IE and Safari out at Pwn2Own on day 1

[pparks1]

I really wish they would have tested IE9...but not being released yet means they won't...because pre-release versions of something are just that, unfinished and not ready for prime-time.

Making sport of browser security, hackers topple IE, Safari • The Register

Contestants in a high-stakes hacking contest had no trouble toppling the Apple Safari and Microsoft Internet Explorer browsers, proving for a fifth year in a row that no software or application is safe from people with the expertise and motivation to exploit them.


The attacks came on Day One of the Pwn2Own contest, which pays more than $15,000 apiece for exploits that successfully give the attacker full remote access of the targeted machine. Wednesday's event saw hackers take complete control of a fully patched Sony Vaio and MacBook Air by compromising IE and Safari respectively. Google's Chrome browser was also up for grabs, but no one stepped forward to try hacking it.

Google's Chrome untouched at Pwn2Own hack match - Computerworld

If Chrome comes out unscathed, as it now appears it will, the browser will have survived three consecutive Pwn2Owns, a record.

Firefox testing was expected to commence today.

 

[G1LLY]

I knew there was a good reason why I was using Chrome

Apple need to up their security a lot more, that result is really really poor, IE8 well who's surprised about that one, not me that's for sure.

Hopefully Firefox's security can hold out.

 

[Windows 911]

Do you guys know if they test Opera? I would be really curious to see the results for that one. I don't like the idea that they are just going after FF 3.6, and IE8, instead of the 4 and 9 respectively... Nonetheless, the results should be interesting.

 

[G1LLY]

Do you guys know if they test Opera? I would be really curious to see the results for that one. I don't like the idea that they are just going after FF 3.6, and IE8, instead of the 4 and 9 respectively... Nonetheless, the results should be interesting.

Because they are aren't released yet, pointless testing development software, wouldn't really be fair plus their usage won't be as wide spread as the stable versions.

 

[Windows 911]

That is quite true, good point. Well, I'll have to wait to see next year. I just looked up the results for the fall of IE8, they bypassed ASLR, DEP, and the protected mode. Pwn2own said that they never saw that before... And like you said, Apple seriously needs to step up their game. I have read multiple articles that Apple's security is definitely lacking...

 

[fseal]

They can't be trying very hard on Opera given the number of vulnerabilities found in it over the last year :/

http://secunia.com/advisories/search/?search=opera

One always has to queestion the motivations of the participants. EVERYONE wants to bag on IE, but what street cred to you get from poking holes in everyones hero Opera?

 

[pparks1]

That is quite true, good point. Well, I'll have to wait to see next year. I just looked up the results for the fall of IE8, they bypassed ASLR, DEP, and the protected mode. Pwn2own said that they never saw that before...

I honestly don't expect the situation with IE to improve much by next year. Honestly, they were supposed to be better with IE6 (and weren't), IE7 (and weren't), IE8 (well, we all now how secure that has been), and now here comes IE8.

And like you said, Apple seriously needs to step up their game. I have read multiple articles that Apple's security is definitely lacking...

Apple doesn't have enough customers for it to really matter.

 

[seekermeister]

They can't be trying very hard on Opera given the number of vulnerabilities found in it over the last year :/

Search - Advisories - Community

One always has to queestion the motivations of the participants. EVERYONE wants to bag on IE, but what street cred to you get from poking holes in everyones hero Opera?

That is a very poor accessment of Opera. If you take the time to check, all of those vulnerabilities have been fixed in the current version. What does make a browse insecure, such as IE has always been in the past, is that a known vulnerability is not fixed, or worse that some are never published so that the users are unaware of them.

Opera has ALWAYS been the most secure browser available. That does not mean that it is perfect, nor that faults will never be found, it means that once a vulnerability is known, Opera fixes it VERY rapidly.

 

[Windows 911]

I think many of the contestants in Pwn2Own use Opera for their browser. I wonder which one is more secure, Chrome or Opera? I personally like Opera a bit more because of its fantastic Software acceleration and more personal options to choose from.

 

[fseal]

Well yes, of course they are all fixed, but given that they are being found at a steady rate, it's pretty safe to assume that it still has some, in fact probably a lot. Until the discoveries slow down to one or two a year, the software is guaranteed to contain plenty more waiting to be discovered.

Sentences like this "Google's Chrome browser was also up for grabs, but no one stepped forward to try hacking it." speaks voolumes about the fairness of it all.

Given that Safari and Chrome are based on the same base layout engine, it's entirely likely to suffer a lot of the same flaws. Why aren't people going after it? If Google makes it through because no one dared to suffer community retribution for even trying, does it get to claim it survived too?

