God Bless the Rains Down in Africa: May 2020

Friday, May 22, 2020

Practical Bleichenbacher Attacks On IPsec IKE

We found out that reusing a key pair across different versions and modes of IPsec IKE can lead to cross-protocol authentication bypasses, enabling the impersonation of a victim host or network by attackers. These vulnerabilities existed in implementations by Cisco, Huawei, and others.

This week at the USENIX Security conference, I will present our research paper on IPsec attacks: The Dangers of Key Reuse: Practical Attacks on IPsec IKE written by Martin Grothe, Jörg Schwenk, and me from Ruhr University Bochum as well as Adam Czubak and Marcin Szymanek from the University of Opole [alternative link to the paper]. This blog post is intended for people who like to get a comprehensive summary of our findings rather than to read a long research paper.

IPsec and Internet Key Exchange (IKE)

IPsec enables cryptographic protection of IP packets. It is commonly used to build VPNs (Virtual Private Networks). For key establishment, the IKE protocol is used. IKE exists in two versions, each with different modes, different phases, several authentication methods, and conﬁguration options. Therefore, IKE is one of the most complex cryptographic protocols in use.

In version 1 of IKE (IKEv1), four authentication methods are available for Phase 1, in which initial authenticated keying material is established: Two public key encryption based methods, one signature based method, and a PSK (Pre-Shared Key) based method.

Attacks on IKE implementations

With our attacks we can impersonate an IKE device: If the attack is successful, we share a set of (falsely) authenticated symmetric keys with the victim device, and can successfully complete the handshake – this holds for both IKEv1 and IKEv2. The attacks are based on Bleichenbacher oracles in the IKEv1 implementations of four large network equipment manufacturers: Cisco, Huawei, Clavister, and ZyXEL. These Bleichenbacher oracles can also be used to forge digital signatures, which breaks the signature based IKEv1 and IKEv2 variants. Those who are unfamiliar with Bleichenbacher attacks may read this post by our colleague Juraj Somorovsky for an explanation.

The affected hardware test devices by Huawei, Cisco, and ZyXEL in our network lab.

We show that the strength of these oracles is sufficient to break all handshake variants in IKEv1 and IKEv2 (except those based on PSKs) when given access to powerful network equipment. We furthermore demonstrate that key reuse across protocols as implemented in certain network equipment carries high security risks.

We additionally show that both PSK based modes can be broken with an offline dictionary attack if the PSK has low entropy. Such an attack was previously only documented for one of those modes (edit: see this comment). We thus show attacks against all authentication modes in both IKEv1 and IKEv2 under reasonable assumptions.

The relationship between IKEv1 Phase 1, Phase 2, and IPsec ESP. Multiple simultaneous Phase 2 connections can be established from a single Phase 1 connection. Grey parts are encrypted, either with IKE derived keys (light grey) or with IPsec keys (dark grey). The numbers at the curly brackets denote the number of messages to be exchanged in the protocol.

Where's the bug?

The public key encryption (PKE) based authentication mode of IKE requires that both parties exchanged their public keys securely beforehand (e. g. with certiﬁcates during an earlier handshake with signature based authentication). RFC 2409 advertises this mode of authentication with a plausibly deniable exchange to raise the privacy level. In this mode, messages three and four of the handshake exchange encrypted nonces and identities. They are encrypted using the public key of the respective other party. The encoding format for the ciphertexts is PKCS #1 v1.5.

Bleichenbacher attacks are adaptive chosen ciphertext attacks against RSA-PKCS #1 v1.5. Though the attack has been known for two decades, it is a common pitfall for developers. The mandatory use of PKCS #1 v1.5 in the PKE authentication methods raised suspicion of whether implementations resist Bleichenbacher attacks.

PKE authentication is available and fully functional in Cisco's IOS operating system. In Clavister's cOS and ZyXEL's ZyWALL USG devices, PKE is not ofﬁcially available. There is no documentation and no conﬁguration option for it and it is therefore not fully functional. Nevertheless, these implementations processed messages using PKE authentication in our tests.

Huawei implements a revised mode of the PKE mode mentioned in the RFC that saves one private key operation per peer (we call it RPKE mode). It is available in certain Huawei devices including the Secospace USG2000 series.

