34
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by Rooster@infosec.pub to c/technology@beehaw.org

Found the error Not allowed to load local resource: file:///etc/passwd while looking at infosec.pub's communities page. There's a community called "ignore me" that adds a few image tags trying to steal your passwd file.

top 20 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Rooster@infosec.pub 18 points 1 year ago
[-] drwho@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago

My first thought was that a Javascript library pulled from a CDN got spiked.

[-] himazawa@infosec.pub 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Is this, by any chance, originated from the sub called ignore? In that case is probably my bad because is set as the image of the channel. (I was playing with lemmy in the previous version and forgot about it, sorry. It will not work since your browser can't access local file that easily without breaking the sandbox :))

Edit: I removed it so you shouldn't see the alert anymore. What I wasn't expecting is that apparently every sub is loaded even if you don't visit it.

/cc @shellsharks@infosec.pub

[-] BlueBockser@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago

But... why? Why even put that URL there? Even if it was most likely harmless for all users, this still looks like an attempt at data exfiltration.

[-] himazawa@infosec.pub 1 points 1 year ago

Because I wanted to try if others URI schemas were supported instead of http / https. file:// was a valid one. Don't worry, the day an attempt of data exfil will happen, you will not see it though your console logs.

[-] farthom@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 year ago

Holy shit this is kind of unsettling. Though I would expect ALL major browsers to reject reading any local files like this..... would this kind of thing actually succeed somewhere/somehow?

[-] Rooster@infosec.pub 4 points 1 year ago

If you ran your browser as root and configured your browser to load local resources on non-local domains maybe. I think you can do that in chrome://flags but you have to explicitly list the domains allowed to do it.

I'm hoping this is just a bad joke.

[-] skullgiver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nl 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

[This comment has been deleted by an automated system]

[-] fox@vlemmy.net 1 points 1 year ago

you don't need to be root to read /etc/passwd

[-] Greg@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Are you sure? What do you get when you run $ cat /etc/passwd in terminal? Just paste the results here 😇

Edit: to anyone reading this on the future, don't actually do this, it was a joke

[-] fox@vlemmy.net 4 points 1 year ago

yup pretty sure

$ cat /etc/passwd
fox:hunter2:1000:1000::/home/fox:/usr/bin/zsh

😉

[-] animist@lemmy.one 3 points 1 year ago

Weird, all I see is *******

[-] delial@lemmy.sdf.org 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Since you told me not to. There isn't a risk on most linux systems; passwords were moved to /etc/shadow a long time ago. It only leaks the names of your users and largely useless info for most attackers:

root:x:0:0:root:/root:/bin/bash
daemon:x:1:1:daemon:/usr/sbin:/usr/sbin/nologin
bin:x:2:2:bin:/bin:/usr/sbin/nologin
sys:x:3:3:sys:/dev:/usr/sbin/nologin
sync:x:4:65534:sync:/bin:/bin/sync
games:x:5:60:games:/usr/games:/usr/sbin/nologin
man:x:6:12:man:/var/cache/man:/usr/sbin/nologin
lp:x:7:7:lp:/var/spool/lpd:/usr/sbin/nologin
mail:x:8:8:mail:/var/mail:/usr/sbin/nologin
news:x:9:9:news:/var/spool/news:/usr/sbin/nologin
uucp:x:10:10:uucp:/var/spool/uucp:/usr/sbin/nologin
proxy:x:13:13:proxy:/bin:/usr/sbin/nologin
www-data:x:33:33:www-data:/var/www:/usr/sbin/nologin
backup:x:34:34:backup:/var/backups:/usr/sbin/nologin
list:x:38:38:Mailing List Manager:/var/list:/usr/sbin/nologin
irc:x:39:39:ircd:/run/ircd:/usr/sbin/nologin
gnats:x:41:41:Gnats Bug-Reporting System (admin):/var/lib/gnats:/usr/sbin/nologin
nobody:x:65534:65534:nobody:/nonexistent:/usr/sbin/nologin
_apt:x:100:65534::/nonexistent:/usr/sbin/nologin
systemd-network:x:101:102:systemd Network Management,,,:/run/systemd:/usr/sbin/nologin
systemd-resolve:x:102:103:systemd Resolver,,,:/run/systemd:/usr/sbin/nologin
messagebus:x:999:999:System Message Bus:/:/usr/sbin/nologin
systemd-timesync:x:998:998:systemd Time Synchronization:/:/usr/sbin/nologin
systemd-coredump:x:997:997:systemd Core Dumper:/:/usr/sbin/nologin
delial:x:1000:1000:,,,:/home/delial:/bin/bash
sshd:x:103:65534::/run/sshd:/usr/sbin/nologin
xrdp:x:104:110::/run/xrdp:/usr/sbin/nologin
dictd:x:105:111:Dictd Server,,,:/var/lib/dictd:/usr/sbin/nologin
nm-openvpn:x:106:112:NetworkManager OpenVPN,,,:/var/lib/openvpn/chroot:/usr/sbin/nologin
sssd:x:107:113:SSSD system user,,,:/var/lib/sss:/usr/sbin/nologin
[-] marvin@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 year ago

Well it's not completely useless. It offers some insights into the system. Which service accounts exists, what usernames are used.

If an attacker finds a valid username they can then start bruteforcing the password.

From your account list we can see you have sshd and xrdp. Do they both provide the same kind of bruteforce protection? Are there any recent exploits for either?

[-] trachemys@iusearchlinux.fyi 2 points 1 year ago

That’s because passwd doesn’t store the password hashes. Just user names.

[-] dotslashme@infosec.pub 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Can confirm it's still there for the ignore me community.

[-] Penguincoder@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago

Nice share, thanks for the information. Definitely need to be careful both as a server operator with Lemmy, and a user of it.

[-] reverendsteveii@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago

honestly, this feels more like a proof of concept than an actual hack. passwords are almost universally encrypted and stored in /etc/shadow nowadays and when I was on the security CoP at my old job cat'ing /etc/passwd was how we proved basic read access to a system but nothing more.

[-] laenurd@lemmy.lemist.de 0 points 1 year ago

While this is concerning, I wonder what the author(s) of this were thinking would happen. I assume it's supposed to be an attempt at stealing the server's passwords, since I at least know of no browser that freely allows access to local files.

[-] ollien@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago

FWIW, /etc/passwd itself contains no passwords (the name exists for historical reasons) but it definitely is a globally accessible file that can give you clues about the target system. Given this, it's more likely the user is attempting to find out if arbitrary disk reads are possible by using a well known path on many servers.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 29 Jun 2023
34 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37699 readers
275 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS