Stopping "PattyMail" Email Bugs 248
An anonymous reader writes, "In the U.S. Congressional Inquiry into the HP spy scandal, it was revealed that HP used Web bugs to track the source of leaks. HP's Fred Adler considers them a useful investigative tool which HP will keep using. Since dubbed PattyMail after HP Chairwoman Patricia Dunn, Web bugs have been around for a while. But it turns out the vulnerability they represent is far worse than first thought. Microsoft Outlook won't have a patch until 2007. The company at the center of the scandal claims they've done nothing wrong. But could repressive governments use them to track down critics? Can anything be done to stop Web bugs?"
Get rid of pics in emails (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
So why not just use a bigger graphic? Actually Outlook seems to block all graphics by default....so I don't see the problem. Though maybe it doesn't for internal mail.
Re: (Score:2)
Or, if they are like any large business (or university, as is my case), it may be pre-configured in their system image to display graphics by default (at least on internal mail).
use Pine (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Get rid of pics in emails (Score:4, Informative)
The issue discussed in TFA does not involve image bugs but iframe bugs.
Now, I don't know, but they would potentially still be triggered if you were using a "convert to plain text" filter???
Re: (Score:2)
A good fix would be to have your email client fetch all external files via a caching proxy server.
Huh? (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't think so. Please explain how your proposal would prevent the sender from detecting the user reading the mail in the following image tag, where the final part of the URL path is a uniquifier:
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It depends what the bug-sender is trying to do. If he wants to see that a particular person has opened a particular email, and he controls what identifier gets sent to that person, then by tracking when the identifier is loaded he may know that the email has been read. If an ISP fetches and caches the urls of all emails sent t
Re: (Score:2)
I think a better solution would be for each URL in every message to be rewritt
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Even one hit from a cache with an IP address not belonging to HP would indicate a potential breach of confidence and finger who forwarded the mail or exposed it to an insecure network.
Re: (Score:2)
A proxy does not get around the fact that you are downloading <img src=http://www.foo.com/email7tothrillseaker.gif >
But it does reduce the ability to track down where that email was forwarded to. Of course if a client side script gives the image a more informative name such as 10.0.0.34.sf.cnet.windowsxp.outlook11.johnsmith.em ail7tothrillseaker.gif and your email client fetches an image like that, it doesn't matter if you use a proxy or not to fetch it
Re: (Score:2)
What would work: If all ISPs or at least a great majority scan all emails for images and download _all_ the images, then the fact that an image is downloaded doesn't give the sender any information anymore. The next step would be an html feature to have images directly in the html; many legitimate uses of images do actually involve tiny images and including them directly in a webpage or email would probably be more efficient anyway; the ISP
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Not quite true. If your ISP and Bob's ISP and Alice's ISP are all different and they all download the image, then I know that the email which I sent to you has been forwarded to two different mailboxes. I may not know for sure who those mailboxes belong too - you could have forwarded it to your own home account. But I
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, the next step would be to move to a proper document format, like PDF. People don't really care how their messages are encoded, all they want is to be able to put salutations in 48-pt Monotype Corsiva in putrid pink on a bright green background. It's just a shame you can't embed a looping audio track of a small child farting and laughing, which I fear will hinder the mass acceptance of PDF as a "family-friendly" mail format
Re: (Score:2)
Images can already be imbedded in emails, and anyone that wants their html emails to have the images show up relibably already does this. It is horribly inefficient however, as mimencoding an image increases the size by a factor of about four IIRC.
High end email blasts embed all th
Re:Get rid of pics in emails (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
An email client only has any business talking to your ISP's email server on POP3 and SMTP and nothing else.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
When readnotify was mentioned during the hearings, I signed on for a trial account. In the signup page, when it asked where I heard about them, I answered that I heard about them in the Congressional Hearings on Pretexting. One web bug they used in the test messages I tried was a wav file set to play at zero volume. I didn't look at the wav file itself, so I couldn't tell if there was anything malicious in the wav file.
