[HN Gopher] Thanksgiving 2023 security incident
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Thanksgiving 2023 security incident
        
       Author : nomaxx117
       Score  : 268 points
       Date   : 2024-02-01 19:59 UTC (3 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (blog.cloudflare.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (blog.cloudflare.com)
        
       | jshier wrote:
       | Fascinating and thorough analysis! I guess if you think an
       | account is unused, just delete it!
        
         | phyzome wrote:
         | Probably safer to rotate the credentials and then schedule it
         | for deletion later. Then if you discover it _wasn 't_ unused
         | after all, you have an easier recovery... :-)
        
       | sebmellen wrote:
       | The most surprising part of this is that Cloudflare uses
       | BitBucket.
        
         | Cthulhu_ wrote:
         | How so? It integrates well with the other Atlassian products
         | they use.
        
         | infecto wrote:
         | Maybe but maybe not. I don't like Bitbucket but there are a
         | number of large companies where they worry about using services
         | owned by competitors in one of their verticals.
        
           | kccqzy wrote:
           | Bitbucket doesn't have to be a service. It can be an old-
           | fashioned downloaded software that you install on your own
           | machines. Not everything is SaaS.
        
             | infecto wrote:
             | Not sure what you mean? If you are alluding to the OP that
             | said it was surprising...I don't think he found it
             | suprising they they use Bitbucket over Mercurial. I think
             | its safe to assume he meant bitbucket over a Github.
             | 
             | In the git universe there is a pretty short list of
             | services, locally or hosted that you would probably use as
             | an entity as large as cloud flare.
        
         | toyg wrote:
         | Integrates with Jira and the rest of Atlassian's stuff, and
         | it's just another git server at the end of the day.
        
       | sevg wrote:
       | > Even though we believed, and later confirmed, the attacker had
       | limited access, we undertook a comprehensive effort to rotate
       | every production credential (more than 5,000 individual
       | credentials), physically segment test and staging systems,
       | performed forensic triages on 4,893 systems, reimaged and
       | rebooted every machine in our global network including all the
       | systems the threat actor accessed and all Atlassian products
       | (Jira, Confluence, and Bitbucket).
       | 
       | > The threat actor also attempted to access a console server in
       | our new, and not yet in production, data center in Sao Paulo. All
       | attempts to gain access were unsuccessful. To ensure these
       | systems are 100% secure, equipment in the Brazil data center was
       | returned to the manufacturers. The manufacturers' forensic teams
       | examined all of our systems to ensure that no access or
       | persistence was gained. Nothing was found, but we replaced the
       | hardware anyway.
       | 
       | They didn't have to go this far. It would have been really easy
       | not to. But they did and I think that's worthy of kudos.
        
         | readyplayernull wrote:
         | > The manufacturers' forensic teams examined all of our systems
         | to ensure that no access or persistence was gained. Nothing was
         | found, but we replaced the hardware anyway.
         | 
         | Aha, the old replace-your-trusted-hardware trick.
        
           | zitterbewegung wrote:
           | Manufacturers have had security vulnerabilities for hardware
           | to the point that the firmware on device couldn't be trusted
           | to be replaced so they said to get new hardware so it's not a
           | bad strategy.
        
           | AzzyHN wrote:
           | In a corporate environment, standard procedure when an
           | employee's computer gets infected is to re-image it. Even if
           | it was a stupid virus that was immediately caught, the
           | potential risk of undetected malware running amuck is just
           | too high.
           | 
           | Now imagine, instead of Steve from HR's laptop, it's one of
           | Cloudflare's servers.
        
         | syncsynchalt wrote:
         | Honestly I wish we'd had an excuse/reason to do an org-wide
         | prod creds refresh like this at some places I've been.
         | 
         | You find some scary things when you go looking for how exactly
         | some written-by-greybeard script is authenticating against your
         | started-in-1990s datastore.
        
         | barkingcat wrote:
         | I think they did have to do that far though.
         | 
         | Getting in at the "ground floor" of a new datacentre build is
         | pretty much the ultimate exploit. Imagine getting in at the
         | centre of a new Meet-Me room
         | (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meet-me_room) and having
         | persistent access to key switches there.
         | 
         | Cloudflare datacentres tend to be at the hub of insane amounts
         | of data traffic. The fact that the attacker knew how valuable a
         | "pre-production" data centre is means that cloudflare probably
         | realized themselves that it would be a 100% game over if
         | someone managed to get a foot hold there before the regular
         | security systems are set up. It would be a company ending event
         | if someone managed to install themselves inside a data centre
         | while it was being built/brought up.
         | 
         | Also remember, at the beginning of data centre builds, all
         | switches/equipment have default / blank root passwords
         | (admin/admin), and all switch/equipment firmware are old and
         | full of exploits (you either go into each one and update the
         | firmware one by one or hook them up to automation for fleet
         | wide patching) Imagine that this exploit is taking place before
         | automation services had a chance to patch all the firmware ...
         | that's a "return all devices to make sure the manufacturer
         | ships us something new" event.
        