We were able to conﬁrm the existence of Bleichenbacher oracles in all these implementations. Here are the CVE entries and security advisories by the vendors (I will add links once they are available):

Cisco: CVE-2018-0131, Security Advisory
Huawei: CVE-2017-17305, Security Advisory
Clavister: CVE-2018-8753, Security Advisory
Zyxel: CVE-2018-9129, Security Advisory

On an abstract level, these oracles work as follows: If we replace the ciphertext of the nonce in the third handshake message with a modiﬁed RSA ciphertext, the responder will either indicate an error (Cisco, Clavister, and ZyXEL) or silently abort (Huawei) if the ciphertext is not PKCS #1 v1.5 compliant. Otherwise, the responder continues with the fourth message (Cisco and Huawei) or return an error notiﬁcation with a different message (Clavister and ZyXEL) if the ciphertext is in fact PKCS #1 v1.5 compliant. Each time we learn that the ciphertext was valid, we can advance the Bleichenbacher attack one more step.

A Bleichenbacher Attack Against PKE

If a Bleichenbacher oracle is discovered in a TLS implementation, then TLS-RSA is broken since one can compute the Premaster Secret and the TLS session keys without any time limit on the usage of the oracle. For IKEv1, the situation is more difﬁcult: Even if there is a strong Bleichenbacher oracle in PKE and RPKE mode, our attack must succeed within the lifetime of the IKEv1 Phase 1 session, since a Diffie-Hellman key exchange during the handshake provides an additional layer of security that is not present in TLS-RSA. For example, for Cisco this time limit is currently ﬁxed to 60 seconds for IKEv1 and 240 seconds for IKEv2.

To phrase it differently: In TLS-RSA, a Bleichenbacher oracle allows to perform an ex post attack to break the conﬁdentiality of the TLS session later on, whereas in IKEv1 a Bleichenbacher oracle only can be used to perform an online attack to impersonate one of the two parties in real time.

Bleichenbacher attack against IKEv1 PKE based authentication.

The figure above depicts a direct attack on IKEv1 PKE:

The attackers initiate an IKEv1 PKE based key exchange with Responder A and adhere to the protocol until receiving the fourth message. They extract the encrypted nonce from this message, and record the other public values of the handshake.
The attackers keep the IKE handshake with Responder A alive as long as the responder allows. For Cisco and ZyXEL we know that handshakes are cancelled after 60 seconds, Clavister and Huawei do so after 30 seconds.
The attackers initiate several parallel PKE based key exchanges to Responder B.

In each of these exchanges, they send and receive the ﬁrst two messages according to the protocol speciﬁcations.
In the third message, they include a modiﬁed version of the encrypted nonce according to the the Bleichenbacher attack methodology.
They wait until they receive an answer or they can reliably determine that this message will not be sent (timeout or reception of a repeated second handshake message).

After receiving enough answers from Responder B, the attackers can compute the plaintext of the nonce.
The attackers now have all the information to complete the key derivation and the handshake. They thus can impersonate Responder B to Responder A.

Key Reuse

Maintaining individual keys and key pairs for each protocol version, mode, and authentication method of IKE is difﬁcult to achieve in practice. It is oftentimes simply not supported by implementations. This is the case with the implementations by Clavister and ZyXEL, for example. Thus, it is common practice to have only one RSA key pair for the whole IKE protocol family. The actual security of the protocol family in this case crucially depends on its cross-ciphersuite and cross-version security. In fact, our Huawei test device reuses its RSA key pair even for SSH host identification, which further exposes this key pair.

A Cross-Protocol Version Attack with Digital Signature Based Authentication

Signature Forgery Using Bleichenbacher's Attack

It is well known that in the case of RSA, performing a decryption and creating a signature is mathematically the same operation. Bleichenbacher's original paper already mentioned that the attack could also be used to forge signatures over attacker-chosen data. In two papers that my colleagues at our chair have published, this has been exploited for attacks on XML-based Web Services, TLS 1.3, and Google's QUIC protocol. The ROBOT paper used this attack to forge a signature from Facebook's web servers as proof of exploitability.

