Digital piggy bank sevice broken into by cybercrooks

Saving money, at least in modest amounts, used to be a very simple business.

The easiest approach – many of us still do it, even in this online age – is the coin jar (or piggy bank, if you’re really old-school).

Instead of frittering away your small change on daily inconsequentials, you dump unused coins in the big glass jar in the corner of the living room, and just before it’s too heavy to pick up and move altogether…

…you drag it down to the bank and are often be pleasantly surprised how much money has accumulated in there.

But that’s a very 1990s approach! Why not put your money into a digital piggy bank, instead?

And, better yet, why not choose a piggy bank that deliberately starts out in debt?

It sounds bizarre – you essentially take out a loan you can’t touch, and clock up your “savings” by paying it off.

At the end of the period – a year, say – you’ve paid off the loan, so you not only get access to your loan capital as your “savings”, but also have a year’s worth of loan repayments that boost your credit rating.

By deliberately racking up debt to save against, your savings end up acting both as credit and as credit history.

That’s the business model of UK company Loqbox, which says it keeps the service free due to the affiliate fees it gets from the banks into which its customers release their funds after paying off a loan:

After making monthly payments for a year, your loan is repaid and you leave LOQBOX with an improved credit score and your money back into a new account for free.

[…]

We get paid by our partner banks for opening a new account for you, which is how we keep LOQBOX free. But if you’d prefer, you can opt for our Flexi Unlock premium add-on and unlock into an existing account for £30.

So far, so good…

…except that there’s a lot riding on you being able to keep up your “savings” payments for the period of the loan.

If you raid the coin jar every now and then (we’ve all done it – it’s part of the game!), the worst that can happen is you end up with nothing saved, or you take longer to fill the jar than you hoped.

But even though you can take an early exit from debt-based savings systems like Loqbox’s, and get back what you you’ve put in so far, you won’t then have finished the loan process in full, as – as the company warns – unlocking early could harm your credit history.

And you can’t just skip payments at will, in the same way that you can go a few weeks without putting coins in the jar, because that really would harm your credit history.

In other words, as well as keeping up your side of the repayments, and taking care of your online account, you’d better hope nothing bad happens to your account data at the other end.

Crooks in the piggy bank

Unfortunately, according to customer tweets and news reports, Loqbox has just suffered a data breach that uncovered enough personal data to make most affected customers uncomfortable, apparently including names, emails, phone numbers, postal addresses and dates of birth.

Additionally, partial bank account and card number details were stolen, too.

UK IT publication The Register claims that this “external attack” got at bank account sort codes plus two digits of the account number, as well as credit card expiry dates plus 10 digits’ worth of the card number.

Fortunately, those numbers don’t identify customers’ accounts or cards precisely enough to let them be abused directly.

Sort codes generally identify the bank and a branch, which crooks could guess at from your home address anyway; UK bank account numbers are usually eight digits long; and credit cards typically have 16 digits.

Also, the 10 card digits stolen apparently include the parts of the number that are often disclosed or can be figured out anyway, namely:

  • The first six digits, which identify the financial provider. These digits make up what’s called the BIN, short for Bank Identification Number. A glance at your credit card’s colour or design is often enough to figure out those numbers anyway.
  • The last four digits, which are routinely printed on receipts or sent in unencrypted emails. These are pretty much used as semi-public “check digits” to make it easy for you to see which card you used for what transactions.

In short, the breach sounds bad, but not that bad.

There’s no mention of passwords or password hashes being stolen, which almost certainly means that the crooks can’t use the breached data to wander into your Loqbox online account with ease, and there’s no mention of any transactional data or other credit history information being accessed.

What to do?

Loqbox doesn’t seem have any information about the breach on its own website or blog so we’re assuming that affected customers will hear by email.

Note that it doesn’t mean you are entirely off the hook if you haven’t yet heard from Loqbox – breach investigations can take quite some time to complete.