           | vasco wrote:
           | What I think they meant is customers would keep paying them.
           | And they are right, one just has to look at Okta, Solarwinds
           | and other providers that have been owned, not done half of
           | this and somehow are still in business. Everyone whistles to
           | the side and pretends they shouldn't switch vendors, rotate
           | all creds, cycle hardware, because it saves lots of work and
           | this stuff falls under "reasonable oopsie" to the general
           | public, when in fact there should be rules about what to do
           | in the event of a breach that should be much stricter. So
           | they do some partial actions to "show work" in case of
           | lawsuits and keep going. The old engineers leave, new ones
           | come in, and now you have systems who are potentially owned
           | for years to come.
           | 
           | It takes some honesty and good values by someone in the
           | decision-making to go ahead with such a comprehensive plan.
           | This is sad because it should be tablestakes, as you say
           | correctly, but having seen many other cases, I think although
           | they did "the expected", it's definitely above and beyond
           | what peers have done.
        
           | swyx wrote:
           | do manufacturers share some of the cost of this kind of
           | security related return or is this a straight up "pay twice
           | for the same thing" financial hit?
        
             | eastdakota wrote:
             | We have very good relations with our network vendors (in
             | this case, Cisco, Juniper, and Arista). The CEOs of all of
             | them 1) immediately got on a call with me late on a
             | weekend; 2) happily RMAed the boxes at no cost; and 3) lent
             | us their most senior forensics engineers to help with our
             | investigation. Hat tip to all of them for first class
             | customer service.
        
               | swyx wrote:
               | shows how much they value you as a partner and i'm sure
               | they appreciate your overall business.
               | 
               | thanks Matthew! love the transparency and dedication to
               | security as always. really sucks to have this be
               | continuing fallout from Okta's breach. wish large scale
               | key rotation was more easily automatable (or at least as
               | a fallback, there should be a way to track key age on
               | clientside? so that old keys stick out like a sore
               | thumb). i guess in the absence of industry standard key
               | rotation apis someday you might be able to "throw AI at
               | it".
        
           | tgsovlerkhgsel wrote:
           | > It would be a company ending event if someone managed to
           | install themselves inside a data centre while it was being
           | built/brought up.
           | 
           | It wouldn't. Most people like to assume the impact of
           | breaches to be what it _should_ be, not what it actually is.
           | 
           | Look at the 1-year stock chart of Okta and, without looking
           | up the actual date, tell me when the breach happened/was
           | disclosed.
        
             | mschuster91 wrote:
             | > Look at the 1-year stock chart of Okta and, without
             | looking up the actual date, tell me when the breach
             | happened/was disclosed.
             | 
             | The problem with this is that while _security minded_
             | people know what Okta is and why to stay the fuck away from
             | handing over your crown jewels to a SaaS company is
             | warranted, C-level execs _don 't care_. They only care
             | about their golf course or backroom deal friends and about
             | releasing PR statements full of buzzwords like "zero
             | trust", "AI based monitoring" and whatever.
             | 
             | The stock markets don't care either, they only look at the
             | financial data, and as long as there still are enough
             | gullible fools signing up, they don't care and stonk goes
             | up.
        
           | nolok wrote:
           | > It would be a company ending event
           | 
           | Given they got out of cloudbleed without any real damage let
           | alone lasting damage, I disagree.
           | 
           | (I don't disagree with your point about how bad of a problem
           | this would be, I'm just insisting that security failure is
           | not taken seriously at all by anyone)
        
             | Hrundi wrote:
             | I don't remember any companies that ended thanks to
             | cloudbleed, but I'd be happy to be proven wrong
        
             | chx wrote:
             | Presuming taviso is not exaggerating and why would he CF's
             | reply to cloudbleed was ... not quite nice.
             | 
             | https://twitter.com/taviso/status/1566077115992133634
             | 
             | > True story: After cloudbleed, cloudflare literally
             | lobbied the FTC to investigate me and question the legality
             | of openly discussing security research. How come they're
             | not lobbying their DC friends to investigate the legality
             | KF?
             | 
             | For those not familiar with the history , this tweet
             | started the cloudbleed disclosure to cloudflare:
             | 
             | https://twitter.com/taviso/status/832744397800214528
             | 
             | > Could someone from cloudflare security urgently contact
             | me.
             | 
             | This followed: https://blog.cloudflare.com/incident-report-
             | on-memory-leak-c...
        