IKEv2 With Digital Signatures

Digital signature based authentication is supported by both IKEv1 and IKEv2. We focus here on IKEv2 because on Cisco routers, an IKEv2 handshake may take up to four minutes. This more relaxed timer compared to IKEv1 makes it an interesting attack target.

I promised that this blogpost will only give a comprehensive summary, therefore I am skipping all the details about IKEv2 here. It is enough to know that the structure of IKEv2 is fundamentally different from IKEv1.

If you're familiar with IT-security, then you will believe me that if digital signatures are used for authentication, it is not particularly good if an attacker can get a signature over attacker chosen data. We managed to develop an attack that exploits an IKEv1 Bleichenbacher oracle at some peer A to get a signature that can be used to break the IKEv2 authentication at another peer B. This requires that peer A reuses its key pair for IKEv2 also for IKEv1. For the details, please read our paper [alternative link to the paper].

Evaluation and Results

For testing the attack, we used a Cisco ASR 1001-X router running IOS XE in version 03.16.02.S with IOS version 15.5(3)S2. Unfortunately, Cisco's implementation is not optimized for throughput. From our observations we assume that all cryptographic calculations for IKE are done by the device's CPU despite it having a hardware accelerator for cryptography. One can easily overload the device's CPU for several seconds with a standard PC bursting handshake messages, even with the default limit for concurrent handshakes. And even if the CPU load is kept below 100 %, we nevertheless observed packet loss.

For the decryption attack on Cisco's IKEv1 responder, we need to ﬁnish the Bleichenbacher attack in 60 seconds. If the public key of our ASR 1001-X router is 1024 bits long, we measured an average of 850 responses to Bleichenbacher requests per second. Therefore, an attack must succeed with at most 51,000 Bleichenbacher requests.

But another limit is the management of Security Associations (SAs). There is a global limit of 900 Phase 1 SAs under negotiation per Cisco device in the default conﬁguration. If this number is exceeded, one is blocked. Thus, one cannot start individual handshakes for each Bleichenbacher request to issue. Instead, SAs have to be reused as long as their error counter allows. Furthermore, establishing SAs with Cisco IOS is really slow. During the attack, the negotiations in the first two messages of IKEv1 require more time than the actual Bleichenbacher attack.

We managed to perform a successful decryption attack against our ASR 1001-X router with approximately 19,000 Bleichenbacher requests. However, due to the necessary SA negotiations, the attack took 13 minutes.

For the statistics and for the attack evaluation of digital signature forgery, we used a simulator with an oracle that behaves exactly as the ones by Cisco, Clavister, and ZyXEL. We found that about 26% of attacks against IKEv1 could be successful based on the cryptographic performance of our Cisco device. For digital signature forgery, about 22% of attacks could be successful under the same assumptions.

Note that (without a patched IOS), only non-cryptographic performance issues prevented a succesful attack on our Cisco device. There might be faster devices that do not suffer from this. Also note that a too slow Bleichenbacher attack does not permanently lock out attackers. If a timeout occurs, they can just start over with a new attack using fresh values hoping to require fewer requests. If the victim has deployed multiple responders sharing one key pair (e. g. for load balancing), this could also be leveraged to speed up an attack.

Responsible Disclosure

We reported our ﬁndings to Cisco, Huawei, Clavister, and ZyXEL. Cisco published ﬁxes with IOS XE versions 16.3.6, 16.6.3, and 16.7.1. They further informed us that the PKE mode will be removed with the next major release.

Huawei published ﬁrmware version V300R001C10SPH702 for the Secospace USG2000 series that removes the Bleichenbacher oracle and the crash bugs we identiﬁed. Customers who use other affected Huawei devices will be contacted directly by their support team as part of a need-to-know strategy.

Clavister removed the vulnerable authentication method with cOS version 12.00.09. ZyXEL responded that our ZyWALL USG 100 test device is from a legacy model series that is end-of-support. Therefore, these devices will not receive a ﬁx. For the successor models, the patched ﬁrmware version ZLD 4.32 (Release Notes) is available.

