<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://blogs.technet.com/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>Musings of a Microsoft Security Advisor</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/default.aspx</link><description>Security Advisor for Microsoft's Communication Sector in North America</description><dc:language>en-US</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2.1 SP1 (Build: 61025.2)</generator><item><title>Internet Explorer 8 Best in Class in Catching Malware</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/archive/2009/08/07/internet-explorer-8-best-in-class-in-catching-malware.aspx</link><pubDate>Fri, 07 Aug 2009 20:49:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:3271593</guid><dc:creator>Ido Dubrawsky</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><comments>http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/comments/3271593.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/commentrss.aspx?PostID=3271593</wfw:commentRss><description>According to a March 2009 report by &lt;A title="NSS Labs" href="http://nsslabs.com/" target=_blank mce_href="http://nsslabs.com"&gt;NSS Labs&lt;/A&gt;&amp;nbsp;comparing the effectiveness of various browsers in defending against malware, Internet Explorer 8 came out on top with Firefox 3.0 come in a distant second.&amp;nbsp; For more information about the tests and the results you can find the entire report &lt;A title="NSS Browser Malware Test Results" href="http://nsslabs.com/test-reports/NSS%20Labs%20Browser%20Security%20Test%20-%20Socially%20Engineered%20Malware.pdf" target=_blank mce_href="http://nsslabs.com/test-reports/NSS%20Labs%20Browser%20Security%20Test%20-%20Socially%20Engineered%20Malware.pdf"&gt;here&lt;/A&gt;.&lt;img src="http://blogs.technet.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=3271593" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><category domain="http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/archive/tags/malware/default.aspx">malware</category><category domain="http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/archive/tags/Firefox/default.aspx">Firefox</category><category domain="http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/archive/tags/Safari/default.aspx">Safari</category><category domain="http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/archive/tags/Opera/default.aspx">Opera</category><category domain="http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/archive/tags/Internet+Explorer+8/default.aspx">Internet Explorer 8</category><category domain="http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/archive/tags/Chrome/default.aspx">Chrome</category></item><item><title>Apple Finally Acknowledges Anti-Virus Software</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/archive/2008/12/02/apple-finally-acknowledges-anti-virus-software.aspx</link><pubDate>Tue, 02 Dec 2008 21:19:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:3162933</guid><dc:creator>Ido Dubrawsky</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><comments>http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/comments/3162933.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/commentrss.aspx?PostID=3162933</wfw:commentRss><description>&lt;P&gt;Apple has finally acknowledged that running anti-virus software on a Mac is a &lt;EM&gt;good thing.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/EM&gt;&amp;nbsp; In a deeply buried knowledge-base &lt;A class="" title="Apple KB article" href="http://support.apple.com/kb/HT2550" target=_blank mce_href="http://support.apple.com/kb/HT2550"&gt;article&lt;/A&gt; Apple has come forward and stated:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;"Apple encourages the widespread use of multiple antivirus utilities so that virus programmers have more than one application to circumvent, thus making the whole virus writing process more difficult."&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;It's interesting, however, to note that this information was not publicized very well and only came to light recently on PC World's &lt;A class="" title="PC World's Blog" href="http://www.pcworld.com/blogs.html" target=_blank mce_href="http://www.pcworld.com/blogs.html"&gt;blog&lt;/A&gt; today.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;img src="http://blogs.technet.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=3162933" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><category domain="http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/archive/tags/Security/default.aspx">Security</category><category domain="http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/archive/tags/MacOS/default.aspx">MacOS</category><category domain="http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/archive/tags/Apple/default.aspx">Apple</category><category domain="http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/archive/tags/Anti-Virus/default.aspx">Anti-Virus</category></item><item><title>Apple Fails to Fix DNS Flaw</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/archive/2008/07/28/apple-fails-to-fix-dns-flaw.aspx</link><pubDate>Mon, 28 Jul 2008 21:02:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:3094892</guid><dc:creator>Ido Dubrawsky</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><comments>http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/comments/3094892.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/commentrss.aspx?PostID=3094892</wfw:commentRss><description>&lt;P&gt;The &lt;A class="" title="DNS Flaw" href="http://www.doxpara.com/" target=_blank mce_href="http://www.doxpara.com/"&gt;recent flaw&lt;/A&gt; in DNS that was identified by &lt;A class="" title="Dan Kaminsky Bio" href="http://www.doxpara.com/?page_id=1159" target=_blank mce_href="http://www.doxpara.com/?page_id=1159"&gt;Dan Kaminsky&lt;/A&gt;&amp;nbsp;represents a serious threat to the overall working of the Internet for many users.&amp;nbsp; The vulnerability represented such a serious concern that Kaminsky worked with major operating system vendors and DNS software developers to coordinate the simultaneous release of fixes for this flaw.&amp;nbsp; This coordination was coordinated with the help of US CERT.&amp;nbsp; However, for reasons that remain unclear, Apple has failed to deliver a fix for this flaw in their own DNS server in Mac OS X Server.