           | sneak wrote:
           | > _Imagine getting in at the centre of a new Meet-Me room and
           | having persistent access to key switches there._
           | 
           | This wouldn't get you much. We already assume the network is
           | insecure. This is why TLS is a thing (and mTLS for those who
           | are serious).
        
             | noizejoy wrote:
             | > We already assume the network is insecure.
             | 
             | Maybe naively, I wish this assumption became universal.
        
             | sophacles wrote:
             | I suspect "we" is a much smaller group than you imagine.
             | I've gotten pcaps from customers as recently as this year
             | that include unencrypted financial transaction data. These
             | were captured on a router, not an end host, so the traffic
             | was going across the client's network raw.
        
         | tptacek wrote:
         | This is why old secops/corpsec security hands are so religious
         | about tabletop exercises, and what's so great about
         | BadThingsDaily+ on Twitter. Being prepared to do this kind of
         | credential rotation takes discipline and preparation and, to be
         | frank, most teams don't make that investment, including a lot
         | of really smart, well-resourced ones.
         | 
         | If Cloudflare is in a position where their security team can
         | make a call to rotate every secret and reimage every machine,
         | and then that happens in some reasonable amount of time, that's
         | pretty impressive.
         | 
         | + https://twitter.com/badthingsdaily?lang=en
        
           | akira2501 wrote:
           | It'd be more impressive if they actually got all the
           | credentials.
           | 
           | It's good that you think you can absorb a complicated
           | security task, it's useless if you have no way to test or
           | verify this action.
        
             | swyx wrote:
             | yes but this is a nice #2. not many fortune 500s would 1)
             | even know they were breached and 2) if they were breached,
             | have the breach be so contained.
        
         | schainks wrote:
         | Having seen the small number of DEFCON talks that I've seen, I
         | would have absolutely gone that far.
        
         | orenlindsey wrote:
         | Cloudflare is showing how to correctly respond to attacks.
         | Other companies should take note.
        
         | ldoughty wrote:
         | The nuclear response to compromise should be the standard
         | business practice. It should be exceptional to deviate from it.
         | 
         | If you assume that they only accessed what you can prove they
         | accessed, you've left a hole for them to live in. It should
         | require a quorum of people to say you DON'T need to do this.
         | 
         | Of course, this is ideal world. I'm glad my group is afforded
         | the time to implement features with no direct monetary or user
         | benefit.
        
       | marcinzm wrote:
       | > we were (for the second time) the victim of a compromise of
       | Okta's systems
       | 
       | I'm curious if they're rethinking being on Okta.
        
         | Icathian wrote:
         | The challenge being, who else could possibly handle
         | Cloudflare's requirements? I imagine the next step is to build
         | their own, and that's obviously not an easy pill to swallow.
        
           | amluto wrote:
           | Why not? Cloudflare already operates a system that can help
           | customers to require SSO for access to their services -- why
           | not try to capture more of that vertical by becoming an IdP?
        
           | whalesalad wrote:
           | They already run their own zero trust infrastructure for
           | customers, kinda surprised they are not dogfooding it.
           | https://www.cloudflare.com/plans/zero-trust-services/
        
             | mikey_p wrote:
             | Did you read the article?
             | 
             | They are using zero trust and explained that it's why the
             | scope of the security incident was extremely limited.
        
             | jgrahamc wrote:
             | We use our Zero Trust stuff extensively. In fact, we built
             | it for ourselves initially.
        
             | tomschlick wrote:
             | They are, but they don't have management for user accounts,
             | 2fa, etc. You setup a connection to something like Okta,
             | Google Apps, O365, SAML, etc to be your persistent user db
             | and cloudflare just enforces it.
             | 
             | I wouldn't be surprised if they are working on first party
             | IAM user support though.
        
             | margalabargala wrote:
             | There are good reasons not to dogfood critical services
             | like that; it can make recovering from unexpected issues
             | much harder if you introduce mutual dependencies.
             | 
             | For example, if Slack devops team were to exclusively
             | communicate over Slack, then a Slack outage would be much
             | harder to resolve because the team trying to fix it would
             | be unable to communicate.
        
