Google Chrome to abandon older versions of Windows and Mac OS X April 2016

Google Chrome icon

Back in November of 2015, Google made an unwelcome announcement which was some very bad news for older Windows and older Mac OS X users.

On their Google Chrome Blog posting at that time, Google announced that it will stop providing updates to Google Chrome for the following Windows and Mac OS X versions;

  • Windows XP
  • Windows Vista
  • Mac OS X 10.6 (Snow Leopard)
  • Mac OS X 10.7 (Lion)
  • Mac OS X 10.8 (Mountain Lion)

NOTE: Linux 32-bit Distribution users see the end of this article for your sad news too, but most of you are already aware of this since it happens this month!

This does not mean Google Chrome will stop working in these OS versions — which would almost be better security wise. Instead, Google has decided to simply stop providing updates to the installed versions of Google Chrome for these OS versions.

This is very bad news since Google Chrome has Flash built in (which is updated as needed with Google Chrome). These older versions of Windows and Mac OS X will be doubly vulnerable. Over the years, these users have gotten used to not having to update Flash separately like you need to do in other browsers like Firefox, Safari, Opera, earlier versions of Internet Explorer, Pale Moon, etc.
Because Flash is built in to Google Chrome, these abandoned users will not be getting the Flash updates either.

This will make these older versions of non updated Google Chrome extremely vulnerable to browser attacks from infected websites. Malware purveyors will quickly begin to adjust their attacks (if they have not already in anticipation of this change) to look for these older vulnerable systems using outdated/vulnerable versions of Google Chrome as new attack vectors for these abandoned Windows and Mac users.

Those thinking that being a Mac user will make you impervious to attack, think again. Browser attacks are one thing that every operating system including Windows, Macs and Linux have been subject to these days. Sure Windows users get hit more often but that is because they are the biggest user base and they have the largest target on their back, but Mac users and Linux users can still get hit at times if they have outdated operating systems, Flash, Java, etc. Even Android has been hit by a banking trojan these days – reported March 9, 2016 by ESET’s We Live Security Blog.

With other browsers, you could simply remove Flash from the system and be done with it if you were concerned about it and didn’t mind losing the ability to see YouTube videos and other Flash supported content on other websites. Although, with HTML5 support coming right along, that could be moot.

Some might be quick to blame Adobe Flash, but apparently this is not the case as Adobe is quick to point out in at least two places that they support these OSes:

Plus other browsers such as Firefox clearly still support these OSes and Flash on these OSes. However, they will have to update their supported browsers to NOT include Google Chrome after April 2016 unless Google rethinks all this for at least a couple of the newer, of the older, OS versions. 😉

If Google does not give a reprieve/stay of execution, once Adobe makes their final update to Adobe Flash in April 2016 and Google updates Google Chrome the final time for these OS version users that includes that last Flash version, it will apparently be the last Google Chrome AND thereby Flash update that these Google abandoned OSes will see Google based on the Google Chrome blog article posted November 2015.

Google has been very quiet on the subject since that date so no reprieve or stay of execution even for the newer OS versions to be abandoned; Windows Vista and Mac OS X 10.8 (Mountain Lion).

It seems quite harsh to drop support for these two OS versions (Vista and Mac OS X 10.8 (Mountain Lion)) since Google supported the earlier noted OS versions like Windows XP and Mac OS X 10.6 (Snow Leopard) for so many years! But there it is.

If you are using one of these older OS versions of Windows or Mac OS X, read it and weep for the loss of a great browser like Google Chrome, and make be wise to make the move to Mozilla Firefox newest version to-date 44.0.2 (STILL supports Mac OS X 10.6 Mountain Lion), or Opera (however NO support for Mac OS X 10.6 Mountain Lion, but does support Lion and Mountain Lion), which have not, so far, abandoned these users. But they are not the only players still in the game…

There is also another browser project that has gained a lot of popularity among Windows users — the Pale Moon browser. There are versions for Windows: Pale Moon, Pale Moon 64, Portable. There are also versions for:  Atom/XP, Linux and Android on the Download tab on the website.

