• cum@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    387
    arrow-down
    19
    ·
    6 days ago

    What is he talking about, public WiFi can easily poison and monitor your DNS requests (most people don’t know or use encrypted DNS), and there’s still tons of non-https traffic leaks all over the place that are plain text. Even if encrypted, there’s still deep packet inspection. VPNs can mitigate DPI techniques and shift the trust from an easily snoopable public WiFi to the VPN’s more trustworthy exit servers.

    This guy really needs to elaborate on what he’s trying to say when the cyber security field very much disagrees with this stance. I’m not a huge fan of Proton, but they aren’t doing anything wrong here. You should use it for public Wi-Fi.

    • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      70
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      6 days ago

      Yup. You can grab any unencrypted data passed between the user’s browser and a server literally out of thin air when they’re connected to an open access point. You sit happily at the Starbucks with your laptop, sniffing them WiFi packets and grabbing things off of them.

      Oh and you have no idea what the myriad of apps you’re using are connecting to and whether that endpoint is encrypted. Do not underestimate the ability of firms to produce software at the absolute lowest cost with corners and walls missing.

      If I was someone who was to make money off of scamming people, one thing I’d have tried to do is to rig portable sniffers at public locations with large foot traffic and open WiFi like train stations, airports, etc. Throw em around then filter for interesting stuff. Oh here’s some personal info. Oh there’s a session token for some app. Let me see what else I can get from that app for that person.

        • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          5 days ago

          Oh nice. Just gotta dress em up like Unifi or Aruba then stick em up on the ceiling.

          • sudneo@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            5 days ago

            Yep, my partner gave one for my birthday, it’s basically plug-and-play. It can automatically harvest credentials, spoof captive portals, etc. I bet that in most places nobody would question something like this hanging on the ceiling indeed.

      • asdfasdfasdf@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        6 days ago

        We need a switch like Firefox has that disallows anything non-HTTPS, but from the phone level. Companies like Apple and Google could also eventually warn apps that they’re going to make it the default setting.

        • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          5 days ago

          Apps don’t use the system browser to connect to REST endpoints. Neither do they use the OS. Apps typically use a statically linked library. There are use cases for HTTP-only connections so it’s unlikely that those libraries would mess with forcing or even warning its users that they’ve used HTTP instead of HTTPS. Point is Google and Apple can do little in this regard. Unless they scan apps’ source code which could be possible to some extent but still difficult because URLs are often written in pieces.

          • asdfasdfasdf@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            5 days ago

            Sure, I didn’t say they use the system browser - I said the opposite. I’m saying the OS should be able to block non-HTTPS connections. If you have control of the OS you can control what protocols are used by apps, unless I’m missing something.

            What cases are there for non-HTTPS? I can’t think of any. It’s 2024. All communication should be encrypted.

            • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              5 days ago

              The OS interfaces provided to apps (generally POSIX) have no idea what HTTP is. They’re much lower level than that. If an OS is to control what protocols are used by apps, it has to offer some functionality that does HTTP for the apps and apps have to use it. Unfortunately the only way to force that would be to disable the general OS interfaces so that apps can’t just use existing libraries that use those. If you did that your OS would become useless in other ways that rely on the basic interfaces.

              The other way the OS could do anything about it is to inspect network traffic going over its network interfaces. That would be a significantly different can of worms and it’s not free in terms of processing power and therefore battery. Then you’d have the screams of privacy people that Android or iOS is looking at all network traffic.

              So all in all, the OS isn’t very well suited to police application level protocols like HTTP. At least not on devices whose primary purpose isn’t network traffic related.

      • ripcord@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        5 days ago

        Also, any unlatched, unfirewalled vulnerabilities you have are immediately available to anyone on that local WiFi network. One thing VPNs may do is cause you to ignore requests from systems on the local network, which helps.

        • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 days ago

          That’s an interesting one. I know it depends on configuration, but in the run-of-the-mill case, does connecting through VPN stop local services to listen on local IPs? I know our corpo VPN kills local LAN access but I’m curious what the default for OpenVPN/Wireguard might be.

    • asdfasdfasdf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      46
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      6 days ago

      How is DPI a problem if it’s encrypted? That would only work if the attacker had installed their CA cert on your client machine, right?

      • henfredemars@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        47
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 days ago

        I’m doing DPI on my own network and I can still view TLS certificate fingerprints and some metadata that provides a good educated guess as to what a traffic flow contains. It certainly better that it’s encrypted, but there is a little information that leaks in metadata. I think that’s what was meant.

        • catloaf@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          31
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 days ago

          True, but this is generally not useful information to anyone. They can see you’re visiting bank.com, but they still can’t see your bank details.

          It might be useful if they’re trying to target you for phishing, but a targeted attack is extremely unlikely.

          Also, any wireless equipment from the past 15 years or so supports client isolation.

      • orange@communick.news
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        6 days ago

        I think it might be confusion between inspecting plaintext metadata like SNI vs actually inspecting encrypted contents (e.g. HTTPS content, headers, etc.).

    • Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      Dpi only works if they install a cert on your phone. Else they can’t crack it (in real time) or you would receive HTTPS errors

      • ripcord@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 days ago

        You dont need to examine the contents of http traffic to do what many services call DPI.

        you can still read unencrypted traffic, like most DNS. Or even without that, you can frequently tell from the endpoint IP who someone is talking to, and what types of applications from port numbers used. Etc.

        If you’re torrenting, for example, that’s pretty easy to see.

        • Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          5 days ago

          Still not DPI. Regardless of what other manufacturers or devs call it.
          At best it’s a network monitor. Literally pihole can give you most of those stats as well.

    • Fontasia@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      Yeah, while it is true, lots of VPN companies are grifts just buying VPS’s and installing OpenVPN, this “Cyber security expert” puts far too much faith in HTTPS and probably never seen a lecture from the Black Hat conference

      • ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        5 days ago

        probably never seen a lecture from the Black Hat conference

        Not defending Robert Graham because I’m also eyebrow raising his statement. And while you may be 100% correct that he never actually stayed to listen to a lecture, he absolutely spoke at a lot of them since 2000.

        https://infocondb.org/presenter/robert-graham

      • ripcord@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 days ago

        Many VPNs using OpenVPN is…fine.

        The value adding is the VPN infrastructure they’re providing. You can’t just install the standard OpenVPN client and expect it to DO anything without some kind of service.

        True on the HTTPS thing.

    • AlecSadler@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      6 days ago

      I’m not even an expert in this stuff, but with a tool I found online I demonstrated that it was easy to snoop people’s passwords on my school’s wifi networks back in the day. It took minutes.

          • 5dh@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            31
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            6 days ago

            I’m sorry, but I don’t believe it is. Nearly all traffic is TLS. When this is attacked, you’d get TLS error. Am I missing something?

            • AlecSadler@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              6 days ago

              There exist plenty of services on school campuses that send passwords in plaintext. There are services outside of school campuses that do, too. Hell, I’ve been able to bypass 2FA checks by just navigating around them, I don’t know what else to tell you, not everything out there uses the best security practices, so don’t assume that they do.