I did the testing from an OpenBSD machine using Sy
Re: (Score:2)
The only times this has ever mattered to me (i.e. I needed to see the pictures), the email has a link at the top that says "Can't read this email? Click here!". This opens a web page with the information in the email visible. (This was, as I recall, for WoW newsletters.)
In all other cases, I'm better without the graphics, and web bugs won't work. It makes me
Re: (Score:3)
Does word still allow automatic macro execution? That's absolutely crazy. Have people forgotten about the nasty virus-via-word-macro years?
4) Do not use HTML email. HTML makes things PRETTIER, not more useful.
Specifically, your mail client should always always be set to never fetch anything off of a server. If the mail has a link for a picture, if the picture isn't specifically sent as an attachment to the mail, then it should onl
Yes. (Score:5, Insightful)
Um, how about not reading email in HTML? Even LookOut!, er, Outlook you can set to convert mail to plain text.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Pfft, you kids and your bloatware. (Score:3, Funny)
That ought to be good enough for anybody.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Pfft, you kids and your bloatware. (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
telnet [mailhost] 143
a01 LOGIN [username] [password]
a02 SELECT Inbox
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
> configure it for text-only
didn't work, since I easily tracked this text only email back to zdnet. [zdnet.com]
:^)
Re: (Score:2)
That way you can still see the content, yet not annoy the sender. Should be pretty easy with Sendmail and a Procmail rule. It would break PGP S/MIME
Re: (Score:2)
If you use spamd [openbsd.org] in greylisting mode, you will be even more surprised
Re: (Score:2)
Many email clients offer the chance to view only the plaintext representation, but if you forward the email to other parties, the html block continues to propagate. That means web bugs will still track most of the journey, as long as a number of people don't disable html or remote-image-fetching features.
How many people (besides c|net reporters today) are paranoid enough to view-as-text, cut and paste only the text, and then forward a sanitized version of the message? At this point, it's easier to just
But... (Score:2)
A new message leaves the reference too vague for most Bid'ness Bob's to understand the question. You'd have to include the message or eight pages of text to get them into context on the discussion. That kind of defeats "it's easier" part of your suggestion.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'll feed the troll. Fire up mail.app. Go to Preferences->Viewing. Un-check "Display remote images in HTML messages". When an HTML message comes in and you want to see the message but not those question marks, press Command-Option-P. Now you have a plain-text view. Want to go back to HTML? Command-].
Enjoy.
Re: (Score:2)
I laughed.
Usual FUD (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Usual FUD (Score:4, Insightful)
"Can anything be done to stop Web bugs?" (Score:5, Funny)
Moving forward. (Score:5, Funny)
I've even heard that someone is working on a revolutionary OS that runs entirely in text mode, and uses command-line control, and is completely impervious to web bugs, Windows trojans, and other such infestations.
Re:Moving forward. (Score:4, Funny)
Alternatively you can unplug the three pronged virus enabler device that runs from every computer to the electrical socket.
Apple Ultra Cube (Score:2)
Ah. You might have also heard of the secret Apple Ultra-Cube project. An amazing revolutionary project that was revolutionary because not only did not come without a floppy drive, it came without USB and CD/DVD as well (in order for Apple to force us to leave behind clumsy legacy storage). Driver problems were a thing of the past: it interfaced equally well with ANY peripheral hardware available. The amazingly simple interface design completely got rid of cable-clutter. It was hard
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Apparently , a new computer virus has been engineered by a user of America Online that is unparalleled in its destructive capability. Other, more well-known viruses such as Stoned, Airwolf, and Michaelangelo pale in comparison to the prospects of this newest creation by a warped mentality.
What makes this virus so terrifying is the fact that no program needs to be exchanged for a new computer to be infected. It can be spread through the existing e-mail sy
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
One point, though, is that those packing peanuts are intended to protect the valuable contents of the package during shipment. Without them, you'll see a pile of broken junk when you open the box.
HTML formatting is like doodling on the envelope and using a fancy stamp to mail your mortgage payment. It's worthless and will probably be ignored.
