The whole day today was spent in analyzing Nutch Source Code with Anshul. It is almost 8:00 pm now and nothing has been done yet! Have received an e-mail from Chris Mattman and Ashish Vaidya giving some pointers. Hopefully, it’s gonna help!
Had problems while compiling the code as well. It’s strange that when I installed j2sdk from Java Sun site I did not get javac in the /usr/java/jre1.5.0_02/bin directory. So since I did not have enough time to look for the files, I simply downloaded Netbeans and got the thing compiled with Daddu’s suggestion!
Will blog later when I can get some success with Nutch.
-Rajat.
Rajat’s Abode

If this is the error you are getting then one of the solutions is to reset your root password on the MySQL database server.

$ pkill mysql
$ sudo mysqld --skip-grant-privileges
$ mysql

At this point you get the mysql command shell. You will need to update the root password and flush the table when you reset the password.

mysql> set UPDATE mysql.user SET Password=PASSWORD('YOUR_NEW_PASSWORD') WHERE User='root';
mysql> FLUSH PRIVILEGES;

Now that you’ve flushed your passwords, just restart your mysql daemon.

$ sudo pkill mysqld
$ sudo /etc/init.d/mysqld start
$ mysql -u root -p
Enter Password: YOUR_NEW_PASSWORD
mysql>

You should be all set now!

Having been in application security for more than 2 decades now and officially completing my 18th year now of being meaningfully employed in that space there is just a lot of crud that I have gathered in my brain. Most of that is history of how things came about to be. That stuff is likely not interesting to most but I find it intriguing as to how some seemingly minor decisions of one software vendor can have massive impact to the web application security industry.

Oh the dreaded IE…
Internet Explorer 4, 5 and 6 that started in the Windows XP days (or even earlier, can’t recall) had a setting – the cookie jar was not shared – i.e., if you opened a new window to a site, you would have to log in again unless you used “Ctrl+N” key to open a new window from an existing session. Each new process would have its own cookie jar. For the uninitiated, the “cookie jar” is the internal browser storage of cookies. Cookies are random looking strings that indicate a “trust token” that a web server places in the browser. Since HTTP is a connectionless protocol, this cookie is what preserves the “state” and this is exactly what authorization decisions in HTTP context are typically based on. These cookies are stored in a web browser data storage called cookie jar where each cookie gets stored with the name, value, domain, path (and today, there are few other attributes but that wasn’t the case back in 2004-2005). The browser gets all these parameters from the HTTP response header Set-Cookie. Microsoft, the vendor for Internet Explorer, made a decision that each new window of IE should have its own set of stored cookies that were not shared. Mozilla Firefox and Google Chrome always had a shared cookie jar if I recall correctly.

Along came a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)…

Jesse Burns from iSecPartners (an NYC-based security consultancy that was acquired by NCC group) back then wrote a paper which I think was the seminal paper on Cross-Site Request Forgery. They called it “XSRF” back then because “XSS” was already in parlance back-then. Thereafter, there were presentations in 2006 about the same by Microsoft. The whole attack was simple. The victim has a browser tab open in which they are logged into a site that has issued that session a cookie value. Due to the browser same-origin policy (a concept that Netscape designed in 1995) that cookie would be resent by the browser in the request as a Cookie HTTP request header whenever an HTTP request was sent to the same domain, protocol (“scheme”) and port. There were few idiosyncracies of IE (which made it infamous back then) such as if the port number did not match IE did not complain and would think that access was allowed per the Same-Origin Policy (SOP). What does that mean? http://example.com and http://example.com:81 would be treated as the same origin! Weird right? It wasn’t the case with other browsers. This was also documented in Michal Zalewski’s book Tangled Web in 2011. Where am I going with this? So while IE did some weird things, it did one good thing – isolate cookie jars. So if you opened up a new window where the attacker ran a payload that sent a request to the site which had handed you a cookie, the new IE window would have no interesting cookies to share with that site – inadvertently protecting the user from being a victim to a CSRF issue. Yes, the hated IE protected the users from being victim to CSRF! Who would have thought? That’s how weird 2005 was 🙂

Fast forward…

Since all browser vendor today have concept of shared cookie jars because who doesn’t like opening new tabs of their favorite cloud consoles without having to re-login right? So what did we the people do? We came up with another attribute that could be added to a Set-Cookie HTTP response header – SameSite attribute which restricted the cookie from being sent unless the request originated from a page on the same site as the cookie issuer.