There is also a Mac OS X version of Pale Moon 26.1.1 Unofficial available as of February 2016. As noted on their forum page:

Important note:
The Mac OSX version of Pale Moon is still very much in development. Your assistance in bringing this build to fruition is greatly appreciated, but you can expect there to be bugs and problems for a while yet!
Any specific bugs you find that don’t have their own topic yet: please make a new topic; one bug per topic please to keep things organized.
Please also note that these builds are currently created by BitVapor and Moonchild will likely not be able to provide insight or assistance due to lack of Mac hardware and OS/build knowledge for Mac.

Windows XP Vista No Support Yellow Strip Popup Google Chrome

Windows XP Vista already shows No Support Yellow Info band in Google Chrome

Those using these older versions of Windows (See image to the right), and Mac are already getting an annoying yellow warning info band across the top of their Google Chrome browsers.It is advising them to move to a more modern operating system. Wise move on Google’s part and it also servers to show that they  do not appear to be backing down from their November 2015 announcement.

That means Google Chrome users will need to do something to address the issues by either upgrading to a more modern operating system where possible, getting a newer computer with a more modern operating system since all of these operating systems are older and most have been abandoned by their creators anyway except Vista which is coming next April 2017 (preferable security wise), or barring all that, changing to a supported browser, or using an extension to address the old version of Flash issue (see end of article posting).

If you move to another browser, it will be very important to keep Adobe Flash updated since only Google Chrome in Windows 7, 8.1 and Windows 10, or on Mac OS X: Mavericks, Yosemite and El Capitan! will include Flash updates automatically with browser updates after April 2016.
NOTE: In addition, in Windows 8.1, the latest versions of Internet Explorer (IE10, IE11), and of course the new Edge browser on Windows 10 include Flash built in and updated for you like Google Chrome does.

Older versions of Windows and Mac are not the only users to be abandoned/axed by Google Chrome in early 2016. ALL 32-bit Linux distribution versions are also being abandoned — this month — March 2016 as noted in BetaNews, Slash Dot, and PCWorld and other news outlets back in November and December 2015.

Even though many and maybe even most computers these days are 64-bit, there are still a lot of 32-bit computers and 32-bit operating systems in use around the world today so this may be a move forward for 64-bit, but it is also a sad day for all the 32-bit hardware/operating systems worldwide.

Of course, there are still several browsers like Firefox, Opera and Pale Moon available for Linux 32-bit computers —  just as there are for Windows and Mac users. There are also some alternative browsers based on Firefox available (Pale Moon noted earlier here is included), and distro-specific versions of Firefox like Iceweasel in Debian Linux, etc.)

For all users of Google Chrome, there are some Flash blocking or control Extension possibilities that can protect everyone, but particularly these older users from having Flash run all the time if they choose to continue to use Google Chrome:

Bits are Bits…Net Neutrality

But they say we'll all be better off this way (as they cut new content, innovation, consumer choice)

But they say we’ll all be better off this way (as they cut new content, innovation, consumer choice) – Imgur.com

What is net neutrality?

At its simplest, net neutrality holds that just as phone companies can’t check who’s on the line and selectively block or degrade the service of callers, everyone on the internet should start on roughly the same footing: ISPs shouldn’t slow down services, block legal content, or let companies pay for their data to get to customers faster than a competitor’s.

In this case, we’re also talking about a very specific policy: the Open Internet Order, which the FCC adopted in 2010. Under the order, wired and wireless broadband providers must disclose how they manage network traffic. Wired providers can’t block lawful content, software, services, or devices, and wireless providers can’t block websites or directly competing apps. And wired providers can’t “unreasonably discriminate” in transmitting information. The FCC has been trying in one way or another to implement net neutrality rules since 2005.