That's a Lot of Fallout (Score:2)
You know you've done something wrong when your name becomes a common term for something evil like PattyMail. I certainly hope she's still not blowing this off like she didn't do anything wrong. Then again, if everyone in corporate America does this, I hope that comes to light also.
Lesson for leakers (Score:2)
Print the email, and store it in a safe place.
Transcribe the information to another paper media, and pass that along as anonymously as possible - the mail with non-lick stamps and evelopes possibly.
So, is it spyware? (Score:5, Interesting)
So, is this spyware, or not? I would say yes. The website is spyware, as it is tracking where it's user comes from....but then isn't all of the internet spyware?
The ZDnet article asks it best......"Phoning home? Deception? It must be spyware. Right? At least if you're a politician that's not well steeped in technology, it must be. Or is that the case? Maybe it is spyware after all. And maybe all HTML-based e-mail should visibly disclose that the page contains "tracking" elements with links back to more information on what those elements do and what the privacy policy of the sender is. Does PattyMail qualify as spyware and should the senders of HTML-based e-mail disclose their use of trackable graphical elements in the e-mail itself? Feel free to answer below."
Why would the sender have to do a thing? (Score:2)
Why would the sender have to identify email as such? The "bad" senders would ignore such requirements anyway. Realize instead that any email client can easily recognize such emails by looking at the links inside the body of the mail. This would be extremely reliable and foolproof (i.e. anything that uses
Solution is NOT regulation. (Score:4, Insightful)
The solution here isn't regulation. It's just for people to decide whether a feature (in this case, HTML mail) is really worth the risk.
Alterately, we could 'neuter' HTML mail so that only the most basic formatting commands worked; use it purely as a style markup language, with no iframes, images, or externally linked text. That seems like it would solve the problem while preserving the reason 90% of idiot users want HTML: so they can use bold/italic/flashing-red-text or whatever.
Re: (Score:2)
Legislating against this is ridiculous. The definition of "tracking elements" is prohibitively vague. It works just as well whether you put a 1x1 invisible gif at the bottom, or a 3
Re: (Score:2)
Plain Text Only (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Plain Text Only (Score:4, Funny)
Don't read your email in HTML format. Problem solved.
Paul Tomblin said it best. (Score:5, Funny)
"The PROPER way to handle HTML postings is to cancel the article, then hire a hitman to kill the poster, his wife and kids, and fuck his dog and smash his computer into little bits. Anything more is just extremism."
- Paul Tomblin was talking about USENET when he said this, but he was right.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
I can name the solution in four words (Score:2)
United States Postal Service
Four more words for you (Score:2)
How about an anonymizer for mail-induced browsing? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is that the image name will allow the user to be traced, so requesting it anonymously still indicates who inititially got the email. The image name can be generated uniqe to each email sent.
Re: (Score:2)
The sender knows who initially got the e-mail; that's the addressee. The main article was about tracking to whom the mail was forwarded. Forwarded copies will have the same image links as the original. So if the original recipient and the recipient of a forwarded copy both have anonymous image browsing, the original sender will know only that the message is being read again, but won't know from where.
Re: (Score:2)
Mutt ! (Score:2, Informative)
Finally! (Score:2, Funny)
Block in the firewall? (Score:4, Funny)
Not that easy (Score:2)
Tons of companies, including shady ones (spammers, phishers, Microsoft), use email tracking "bugs" to determine whether an email has been read, if an address is 'live,' or determine a user's IP address or location.
Blocking their IPs would be as nontrivial a process as blocking all spam-producing IPs. And we know that's not exactly easy (how's that going, SpamHaus?).
The "solution" in my mind, is just to block all the HTML elements
I can think of three ways... (Score:2, Informative)
HTML mail doesn't need network access (Score:2)
Allowing the content of an e-mail message to establish arbitrary network connections at all (or at the very least, without daully authorized consent from the user) is an immediate and obvious security risk. I understand that it is easiest to simply embed a full-fledged web browser component in the mail client, but it does not need ne
Here's a start: (Score:2)
$body =~ s///g; # get rid of IMG tags
$body =~ s/url\(.*\)//g; # get rid of CSS links too
Problem solved.