         | BytesAndGears wrote:
         | My company will only give us new laptops that are preinstalled
         | with Okta's management system.
         | 
         | I am grandfathered in to an old MacBook that has absolutely no
         | management software on it, from the "Early Days" when there was
         | no IT and we just got brand new untouched laptops.
         | 
         | They offered me an upgrade to an M1/M2 pro, but I refused,
         | saying that I wasn't willing to use Okta's login system if I
         | have my own personal passwords or keys anywhere on my work
         | computer.
         | 
         | Since that would hugely disrupt my work, I can't upgrade. Maybe
         | I can use incidents like this to justify my beliefs to the IT
         | department...
        
           | verve_rat wrote:
           | Why do you need personal passwords on your laptop to do your
           | work? I'm not understanding this.
        
             | BytesAndGears wrote:
             | Fair question, but I use a lot of things that are varying
             | degrees of helpful for my work:
             | 
             | * personal ChatGPT and copilot subscriptions, since company
             | doesn't pay for these
             | 
             | * Trello account for keeping track of my todo list
             | (following up with people, running deploys)
             | 
             | * Obsidian for keeping notes, as a personal knowledge-base
             | (things like technologies and reminders)
             | 
             | * Apple account for music, copy/paste, sharing photos from
             | my travel with coworkers, synching docs related to my work
             | visa and taxes
             | 
             | * Personal slack login for communicating with my partner in
             | our private server
             | 
             | * personal GitHub account credentials for synching my
             | private dotfiles repo with my neovim config. basically
             | can't work without my dotfiles, but I could theoretically
             | email these to myself or something, to prevent this one.
             | 
             | And sure, I could be stubborn and not use any of this, but
             | I'd be way less productive and kinda miserable.
        
               | MichaelZuo wrote:
               | Why don't you just do those on a second, personal,
               | laptop?
               | 
               | Does your workplace restrict you from bringing it in?
        
               | BytesAndGears wrote:
               | Convenience, I suppose... and that doesn't solve all of
               | the issues (eg Copilot)
               | 
               | I'm fine with it because I know there's no management
               | software on this laptop, but yeah it's a totally
               | different story if I had to use a newer one with SSO and
               | management software
        
               | jen729w wrote:
               | I've been in the same situation. With two laptops you
               | lose the ability to, say, send email directly to your
               | task system.
               | 
               | It's really easy to say 'don't use your personal stuff at
               | work', but when work is some locked-down behemoth whose
               | view of productivity software is 'just use Office', and
               | you're really trying to be better at your job, using your
               | own tools can be the only solution.
               | 
               | And in my situation, yeah, they didn't want you bringing
               | things in. I worked in a secure area.
        
               | pests wrote:
               | Then you need to let the employer see your lack of
               | productivity when you are limited by the locked-down
               | system.
               | 
               | Finding solutions to work around the systems, on your own
               | time and dime, only hurts in the long run.
               | 
               | They think everything is fine. Nothing will ever get
               | fixed. Voice these concerns.
        
               | Xeyz0r wrote:
               | Why carry a second laptop when you can log in wherever
               | you need to on your work laptop? It's easier for me to
               | store all my passwords in a password manager and log in
               | to the websites I need from my work laptop.
        
               | hinkley wrote:
               | * Jetbrains
               | 
               | * Stack Overflow
               | 
               | * Job Search sites
               | 
               | I don't remember if Jetbrains needs a password to get to
               | personal licenses, but they definitely do to use their
               | bug database. I suspect they're not the only one.
               | 
               | Letting other people blow off steam can be an act of
               | self-preservation. Insisting that people only ever do
               | 100% work things at work or on work hardware slightly
               | raises your low-but-never-zero chances of being murdered
               | by coworkers. Or less ironically, hilariously intense
               | bridge-burning activities.
               | 
               | Also most of this conversation is happening during work
               | hours so I think we can infer that grandparent is being a
               | little hypocritical.
        
               | _boffin_ wrote:
               | Let me get this straight... you're taking privileged
               | company information and transferring it to personal...
               | 
               | I'm now understanding how people get sued when going from
               | company to company.
        
               | BytesAndGears wrote:
               | Certainly nothing privileged! Moreso just reminders about
               | "follow up with person x" and that kind of thing
        
               | _boffin_ wrote:
               | Let me ask you one follow up question: if you and the
               | company had a disagreement of sorts and they examined
               | your activity, would you believe they find nothing that
               | they'd deem privileged?
        
               | sneak wrote:
               | > _personal Trello account for keeping track of my todo
               | list._
               | 
               | > _personal Obsidian for keeping meeting notes, and
               | recording conversations as a personal knowledge-base_
               | 
               | I'm not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure these could subject
               | a _lot_ of your other personal data to potential subpoena
               | should your employer get sued by a sufficiently
               | determined attacker.
               | 
               | Don't cross the streams.
        