That was in the sidebar from The Verge’s article from May 14, 2014 called GAME OF PHONES: HOW VERIZON IS PLAYING THE FCC AND ITS CUSTOMERS

So very important!

Much more in the article.

I found that when I was reading a more recent article by arstechnica called Report: Verizon FiOS claimed public utility status to get government perks:

“It’s the secret that’s been hiding in plain sight,” said Harold Feld, senior VP of consumer advocacy group Public Knowledge and an expert on the FCC and telecommunications. “At the exact moment that these guys are complaining about how awful Title II is, they are trying to enjoy all the privileges of Title II on the regulated side.”

“There’s nothing illegal about it,” Feld, who wasn’t involved in writing the report, told Ars. However, “as a political point this is very useful.”

The FCC classifies broadband (such as FiOS) as an information service under Title I of the Communications Act, resulting in less strict rules than the ones applied to common carrier services (such as the traditional phone system) under Title II. But since both services are delivered over the same wire, Verizon FiOS is able to reap the benefits of utility regulation without the downsides.

Much more in this article as well.

Bits are bits. This is the point I have been pushing. Like water companies, electric companies and even telcos. There should be no fast lanes. There should be no place where they discriminate between bits. They are the water or electric company of the Internet. they provide the pipes that the data rides through. They should be simply providing the bits and not discriminating between them.

If they start discriminating between the bits, they set themselves up as the gatekeepers of the Internet. It opens the door to invasion of privacy and discrimination. It also stifles innovation by making it easier for big business to control the industry. It makes it exponentially harder for the next “Google” or “Yahoo” or other disruptive innovation to take off. If Google or Yahoo had to pay for fast lanes for their customers in the early days of the Internet, they never would have made it out of the gate. Neither will the next innovative and disruptive technology. And we will all be the losers if that happens. It will also make it harder for small businesses in general that might have an online component to their business to provide competitive services because they can’t afford to pay for those fast lanes. This will be true of small businesses that provide remote services as well as hosting, etc.

I think it is very important to contact the FCC and submit your thoughts on this very important issue of Net Neutrality which will affect us all in one way or another. Even if we are just users of the Internet, we will also feel the monetary impact, as well as freedom and privacy impact, and innovation impact. We always do.

What Do You Want Your Representatives to Ask Chairman Wheeler About Net Neutrality? – EFF.org:

Thus, Congress has an important role to play in the struggle for a neutral Internet. We know that members of the subcommittee are planning to re-write the Communications Act, and we know that letters from Congress members aren’t taken lightly by the FCC in the rulemaking process. That means it’s time to let our elected officials and the FCC know that we will fight to protect the future of our open Internet.

Here are three ways to join the debate and have your voice heard:

  1. Today, tweet your questions for FCC Chairman Wheeler during the Communications and Technology Subcommittee hearing using the hashtag #AskWheeler.
  2. Call your representative. Let’s be clear: any rules that allow Internet providers to discriminate against how we access websites would be a disaster for the open Internet.
  3. Submit comments in the FCC official rulemaking process. We’ve made it easy with our DearFCC.org public comment tool. It’s time to fill the FCC’s Open Internet docket with our voices and our stories. After all, it’s our Internet.

There are no easy solutions. But the FCC and Congress both want and need to hear from us. So let’s give them what they ask for. Let’s defend our Internet.

Support Ends today for Windows XP and Office 2003

RIP Windows XP and Office 2003!

Well, like it or not, Windows XP Home and Professional, as well as Microsoft Office 2003 support ends today, April 8, 2014.

Windows XP Home and Professional Support Ends today, April 8, 2014!

Windows XP Home and Professional Support Ends today, April 8, 2014!

 

Windows XP support end: 10 steps to cut security risks – ZDNet

“While doing nothing is an option, we do not believe that most organisations — or their auditors — will find this level of risk acceptable,” vice president and Gartner fellow Neil MacDonald said in a report, Best practices for secure use of XP after support ends.