FAQs

Why don't you have a cool name for this attack?
The attack itself already has a name, it's Bleichenbacher's attack. We just show how Bleichenbacher attacks can be applied to IKE and how they can break the protocol's security. So, if you like, call it IPsec-Bleichenbacher or IKE-Bleichenbacher.
Do you have a logo for the attack?
No.
My machine was running a vulnerable firmware. Have I been attacked?
We have no indication that the attack was ever used in the wild. However, if you are still concerned, check your logs. The attack is not silent. If your machine was used for a Bleichenbacher attack, there should be many log entries about decryption errors. If your machine was the one that got tricked (Responder A in our figures), then you could probably find log entries about unfinished handshake attempts.
Where can I learn more?
First of all, you can read the paper [alternative link to the paper]. Second, you can watch the presentation, either live at the conference or later on this page.
What else does the paper contain?
The paper contains a lot more details than this blogpost. It explains all authentication methods including IKEv2 and it gives message flow diagrams of the protocols. There, we describe a variant of the attack that uses the Bleichenbacher oracles to forge signatures to target IKEv2. Furthermore, we describe the quirks of Huawei's implementation including crash bugs that could allow for Denial-of-Service attacks. Last but not least, it describes a dictionary attack against the PSK mode of authentication that is covered in a separate blogpost.

Media Coverage, Blogs, and more

English

German

CertCrunchy - Just A Silly Recon Tool That Uses Data From SSL Certificates To Find Potential Host Names

It just a silly python script that either retrieves SSL Certificate based data from online sources, currently https://crt.sh/, https://certdb.com/, https://sslmate.com/certspotter/, and https://censys.io or given an IP range it will attempt to extract host information from SSL Certificates. If you want to use Censys.io you need to register for an API key.

How to install

git clone https://github.com/joda32/CertCrunchy.git
cd CertCrunchy
sudo pip3 install -r requirements.txt

How to use it?
Very simply -d to get hostnames for a specific domain
-D to get hostnames for a list of domains (just stuff it in a line-delimited text file)
-I to retrieve and parse certificates from hosts in a netblock / IP range (e.g. 192.168.0.0/24)
-T the thread count makes stuff faster, but don't over do it
-o Output file name
-f Output format CSV or JSON, CSV is the default
for the rest, I'm still working on those :)

API keys and configs
All API keys are stored in the api_keys.py file below is a list of supported APIs requiring API keys.

Censys.oi https://censys.io
VirusTotal https://www.virustotal.com/en/documentation/public-api/

Download CertCrunchy

More information

Thursday, May 21, 2020

Testing SAML Endpoints For XML Signature Wrapping Vulnerabilities

A lot can go wrong when validating SAML messages. When auditing SAML endpoints, it's important to look out for vulnerabilities in the signature validation logic. XML Signature Wrapping (XSW) against SAML is an attack where manipulated SAML message is submitted in an attempt to make the endpoint validate the signed parts of the message -- which were correctly validated -- while processing a different attacker-generated part of the message as a way to extract the authentication statements. Because the attacker can arbitrarily forge SAML assertions which are accepted as valid by the vulnerable endpoint, the impact can be severe. [1,2,3]

Testing for XSW vulnerabilities in SAML endpoints can be a tedious process, as the auditor needs to not only know the details of the various XSW techniques, but also must handle a multitude of repetitive copy-and-paste tasks and apply the appropriate encoding onto each message. The latest revision of the XSW-Attacker module in our BurpSuite extension EsPReSSo helps to make this testing process easier, and even comes with a semi-automated mode. Read on to learn more about the new release!

SAML XSW-Attacker

After a signed SAML message has been intercepted using the Burp Proxy and shown in EsPReSSO, you can open the XSW-Attacker by navigating to the SAML tab and then the Attacker tab. Select Signature Wrapping from the drop down menu, as shown in the screenshot below:

To simplify its use, the XSW-Attacker performs the attack in a two step process of initialization and execution, as reflected by its two tabs Init Attack and Execute Attack. The interface of the XSW-Attacker is depicted below.

XSW-Attacker overview

The Init Attack tab displays the current SAML message. To execute a signature wrapping attack, a payload needs to be configured in a way that values of the originally signed message are replaced with values of the attacker's choice. To do this, enter the value of a text-node you wish to replace in the Current value text-field. Insert the replacement value in the text-field labeled New value and click the Add button. Multiple values can be provided; however, all of which must be child nodes of the signed element. Valid substitution pairs and the corresponding XPath selectors are displayed in the Modifications Table. To delete an entry from the table, select the entry and press `Del`, or use the right-click menu.