So there you have it… the history of SameSite and how one of the most hated browsers of the day (IE) did one good thing for users – protect them from CSRF! 🙂

Sometimes simplest of the errors get you bad….and this was one such time.
I was trying to connect to my Oracle XE DB using SQL*Plus but kept getting this errror

connect hr/************
ERROR:
ORA-01034: ORACLE not available
ORA-27101: shared memory realm does not exist

Turns out I did not start the DB instance.
Start -> All Programs -> Oracle Database 10g Express Edition -> Start Database

In the capitalist world, it is said that the companies survive on the hyper-consumerism of the people. The highly competitive economical scenario results in an environment where (as they say) consumer is the winner, but not without a fight.
A few weeks back, my Compaq Presario Laptop 2575us went bad. Well, the laptop is 2 yrs old and it has already been serviced twice so I guess my patience thresholds have diminished over a period of time. But this time around a person with even immense patience could have lost his mind. So here’s what happened. My laptop’s S-video port had been dysfunctional since the time I can recall but I never had so much time to let my laptop go out of my hands. This time when I sent it for repairs my laptop almost disappeared from the face of the earth for almost 25 days. And when they returned it to me to a wrong address I had a premonition of difficult times. The “repaired” laptop even failed to start.
This really infuriated me coz my 25 day wait had gone down the drain. So I called up the customer care and they asked me to ship the laptop to service center yet again. But this time around they wanted me to wait for 3 days before I could FedEx it to them. It was completely unacceptable to me. So I spoke to the supervisor and became as adamant as a stone. I continued to ask him for next day shipping and he continued to repeat that he could not do that. A 2hr45min sparring continued on the phone and it resulted in him being the loser as he disconnected the phone. He kept saying that this discussion is going nowhere as we cannot reach an agreement and I kept insisting that the call had multiple destinations : 1. To the HP supervisors and 2. To the BBB .
This guy called himself Nick and he also refused to give me his employee number. I knew very well (because of past experience that Compaq uses words like “You have no proof for your requests” etc.) so this time I needed some real strong evidence of my conversation. So I requested the permission from this Nick guy to allow me to record the conversation. I think this made him a little wary of my intentions. But still he did not give me his details. I think he was really scared because he felt that my wrath could result in him facing the music from his bosses in Palo Alto, CA. There were a few interesting discussions, for example, he said “I am Nick and you can identify me with this name alone.” to which I retorted by saying “Well…I know that Nick is a common name in U.S and you guys might as well redirect my call to NY Knicks judging by the way things are going.”.
So the next day I called up the HP Customer Care Service Manager’s Line at 1-877-917-4380 , code 94 option 1. This time I spoke to a guy called Douglas Gilmore who was equally tough with me (if not more). He refused to acknowledge any of my concerns initially. But later as the conversation progressed, it went on from being just a plain discussion to a heated argument. However, I did not utter even a single foul word because I knew that he could use my language as a pretext to disconnect my call which I was not willing to risk at all. So throughout the discussion I kept my head cool and tried to explain the things to him. But after going through the history of the whole thing, he realized that I had suffered a lot because of this laptop and that the attitude of the Customer care was rather cold. So he finally agreed to give me a replacement after much requests. This was probably my best argument till date and I think that it was some good thinking on my part as well as some codial behavior on the part of the managers that I could get what I truly deserved: a replacement to my defective laptop.
-Rajat.
Japanese art forms

This time the DefCon CTF challenges were really tough. After about 40 hours of straight effort in those 2 days my head was spinning. There were some nice write-ups that people have posted:
Vedagodz’s site is up at : http://shallweplayaga.me/
Pursuits Trivial 400 writeup : http://pastie.org/510841
Binary l33tness 300 writeup : http://hackerschool.org/DefconCTF/17/B300.html (based on k0rupt’s original work)
Crypto badness 400 : http://beist.org/defcon2009/defcon2009_crypto400_solution.txt

The introduction of low-cost flying alternatives in the Indian skies is a good thing for the Indian consumers as one would reckon. However, the consumers only stand to gain if they get a service which at least gets them their money worth.
Sadly though, the quality of service provided by these low-cost airlines is also “low-grade”. The business principle seems sound that people who want food/refreshments in flight buy it but that does not necessarily mean that one gets hard pressed to board the flight itself. The airline management needs to rethink that low-cost does not mean high tension. My flight experience was as follows:
I was to board the flight from Delhi – Mumbai at around 9:00 pm. However, until 10:30 pm there were no announcements which made me ponder about the very existence of the flight itself. At about 11:00 pm it was announced that the entry would be from Gate # 3. The people rushed in like a horde of animals trying to get into a DTC (Delhi Transport Corporation) bus. Then a technical snag – the key was unable to open the gate # 3 – occurred to make the matters worse. The gates were changed to Gate # 1 resulting into a new frenzy of people trying to reach gate # 1. In what ensued, there were a series of announcements for passengers to board the flight, however, there was a slight problem. The officials on Gate # 1 were not ready to let passengers through. The flights like “Air Deccan” have given a new meaning to the term “fight to the finish” as your fight to get a seat in the flight never ends!

Now I’ve no problems considering that the population of India is huge. However, I do have a problem when seemingly intelligent (?) people do not display basic intelligence. Air Deccan issues unique numbers on it’s boarding passes when people check-in. Why these numbers are not used for seat assignments is a question that only Air Deccan can answer. Apparently, they use these numbers to identify which passengers have / have not boarded the flight.

Unitl these companies realize that cheap tickets should not mean cheap quality the consumers will continue to remain at a loss in these airlines which are advertized as a “high value for money”.