Between 20 percent and 25 percent of enterprise systems are still running XP, and one-third of organisations continue to use it on more than 10 percent of their machines, Gartner estimates.

For those still using the venerable OS after the end of routine Microsoft updates and security patches, MacDonald has come up with 10 best practices to minimise the risks.

Rest in Peace, Windows XP – PCMag SecurityWatch

Rest in Peace Windows XP 2001-2014 You will be missed!

Rest in Peace Windows XP 2001-2014 You will be missed! Image links to PCMag article.

This is the end. Your Windows XP computer will get its last update today. Oh, it’s not going to roll over and kick the bucket, but continuing to use it will be more and more dangerous, since any new vulnerabilities that arise won’t be patched. We checked in with a number of security experts to discuss just how risky life will be for those who continue to run XP.

It’s the end of the line for Windows XP – USAToday

The software — introduced in an era before texting, Facebook, Snapchat, the iPhone and iPad — has lingered thanks to the reluctance of many consumers and small businesses to change. Despite its age, XP is the No. 2 computer operating system, and many folks are in store for a rude wake-up call.

Microsoft on Tuesday ceases official support for XP. The company will no longer issue patches or system updates to protect against viruses and other malware. If you run into any snags at all, you won’t be able to call Microsoft for technical assistance.

Microsoft Ends Support for Windows XP – Mashable

“Microsoft has provided support for Windows XP for the past 12 years. But now the time has come for us, along with our hardware and software partners, to invest our resources toward supporting more recent technologies so that we can continue to deliver great new experiences,” wrote Microsoft in an announcement.

Launched on October 25, 2001, Windows XP is one of the most successful Microsoft products ever; its successor, Windows Vista, was quickly replaced with Windows 7, and it took as long as September 2012 for Windows 7 to overtake XP as the most popular desktop operating system.

Microsoft ends support for Windows XP and Office 2003 – TheNextWeb

If you’re wondering why April 8, 2014 is the date support for both of these products ends, it’s really quite simple. Microsoft releases regular patches on Patch Tuesday, the second Tuesday of every month.

Microsoft supports its products for many years, and depending on when service packs as well as successors are released, the company eventually announces, in advance, when it will cut off support. April 8 happens to be the last Patch Tuesday for both products, meaning if security holes are found after today’s date, they won’t be plugged.

Excellent point!

Netmarketshare.com for Operating Systems pulled today showed March 2014 tallies:

Networkmarketshare, as of March 2014, pulled today, still shows Windows XP as 27.69% of the MarketShare.

Networkmarketshare, as of March 2014, pulled today, still shows Windows XP as 27.69% of the MarketShare. Link goes to metmarketshare.com

I personally still find it unbelievable that Microsoft, or any company really, would retire/pull support an OS that still garners nearly 30% of Windows users around the world.

Of course if you are an Enterprise company that can afford $200 PER PC for the first year, and increasing amounts each year THEREAFTER for Windows XP updates (security updates only by the way)…

Windows XP support will be available after April 8—just not for you – PCMag

Meet Microsoft’s Custom Support for Windows XP, described as a last-ditch effort for big businesses to quite literally buy some more time to migrate from Windows XP to a more modern operating system. The U.K. paid 5.548 million pounds to Microsoft for an additional year of support to maintain critical and important security updates for Windows XP, Office 2003, and Exchange 2003. Otherwise, Microsoft plans to end support for Windows XP by April 8.

Microsoft has been warning about the demise of Windows XP support since September, 2007, and Custom Support will extract a heavy toll from businesses that were too slow to act: up to $5 million per year (according to a report from Gartner), negotiated on a custom, per-company basis. Last year, Gartner issued a report claiming that the prices could go as high as $200 per PC, per year. The firm called such prices “punitive”.

Should consumers get the same break?

To date, Microsoft has given no indication that it will extend consumer support for Windows XP after the April 8 deadline, even though it has extended anti-malware support through July, 2015. After that date, any and all vulnerabilities found for Windows XP will live on forever, even though there are some avenues to keep your PC safe and protected after the deadline expires.