               | BytesAndGears wrote:
               | Ooh actually that's the most compelling reason I've
               | heard. I think I might actually separate some of those
               | accounts with this reasoning.
        
               | marksomnian wrote:
               | Also it's a violation of Obsidian's license:
               | 
               | > Obsidian is free for personal and non-profit use.
               | However, if you use Obsidian for work-related activities
               | that generate revenue in a company with two or more
               | people, you must purchase a commercial license for each
               | user. Non-profit organizations are exempt from this
               | requirement.
               | 
               | https://obsidian.md/license
        
               | kccqzy wrote:
               | You use so many personal accounts for work that it's
               | unfathomable for me. If some hacker manages to hack into
               | your account and find so much valuable information about
               | your work, your work is going to be mightily pissed about
               | it. Imagine you are working on an upcoming product launch
               | and the attacker used your personal account to leak the
               | launch. Or imagine they just decided to leak your
               | company's internal source code. Or imagine they simply
               | use the technical information in your personal attacks to
               | steal user data (even Cloudflare says they worry about
               | this: "Our aim was to prevent the attacker from using the
               | technical information about the operations of our network
               | as a way to get back in").
               | 
               | You are making your work take on an extraordinary risk in
               | hiring you.
        
             | deathanatos wrote:
             | The parent's view does seem a bit extreme, but there is
             | always some overlap. Whatever HR system you have is going
             | to be in a weird area of personal/employee overlap, as
             | it'll need to have a password that your personal life has
             | access to. (As tax documents, pay stubs, benefits stuff,
             | etc. all impact the "personal" side of one's life. E.g., I
             | need to store -- in my personal archives -- the years W-2.)
             | 
             | Also, people just do things for convenience. (Although I
             | tend to pipe these passwords over an SSH connection, so
             | that they're not resident on the work laptop. Though there
             | is a good argument to be had about me permitting my work
             | laptop SSH access to my personal laptop. From a technical
             | standpoint, my employer could hack/compromise my personal
             | laptop. From a legal and trust standpoint, I presume they
             | won't.)
        
               | sneak wrote:
               | It's not extreme at all, it's the bare minimum that
               | professionals do.
               | 
               | Absolutely _none_ of my personal stuff ever touches a
               | corporate machine. Ever. I wouldn 't even log in to the
               | W2 downloading app as an employee from the work machine.
               | 
               | Granting work ssh keys access to your personal machine is
               | crazy; if your work machine gets compromised, they steal
               | your entire personal system's home directory too. Why
               | would you unnecessarily expand the blast radius of a
               | compromise like this?
        
               | pbhjpbhj wrote:
               | >From a technical standpoint, my employer could
               | hack/compromise my personal laptop. From a legal and
               | trust standpoint, I presume they won't.)
               | 
               | You trust all personnel with access to your employers
               | network?
               | 
               | What's more surprising is that they trust you to setup
               | adhoc ssh connections to arbitrary endpoints; unless
               | you're the person in charge of network security?
               | 
               | Would anyone notice if you, or an intruder, dumped
               | terabytes of data over that connection?
               | 
               | I don't work in IT but this just doesn't feel right to
               | me.
        
           | yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
           | > if I have my own personal passwords or keys anywhere on my
           | work computer.
           | 
           | Well... don't do that? Why would you ever have personal
           | anything on a work computer?
        
             | Symbiote wrote:
             | A Github account, for one possible example.
        
               | pizzalife wrote:
               | Well, why? It just seems risky. Everything you make on
               | your work laptop / during work hours is typically owned
               | by your employer. If your employer is paying you to
               | contribute to OSS, don't use your personal github
               | account. Just don't ever mix personal and company
               | accounts on company hardware.
        
               | electroly wrote:
               | Note that if you do make a second account, at least one
               | of them must be a paid account. A single person cannot
               | have multiple free accounts and GitHub does not care if
               | it's because one is for work; it's in the TOS.
        
               | deathanatos wrote:
               | This is why I use a separate Github account for work?
               | 
               | (& then just rotate the credentials on it when you part
               | ways with the employer.)
               | 
               | Some of my co-workers even do a Github account per
               | employment.
        
               | _boffin_ wrote:
               | That's me--a GitHub account per employer with employee
               | email.
        
               | _boffin_ wrote:
               | Doesn't matter. No personal stuff on company devices.
               | 
               | I just don't understand any rational otherwise.
        
