Uber Discloses Database Breach, Targets GitHub With Subpoena 47
New submitter SwampApe tips news that Uber has revealed a database breach from 2014. The company says the database contained names and diver's license numbers of their drivers, about 50,000 of which were accessed by an unauthorized third party. As part of their investigation into who was behind the breach, Uber has filed a lawsuit which includes a subpoena request for GitHub. "Uber's security team knows the public IP address used by the database invader, and wants to link that number against the IP addresses and usernames of anyone who looked at the GitHub-hosted gist in question – ID 9556255 – which we note today no longer exists. It's possible the gist contained a leaked login key, or internal source code that contained a key that should not have been made public."
I'll bet an Uber developer leaked it (Score:5, Insightful)
Now, why would they be asking about a gitHub gist?
I'll bet one of Uber's own developers leaked the key. Presumably, by accident.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
hackers constantly trawl github for morons that leave keys in their code. So many organizations have been caught out now, especially ones that host on amazon, that their is simply no excuse for this happening anymore.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Neither do I. They call it social coding. Sometimes it's agile social coding within the cloud.
I call it a security risk because it's too easy for idiots to accidentally publish theyr keys, and the more I see GitHub going up and down like a toilet seat every time some idiot feels like doing a DDOS attack, the more I think we've spent years working on DVCSes only to re-create the single-point-of-failure that we had with c
Re: (Score:2)
Github provides (private) hosting for proprietary projects, for a price. My guess is they didn't realise the gist wasn't protected similarly.
Just a distraction from the real fail... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Just a distraction from the real fail... (Score:5, Insightful)
Any hacker with any decent opsec would not be showing their actual IP address. The subpoena request is just smoke and mirrors to hide Uber's own security fail. Even if GitHub were to hand over the data, they would likely find nothing useful. Uber know that GitHub will not hand over that data without a fight. I am willing to bet that Uber are going to start claiming that the hack isn't their fault because GitHub won't hand over the data. If Uber already know the public IP of the hacker, why do they need the info from GitHub to proceed? Meanwhile the actual security fail of Uber making their database access info publicly accessible gets overlooked.
Because they think it was a crime of opportunity, which sounds like a reasonable supposition -- the hacker stumbled across the key in Github, then either gave (or sold) the key to someone else to do the hack, or did the hack himself. Clearly he wouldn't have downloaded the data using his own IP address, but it's entirely possible that when he found the key on Github, he was using a traceable IP.
By admitting that one of their developers leaked the key himself on Github, it seems a little late for them to claim that they have no responsibility for the breach.
Re: (Score:1)
What kind of fucking retard uploads secrets to github?
What kind of fucking retard company employs retards like that?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
It is a very common occurrence. despite what many like to believe, the vast majority of developers are completely clueless when it comes to security and handling secrets.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Lots of companies employ junior devs they can push around.
I'd bet my life that Uber has no opsec procedure at all for sharing keys on their dev team.
The dev was an idiot, sure, but s/he probably thought a secret gist was "good enough". And now this kid is gonna be the fall guy/girl for a failure of technical and managerial leadership.
Re: (Score:1)
I know, right? Git is so intuitive and easy to figure out that there's *no way* anybody should be doing that accidentally.
Re: (Score:3)
gists have nothing to do with git.
It's a GitHub proprietary feature. It's kinda like a pastebin, but it sticks around. You can publish gists from a repo, though.
Developers use them to share little snippets that don't deserve a repo. They are often used for support cases, as a home for snippets used in a programming blog, etc. etc. etc. A developer might make a gist to show to an open-source author or to a commercial software vendor's support team, etc. Like, "here's what I did, what is wrong with this?" ki
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The same kind that constantly commits vim swap, openoffice lock files and other junk files into svn. From my experience, is not that rare, and they aren't retarded, just careless or insufficiently trained
Re:Just a distraction from the real fail... (Score:5, Informative)
Because they think it was a crime of opportunity, which sounds like a reasonable supposition -- the hacker stumbled across the key in Github, then either gave (or sold) the key to someone else to do the hack, or did the hack himself. Clearly he wouldn't have downloaded the data using his own IP address, but it's entirely possible that when he found the key on Github, he was using a traceable IP.
There could be hundreds of legitimate accesses of that file. If the hacker was indeed using a hidden IP address to access the database, but his real IP to download the gist, how are Uber going to determine that from all the other legitimate accesses? If the hacker gave away or sold that information, there is going to be no way for Uber to determine a link at all. This just seems like a fishing expedition to hide the real fail.
By admitting that one of their developers leaked the key himself on Github, it seems a little late for them to claim that they have no responsibility for the breach.
Ahh... but the thing is that Uber haven't admitted to anything like that. By serving a subpoena against GitHub, it is clear that is what has happened, but nowhere have I seen Uber actually admit this. If Uber were actually to admit this, it would likely open them up to lawsuits from their affected drivers.
Re: (Score:2)
Because they think it was a crime of opportunity, which sounds like a reasonable supposition -- the hacker stumbled across the key in Github, then either gave (or sold) the key to someone else to do the hack, or did the hack himself. Clearly he wouldn't have downloaded the data using his own IP address, but it's entirely possible that when he found the key on Github, he was using a traceable IP.
There could be hundreds of legitimate accesses of that file. If the hacker was indeed using a hidden IP address to access the database, but his real IP to download the gist, how are Uber going to determine that from all the other legitimate accesses? If the hacker gave away or sold that information, there is going to be no way for Uber to determine a link at all. This just seems like a fishing expedition to hide the real fail.