&amp;nbsp; In&amp;nbsp;their&amp;nbsp;article, "&lt;EM&gt;&lt;A class="" title="Apple DNS Flaw unpatched" href="http://db.tidbits.com/article/9706" target=_blank mce_href="http://db.tidbits.com/article/9706"&gt;Apple Fails to Patch Critical Exploited DNS Flaw&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/EM&gt;"&amp;nbsp;on the TibBits website, &lt;A class="" title="Rich Mogull's articles" href="http://db.tidbits.com/author/Rich%20Mogull" target=_blank mce_href="http://db.tidbits.com/author/Rich%20Mogull"&gt;Rich Mogull&lt;/A&gt; and &lt;A class="" title="Glenn Fleishmann's articles" href="http://db.tidbits.com/author/Glenn%20Fleishman" target=_blank mce_href="http://db.tidbits.com/author/Glenn%20Fleishman"&gt;Glenn Fleishmann&lt;/A&gt;&amp;nbsp;detail how Apple has not released a fix for the flaw for the DNS server in Mac OS X.&amp;nbsp; What this means is that any user who relies on a Mac OS X DNS server is at risk of being the victim of DNS cache poisoning and site hijacking.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; The attack is not new.&amp;nbsp; Cache poisoning has been around for quite a while, but the flaw identified by Dan Kaminsky is faster and more effective than previous flaws in this category.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;So what's the risk?&amp;nbsp; The risk is more for the consumer end-user rather than the enterprise user since consumers tend to rely more on their ISP's DNS servers &amp;nbsp;for&amp;nbsp;name resolution.&amp;nbsp; A little side note...as of Friday, July 25th 2008, some of the biggest ISPs --&amp;nbsp;AT&amp;amp;T, Bell Canada, T-Mobile, and others -- have yet to patch according to this &lt;A class="" title="ISPs slow to patch DNS flaw" href="http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2008/07/25/isps_slow_to_patch/" target=_blank mce_href="http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2008/07/25/isps_slow_to_patch/"&gt;article&lt;/A&gt;.&amp;nbsp; Anyway, the risk is that consumers (and some enterprise users) could find themselves being redirected to malicious websites where attackers can try and download malware to their machines or conduct social engineering attacks against the user.&amp;nbsp; This is certainly not a "The sky is falling" scenario when it comes to online banking as the SSL certificate mismatch would be one warning sign that could indicate to the end user that the site they are visiting is not who it claims to be.&amp;nbsp; However, there will certainly be many who could be impacted by this flaw if they did not pay attention to the certificate error or if there was no certificate at all (and the connection wasn't protected by SSL).&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;On the whole this leaves Apple users and those users who depend on Mac OS X's DNS server software in a bit of bind.&amp;nbsp; Hopefully they will move quickly on patching this flaw.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;img src="http://blogs.technet.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=3094892" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><category domain="http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/archive/tags/Security/default.aspx">Security</category><category domain="http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/archive/tags/MacOS/default.aspx">MacOS</category><category domain="http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/archive/tags/Apple/default.aspx">Apple</category><category domain="http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/archive/tags/Network+Security/default.aspx">Network Security</category><category domain="http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/archive/tags/DNS/default.aspx">DNS</category></item><item><title>Apple Losing Some of its Shine</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/archive/2008/07/25/apple-losing-some-of-its-shine.aspx</link><pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 19:08:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:3093739</guid><dc:creator>Ido Dubrawsky</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><comments>http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/comments/3093739.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/commentrss.aspx?PostID=3093739</wfw:commentRss><description>&lt;P&gt;It's been somewhat interesting when I talk with customers and people that I know and they tell me that the Mac has better security than Windows.&amp;nbsp; First thing I have to ask is what version of Windows and MacOS are they talking about?&amp;nbsp; Usually they sit down and compare OS X (either Tiger or Leopard) to Windows XP.&amp;nbsp; They don't even consider Vista in the mix...which is somewhat frustrating but nevertheless, let's continue.&amp;nbsp; They tell me how Apple has so many fewer security bugs (or bugs in general) because Apple rarely ever releases patches (unlike Microsoft where we release patches once a month) and the fact that Apple's MacOS is "immune" to malware.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Yesterday SC Magazine published an interesting article titled "&lt;EM&gt;&lt;A class="" title="Mac attacks on rise" href="http://www.scmagazineus.com/Mac-attacks-on-rise/article/112860/" target=_blank mce_href="http://www.scmagazineus.com/Mac-attacks-on-rise/article/112860/"&gt;Mac attacks on rise&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/EM&gt;" that describes how malware writers are now finding it worth their while to develop malware for the Mac platform.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; The level of the problem is certainly nowhere near it is with the Windows world but it's getting to the point now that Mac users are being cautioned not to be complacent about security.&amp;nbsp; For example, the OSX/Hovdy-A&amp;nbsp;trojan is a particular pernicious little guy that can do things like steal passwords, disable the firewall on the Mac and disable security settings.&amp;nbsp; As the Mac population grows (Apple announced recently that it has had its best quarter in its 31-year history selling 2.5 million computers) more and more malware writers and attackers are going to be looking at the Mac as the platform of opportunity.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;&lt;FONT face=tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif&gt;&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/STRONG&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;img src="http://blogs.technet.