Next, click the Generate vectors button - this will prepare the payloads accordingly and brings the Execute Attack tab to the front of the screen.

At the top of the Execute Attack tab, select one of the pre-generated payloads. The structure of the selected vector is explained in a shorthand syntax in the text area below the selector.
The text-area labeled Attack vector is editable and can be used to manually fine-tune the chosen payload if necessary. The button Pretty print opens up a syntax-highlighted overview of the current vector.
To submit the manipulated SAML response, use Burp's Forward button (or Go, while in the Repeater).

Automating XSW-Attacker with Burp Intruder

Burp's Intruder tool allows the sending of automated requests with varying payloads to a test target and analyzes the responses. EsPReSSO now includes a Payload Generator called XSW Payloads to facilitate when testing the XML processing endpoints for XSW vulnerabilities. The following paragraphs explain how to use the automated XSW attacker with a SAML response.

First, open an intercepted request in Burp's Intruder (e.g., by pressing `Ctrl+i`). For the attack type, select Sniper. Open the Intruder's Positions tab, clear all payload positions but the value of the XML message (the `SAMLResponse` parameter, in our example). Note: the XSW-Attacker can only handle XML messages that contain exactly one XML Signature.
Next, switch to the Payloads tab and for the Payload Type, select Extension-generated. From the newly added Select generator drop-down menu, choose XSW Payloads, as depicted in the screenshot below.

While still in the Payloads tab, disable the URL-encoding checkbox in the Payload Encoding section, since Burp Intruder deals with the encoding automatically and should suffice for most cases.
Click the Start Attack button and a new window will pop up. This window is shown below and is similar to the XSW Attacker's Init Attack tab.

Configure the payload as explained in the section above. In addition, a schema analyzer can be selected and checkboxes at the bottom of the window allow the tester to choose a specific encoding. However, for most cases the detected presets should be correct.

Click the Start Attack button and the Intruder will start sending each of the pre-generated vectors to the configured endpoint. Note that this may result in a huge number of outgoing requests. To make it easier to recognize the successful Signature Wrapping attacks, it is recommended to use the Intruder's Grep-Match functionality. As an example, consider adding the replacement values from the Modifications Table as a Grep-Match rule in the Intruder's Options tab. By doing so, a successful attack vector will be marked with a checkmark in the results table, if the response includes any of the configure grep rules.

Credits

EsPReSSO's XSW Attacker is based on the WS-Attacker [4] library by Christian Mainka and the original adoption for EsPReSSO has been implemented by Tim Günther.
Our students Nurullah Erinola, Nils Engelberts and David Herring did a great job improving the execution of XSW and implementing a much better UI.

---

[1] On Breaking SAML - Be Whoever You Want to Be
[2] Your Software at My Service
[3] Security Analysis of XAdES Validation in the CEF Digital Signature Services (DSS)
[4] WS-Attacker

Parrot Security OS 4.7 Released With New Linux Kernel, Menu Structure, Tools Improvements And Many Changes

In Sep 18 2019, Parrot Security OS 4.7 has released, with many new following changes below.

Latest Linux 5.2.x series
The new ISO files of Parrot 4.7 are being released only now, but we were the first Debian derivative distribution to introduce Linux 5.1 and 5.2 to all our users, and now ParrotSec team is ready to offer it also with our ISO files rebild cycle to support more devices and integrate all the latest linux features from the beginning.

New sandbox behavior (opt-in rather than opt-out)
Sandboxing is a great thing, and ParrotSec team was in the first line when they introduced our custom Firejail and AppArmor solution for the first time many years ago. We still want to improve such feature and ParrotSec team has a whole team dedicated to improve sandboxing and hardening of the Parrot Security OS system, but ParrotSec team had to face the many users with issues caused by the restrictions of our sandbox.

In Parrot Security OS 4.7 the sandbox is disabled by default, and users can decide wether to start an application sandboxed or not. You can easily start the sandboxed version of an installed program from the /sandbox/ folder or from a dedicated menu that ParrotSec team plans to improve in the future (meanwhile the search feature of the bottom menu will fit all your needs), or you can re-enable it by default by using the firecfg tool.