Or there could be 2 accesses of that file, depending on how long they left it up there. Right now, only Github knows how many people accessed it.
By admitting that one of their developers leaked the key himself on Github, it seems a little late for them to claim that they have no responsibility for the breach.
Ahh... but the thing is that Uber haven't admitted to anything like that. By serving a subpoena against GitHub, it is clear that is what has happened, but nowhere have I seen Uber actually admit this. If Uber were actually to admit this, it would likely open them up to lawsuits from their affected drivers.
They provided the exact Gist URL that had the information, if the drivers want to sue, they can subpoena Github themselves.
Re:Just a distraction from the real fail... (Score:4, Informative)
"Or there could be 2 accesses of that file, depending on how long they left it up there"
They're asking for 6 months of data. Here's the subpoena.
http://regmedia.co.uk/2015/02/... [regmedia.co.uk]
Re: (Score:2)
which means very little in itself.
Re: Just a distraction from the real fail... (Score:1)
Because you can't hard code keys into publicly available code without letting people see those keys?
Not much of a reason.
Even with closed source the key can still leak.
Re: (Score:3)
Why would they? They'll simply rise a lawsuit demanding damages against them all. Since that's a civil suit, the accused need to prove their innocence, which will take years and absurd amounts of money - or they can settle out of court with Uber for a couple th
Re: (Score:3)
Why would they? They'll simply rise a lawsuit demanding damages against them all. Since that's a civil suit, the accused need to prove their innocence, which will take years and absurd amounts of money - or they can settle out of court with Uber for a couple thousand dollars.
Since they know or should know that most of the people accessing that site haven't done anything wrong, that could get them into deep trouble. And Uber has deep pockets filled with a billion dollars of investor's money, and some lawyer will take them on and make a mint.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Any hacker worth their weight surfs hidden all the time just for the very reason you mentioned. Hackers leech git around the clock looking for keys and chances are that's how it was found. Even if they narrow it down it's going to be damn near impossible to prove.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
"If Uber already know the public IP of the hacker, why do they need the info from GitHub to proceed?"
The answer in the summary: "to link that number against the IP addresses and usernames." Right now they just have an IP, but it's possible that the attacker was logged into their Github account, another piece of information that could help identify him.
"Any hacker with any decent opsec would not be showing their actual IP address."
There's tons of very skilled and usually-careful criminals in prison. Everyon
Re:Just a distraction from the real fail... (Score:4, Interesting)
There's tons of very skilled and usually-careful criminals in prison.
The above is complete bullshit.
The prisons house people who were sloppy, stupid, and lazy.
The smart criminals are in political office and on boards of corporations.
Re:Just a distraction from the real fail... (Score:5, Informative)
There's tons of very skilled and usually-careful criminals in prison.
The above is complete bullshit.
The prisons house people who were sloppy, stupid, and lazy.
The smart criminals are in political office and on boards of corporations.
No. Medium level smart criminals become politicians. The real top level smart criminals become C?O of publicly traded corporations, usually banks, and mutual funds. The super smart criminals buy the politicians to provide safety net for the smart C?O criminals and they remain largely opaque to scrutiny.
Re: (Score:3)
The prisons house people who were sloppy, stupid, and lazy.
script kiddies often fall into those categories, yes.
and prisons also house people who didn't quit while they were ahead.
Re: (Score:2)
Interestingly, there may be no parties of standing except Uber and the hackers. The drivers would have to show damages that have already occurred, and cannot recover for conjectured damages in the future by reason of breach of privacy.
Re: (Score:2)
That doesn't change the fact that the attacker committed a crime and illegally accessed private information.
If you provide an api [uber.com] with a key already included in the sample code.
https://github.com/uber [github.com]
Using that sample code doesn't necessarily mean it was an attack.
Maybe they are just dumb? (Score:1)
Possibly the breach was related to this http://nathanmock.com/archives/how-i-accessed-employee-settings-on-ubers-app
Re: (Score:2)
I'd say yea, they certainly are dumb! Don't put an admin switch in a consumer app! Sure, they could have put in better checking to make sure it is an appropriate account accessing, but, still, it is better to just leave the code out of the app!
There should be a separate driver app, possibly off the app store. The Enterprise Program is not appropriate, because Uber drivers are not Uber employees, so not technically eligible. But Apple now has a B2B program where this would fit. Even a separate App-Store driv
I'm an expert! Trust me! (Score:5, Funny)
After watching years of Law and Order, I feel I'm qualified to make a judgement. ;)
This sounds like a fishing expedition. (DUN DUN)
Slashdot layout (Score:2, Interesting)
Just got back from a two week vacation without internet so maybe I missed the memo... but what the FUCK happened to the slashdot layout? It's all jacked up and completely unusable... Is this the new beta bullshit?
DL# (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, two people are very interested in that, one can find out, and the fourth can exert some leverage and get at information.
The first two are your DMV (or other agency) and insurance company. The DMV is interested if there's any commercial operations going on by unlicensed drivers. Penalties for such generally are minor, usually just suspension of the commercial activity to suspension of the license and a small fine.
The se
Re: (Score:2)
The link between person and drivers license isn't only held by the DMV or similar agencies - if you've ever used a driver's license as an ID card, well...
Which is why god invented passport cards. I never use my driver's license as an ID for precisely this reason.
Uber planning an amphibious assault? (Score:5, Funny)
Uber has got to have a LOT of drivers if 50,000 of them are also licensed DIVERS. What're they going to do - launch an amphibious assault with 50,000 divers?
Seriously, people have got to start proofreading their posts. Come on - it's not that hard.