advertisement
advertisement

HTTPS Has A Security Hole, But Browser Makers May Save E-tail Sites From Having To Fix It Themselves

Written by Frank Hayes
September 21st, 2011

Secure HTTP may be in trouble. The protocol that E-Commerce sites use to safely receive customers’ payment-card information can be hijacked in a matter of minutes, according to two security researchers who will demonstrate their attack at a security conference on Friday (Sept. 23). In case anyone doubts how relevant their demonstration is, their target will be a PayPal account.

The good news: The security hole can be closed by upgrading E-Commerce sites to a version of the security protocol that has been available since 2006. The bad news: Most E-Commerce Web sites and most Web browsers are still using the version with the security hole. The security-guru consensus: The sky isn’t falling yet, and browser makers may be able to implement a tweak that blocks the threat without a new security protocol.

According to Kaspersky Labs, researchers Juliano Rizzo and Thai Duong found a way to capture and decrypt HTTPS cookies on the fly. If their technique works, cyberthieves who can successfully eavesdrop on a user’s online session could hijack it, even if it’s supposed to be secure.

The security hole has been known for years, but most experts believed it was too hard to exploit for thieves to use. As a result, the OpenSSL package used by many E-Commerce sites, as well as the Firefox and Chrome browsers, still use a security protocol called Transport Layer Security (TLS) 1.0, which has the bug. Microsoft’s Internet Explorer browser and IIS Web server support a safer version of TLS, but not by default.

That means most E-Commerce sessions are using the vulnerable version of the protocol. And because of the chicken-and-egg problem of security protocols, E-Commerce sites are unwilling to raise their versions of TLS if that will block some customers whose browsers can’t handle the later version.

How serious a problem is the new attack? The demonstration on Friday (at the Ekoparty security conference in Buenos Aires, Argentina, if you’re in the neighborhood) will shed more light on the threat. But early reports are that it may be possible to close the security hole on the browser side. That means E-tailers may not have to bite the bullet and lock out customers for their own good.

Google, which has had details of the exploit since at least June, is reportedly almost ready with an update for its Chrome browser that should block the threat. There’s no word from Microsoft or Mozilla on their plans for security updates to solve the problem.


advertisement

Comments are closed.

Newsletters

StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!
advertisement

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

StorefrontBacktalk
Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.