半肾
精华
|
战斗力 鹅
|
回帖 0
注册时间 2006-5-29
|
http://heartbleed.com/
Is this a MITM bug like Apple's goto fail bug was?
No this doesn't require a man in the middle attack (MITM). Attacker can directly contact the vulnerable service or attack any user connecting to a malicious service. However in addition to direct threat the theft of the key material allows man in the middle attackers to impersonate compromised services.
Has this been abused in the wild?
We don't know. Security community should deploy TLS/DTLS honeypots that entrap attackers and to alert about exploitation attempts.
Can attacker access only 64k of the memory?
There is no total of 64 kilobytes limitation to the attack, that limit applies only to a single heartbeat. Attacker can either keep reconnecting or during an active TLS connection keep requesting arbitrary number of 64 kilobyte chunks of memory content until enough secrets are revealed.
又不是只有植入恶意程序才会让电脑被感染，换句话说，利用了该漏洞还需要植入恶意程序感染电脑么？通过冒用安全证书伪装成受信网站来获得用户数据，隐蔽性比塞个木马、开个端口不是高多了么？
我想你一直在纠结的是实际的感染，比如确实地在终端上植入了一个木马或者病毒这种。我这里说的感染是利用heartbleed漏洞对终端电脑进行某种入侵，从而使被影响的电脑在漏洞被修复后仍然存在安全问题。
我在这里一直反复重申我不懂技术，唯一能做到就是尽量使用可信的消息源。
虽然我不觉得懂技术的人就有科普的义务，但是你既然说我是胡说造谣，是不是也请指出我错在哪里，至少对“通过heartbleed漏洞，究竟有没有可能使终端电脑在该漏洞被修复后仍然存在因为该漏洞被利用而产生的安全问题？”做一个明确的回答？
|
|
沪公网安备 31010702007642号 )
发表于 2014-4-9 02:36