               | babypuncher wrote:
               | So you just don't listen to music at work?
        
               | _boffin_ wrote:
               | Do you have a phone and headphones?
        
               | yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
               | Okay, I'll bite; what about a github account? You don't
               | generally own code you write for an employer, so why
               | would you be an personal repos from a company machine?
               | (Likewise, there's generally no good reason for the
               | company to have access to personal repos, so those
               | security domains should never overlap)
        
           | samcat116 wrote:
           | > new laptops that are preinstalled with Okta's management
           | system
           | 
           | Okta doesn't make device management software, thats made by
           | companies like Jamf. Okta can integrate with them but Okta
           | isn't what manages your laptop at all.
           | 
           | > I wasn't willing to use Okta's login system if I have my
           | own personal passwords or keys anywhere on my work computer.
           | 
           | Do not do this, its not a personal device.
        
             | michaelt wrote:
             | _> Do not do this, its not a personal device. _
             | 
             | You think nobody's logged into their personal spotify on
             | their work computer? All those guys wearing headphones in
             | the office have brought in CDs to play in their laptop CD
             | drives?
             | 
             | And that business traveller away from their partner and
             | kids for a week+ isn't going to video call them? Or watch
             | some netflix in their hotel room in the evening?
             | 
             | That's so unrealistic, you could write IT security policy
             | for a Fortune 100 company :)
        
       | jrockway wrote:
       | Which "nation state" do we think this was?
        
         | meowface wrote:
         | For these kinds of attacks it's nearly always China, Russia,
         | US, or sometimes Iran. 95% chance it's either China or Russia,
         | here.
        
           | 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
           | When has it been the US?
        
             | AzzyHN wrote:
             | We do a lot of hacking
        
             | toyg wrote:
             | Stuxnet?
        
           | toyg wrote:
           | Their response program being called "Code Red" is likely a
           | hint.
        
         | godzillabrennus wrote:
         | China.
        
         | jedahan wrote:
         | The writeup contains indicators, including IP addresses, and
         | the location of those addresses. In this case, the IP address
         | associated with the threat actor is currently located in
         | Bucharest, Romania.
        
           | tomschlick wrote:
           | No nation state is going to use IPs from their own country if
           | they don't want to be caught. They will use multiple layers
           | of rented VPS's with fake identities to pay for those
           | resources.
        
             | jrockway wrote:
             | Yeah. I've dealt with definitely-not-nation-states before,
             | and their pattern was to sign up for free/cheap CI services
             | (CircleCI, Github Actions, that sort of thing) and launch
             | their attacks from there. The VPS thing also sounds very
             | very plausible to me, I figured there was a long tail, but
             | until I was looking up every network that was attacking us,
             | I really had no idea how deep the long tail goes. I now
             | feel like half the world's side hustle is to rent a server
             | that they never update and host a couple of small business
             | websites there.
        
               | bredren wrote:
               | > I now feel like half the world's side hustle is to rent
               | a server that they never update and host a couple of
               | small business websites there.
               | 
               | Do you mean people are offering build / host services for
               | small biz, and leaving their servers in such a state they
               | can be owned and used as jump points for intrusion?
               | 
               | Reason I ask is long-hosted small business websites are
               | sometimes established with the intent to legitimize some
               | future unrelated traffic.
        
           | CubsFan1060 wrote:
           | M247 is commonly used by VPN providers (https://www.reddit.co
           | m/r/PrivateInternetAccess/comments/8xwn...)
        
         | lijok wrote:
         | Which nation state has good enough employment protection laws
         | that they can take weekends off while doing recon on a top
         | value target?
        
           | icepat wrote:
           | Yes, they must have been a member of the Norwegian Foreningen
           | Svartehattehackere. They are a very strong union.
        
           | toyg wrote:
           | Might be a coincidence. A certain nation-state is currently
           | engaged in all-out war; the intruder might have been summoned
           | to another, more urgent task.
        
       | belltaco wrote:
       | Great write up.
       | 
       | > Over the next day, the threat actor viewed 120 code
       | repositories (out of a total of 11,904 repositories
       | 
       | > They accessed 36 Jira tickets (out of a total of 2,059,357
       | tickets) and 202 wiki pages (out of a total of 14,099 pages).
       | 
       | Is it just me or 12K git repos and 2 million JIRA tickets sound
       | like a crazy lot. 15K wiki pages is not that high though.
       | 
       | > Since the Smartsheet service account had administrative access
       | to Atlassian Jira, the threat actor was able to install the
       | Sliver Adversary Emulation Framework, which is a widely used tool
       | and framework that red teams and attackers use to enable "C2"
       | (command and control), connectivity gaining persistent and
       | stealthy access to a computer on which it is installed. Sliver
       | was installed using the ScriptRunner for Jira plugin.
       | 
       | > This allowed them continuous access to the Atlassian server,
       | and they used this to attempt lateral movement. With this access
       | the Threat Actor attempted to gain access to a non-production
       | console server in our Sao Paulo, Brazil data center due to a non-
       | enforced ACL.
       | 
       | Ouch. Full access to a server OS is always scary.
        