Nathan
Re: (Score:2)
$body =~ s/<img .*>//g; # get rid of IMG tags
$body =~ s/url\(.*\)//g; # get rid of CSS links too.
Problem Solved (take 2)
Re: (Score:2)
Problem NOT Solved (Score:2, Informative)
http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/?p=610 [freedom-to-tinker.com]
Security relies on ignorance (Score:2)
As the demographic of Slashdot is generally technically inclined, we see workarounds as obvious "no brainers." We offer up solutions such as "use text-only! [idiot!]" Other things like keeping up with patches and the like are also pretty similar in nature.
The fact is, the general public is non-technical and wouldn't know where to begin to look for "web bugs" or any other such vulnerability.
And as for HP claiming they
Spamhaus to the rescue? (Score:2)
With Outlook, just use a software firewall (Score:4, Insightful)
Zonealalarm's pretty basic - it* only has concepts of "local" and "Internet" zones; simply ensure that the Exchange server that it wants to connect to is in the "local" zone and that Outlook can't access the "Internet" zone.
*the version I'm using, anyway.
Can anything be done to stop Web bugs? (Score:5, Funny)
Can anything be done to stop Web bugs?
Funny you should ascii...
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, come on, what's the ansi? Come on! WT^H^H UTF is the answer?
Two Solutions (Score:2, Informative)
Solution #2:
Schwab
Mailscanner (Score:2)
Sendmail/MailScanner/Pmail (Score:4, Informative)
www.mailscanner.info
www.pmail.com
Problem solved, oh, maybe five years ago. It amazes me that anyone just figured this was a problem NOW.
I've received hundreds, if not thousands, of emails with a {disarmed} header modification inserted by MailScanner... it's quite interesting to learn who is routinely inserting tracking bugs in their mailings.
I suppose you could also use transparent caching a'la squid to bumfuzzle some of the trackers and speed up browsing for your end users at the same time. But it seems like nowadays the bugs usually contain individualized tracking codes that would make it through the cache anyway.
You just have to strip out external references and tell the end users "that guy who sent you this is using a broken mailer". That's the strategy the HTML addicts used to create this problem, after all - they told the clueless that HTML was normal and that anybody who couldn't read it was using broken or obsolete software. I use the same line (which happens to be true) if somebody complains that they can't read company XYZ's mailings because the image links have been stripped out; "oh, company XYZ is using a broken obsolete mailer that puts external links into the text; until they learn to use the Internet you'd better find a new company to deal with or stick to phone calls".
Quit using HTML for email (Score:2)
Bugged Attachments (Score:2)
What it does have to do with is bugged attachments. Yeah, just like those old worms that portrayed executables as image files or what not. Turn off HTML all you want, but if you want to see what's in the file that is supposed to be extremely important, even vital, you still have to open the file. Thunderbird, and even Mutt won't help you with this.
I read so
Use something simple (Score:2, Informative)
My favorite (Score:2)
Traceable email? (Score:2, Funny)
HTML email by proxy could probably solve this (Score:2)
Imagine if you will, that Gmail's mail servers would instantly, upon receiving an HTML message, retrieve all cacheable resources linked by the message and save copies of those resources on Gmail's servers. The sender gets little to no useful information out of it (all they know for certain is that Gmail's servers received the message shortly after it was sent). Gmail's servers would replace URLs embedd
Re: (Score:2)
Tracking pixels are also used on web pages for CPA (cost per action (click-throughs)) and CPL (cost per lead (submissions)) campaigns.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Ok, I read the F-ing article and maybe I don't understand what *you* mean by "image bugs" but this is exactly the technique I associate with that term. Apparently ReadNotify.com is making money on their ability to do this in things other than just web pages/mail (like embedded in MS
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
It is NOT about images (Score:2, Informative)
IFRAMEs _not_ images!
http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/?p=610 [freedom-to-tinker.com]