this post was submitted on 29 Jun 2023
207 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37746 readers
47 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Found the error Not allowed to load local resource: file:///etc/passwd while looking at infosec.pub's communities page. There's a community called "ignore me" that adds a few image tags trying to steal your passwd file.

You have to be extremely poorly configured for this to work, but the red flags you see should keep you on your toes for the red flags you don't.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] farthom@lemmy.ca 29 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Holy shit this is kind of unsettling. Though I would expect ALL major browsers to reject reading any local files like this..... would this kind of thing actually succeed somewhere/somehow?

[–] Rooster@infosec.pub 30 points 1 year ago (3 children)

If you ran your browser as root and configured your browser to load local resources on non-local domains maybe. I think you can do that in chrome://flags but you have to explicitly list the domains allowed to do it.

I'm hoping this is just a bad joke.

[–] fox@vlemmy.net 10 points 1 year ago (3 children)

you don't need to be root to read /etc/passwd

[–] trachemys@iusearchlinux.fyi 16 points 1 year ago

That’s because passwd doesn’t store the password hashes. Just user names.

[–] Greg@lemmy.ca 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Are you sure? What do you get when you run $ cat /etc/passwd in terminal? Just paste the results here 😇

Edit: to anyone reading this on the future, don't actually do this, it was a joke

[–] fox@vlemmy.net 32 points 1 year ago (2 children)

yup pretty sure

$ cat /etc/passwd
fox:hunter2:1000:1000::/home/fox:/usr/bin/zsh

😉

[–] animist@lemmy.one 28 points 1 year ago

Weird, all I see is *******

[–] anlumo@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago

Not even a root user, the most secure system ever.

[–] delial@lemmy.sdf.org 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Since you told me not to. There isn't a risk on most linux systems; passwords were moved to /etc/shadow a long time ago. It only leaks the names of your users and largely useless info for most attackers:

root:x:0:0:root:/root:/bin/bash
daemon:x:1:1:daemon:/usr/sbin:/usr/sbin/nologin
bin:x:2:2:bin:/bin:/usr/sbin/nologin
sys:x:3:3:sys:/dev:/usr/sbin/nologin
sync:x:4:65534:sync:/bin:/bin/sync
games:x:5:60:games:/usr/games:/usr/sbin/nologin
man:x:6:12:man:/var/cache/man:/usr/sbin/nologin
lp:x:7:7:lp:/var/spool/lpd:/usr/sbin/nologin
mail:x:8:8:mail:/var/mail:/usr/sbin/nologin
news:x:9:9:news:/var/spool/news:/usr/sbin/nologin
uucp:x:10:10:uucp:/var/spool/uucp:/usr/sbin/nologin
proxy:x:13:13:proxy:/bin:/usr/sbin/nologin
www-data:x:33:33:www-data:/var/www:/usr/sbin/nologin
backup:x:34:34:backup:/var/backups:/usr/sbin/nologin
list:x:38:38:Mailing List Manager:/var/list:/usr/sbin/nologin
irc:x:39:39:ircd:/run/ircd:/usr/sbin/nologin
gnats:x:41:41:Gnats Bug-Reporting System (admin):/var/lib/gnats:/usr/sbin/nologin
nobody:x:65534:65534:nobody:/nonexistent:/usr/sbin/nologin
_apt:x:100:65534::/nonexistent:/usr/sbin/nologin
systemd-network:x:101:102:systemd Network Management,,,:/run/systemd:/usr/sbin/nologin
systemd-resolve:x:102:103:systemd Resolver,,,:/run/systemd:/usr/sbin/nologin
messagebus:x:999:999:System Message Bus:/:/usr/sbin/nologin
systemd-timesync:x:998:998:systemd Time Synchronization:/:/usr/sbin/nologin
systemd-coredump:x:997:997:systemd Core Dumper:/:/usr/sbin/nologin
delial:x:1000:1000:,,,:/home/delial:/bin/bash
sshd:x:103:65534::/run/sshd:/usr/sbin/nologin
xrdp:x:104:110::/run/xrdp:/usr/sbin/nologin
dictd:x:105:111:Dictd Server,,,:/var/lib/dictd:/usr/sbin/nologin
nm-openvpn:x:106:112:NetworkManager OpenVPN,,,:/var/lib/openvpn/chroot:/usr/sbin/nologin
sssd:x:107:113:SSSD system user,,,:/var/lib/sss:/usr/sbin/nologin
[–] marvin@lemmy.sdf.org 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Well it's not completely useless. It offers some insights into the system. Which service accounts exists, what usernames are used.

If an attacker finds a valid username they can then start bruteforcing the password.

From your account list we can see you have sshd and xrdp. Do they both provide the same kind of bruteforce protection? Are there any recent exploits for either?

[–] delial@lemmy.sdf.org 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's why I said largely useless. An attacker can narrow down the attack surface by ignoring anything that can't login, but that just leaves them with root and delial, and they already knew or could've guessed both of those pieces of information (in this context anyway).

And as you noted when looking at the service accounts, they might be able to login or crack their way in via xrdp or sshd. So, unless you're port-forwarding those protocols from the internet, how useful is that really? I would say largely useless. Assuming they port-scanned your public IP, they still need either an insecure config or an unpatched, remotely exploitable bug.

That being said, you're totally right. The average Linux user isn't "administering" their system, so they probably aren't following their distribution's security mailing list, installing security patches as they're released, and actually RTFM. It's best for the average user to play it unbelievably safe.

In this case, the machine isn't actually running xrdp, and sshd doesn't accept passwords or root logins. (Although, I need to setup knockd to protect that non-standard sshd port a bit more.) All passwords used on the system are random and longer than 32 characters. My router doesn't port-forward to this machine, either.

This has been an exercise of Cunningham's Law for the benefit of those reading.

[–] marvin@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Sometimes I hate how well Cunningham's Law works. 😃

[–] Rooster@infosec.pub 2 points 1 year ago

My bad, I guess it just feels like a file that would be behind tighter perms.

[–] farthom@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Yeah, seems highly unlikely to ever yield any results. Even if you did manage to read a file, you have to get lucky finding a password hash in a rainbow table or the password being shit enough to crack.

[–] nzodd 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Also generally the actual password (or rather its hash) is stored in /etc/shadow on most systems from the past 20 odd years.

[–] farthom@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago

Yeah this is a TIL for me. I didn't realize they were separated out. It makes sense, though I grant I've never taken a close look at these files.

[–] lemmyvore@feddit.nl 2 points 1 year ago

And if anybody has publicly accessible ssh on their desktop machine, that allows password login, they're kinda asking for it.

[–] orthagonal@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

I cracked the BMC on my workstation motherboard by binwalking the publicly available firmware and finding, to my delight and dread, that the built in root user password was laughably weak. If a top5 motherboard manufacturer is still doing shit like that, users are too.

I also work in support and have seen first hand the bananas things people do, even smart people that should know better

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)