         | Aeolun wrote:
         | > Is it just me or 12K git repos and 2 million JIRA tickets
         | sound like a crazy lot. 15K wiki pages is not that high though.
         | 
         | I think my org has on the order of 3 repositories per dev? They
         | seem to have 3200 employees, with what I assume to be a
         | slightly higher rate of devs, so you'd expect around 6-7
         | thousand?
         | 
         | 2M Jira tickets is probably easily achieved if you create
         | tickets using any automated process.
        
           | trollied wrote:
           | They might create a JIRA ticket for each customer support
           | interaction. Would make sense.
        
         | ummonk wrote:
         | The number of repositories sounds really high. The number of
         | tickets doesn't.
        
         | spenczar5 wrote:
         | 12k git repos can happen if the team uses github enterprise
         | with forking internally.
         | 
         | It can also happen in franken-build systems which encourage
         | decoupling by making separate repos: one repo that defines a
         | service's API, containing just proto (for example). A second
         | repo that contains generated client code, a third with
         | generated server code, a fourth for implementation, a fifth
         | which supplies integration test harnesses, etc...
         | 
         | Sound insane? It is! But its also how an awful lot of stuff
         | worked at AWS, just as an example.
        
           | sesm wrote:
           | I can relate to this, it seems that code hosting providers
           | push their users into having more repos with their CI
           | limitations. I've noticed that with GitHub Actions, I assume
           | Atlassian does the same.
        
         | OJFord wrote:
         | They probably have thousands of devrel/app engineer type
         | example/demo/test repos alone - it doesn't say they're
         | _active_.
         | 
         | 2M tickets - in my 4.5y at present company we've probably
         | averaged about 10 engineers and totalled 4.5k tickets.
         | Cloudflare has been around longer, has many more engineers,
         | might use it for HR, IT, etc. too, might have processes like
         | every ticket on close opens a new one for the reporter to test,
         | etc. It sounds the right sort of order of magnitude to me.
        
         | pkkim wrote:
         | At least 25% of that is a single Jira project consisting of
         | formulaic tickets to capture routine changes in production, and
         | a large portion of that is created by automated systems. There
         | may be other such projects too.
         | 
         | Source: former Cloudflare employee
        
       | Aeolun wrote:
       | Reading this 2 months after the fact feels a bit late, but I
       | guess it's better for your stock price if these revelations
       | happen with remediation already in hand?
       | 
       | Since they didn't really have reason to believe my data was
       | accessed, maybe that's ok. I know from firsthand experience how
       | hard rotating all your credentials across the whole org is.
        
         | Cthulhu_ wrote:
         | The final security report was only released yesterday, and the
         | amount of work they did to make sure all of their systems were
         | secure after the incident was A Lot; two months is pretty quick
         | for a project of that scale IMO.
        
           | Aeolun wrote:
           | Yes, but if after two months they'd found out that customer
           | data _had_ been compromised, that would be a little late for
           | me to do anything about it.
        
             | nemothekid wrote:
             | What do you expect them to do? It sounds like you are
             | complaining that they weren't able to instantly ascertain
             | if customer data had been compromised.
        
             | eastdakota wrote:
             | Had customer data been impacted we would have disclosed it
             | immediately.
        
               | htrp wrote:
               | ^ eastdakota is part of the cloudflare mgmt team (CEO)
        
       | BytesAndGears wrote:
       | Writeups and actions like this from cloudflare are exactly why I
       | trust them with my data and my business.
       | 
       | Yes, they aren't perfect. They do some things that I disagree
       | with.
       | 
       | But overall they prove themselves worthy of my trust,
       | specifically because of the engineering mindset that the company
       | shares, and how serious they take things like this.
       | 
       | Thank you for the blog post!
        
         | Xeyz0r wrote:
         | Nobody is perfect, but Cloudflare indeed inspires confidence.
         | Especially thanks to cases where they don't hesitate to talk
         | about the issue and how they resolved it. It's precisely these
         | descriptions of such situations that demonstrate their ability
         | to overcome any challenges.
        