BTW: Apple‘s Mac OS X Mavericks holds 3.75% of the market (putting it between Windows 8.1 and Vista), however, if you include all Mac OS X operating systems listed: Mac OS X 10.6 1.29% (support ended), Mac OS X 10.8 1.18%, Mac OS X 10.7 1.05% Mac OS X 10.5 .24% (support ended), Mac OX X 10.4 0.06% (supported ended), and Mac OS X no version reported 0.01%, then the total is 7.58% of the operating system total market share (which puts it on the low end between Windows XP and Windows 8).

But, that does mean that only 1.59% of all Mac OS X users are running expired versions with no support.

Compare that with 27.69% of Windows users running  Windows XP.

NOTE: That doesn’t count the expired/no support users running Windows NT at 0.15%, Windows 2000 at 0.03%. Apparently Windows 98 users have finally fallen off at 0.00%.

Windows XP end of support: why it concerns you – OnWindows.com

Reto Haeni explores the risks of running Windows XP after its end of service and the benefits of migrating to newer operating systems

This article was first published in the Spring 2014 issue of Touch

Designed in a different era

Computers running Windows XP routinely experience a significantly higher malware infection rate than computers running any other supported version of Windows. Much of the elevated infection rate on Windows XP can be attributed to the fact that some of the key built-in security features included with more recent versions of Windows are not present in Windows XP. Windows XP, designed in a different era, simply can’t mitigate threats as effectively as newer operating systems, like Windows 7 and Windows 8. As the threat landscape has evolved over the past twelve years since the release of Windows XP, so has software security.

It’s time folks! If you haven’t done it yet, and if you are still running Windows XP on the Internet, it is high time to correct this by upgrading to a modern OS that is still supported, or disconnect from the Internet.

Please, unless you are a technical person who truly understands the risks and has taken steps to mitigate the overwhelming risks, then please be responsible and disconnect your Windows XP computer now!

Or move to new computer running a current version of Windows, or a Mac from Apple, or the Open Source ‘UNIX like’ Linux operating system and run Windows XP programs with Crossover as suggested here, or you could use Windows XP offline, and use a Linux LiveCD for Internet surfing and email, etc as suggested here and not mess up your offline Windows XP system. No matter how you do it, PULL THE PLUG on Windows XP – Disconnect the Ethernet or Wireless connection to the Internet! Just as soon as you get any April 8th Windows Updates on Patch Tuesday.

Unless you know what you are doing, you will be playing Russian Roulette with your Windows XP computer if you allow it to be online once Microsoft ends support after April 8, 2014. And that has been only Life Line extended support since 2009.

 

Microsoft Office 2003 support ends today, April 8, 2014!

Microsoft Office 2003 support ends today, April 8, 2014!

We also mentioned Microsoft Office 2003. Oh, yes, Microsoft Office 2003 has also expired today. No more security updates will be provided for Office 2003 either, just like Windows XP.

If you are still using Office 2003, it’s high time to remove it and move to a current version of Microsoft Office, or move to one of the Open Source alternatives such as;  Apache Foundation‘s OpenOffice.org or Document Foundation‘s LibreOffice, or move to using online versions of MS Office software like MS Office Web Apps or move over to Google’s online document handling programs; Google Docs.

 

Microsoft Security Advisory (2798897)

Microsoft Security Advisory (2798897)

This is a security advisory about fraudulent certificates that need to be revoked!

As Security Garden wrote here:

Microsoft released Security Advisory 2798897 to provide notification regarding a a fraudulent digital certificate issued by TURKTRUST Inc.

TURKTRUST Inc. incorrectly created two subsidiary Certificate Authorities: (*.EGO.GOV.TR and e-islem.kktcmerkezbankasi.org). The *.EGO.GOV.TR subsidiary CA was used to issue a fraudulent digital certificate to *.google.com.