And even if you have heard from Loqbox already, the company may need to contact you again in the future as investigations continue – and you can probably see where the issue that “you might well be expecting an email some time soon” is going.

Our tips are therefore:

  1. Keep a closer eye than usual on your statements. Simply put, if you see something, say something. (But note #2.)
  2. Watch out for emails or calls that know more about you than you might expect. Even without full details of your bank account or payment card, crooks with data from this breach will be in a much more believable position to scam you into thinking they are legitimate. (And see #3.)
  3. Never contact Loqbox or any other financial provider using information from an email or a call. Get out your original paperwork (or turn your payment card over) and use contact details from there – that way, you won’t get tricked into talking to an imposter.
  4. Speak to your card provider about getting a new number. If your card provider thinks there’s now a risk of fraud on your current card, they’ll probably issue you a new card and cancel the old one.
  5. Don’t pick passwords that crooks could guess from your customer data. The more crooks know about you, even if it’s just your birthday and where you live, the more clues they have to guess poorly-chosen passwords. In fact, don’t pick guessable passwords at all – use a password manager if you’re struggling to come up with good passwords yourself.

HOW TO PICK A PROPER PASSWORD

[embedded content]

(No video? Watch on YouTube. No audio? Click on the [CC] icon for subtitles.)

Nvidia patches severe flaws affecting GeForce, Quadro NVS and Tesla

Denial of service, local escalation of privileges, and information disclosure are not security worries most computer users will associate with their racy graphics card or its drivers.

And yet fixes for precisely these issues are part of February’s Nvidia GPU display update, all of which could compromise Windows or Linux PCs, allowing an attacker to gain local access after a malware attack.

In all, the update covers five desktop CVE vulnerabilities, including one, CVE‑2020‑5957, rated as critical. This is in the Windows GPU Display Driver control panel for the GeForce, Quadro  NVS, and Tesla products leading to a corrupt system file and escalation of privileges or denial of service.

A second control panel flaw affecting the same products is CVE‑2020‑5958, which might allow the planting of a malicious DLL file with the same results as above along with information disclosure.

The Virtual GPU Manager gets three fixes addressing CVE‑2020‑5959, CVE‑2020‑5960, and CVE‑2020‑5961, with the first of these rated critical.

Nvidia is also readying separate updates for its enterprise products, namely the Virtual GPU Manager (various hypervisors), and vGPU graphics driver for guest OS (Windows and Linux), which is also affected by some of the above flaws.

Depending on the driver version affected, these will be available in the week of 9 March 2020, with updates during April promised for organizations using either version 10.0 or 10.1 for any of the above products.

These days, updating graphics drivers needs to be part of the standalone user’s patching cycle along with Microsoft’s Patch Tuesday, Intel’s regular CPU and product patches, not forgetting browsers and individual products such as Adobe’s PDF Reader and various plugins .

Nvidia ships fixes for its products almost every month, with missed months made up for by two releases the following month.

Almost all include critical updates for severe vulnerabilities which could cause major problems if left unpatched.

November 2019’s update fixed 11 mostly severe flaws across its desktop products, while August 2019 saw a similar story.


Latest Naked Security podcast

Siri and Google Assistant hacked in new ultrasonic attack

Unsettling news for anyone who relies on smartphone voice assistants: researchers have demonstrated how these can be secretly activated to make phone calls, take photos, and even read back text messages without ever physically touching the device.

Dubbed SurfingAttack by a US-Chinese university team, this is no parlor trick and is based on the ability to remotely control voice assistants using inaudible ultrasonic waves.

Voice assistants – the demo targeted Siri, Google Assistant, and Bixby – are designed to respond when they detect the owner’s voice after noticing a trigger phrase such as ‘Ok, Google’.

Ultimately, commands are just sound waves, which other researchers have already shown can be emulated using ultrasonic waves which humans can’t hear, providing an attacker has a line of sight on the device and the distance is short.