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=3093739" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><category domain="http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/archive/tags/Security/default.aspx">Security</category><category domain="http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/archive/tags/MacOS/default.aspx">MacOS</category><category domain="http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/archive/tags/Microsoft/default.aspx">Microsoft</category><category domain="http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/archive/tags/Apple/default.aspx">Apple</category><category domain="http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/archive/tags/malware/default.aspx">malware</category><category domain="http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/archive/tags/Vista/default.aspx">Vista</category></item><item><title>1024 Bit Keys may be next</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/archive/2007/05/25/1024-bit-keys-may-be-next.aspx</link><pubDate>Fri, 25 May 2007 23:39:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:1057843</guid><dc:creator>Ido Dubrawsky</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><comments>http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/comments/1057843.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/commentrss.aspx?PostID=1057843</wfw:commentRss><description>&lt;P&gt;Looks like there's been progress in cracking 1024 bit RSA keys.&amp;nbsp; Swiss researchers have been making strides along those lines and have reported some progress.&amp;nbsp; We're still several years away from a "sky is falling" scenario but it looks like the days of 1024 bit keys may be numbered.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,132184-pg,1/article.html"&gt;http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,132184-pg,1/article.html&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P mce_keep="true"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;img src="http://blogs.technet.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=1057843" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item><item><title>An Interesting Comment</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/archive/2007/04/27/an-interesting-comment.aspx</link><pubDate>Sat, 28 Apr 2007 02:44:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:835337</guid><dc:creator>Ido Dubrawsky</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><comments>http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/comments/835337.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.technet.com/idubraws/commentrss.aspx?PostID=835337</wfw:commentRss><description>&lt;P&gt;A little bit of information about me.&amp;nbsp; My name is&amp;nbsp;Ido (pronounced e-dough)&amp;nbsp;Dubrawsky and I am the Security Advisor for Microsoft's Communication Sector North America group.&amp;nbsp; My customers run the gamut from media and entertainment companies to print and publishing companies to wired and wireless telecommunications companies.&amp;nbsp; I've been working at Microsoft for only 13 months (tomorrow is my 13 month anniversary) but I have to say I have never been more impresses by the people and dedication in a company as I have seen at Microsoft.&amp;nbsp; My background include about 20 years of UNIX and Linux administration (as well as Microsoft Windows administration). I used to work in Cisco's SAFE Architecture group for 2 1/2 of the 4 1/2&amp;nbsp;odd years I was at Cisco.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;After I left Cisco I worked for SBC/AT&amp;amp;T for a year in their Callisma consulting subsidiary before I was offered this position at Microsoft&amp;nbsp;But enough about me for now...we'll continue that story later.&amp;nbsp; The reason why I wrote this particular post is because I was reading a recent &lt;A class="" title=article href="http://www.networkworld.com/news/2007/042007-hacker-breaks-into-mac-at.html?netht=042307dailynews1&amp;amp;company=Microsoft" target=_blank mce_href="http://www.networkworld.com/news/2007/042007-hacker-breaks-into-mac-at.html?netht=042307dailynews1&amp;amp;company=Microsoft"&gt;article&lt;/A&gt; in Network World about a "Hack the Mac" contest that was held during the CanSecWest conference in Vancouver recently.&amp;nbsp; What was most interesting is that one of the attendees managed to exploit a vulnerability in the Safari browser that provided access to the system -- complete access.&amp;nbsp; One of the conference's principal organizers, Dragos Rui, made the comment:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;BLOCKQUOTE&gt;
&lt;P&gt;"You see a lot of people running OS X saying it's so secure and frankly Microsoft is putting more work into security than Apple has" &lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BLOCKQUOTE&gt;
&lt;P&gt;This is amazing.&amp;nbsp; This is, in my mind,&amp;nbsp;independent acknowledgement and validation of the effort we are doing to improve the security of our software.&amp;nbsp; Remember...I come&amp;nbsp;many years&amp;nbsp;of UNIX administration as well as security consulting.&amp;nbsp; Whenever someone mentioned Microsoft and security in the same breath I used to snicker and laugh.&amp;nbsp; But in my last two years at Cisco and especially in the year I worked at SBC/AT&amp;amp;T I began to notice that Microsoft's Windows platform security had &lt;EM&gt;dramatically&lt;/EM&gt; improved...so much so that when we did a penetration test on customer's networks it was easier to gain the initial access through one of the UNIX&amp;nbsp;systems rather than the Windows systems.&amp;nbsp; This was an eye-opening experience for me and was one of the reasons why I was interested in this position.&amp;nbsp; I hope to bring to light on this blog some of the amazing security efforts that we're doing with the Windows platform in the hopes that people we realize that we have a very good security story.&amp;nbsp; When I read things like Dragos' comment above I feel that we are starting to get recognition for our efforts...now if Apple would just stop those silly ads ;-)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;img src="http://blogs.technet.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=835337" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>