New menu structure and tools improvements
The pentesting menu structure was refactored and re-designed to make tools easier to access in a more logical hierarchical structure. New tools were also added to the project, and ParrotSec team plans to add even more in the future. Not all of them are going to be pre-installed, but a good set of tools in our repository enables pentesters to build up the perfect pentest system for their specific needs, regardless the default package selection picked by ParrotSec team.

Domain changes
To reflect the neutrality of a distro that started as a pentest-only system and became more general purpose later with Parro Home, the community voted through a democratic process to switch to parrotlinux.org as the new default domain of the project.

ParrotSec team will still use ParrotSec.org for other things (included the old email addresses), and they introduced other project domains to handle specific parts of the infrastructure.

Repository changes
ParrotSec team is preparing to integrate a future LTS branch, so they decided to rename the current repository from stable to rolling. Nothing changes for the end user, and the current Parrot Security OS branch will continue to behave the same as before, but now with a different name to better reflect the rolling release nature of the system, waiting for the LTS edition to join the Parrot Security OS family along side the rolling branch in a similar way OpenSUSE does.

New MATE 1.22 release: Parrot Security OS 4.7 ships with the latest MATE 1.22 desktop environment.

Miscellaneous: New Firefox Browser 69, the latest Radare2 and cutter versions and many other important upgrades are all aboard as expected in a properly developed rolling release distro.

How to upgrade to the lastest Parrot Security OS version
You can update your existing Parrot Security OS system with this command:
sudo parrot-upgrade

Or use the raw apt command

sudo apt update
sudo apt full-upgrade

Don't forget to use this command regularly (at least once a week) to receive the latest security updates and bugfixes from the Parrot Security OS repository.

Or you can download the latest release from official download page.

From Parrot Project Blog

Related word

How To Hack Any Whatsapp Account In 2020

The article will also be broken down into different subtopics and subcategories. This to make it easy for those who are just interested in skimming through the article to pick the part of WhatsApp hack they are most interested in. Just incase you don't have enough time to go through the entire article.

Search queries like these are a common place; Can WhatsApp be hacked? Can you read WhatsApp messages? How safe is the most popular trade fair in the world? This article gives you all the solution you need to hack any WhatsApp account, as well as how to protect yourself from a WhatsApp hack attack.

Although the messenger is now on an end-to-end encryption, WhatsApp is still not totally safe from espionage. WhatsApp chats and messages can still be accessed and read remotely, and old &deleted WhatsApp chats and messages retrieved.

WhatsApp Spy: Hack WhatsApp Chats and Messages

A very simple solution is to use a software that can hack WhatsApp remotely. All manufacturers offer to read the WhatsApp messages an extra web portal. In addition to the Whatsapp messages but can also spy on other messengers. So you can also have access to social media accounts.

The software may only be installed on a smartphone. If the user of the smartphone has been informed about the installation and effects.

WhatsApp Hacker: 3 Steps to Hack WhatsApp in 2020

You can hack Whatsapp using a second cell phone. No extra SIM card is necessary for this. The guide also works with a tablet. With this method, the other phone only needs to clone WhatsApp messages is internet connection.

The trick to hack Whatsapp successfully is not a software bug. It's the way WhatsApp has developed the setup wizard. Since there are no user accounts with passwords and you log in via the mobile number, here lies the vulnerability. But you can also protect yourself from the Whatsapp hack.

Hack WhatsApp Chat with the Best WhatsApp Hacking Tool

To read Whatsapp messages, the mobile phone number of the target must be known. The cell phone can remain locked. There is no need to install software to hack and read Whatsapp messages. Even with the PIN or fingerprint, the Whatsapp account can be hacked.

STEP 1: Create a New WhatsApp Account

To hack an account from Whatsapp, the app from the App Store must be installed on the second cell phone. After the installation of Whatsapp, target's phone number is entered. A confirmation request must be waited until access to the smartphone of the victim exists.

STEP 2: WhatsApp Account Confirmation

The confirmation of the Whatsapp account is the actual security risk of the messenger. Whatsapp usually confirms the registration via SMS. Occasionally the confirmation will also be sent by automated phone call via a phone call.

Calls and text messages can be read and taken by anyone even when the screen is locked. So that the WhatsApp hack does not stand out, the SMS must be removed from the start screen by swiping.

STEP 3: Enter Confirmation

The stolen verification PIN is now entered on the second smartphone. As a result, the WhatsApp account has been taken over by you. You can read the WhatsApp messages, which respond to this mobile phone number.

The downside to this trick is that the victim immediately notices the Whatsapp hack as soon as Whatsapp is opened. If the victim goes through the sign-in process again. The attacker loses access to the messages and no Whatsapp messages can be read.

How to Hack Someone's WhatsApp in 2020

A good way to hack a WhatsApp account is to hack whatsapp online. Here you can read WhatsApp messages via a browser and also write. The target user can continue to use his cell phone (works for iOS, Android phone etc) and does not notice the WhatsApp hack.

STEP 1: Access the Cell Phone

In order to be able to read WhatsApp messages by installing software. Access to the unlocked smartphone is required for a short time. In addition, cell phone, a computer or laptop is necessary. On this the Whatsapp messages will be read later.

STEP 2: Access WhatsApp Web

If you have access to the unlocked smartphone, Whatsapp must be started there. The Whatsapp settings include Whatsapp Web . If this is selected, Whatsapp opens a QR code scanner with the hint to open WhatsApp Web in the browser.

If the QR code is scanned in the browser with the smartphone. There is a permanent connection and Whatsapp messages can be read. If you want to hack Whatsapp in this way. You have full access to all incoming messages and you can even write messages yourself.

STEP 3: Read WhatsApp Messages

The target usually sees this Whatsapp hack only when the settings are invoked to Whatsapp Web in the app. Whatsapp messages can be read via the browser. Regardless of whether the smartphone is on home Wi-Fi or on the move. You can also hack group chats admin by just having any of the contact details.

WhatsApp Hack: How to Hack any WhatsApp account

Which is the most popular messaging app globally? Of course, you can use different apps from Android or iOS to send and receive messages. But Whatsapp remains everyone's favorite globally!

Whatsapp is one of the popular apps in the world. There are more than 2 billion active users on Whatsapp, messaging daily with the app. Why do people love WhatsApp? Whatsapp is very convenient and easy to use.

Other messaging apps like Facebook Messenger, still needs a special account to sign up for this app. If you change a new app, you'll need to add another account. This can be stressful, as you have to remember a lot of new passwords and usernames.

HACKER NT

Related articles

How To Secure Your Home Against "Internet Of Things" And FUD

TL;DR, most of the security news about IoT is full of FUD. Always put the risks in context - who can exploit this and what can the attacker do with it. Most story only covers the latter.

Introduction

There is rarely a day without news that another "Internet of Things" got hacked. "Smart" safes, "smart" rifles, "smart" cars, "smart" fridges, "smart" TVs, "smart" alarm systems, "smart" meters, "smart" bulbs, NAS devices, routers. These devices are getting hacked every day. Because most of these devices were never designed with security as a goal, and some of them have been never tested by security professionals, it is no surprise that these things are full of vulnerabilities.

Independent security researchers find these vulnerabilities, write a cool blog post or give a presentation about the vulnerability and the exploit, and the media forgets the constraints just for the sake of more clicks. "We are all doomed" we can read in the news, but sometimes the risks are buried deeply in technical jargon. Please note I blame the news sites here, not the researchers.

http://www.slideshare.net/danielmiessler/iot-attack-surfaces-defcon-2015

There are huge differences between the following risks:

Attackers can directly communicate with the router (or camera) from the Internet without authentication and exploit the vulnerability. This is the worst-case scenario. For example, an automated ransomware attack against your NAS is pretty bad.
Attackers have to position themselves in the same WAN network (e.g. Sprint mobile network in the case of Jeep hacking) to exploit the vulnerability. This is still pretty bad.
The vulnerable code can not be triggered directly from the Internet, but tricks like CSRF can be used to exploit it (details later in this post).
The vulnerable code can not be triggered directly from the Internet, and it uses a protocol/port which prevents Cross Protocol Scripting. Attackers have to access the local network before exploiting this vulnerability.