         | overstay8930 wrote:
         | We're one of their larger enterprise customers and stuff like
         | this makes it easy to get renewals approved easily, keeping
         | engineers in the loop makes it such an easy sell.
        
       | OJFord wrote:
       | > The one service token and three accounts were not rotated
       | because mistakenly it was believed they were unused.
       | 
       | Eh? So why weren't they revoked entirely? I'm sure something's
       | just unsaid there, or lost in communication or something, but as
       | written that doesn't really make sense to me?
        
         | stepupmakeup wrote:
         | Rotating could have been manual and the person in charge wanted
         | to save time. Stress could be a factor too.
        
         | htrp wrote:
         | blameless post mortem most likely
         | 
         | Great call out too
         | 
         | > Note that this was in no way an error on the part of AWS,
         | Moveworks or Smartsheet. These were merely credentials which we
         | failed to rotate.
        
         | phyzome wrote:
         | Betting they have a new item in their compromise runbook. :-)
        
       | londons_explore wrote:
       | Am I the only one who just sees a totally blank page?
       | 
       | Viewing the HTML shows it's got an empty body tag, and a single
       | script in the <head> with a URL of
       | https://static.cloudflareinsights.com/beacon.min.js/v84a3a40...
        
         | chankstein38 wrote:
         | No, that's also what I see. I'm not sure why you're getting
         | downvoted.
         | 
         | EDIT: re-opened the link a few minutes later and now I see the
         | post
        
         | overstay8930 wrote:
         | Happened to me on my iPhone too
        
       | londons_explore wrote:
       | So after the Okta incident they rotated the leaked credentials...
       | 
       | But I think they should have put honeypots on them, and then
       | waited to see what attackers did. Honeypots discourage the
       | attackers from continuing for fear of being discovered too.
        
       | fierro wrote:
       | >The one service token and three accounts were not rotated
       | because mistakenly it was believed they were unused.
       | 
       | This odd to me - unused credentials should probably be deleted,
       | not rotated.
        
         | pbhjpbhj wrote:
         | This smells weird, surely? I'd be looking at who chose not to
         | rotate those particular credentials.
         | 
         | 1: "what are these accounts?"
         | 
         | 2: "oh they're unused, they don't even appear in the logs"
         | 
         | 1: "we should rotate them"
         | 
         | 2: "no, let's keep those rando accounts with the old
         | credentials, the ones we think might be compromised ... y'
         | know, for reasons"
         | 
         | ?
        
       | muzso wrote:
       | > The threat actor searched the wiki for things like remote
       | access, secret, client-secret, openconnect, cloudflared, and
       | token. They accessed 36 Jira tickets (out of a total of 2,059,357
       | tickets) and 202 wiki pages (out of a total of 14,099 pages).
       | 
       | In Atlassian's Confluence even the built-in Apache Lucene search
       | engine can leak sensitive information and this kind of access (to
       | the info by the attacker) can be very hard to track/identify.
       | They don't have to open a Confluence page if the sensitive
       | information is already shown on the search results page.
        
       | kccqzy wrote:
       | > Analyzing the wiki pages they accessed, bug database issues,
       | and source code repositories, it appears they were looking for
       | information about the architecture, security, and management of
       | our global network; no doubt with an eye on gaining a deeper
       | foothold.
       | 
       | For a nation state actor, the easiest way to accomplish that is
       | to send one of their loyal citizens to become an employee of the
       | target company and then have the person send back "information
       | about the architecture, security, and management" of the target
       | company.
       | 
       | Fun (but possibly apocryphal) fact: more than a decade ago in a
       | social gathering of SREs at Google, several admitted to being on
       | the payroll of some national intelligence bureaus.
        
         | toyg wrote:
         | Not if such citizens are sanctioned. Code Red. Hint hint.
        
           | elashri wrote:
           | I think this probably was a name after the famous Code Red
           | worm [1], not a reference to China.
           | 
           | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_Red_(computer_worm)
        
       | orenlindsey wrote:
       | Cloudflare being compromised would be enormous. Something between
       | 5 and 25% of all sites use CF in some fashion. An attacker could
       | literally hold the internet hostage.
        
       | htrp wrote:
       | >They did this by using one access token and three service
       | account credentials that had been taken, and that we failed to
       | rotate, after the Okta compromise of October 2023. All threat
       | actor access and connections were terminated on November 24 and
       | CrowdStrike has confirmed that the last evidence of threat
       | activity was on November 24 at 10:44.
       | 
       | Okta hitting everywhere
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-02-01 23:00 UTC)