NHacker Next
  • new
  • past
  • show
  • ask
  • show
  • jobs
  • submit
▲Debian apt security update (man-in-the-middle) (lists.debian.org)
justicz 1 hours ago [-]
I found this! I posted a semi-click-bait-ey tweet about it here [0], I think it’s important for people know how easy these bugs are to find now. It’s becoming borderline irresponsible not to audit your internet-facing code with modern AI tools.

[0] https://x.com/just1cz/status/2118009777922228361

sczi 55 minutes ago [-]
Nice work! A similar vulnerability in 2019 also found by you included the recommendation to update with:

  apt -o Acquire::http::AllowRedirect=false update
  apt -o Acquire::http::AllowRedirect=false upgrade
Since this also involves redirects, would that protect users while updating apt for this one also?
justicz 1 hours ago [-]
Speaking of which… if any of y’all work on security at OpenAI I have some questions for you about Daybreak! Please email me
hollow-moe 38 minutes ago [-]
But how do I update apt if apt is untrustable until fixed ? Good ol' .deb scp'd in dpkg'd.
thewisenerd 2 hours ago [-]
SoftTalker 1 hours ago [-]
How would an attacker inject a redirect into an apt package download?
mikepurvis 1 hours ago [-]
MITM on the network, I guess like DNS takeover or the like.

So you pass through the upstream headers but then simulate a failure/resume and supply different contents for the resumed download.

SoftTalker 55 minutes ago [-]
So apt doesn't verify signatures on what is actually downloaded?
dinosaurdynasty 46 minutes ago [-]
> Improper file handling when resuming an HTTP download allows a man-in-the-middle attacker to replace a package after verification

from the OP

APT can use HTTPS, but often doesn't, making a MITM attack easier (also the idea for a long time has been signatures are enough, and/or TLS certs used to be a lot harder to get, but at this point you should really be using both).

SoftTalker 24 minutes ago [-]
Still doesn't make sense to me. So package A is downloaded, signature verified, then package B is downloaded, but somehow the package A file is replaced? Is it something like that?
jxie2004 60 minutes ago [-]
[flagged]
1 hours ago [-]
8organicbits 2 hours ago [-]
I feel like they should release manual update instructions since the update mechanism is vulnerable. Although I see my systems already updated via unattended upgrades.

edit: On lobste.rs I see a recommendation for `apt download`: https://lobste.rs/s/h7bvma/man_middle_arbitrary_code_executi...

ChrisArchitect 37 minutes ago [-]
kitehosting 42 minutes ago [-]
[flagged]
sick_of_slop 48 minutes ago [-]
[dead]
opengrass 2 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
klez 1 hours ago [-]
I'm pretty sure apt is written in C++. Am I remembering wrong?
Palomides 1 hours ago [-]
parts of apt are being redone in rust, but anyway this seems to be a logic bug (in c++ code)
Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact
Rendered at 17:34:55 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Vercel.