As it is the case with the worst scenario, one can find a lot of devices connected to the internet. You can always find funny stuff at http://explorer.shodanhq.com/#/explore , or use the nmap screenshot script to find your own stuff :)

Network exposure

Most devices are behind an IPv4 NAT device (e.g. home router), thus can not be reached from the Internet side by default. Except when the device configures the firewall via UPNP. Or the device has a persistence cloud connection, and the cloud can send commands to the device. Or the device uses IPv6 tunneling (e.g. Teredo), thus it is reachable from the Internet. But not every vulnerability on your home network is accessible directly from the Internet. As more and more devices and networks will support IPv6, this scenario might change, but I hope most home routers will come with a default deny configuration in their IPv6 firewall module. On the other hand, scanning for IPv6 devices blindly is not feasible due to the large number of IPv6 addresses, but some tricks might work.

If attackers can not access the device directly, there is a way to hack it through the user's browser. Just convince the victim user to visit a website, and via CSRF (Cross Site Request Forgery) and brute-forcing the device IP, it is possible to hack some devices (mostly through HTTP - if the exploit can fit into simple GET or POST commands.

If attackers can not attack the device vulnerability through the Internet directly, or via CSRF, but have connected to the same network - the network exposure shrinks significantly. And when attackers are on the same network as you, I bet you have bigger problems than the security of the IoT devices ...

Recommendations for home users

Don't buy **** you don't need

Disconnect from the power cord the IoT devices you don't need to operate 7*24.

Disable cloud connectivity if it is not necessary. For example, I have a NAS device that can be reached through the "cloud", but I have disabled it by not configuring any default gateway for the device. I prefer connecting to my network via VPN and reach all my stuff through that.

Prevent CSRF attacks. I use two tricks. Don't use the 192.168.0.x - 192.168.10.x network at-home - use an uncommon IP range instead (e.g. 192.168.156.x is better). The second trick is I configured my Adblock plugin in my primary browser to block access to my internal network. And I use another browser whenever I want to access my internal devices. Update: On Firefox you can use NoScript ABE to block access to internal resources.

Check your router configuration:

disable UPnP
check the firewall settings and disable unnecessary port forwards
check for IPv6 settings, and configure the firewall as default deny for incoming IPv6 TCP/UDP.

Change default passwords, especially for services connected to the Internet. Follow password best practices.

Run Nmap to locate new IoT in your home network :)

Run a WiFi scan to locate new WiFi access points. Let me share a personal experience with you. I moved to a new house and brought my own WiFi router with me. I plugged it in, and forget about WiFi. Months later it turned out I had two other WiFi devices in my house - the cable modem had its own integrated WiFi with default passwords printed on the bottom, and the Set-top-box was the same - default WiFi passwords printed on the bottom. And don't forget to scan for ZigBee, Bluetooth, IrDA, FM, ...

Update your devices - in case you have a lot of free time in your hand.

Don't allow your guests to connect to your home network. Set up a separated AP for them. Imagine your nephew stealing your private photos or videos from your NAS or DNLA server.

With great power, comes great responsibility. The less device you own in your house, the less time you need to maintain those.

Read the manuals of your devices. Be aware of the different interfaces. Configure it in a secure way.

Disable Teredo protocol in case you don't need IPv6.

Stop being amazed by junk hacking.

Update: Disable WebRTC: https://www.browserleaks.com/webrtc , in Chrome you can use this extension: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/webrtc-network-limiter/npeicpdbkakmehahjeeohfdhnlpdklia

Update: Prevent against DNS rebind attacks via configuring a DNS server which can block internal IP addresses. OpenDNS can block internal IP, but this is not a default option, you have to configure it.

Recommendations for vendors

For vendors, I recommend at least the followings:

Implement security during Software Development LifeCycle
Continuous security testing and bug bounties
Seamless auto-update
Opt-in cloud connectivity

Recommendations for journalists

Stop FUD. Pretty please.

The questions to ask before losing your head

who can exploit the vulnerability?
what prerequisites do we have about the attack to successfully exploit the vulnerability? Is the attacker already in your home network? If yes, you have probably bigger problems.
what can the attacker do when the exploit is successful?

And last but not least, don't forget that in the case of IoT devices, sometimes users are the product, not the customer. IoT is about collecting data for marketing purposes.

http://blog.open-xchange.com/2015/02/09/iot/