Zum Inhalt der Seite gehen


There's a "Signal deanonymized" thing going around:
gist.github.com/hackermondev/4…

Stay calm. Deep breaths.

👉 while this is a real consideration, the only thing the attacker gets from this is a very rough (kilometers or tens of kilometers radius) location

👉 other communication platforms that use any kind of caching CDN to deliver attachments are just as affected

👉 you almost certainly should continue to use Signal, unless you specifically know that this is a big problem for you.

#Signal #InfoSec

Dieser Beitrag wurde bearbeitet. (6 Monate her)

teilten dies erneut

Als Antwort auf Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

In other words, it's not great that this is possible, but nowhere near an immediate and present danger to anyone except a very very small group of people doing very very specific things.

If you're in that group, you'd already known you are. You'd have someone to ask about this. And you'd almost certainly be using some other tools to anonymize yourself anyway.

If that's not the case, then this is almost certainly not something to lose sleep over. Signal remains a safe choice of a secure IM. 👍

Als Antwort auf Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

If you are still worried about this, my read of it is that these things might make the attack more difficult:

👉 turn off automatic downloading of media files

This makes this attack rely on you clicking the image to download it, making it very difficult for the attacker to know when to check for the cached status of the resource.

This is important, because for each attachment the attacker can only ask this question once per the period Cloudflare caches these resources (not sure exactly).

Als Antwort auf Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

You can also:

👉 turn of push notifications – this makes the attack rely on you clicking the chat to download the image

👉 turn off read notifications – again, this makes it more difficult for the attacker to know when to ask the question they can only ask once per a specific period of time

👉 use Signal over Tor or a VPN to obscure your actual location – the attacker would get the rough location of the exit node

Dieser Beitrag wurde bearbeitet. (6 Monate her)
Als Antwort auf Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

Technical details tl;dr:

- Signal (and other communication platforms) uses Cloudflare with caching enabled for media

- one can check on which Cloudflare endpoints a given attachment URL got cached (one can use a VPN for this), giving them the ability to roughly geolocate users whose Signal downloaded the file

- a patched version of Signal (or whatever app) allows the attacker to send the message with an image, and extract the attachment URL to know what URL to check for having been cached

Als Antwort auf Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

- images usually get downloaded automatically (and thus get cached on Cloudflare side)

- push notifications make this a 0-click thing, as the targeted user doesn't even have to click on a conversation to have the image downloaded

I believe this technique would work against any communication app that uses any global CDN that does endpoint caching and provides the caching status in HTTP headers of the response.

Dieser Beitrag wurde bearbeitet. (6 Monate her)
Als Antwort auf Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

I'd like to hear what @signalapp has to say about all this. There is a claimed response from Signal in that gist file, but I'd like to see it come directly from Signal before I form an opinion.
Als Antwort auf Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

as an ex cloudflare engineer I can say that cloudflare is more susceptible to this because of anycast.

Fetching a file from other cdns would not produce this outcome unless they were explicitly configured for tiered caching which is unlikely for this style of service where the attachment would be viewed a low number of times.

In a unicast world (how most cdns work) the file would be in a single region for all users and reveal nothing about the users location.

It is cloudflare that uniquely use anycast that makes this specific to them.

I agree it's not what it claims to be (not an accurate location, and could be off by whole countries), but it does reveal "closest cloudflare pop, by network topology, to the user".

Dieser Beitrag wurde bearbeitet. (6 Monate her)