[HN Gopher] Crooks Bypassed Google's Email Verification to Creat...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Crooks Bypassed Google's Email Verification to Create Workspace
       Accounts, Acces
        
       Author : todsacerdoti
       Score  : 177 points
       Date   : 2024-07-26 21:34 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (krebsonsecurity.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (krebsonsecurity.com)
        
       | kabdib wrote:
       | I get occasional probes from Google services against my domain,
       | clearly made by bad actors who are trying to break into it. It's
       | not "lose your domain with a slip of the finger" territory, but
       | it's still not great.
       | 
       | There doesn't appear to be a way to tell Google, "I own this
       | domain, just block all of these bogus requests" other than
       | signing up for the services in question (which I don't want to
       | do!)
       | 
       | Scammers will be scammers, but this is also pretty shitty
       | behavior on Google's part.
        
         | kyrra wrote:
         | What do you mean probing your domain from Google?
        
           | HideousKojima wrote:
           | I assume trying to sign up for Google services (business
           | email etc.) for his domain
        
             | kabdib wrote:
             | Exactly.
        
         | magicalhippo wrote:
         | For Google and Microsoft, you have to add some TXT records to
         | verify your domain.
         | 
         | Surely they could add support for checking that TXT record to
         | "anti-verify" the domain? Ie instead of the "MS=ms12345" value
         | to verify with Microsoft, have some fixed "MS=NOJOY" or
         | whatever to signal to Microsoft you don't want any
         | registrations against your domain.
        
           | bell-cot wrote:
           | Idea: DNS TXT records are free-form. What if you used those
           | to publish some (very short) "Legal Notices", stating that
           | certain things were not authorized, and should be assumed
           | fraudulent?
           | 
           | (Perhaps with similar notices published in your local old-
           | school Legal News. There are entire periodicals devoted to
           | the publication of legal notices.)
           | 
           | It doesn't matter if it would fully stand up in court, if the
           | existence of the published prior notices convinced Google or
           | MS that they were risking a nasty Legal Dept. situation.
        
         | toast0 wrote:
         | When I was an admin for a Google Apps Domain, you couldn't even
         | stop people from making a google account that aliases a google
         | apps account.
         | 
         | Best I could do was run reports and yell at people. But it
         | really would have been nice to stop all attempts to make google
         | accounts for the domain.
        
           | kabdib wrote:
           | Exactly. Google's behavior here is terrible.
        
       | xyst wrote:
       | > through Google's "Sign in with Google"
       | 
       | I used to use these "social logins" exclusively. Whether they
       | were FB, Apple, or Google. Because big tech couldn't get hacked
       | and it was convenient.
       | 
       | But quickly realized how much of a pain it was to deal with when
       | issues at various service providers arose. It complicated
       | operations for small businesses. Often I lost accounts because
       | their support just gave up on trying to diagnose issue.
       | 
       | But also if those IdPs deemed your account in violation of some
       | vague policy, or maybe they just don't like you because of
       | "freeloading". Then you will quickly lose out on access to
       | numerous services.
       | 
       | Some services have sane account management practices and allow
       | you to dissociate the account from a SSO provider. But most I
       | have encountered are just clueless. Some services, the system is
       | designed so bad that I cannot change the email.
       | 
       | I remember l1 support for some company stating emails are
       | immutable because it's more secure that way. Such bullshit.
       | 
       | this bypass event is yet another reason to avoid using
       | Google/Apple/Facebook as SSO provider. These companies have time
       | and time again proved they are pregnable.
       | 
       | Fortunately, thanks to password managers it makes creating
       | complicated passwords with hundreds of services much easier.
        
         | pests wrote:
         | I really like Spotify's approach. In previous years it was
         | confusing as if you signed up under a social you didn't have a
         | user/pass to login with; but now they just break out all login
         | methods and let you link Google/Facebook or just set a standard
         | email/pass.
        
           | w-ll wrote:
           | this backfired on me a few years ago, my nvidia shield was
           | connected to my account and then a friend on wifi linked to
           | it, and it nuked both our accounts. lol
        
         | kevincox wrote:
         | I used to feel similar. But then I realized that my browser's
         | password manager also can't get hacked (or if it does they have
         | full browser access anyways) and it is actually easier to sign
         | in with a pre-filled username and password (just click login)
         | than going through the third-party auth flow (and remembering
         | which one you used).
        
         | kevin_thibedeau wrote:
         | Wait 'til there's a major password manager exploit. The only
         | truly safe option is longish passphrases you can remember.
        
           | Canada wrote:
           | This already happened with last pass.
        
       | amluto wrote:
       | Maybe we need the IdP equivalent of CAA records. If I have a
       | domain that doesn't use a given IdP, I want everyone who might
       | rely on that IdP to know that the IdP in question has no
       | authority on that domain.
        
       | nurtbo wrote:
       | So these attackers could gain access to any account with email
       | with a domain not currently registered to a Google Workspace?
       | This seems like a huge breach of trust. (Especially given that it
       | gave access to _outside_ of Google accounts).
       | 
       | Is there a best practice around confirming adding social login to
       | a pre-existing account? (Like entering current password or email
       | confirmation?)
       | 
       | From the article:
       | 
       | > In the case of the reader who shared the breach notice from
       | Google, the imposters used the authentication bypass to associate
       | his domain with a Workspace account. And that domain was tied to
       | his login at several third-party services online. Indeed, the
       | alert this reader received from Google said the unauthorized
       | Workspace account appears to have been used to sign in to his
       | account at Dropbox
        
         | AnotherGoodName wrote:
         | From what's stated they could create a new account but not gain
         | access to an existing account. So they create
         | "totally_the_admin@bigco.com" and then login via google
         | elsewhere and try to use that as a way to gain further access
         | to bigco accounts, presumably by some manual support.
        
       | mcoliver wrote:
       | I got hit by this. On June 6 I got an email from Google saying
       | welcome to Google workspace for my domain.
       | 
       | I don't have Google workspace for this domain and use an
       | alternate email provider. I was curious so tried to signin and
       | was told that the admin account was an email on my domain (eg
       | foo@mydomain.com). Ok, created that account so I could receive
       | email, except then Google said that I had to use the backup
       | recovery email which happened to be mydomain@gmail.com.
       | 
       | Google said that non verified workspaces (eg not verified through
       | txt or cname records) would be automatically deleted after 7
       | days.
       | 
       | 14 days later the workspace was still there.
       | 
       | I had to go through a convoluted manual form and process to get
       | my workspace domain back and then properly register it so this
       | would not happen again.
       | 
       | I provided the following feedback which seems like common sense,
       | but I guess it ain't that common:
       | 
       | 1) you shouldn't be able to create a workspace with a custom
       | domain without verifying it via DNS records from the start. No 7
       | day grace which actually was broken and for all I know was
       | infinite grace period.
       | 
       | 2) the established admin account with a custom domain email
       | address should be eligible to perform recovery. Not some
       | arbitrary secondary Gmail account.
        
         | ryanjshaw wrote:
         | Thanks for taking the time to explain the issue. I found the
         | article confusing and vague.
        
           | benatkin wrote:
           | It's actually a pretty good article. The information that the
           | author has is limited.
        
       | anoncow wrote:
       | A related topic. I saw Google create hotmail accounts on the
       | Gmail platform e.g., myname@hotmail.com when myname@hotmail.com
       | was a functioning email ID on outlook.com.
       | 
       | I was able to login to Gmail with myname@hotmail.com and send
       | emails. Emails were however being received only on the
       | outlook.com account. Blew my mind.
        
         | gopkarthik wrote:
         | A Google account was being created without Gmail in this case.
        
       | alchemist1e9 wrote:
       | This was done to me. They even called me imitating google
       | security team by using google assistant feature and using a free
       | trial to register my own phone number as the business name then
       | calling via Google to get assistant to call me repeatedly showing
       | up as google. Eventually I picked up as I was also get
       | simultaneously account recovery requests on my gmail. AND they
       | sent me DKIM verified emails that appear to come from google
       | themselves. I recorded the phone conversation if LE might be
       | interested. The combination of there existing an account on
       | workspaces, verified emails, and spoofed google caller ID from
       | numbers that superficially appear to be actually google numbers -
       | you have to read closely that they are Google Assistant numbers!
       | was pretty convincing initially, they had be for a few minutes on
       | the call. And they tell you your account is having it's phone
       | number changed, we need to do something now or it will take a
       | long time to recover it. I didn't fall for it but then I
       | pretended I was and put on a big show. I have a long recording
       | with their voice and timestamps of everything.
       | 
       | Anyway the incident shook me as they also gave me my personal
       | information to prove they are real and it was accurate and kept
       | saying look we aren't asking you for information we are telling
       | you yours so you see we are Google Security!
       | 
       | It has triggered for me a giant project to carefully review all
       | my attack surfaces across all accounts and systems.
        
         | megous wrote:
         | > ... as they also gave me my personal information to prove
         | they are real and it was accurate and kept saying look we
         | aren't asking you for information we are telling you yours so
         | you see we are Google Security!
         | 
         | Yeah, anytime someone gives me information about me, to prove
         | who _they_ are, is instantly suspect. Same goes for not yet
         | authenticated caller (caller id doesn 't count) asking for _my
         | details_ so that they get a proof of who I am. Not going to
         | give extra info to an unknown person, sorry.
         | 
         | I train myself on legit calls to not fall for this, despite
         | some inconvenience.
         | 
         | My hope is that in the future, when the real scummer call will
         | eventually come, I'll be less likely to fall for social
         | engineering tricks, and psychological pressure.
        
