a "blog" and instead becomes "journalism".

    Either just report a summary of what happened, or what the content was, but don't pass off opinions as "the content".

    As such, I think ZDNET should encourage their contributors who cover these type of cenferences to hold themselves to a better standard than simply spouting off brainless opinions to run up their hit-count.

    If Adrian had any sense of professional responsibility he should be feeling chastised by Sotirov's rebuttal, but somehow I doubt it...
    croberts
  • Thanks Ed...

    ...For being a voice of reason in a "Sea of Car Crazies", and for taking the extra time and effort to actually research and disseminate what is being reported (or mis-reported/sensationalized as the case may be).

    Yes, Microsoft O/S' have had more than their fair share of security vulnerabilities. But ALL computer systems are vulnerable and there is only one sure fire way to keep any computer system safe... Turn it off.
    OutsideThe Box
  • Again, Bravo Ed

    Good Job.
    silent.griffin
  • Thanks to all!

    Thank [i]you[/i] Ed, for a great follow up with the researchers who actually did the piece, and for the [i]researcher himself[/i] for actually taking the time out for you (and us) to basicly explain the context of the piece in straight forward terms we can all understand.

    (I'll go tell my wife she can turn her Vista system on again... ;) )
    AllKnowingAllSeeing
  • Rebuttal forthcoming from Adrian Kingsley-Hughes?

    We'll all be patient for the rebuttal from Mr. Adrian Kingsley-Hughes!
    cnfrisch
    • Adrian, we're ready when you are.. (NT)

      .
      silent.griffin
      • I hope Adrian likes the taste of humble pie....

        I get the feeling he is going to be eating a heck of a lot of it over this one!
        Scrat
      • Yes Adrian...

        and please use SPELL CHECK this time!
        Ha!
        rjohn05
  • Wow!

    What a difference a day makes! The ZDTrolls were out in force just yesterday, what with them posting all over the forums about MS' demise.

    And now? Not a troll in sight! I wonder why? Is it because now they are exposed for the FUD slingers they really are? Hey, if it is FUD about MS, then it is ok to spread misinformation, right?

    And where is Adrian Kingsly? Let me guess... He is too spineless to admit that he was wrong. Somehow I expected as much from him. Sad, really...
    Qbt
  • Thanks Ed, great blog

    Even after this, want to bet that the Gutman effect still applies? In other words, what do you think the odds are that we'll be seeing links to the original paper offered as "proof" that Windows is hopelessly broken?

    Keep up the good work Ed! :)
    NonZealot
    • You can't avoid the Gutman effect

      There simply are too many out there not ineterested in discussing facts and being resonable. They have an agenda they keep following and don't let facts get in their way.

      On the other hand, posts like Ed's here are a good way to tell who belongs to the agenda group..
      cgdams
  • Earth to Ed ..... being a nice "black hat" won't change the fact ...

    ... that Vista is and has being insecure for over 1.5 year now. The fact that the authors are professional enough not to try to take advantage of their findings to make money or to get 15 mins of fame still doesn't change the facts of their findings.

    Sure, MS will eventually fix the problem ... but only because this researchers made the facts know to the general public. Who knows how long have

    The fact is Vista's security has always being a joke. All the warnings one learns tolerates (btw: contrary to popular believe, they aren't that annoying), can be easily bypass by creating a simple .NET dll.

    I know you are a MS lover. But come on!! You are just trying to spin the story to hide the facts.
    wackoae
    • Sure, whe get it...

      "My opinion is clear, don't confuse me with facts".
      cgdams
    • Reality is missing you.

      You never phone, you never write...
      Sleeper Service
      • Beverage abuse alert!

        LOL!
        wolf_z
      • You never ....

        ... gave me your phone or address.

        And besides, I would never call or write you. Don't want to give you a false hope.

        .... ugly is not my type.
        wackoae
        • Nor men mine.

          {NT}
          Sleeper Service
    • There is a reason you have "wacko" in your name...

      Put the crackpipe down and inhale some life for a change...
      Scrat
      • What about using some neurons ....

        ... and at least try to debunk what I just said.

        When you are loosing an argument, try some dumb azz random insult .... sure that always works.
        wackoae
        • wacko what is their to debunk. prove what you said then

          wacko what is their to debunk. prove what you said then we can debunk what you posted.
          where is your proof that vista is and has being insecure for over 1.5 year now. hm sounds like you are the one who needs to post some facts to back up your wild claims.

          are we to just take your word for it. you said "The fact that the authors are professional enough not to try to take advantage of their findings to make money or to get 15 mins of fame still doesn't change the facts of their findings" you putting words in the mouth of the researchers is not proof. it just shows you do not know what you are talking about. it looks like just an attempt on your part to make a wild claim that you can not back up. so again where is your proof.
          SO.CAL Guy