What SurfingAttack adds to this is the ability to send the ultrasonic commands through a solid glass or wood table on which the smartphone was sitting using a circular piezoelectric disc connected to its underside.

Although the distance was only 43cm (17 inches), hiding the disc under a surface represents a more plausible, easier-to-conceal attack method than previous techniques.

As explained in a video showcasing the method, a remote laptop generates voice commands using text-to-speech (TTS) Module to produce simulated voice commands which are then transmitted to the disc using Wi-Fi or Bluetooth.

The researchers tested the method on 17 different smartphones models from Apple, Google, Samsung, Motorola, Xiaomi, and Huawei, successfully deploying SurfingAttack against 15 of them.

The researchers were able to activate the voice assistants, commanding them to unlock devices, take repeated selfies, make fraudulent calls and even get the phone to read out a user’s text messages, including SMS verification codes.

Responses were recorded using a concealed microphone after turning down the device’s volume so this communication would not be heard by a nearby user in an office setting.

DolphinAttack rides again

In theory, voice assistants should only respond to the owner’s voice, but these can now be cloned using machine learning software such as Lyrebird, as was the case in this test. It’s a defence of sorts – the need to capture and clone the victim’s voice.

A bigger might simply be the designs of individual smartphones – the team believe the two that did not succumb to SurfingAttack, Huawei’s Mate 9 and Samsung’s Galaxy Note 10, did so because the materials from which they were constructed dampened the ultrasonic waves. According to the researchers, putting the smartphone on a tablecloth was better still.

SurfingAttack was inspired by the 2017 DolphinAttack proof-of-concept, which showed how voice assistants could be hijacked by ultrasonic commands.

Elsewhere, sound has also proved interesting to researchers looking to jump air gaps, and exfiltrate data from computer fan noise.

While hacking voice assistants remains a lab activity with no known real-world attacks to speak of, there’s always a risk that could change. At some point, smartphone makers will surely have to come up with better countermeasures.


Latest Naked Security podcast

Let’s Encrypt issues one billionth free certificate

Last week was a big one for non-profit digital certificate project Let’s Encrypt – it issued its billionth certificate. It’s a symbolic milestone that shows how important this free certificate service has become to web users.

Publicly announced in November 2014, Let’s Encrypt offers TLS certificates for free. These certificates are integral to the encryption used by HTTPS websites.

HTTPS is HTTP that uses the Transport Layer Security (TLS) protocol for privacy and authentication. Your browser uses it to be confident that you’re not visiting an evil website that’s impersonating your real destination using a DNS spoofing attack. It also encrypts the information passing between your browser and the web server so that someone who can snoop on your traffic still can’t tell what you’re doing.

Netscape created HTTPS in 1994, but in 2014 a minority of websites used it. That’s because it could be technically difficult to implement, it was time consuming and it cost money. There was too much friction. That’s what Let’s Encrypt set out to change.

The project is a non-profit effort from the Internet Security Research Group (ISRG), an organisation sponsored by a mixture of privacy advocates and those who benefit from making the online ecosystem healthier. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is a sponsor, along with Cisco, Facebook, Google, the Internet Society (which houses the Internet Engineering Task Force or IETF), Mozilla, and French cloud service provider OVH.

The project issues free certificates, keeping them valid for 90 days before forcing people to renew. It isn’t just the free nature of these certificates that has helped them flood the internet. The other key to the puzzle is automation. Let’s Encrypt created a protocol called Automated Certificate Management Environment (ACME). This is a challenge-response system that automates enrolment with the certificate authority and validation of the domain.

Version two of ACME became a proposed internet standard in May 2019 (did we mention that the IETF’s parent organization is a sponsor?) giving it more credence still. There are various ACME clients, and some have been baked directly into default Linux server distributions, enabling Apache and nginx web servers to run automatic scripts to handle the whole process.

Let’s Encrypt’s approach isn’t perfect. For one thing, it only offers domain validation that checks a person is in control of a domain, rather than extended validation certificates that go the extra mile to validate the legal name of the owner. This has led to some problems, such as Let’s Encrypt’s automatic validation of PayPal phishing sites.

This isn’t a mistake – it’s simply that the organization’s goal is to encrypt as many websites as possible rather than investigate their content, which it prefers to leave to others like Google. Eagle-eyed readers of today’s other stories will spot that the certificate issued on the Stripe phishing scam domain was also from Let’s Encrypt.

Thanks to this flood of free certificates, the web is a lot more encrypted than it was a few years ago. In June 2017, 58% of webpage loads were delivered over HTTPS, the project stated, adding that the number has grown to 81% today. That’s due in large part to free and automated certificate provisioning, but also to a firmer hand by web browser developers. Mozilla now shames any web pages that don’t use HTTPS, while Google removes the ‘secure’ label for HTTP-only sites and gives them a lower search ranking than HTTPS ones.


Latest Naked Security podcast

Clearview AI loses entire database of faceprint-buying clients to hackers

Clearview AI, the controversial facial recognition startup that’s gobbled up more than three billion of our photos by scraping social media sites and any other publicly accessible nook and cranny it can find, has lost its entire list of clients to hackers – including details about its many law enforcement clients.

In a notification that The Daily Beast reviewed, the company told its customers that an intruder “gained unauthorized access” to its list of customers, to the number of user accounts they’ve set up, and to the number of searches they’ve run.

The disclosure also claimed that Clearview’s servers hadn’t been breached and that there was “no compromise of Clearview’s systems or network.” The company said that it’s patched the unspecified hole that let the intruder in, and that whoever it was didn’t manage to get their hands on customers’ search histories.

Tor Ekeland, an attorney for Clearview, sent a statement to news outlets saying that breaches are just a fact of life nowadays:

Security is Clearview’s top priority. Unfortunately, data breaches are part of life in the 21st century. Our servers were never accessed. We patched the flaw, and continue to work to strengthen our security.

Clearview, which has sold access to its gargantuan faceprint database to hundreds of law enforcement agencies, first came to the public’s attention in January when the New York Times ran a front-page article suggesting that the “secretive company […] might end privacy as we know it.”

In its exposé, the Times revealed that Clearview has quietly sold access to faceprints and facial recognition software to more than 600 law enforcement agencies across the US, claiming that it can identify a person based on a single photo, reveal their real name and far more.

Within a few weeks of the Times article, Clearview found itself being sued in a potential class action lawsuit that claims the company amassed the photos out of “pure greed” to sell to law enforcement, thereby violating the nation’s strictest biometrics privacy law – the Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA).

Among the many online sources that Clearview has scraped to get all the biometric data it’s selling (or giving away), Twitter, Facebook, Google and YouTube have ordered the company to stop its scraping – a practice that violates the social media giants’ policies.

In a followup report, the Times noted that there’s a strong use case for Clearview’s technology: finding victims of child abuse. Investigators told the newspaper that Clearview’s tools have enabled them to identify the victims featured in child abuse videos and photos, leading them to names or locations of victims whom they may never have been able to identify otherwise. One retired chief of police said that running images of 21 victims of the same offender returned 14 minors’ IDs, the youngest of whom was 13.

Following the Times’ exposé, New Jersey barred police from using the Clearview app. Canada’s privacy agencies are also investigating Clearview to determine if its technology violates the country’s privacy laws, the agencies said on Friday.

David Forscey, the managing director of the non-profit Aspen Cybersecurity Group, told the Daily Beast that Clearview’s breach should be worrying for its customers:

If you’re a law-enforcement agency, it’s a big deal, because you depend on Clearview as a service provider to have good security, and it seems like they don’t.

Put another way by tech policy advocate Jevan Hutson:

Clearview continues to give us a clear view of why biometric surveillance is an unsalvageable trash fire.


Latest Naked Security podcast

go top