The Certificate Trust list update is available through Windows Updates.

Be sure to apply any Windows Updates that are waiting (showing in the lower right corner in the system tray) to be installed and/or check for Windows Updates manually to be sure you have the update!

This is an important update since fraudulent digital certificates can make spoofing attacks possible.

More information at KrebsOnSecurity here:

Google and Microsoft today began warning users about active phishing attacks against Google’s online properties. The two companies said the attacks resulted from a fraudulent digital certificate that was mistakenly issued by a Turkish domain registrar.

In a blog post published today, Google said that on Dec. 24, 2012, its Chrome Web browser detected and blocked an unauthorized digital certificate for the “*.google.com” domain.

More info from WOT and Firefox and Chrome:

Google blocked both certificates in Chrome on December 26. It now plans to no longer display “Extended Validation” status in Chrome for any certificate issued by TurkTrust. It’s debating whether to also block any connection to HTTPS sites validated by the CA.

Mozilla announced that it too was revoking trust for the two problem certificates in a Firefox update landing next Tuesday. TurkTrust’s root certificate is also being excluded from Firefox for the time being. Microsoft is doing the same, as are other browser vendors.

I would imagine that Apple will be also releasing an update to their Digital Certificate list if this is a universal issue.

Dangerous Internet Explorer Flaw Jeopardizes GMail accounts

‘State-sponsored attackers’ using IE zero-day to hijack GMail accounts – ZDNet:

Microsoft’s advisory speaks of “active attacks” and follows a separate note from Google that references the IE flaw “being actively exploited in the wild for targeted attacks.”

IMPORTANT: This is not the MS12-037 that Microsoft just patched this week on Patch Tuesday.

This is a zero-day vulnerability. Both Microsoft and Google have issued warnings regarding it.

There are Twitter warnings all over the place about “Warning: State-Sponsored attackers may be trying to compromise your account or computer“.

In leiu of a patch for Internet Explorer to fix this vulnerability, Microsoft has devised a “FixIt” Tool intended to block the attack vector:

Microsoft Knowledge Base Article 2719615

Also, according to the ZDNet article:

Microsoft also recommends that Windows users deploy the Enhanced Mitigation Experience Toolkit (EMET), which helps prevent vulnerabilities in software from successfully being exploited.

However, either way, it makes great sense to use Microsoft’s “FixIt” Tool to mitigate this zero-day Internet Explorer vulnerability whether you use Internet Explorer or not.

If you do not wish to use the “FixIt Tool”, you could also use the pre-advisory instructions under the Suggested Actions section to mitigate the problem by disallowing Active Scripting from automatically running on your system (set it to prompt you to allow).

Chrome trumps IE as world’s top browser

Chrome trumps IE as world’s top browser – Computerworld

StatCounter says Google’s browser edged Microsoft’s for the week’s No. 1 spot; Chrome on pace to take May, too

Google Chrome eclipsed Microsoft's Internet Explorer for the first time last week, according to an Irish metrics company. (Data: StatCounter.)

Google Chrome eclipsed Microsoft’s Internet Explorer for the first time last week, according to an Irish metrics company. (Data: StatCounter.)

This is quite understandable since Google Chrome has most of the same great extensions as Mozilla Firefox, as well as tab separation/sandboxing, active updating happens behind the scenes, and it has built-in Flash plugin so users don’t have to worry about keeping Flash updated separately since Google Chrome takes care of that.

And for those who use more than one OS, it is also cross platform.

I use Google Chrome in Linux, and as a alternative browser in both Mac and Windows, although my main browser in Mac and Linux is still Firefox for the most part.

Still, I am impressed by the money being paid out for Bounties for vulnerabilities in the Google Chrome browser. I really like that they are so pro-active about getting vulnerabilities corrected.

Google Chrome certainly makes life easier!