       | taspeotis wrote:
       | > The vector here is they would use one email address to try to
       | sign in, and a completely different email address to verify a
       | token
       | 
       | Is this like the PayPal XSRF vulnerability where any issued XSRF
       | token was considered valid regardless of the user trying to use
       | it?
       | 
       | I'd expect Google to have some standard way to handle this stuff.
        
       | alpenbazi wrote:
       | had that too. did not react. after some time got a mail
       | "workspace closed"
        
       | kalaksi wrote:
       | Uhh, I also received an email like that. I was suspecting
       | something fishy but hoped that they just expect someone to click
       | a link. Any idea what they could have done? I never auth with
       | google. And the email domain is not mine but email provider's.
       | 
       | To add, the welcome email doesn't directly say the domain used
        
       | nottorp wrote:
       | So if you own example.com and use bigboss@example.com as log in
       | to greatonlinegame.com ...
       | 
       | Someone can register example.com with google workspace and then
       | they can use "login with google" to log in to your
       | bigboss@example.com account at greatonlinegame.com, even though
       | your account did not use "login with google".
       | 
       | Did i get it right?
       | 
       | And if i did, i wonder...
       | 
       | Why aren't these logins separate on greatonlinegame.com? If I did
       | it i'd allow a login only by the method that was used to create
       | the account, unless the user configures it otherwise.
        
         | haakon wrote:
         | Your understanding is correct. It happened to me; someone made
         | a Workspace for a domain name I own, and made a user on that
         | workspace to match an email address I have on that domain, and
         | then used "Sign in with Google" on Dropbox. Luckily I don't use
         | Dropbox, so instead of gaining access to my files there, it
         | just resulted in a new Dropbox account being created.
         | 
         | I noticed all this, of course, because I got email
         | notifications for all of it.
        
         | swid wrote:
         | According to spec, when someone uses oauth to try and log into
         | an existing account for the first time, you must require the
         | user to login through their normal method and then prompt them
         | to link the login account.
         | 
         | However, the identity provider cannot force you to do that, and
         | there are many examples of apps which do not follow this part
         | of the spec.
        
           | tnzk wrote:
           | Curious, which part in RFC 6749 do you refer to or other
           | ones?
        
             | swid wrote:
             | I could have sworn I have seen this in the past, but I am
             | not sure exactly where. Thinking about it; it probably
             | would have been part of OIDC and not directly addressed by
             | OAuth... maybe someone can find it for me, or maybe I
             | misspoke when I said it was part of the spec.
        
               | hirsin wrote:
               | I could believe that being in 2.1 as a BCP,but if it's
               | not it's a good idea to add it.
        
         | shreddit wrote:
         | Take superbase for example. If you allow multiple oauth
         | providers accounts get automatically linked if they use the
         | same email address. That's bugging me since day one...
        
       | breakingcups wrote:
       | This is a big deal, nobody would expect Google to fuck up this
       | badly, least of all the parties who support Google's social
       | login.
       | 
       | That means that, even if you don't want anything to do with
       | Google at _all_ , others could have impersonated you by
       | registering a Google Workspace trial account on your email
       | address, "verifying" their account through this vulnerability,
       | and logging in to third-party sites (that support Google login)
       | by using your email address.
        
       | mqus wrote:
       | But but but... Google is so secure! We can trust them to safekeep
       | the data they collect about us! Pinky swear!
        
       | Canada wrote:
       | Funny, Google has just locked me out of my work email. Endless
       | loop of "verify it's you" demanding a phone number, even though I
       | use a security key. Entering a number results in "you have tried
       | too many times, try again in a few hours" but that is not true,
       | it seems permanent. Having Workspace super admins reset my
       | password or suspend login challenge for 10 minutes does not work.
       | It will not let me back in.
       | 
       | Fun fact, Google doesn't allow you to contact support if you are
       | locked out. It also doesn't allow you to post for help on their
       | community forums.
       | 
       | I guess Google gets to decide if I am allowed to use email. My
       | employer apparently doesn't get a say in the matter.
        
       | TONIA1942 wrote:
       | Do you have trouble logging into your social media accounts or
       | have trouble accessing them? I suggest getting in touch with
       | Angelina if you have any problems with your social media account.
       | She works for META, so I can tell you that she is incredibly
       | dependable and always there to help. I advise you to get in touch
       | with her at AngelinaChristopher1738@gmail.com or via her
       | Instagram account, Angelina_Christopher1738. She is the best
       | solution. Her dependable and timely assistance made me feel
       | relieved instead of frustrated. Please get in touch with her if
       | you need help right away!
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-07-27 23:12 UTC)