Certificate Authoritities, DigiNotar, GlobalSign, OSes, Browsers, Adobe, more

[tweetmeme source=”franscomputerservices” only_single=false]DigiNotar Breach Affected 531 Certificates (Tom’s Hardware):

The break-in in Certificate Authority (CA) DigiNotar back in July was much worse than previously thought.

A preliminary analysis of the incident now claims that there have been 531 fraudulent certificates. The hackers may have explored DigiNotar’s servers for the first time in early June and gained control on June 17. The company detected the hack on June 19, but failed to prevent the creation of the first rogue certificate on July 2. The hacker activity apparently ended on July 22.

As a Aryeh Goretsky stated at Scot’s Newsletter Forums noted so succinctly:

DigiNotar, a company which issues digital certificates used to establish cryptographically-secure connections to web sites, was hacked, and over 500 certificates were acquired for high-profile web sites. Amongst other things, this would allow someone* to monitor what would otherwise be secure, private connections to those sites. Passwords, emails, personally-identifiable information and other sensitive data could be viewed by someone* who would otherwise not be able to see that information.

*Such as a government, ISP, or government-owned ISP.

Aryeh, I couldn’t have said it better myself.

And highlighting the fact that it could be a government, ISP, or government-owned ISP is spot on to the concerns.

There was recently an article that suggested that this has already happened in Iran.

Hackers steal SSL certificates for CIA, MI6, Mossad (Computerworld):

Criminals acquired over 500 DigiNotar digital certificates; Mozilla and Google issue ‘death sentence’

Among the affected domains, said Markham, are those for the CIA, MI6, Mossad, Microsoft, Yahoo, Skype, Facebook, Twitter and Microsoft’s Windows Update service.

Google has pointed fingers at Iran, saying that attacks using an ill-gotten certificate for google.com had targeted Iranian users.

Much more in this two page article where a link to Markham’s blog details more about this:

On Monday August 29th at 6.30pm BST Mozilla was informed by Google about a misissued certificate for *.google.com which was being used in active attacks on users in Iran. This certificate was chained to the root of the Dutch CA “DigiNotar”. Since that notification, I have been part of the Mozilla team working on our response.

The CNs concerned were as follows:

*.10million.org
*.balatarin.com
*.google.com
*.logmein.com
*.microsoft.com
*.mossad.gov.il
*.skype.com
*.torproject.org
*.walla.co.il
*.wordpress.com
addons.mozilla.org
azadegi.com
DigiCert Root CA
Equifax Root CA
friends.walla.co.il
login.yahoo.com
Thawte Root CA
twitter.com
VeriSign Root CA
wordpress.com
http://www.cia.gov
http://www.facebook.com
http://www.sis.gov.uk

So much more in Markham’s blog posting.

Delay in disclosing SSL theft put Iranian activists at risk, says researcher (Computerworld)

The delay in disclosing a theft of the digital certificates for some of the Web’s biggest sites, including Google, Skype, Microsoft and Yahoo, put Iranian activists’ lives at risk, a researcher argued Wednesday.

But I think EFF explains the issues best.

Iranian Man-in-the-Middle Attack Against Google Demonstrates Dangerous Weakness of Certificate Authorities (EFF)

What’s worse than finding a worm in your apple? Finding half a worm.

What’s worse than discovering that someone has launched a man-in-the-middle attack against Iranian Google users, silently intercepting everything from email to search results and possibly putting Iranian activists in danger? Discovering that this attack has been active for two months.

People all over the world use Google services for sensitive or private communications every day. Google enables encrypted connections to these services in order to protect users from spying by those who control the network, such as ISPs and governments. Today, the security of this encryption relies entirely on certificates issued by certificate authorities (CAs), which continue to prove vulnerable to attack. When an attacker obtains a fraudulent certificate, he can use it to eavesdrop on the traffic between a user and a website even while the user believes that the connection is secure.

The certificate authority system was created decades ago in an era when the biggest on-line security concern was thought to be protecting users from having their credit card numbers intercepted by petty criminals. Today Internet users rely on this system to protect their privacy against nation-states. We doubt it can bear this burden.

This latest attack was reportedly caught by a user running the Google Chrome browser in Iran who noticed a warning produced by the “public key pinning” feature which Google introduced in May of this year. Basically, Google hard-coded the fingerprints for its own sites’ encryption keys into Chrome, and told the browser to simply ignore contrary information from certificate authorities. That meant that even if an attacker got a hold of a fake certificate for a Google site—as this attacker did—newer versions of the Chrome browser would not be fooled.

Certificate authorities have been caught issuing fraudulent certificates in at least half a dozen high-profile cases in the past two years and EFF has voiced concerns that the problem may be even more widespread. But this is the first time that a fake certificate is known to have been successfully used in the wild. Even worse, the certificate in this attack was issued on July 10th 2011, almost two months ago, and may well have been used to spy on an unknown number of Internet users in Iran from the moment of its issuance until it was revoked earlier today. To be effective, fraudulent certificates do not need to have been issued by the same authority that issued the legitimate certificates. For example, the certificate in question here was issued by a Dutch certificate authority with which Google had no business relationship at all; that didn’t make it any less acceptable to web browsers.

Much more in the article…

This problem is not only related to issues of privacy related to people who’s lives would be in danger, but also, victims of malware purveyors as well.

Cryptographic keys for SSL sites are only as good as the honesty of the holder and issuer of those keys, as well as the honesty and security diligence of the issuer, in this case DigiNotar.

They would like us to think that SSL is extremely safe, but it’s not as safe as those who issue them would like us to believe either. Anyone with money can purchase a SSL certificate, and there have been malware purveyors that have also bought them so folks would ‘feel’ secure. If you see the lock, you think, “Safe”. That’s what they want you to think.

However, just like anyone can purchase what is considered a ‘legitimate’ SSL certificate, good, bad or indifferent, there are worse things.

‘Legitimate’ SSL certificates can be created by site owners as well, good, bad, or indifferent.

The companies that sell SSL certificates and browser makers put out root certificates for their browers and show green or gold with the lock for those obtained by big name sellers of these certificates. So if you are legitimate site owner who creates their own to save money, you are automatically assumed to be ‘not legitimate’ by browsers and it shows as red/dangerous to users.

I don’t see what the solution is, but it really doesn’t matter whether you make your own, or if you buy one, you are still playing craps with SSL certificates in many ways these days.

As Corrine noted in the same topic at Scot’s Newsletter Forums:

Microsoft Security Advisory 2607712 has been updated to revoke the trust of the DigiNotar root certificates by placing them into the Microsoft Untrusted Certificate Store.

The update is available via Automatic Update and applies to all supported releases of Microsoft Windows, including Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows 7, Windows Server 2008, and Windows Server 2008 R2.

Within short order, Mozilla sent out updates to their products including Firefox, Thunderbird, et. revoking the certificates.

Opera has done the same thing yesterday, disabling the root store for DigiNotar.

Because Apple was slow to act, one researcher (thanks Corrine) rapped Apple for not blocking the stolen SSL certificates, and various places on the Internet were trying to help Mac users to take care of disabling and removing the DigiNotar certificates from the KeyChain so Safari and other browsers would be safer online on the Mac. Since then, Apple released an update to revoke DigiNotar from their trusted list:

If you are running an older Mac you can still protect yourself, but you will need to do it manually. You can follow the excellent instructions posted over at the ps | Enable blog.

And most recently, Adobe has posted instructions on how to remove DigiNotar from the Adobe Approved Trust List (AATL) for Adobe Reader.

And here we go again (thanks zlim)…

GlobalSign Stops Issuing Digital Certificates After Hack (PCWorld)

Second firms stops issuing digital certificates (CNET)

How many more will have fallen before it’s all said and done? I am beginning to wonder if we wouldn’t be better off just generating our own SSL certificates, it would likely be as safe as this fiasco has become…