So again, if Opera makes it through unscathed it's far more likely it's because no one bothered to try very hard... The people that do the hacking as well as the contests are so religeously polarized you can't judge much at all by the outcomes, and that's really a shame

 

[pparks1]

Sentences like this "Google's Chrome browser was also up for grabs, but no one stepped forward to try hacking it." speaks voolumes about the fairness of it all.

Well, considering they pay the person who hacks the browser...it doesn't make sense to not hack at Google Chrome if you think you can succeed. There was $20,000 on the line to the person who could bring down the Google Chrome browser. If you even stood a remote chance to break it, would you not put in a little effort to get that $20,000. I know that I would.

Perhaps Google went around and paid highly skilled Chrome hackers $30,000 to not even try. That's the only scenario I can image that would have left Chrome untouched if hackers could hack it.

 

[seekermeister]

Well yes, of course they are all fixed, but given that they are being found at a steady rate, it's pretty safe to assume that it still has some, in fact probably a lot. Until the discoveries slow down to one or two a year, the software is guaranteed to contain plenty more waiting to be discovered.

Sentences like this "Google's Chrome browser was also up for grabs, but no one stepped forward to try hacking it." speaks voolumes about the fairness of it all.

Given that Safari and Chrome are based on the same base layout engine, it's entirely likely to suffer a lot of the same flaws. Why aren't people going after it? If Google makes it through because no one dared to suffer community retribution for even trying, does it get to claim it survived too?

So again, if Opera makes it through unscathed it's far more likely it's because no one bothered to try very hard... The people that do the hacking as well as the contests are so religeously polarized you can't judge much at all by the outcomes, and that's really a shame

You can believe as you choose, but ALL browsers have vulnerabilities, even chrome. Like I said, what matters is how they are dealt with, particularly in terms of speed. Opera 11.1 currently has zero vulnerabilities listed. I do not expect that to remain true, but when one is found, there will be an Opera 11.2 released very quickly. The same can not be said about any other browser.

EDIT: The reason that Internet Explorer is more often targeted, is because of two reasons, first it is an easier target, and second because it is more widely used.

 

[Tepid]

"Google's Chrome browser was also up for grabs, but no one stepped forward to try hacking it."

Sorry,, wrong answer for me.

Really? Why, specifically? So, what they are saying,, Google Chrome has their browser so locked down that The NSA, CIA, MI5, what ever initials you want to put up there can be 100% garraunteed to never, ever, not once, EVER, FOREVER, be NOT ONE TINY BIT vulnerable?

I call BS.

 

[Windows 911]

Hey guys, just an update: Firefox survived Pwn2Own today. So the current standings are...

The Fallen:

Safari 5
IE8
Blackberry OS via Drive-by download through browser

The Survivors:

Firefox 3.6
Google Chrome 10

More to come!

 

[Lebon14]

w00t. Firefox' still alive. That is awesome. Chrome's would be my second choice if Firefox wouldn't be working for me anymore.

 

[Tepid]

sorry, Chromes standing in this is a complete fallacy at best.

Collusion could even be brought to some kind of real debate.

Chrome ONLY survives, cause no one is testing it. That's it.
You can not call something surviving if no one is touching it.

It is not being Tested, It has no way of stating one way or the other.

There can be no real decision,cause NO ONE IS TESTING IT.........

In Other Words, IT SHOULD NOT BE ON THE LIST, IT IS DISQUALIFIED FROM RESULTS AS NO ONE IS TESTING IT, THERE ARE NO RESULTS TO REPORT one way or the other.

The perception of survivability due to the lack of testing does not automatically make it a secure browser.

And it is an Out Right LIE to state as much.

 

[Stormkitty]

Chrome's UI is non-changable, making it a non-option in use. I like being able to change around my UI, and taking away that choice means I don't use the software. Not to mention all the Orwellian Spycode Chrome has, meaning even if I did like it, I'd be using SRWare Iron.

 

[pparks1]

sorry, Chromes standing in this is a complete fallacy at best.

Collusion could even be brought to some kind of real debate.

Chrome ONLY survives, cause no one is testing it. That's it.
You can not call something surviving if no one is touching it.

It is not being Tested, It has no way of stating one way or the other.

There can be no real decision,cause NO ONE IS TESTING IT.........

In Other Words, IT SHOULD NOT BE ON THE LIST, IT IS DISQUALIFIED FROM RESULTS AS NO ONE IS TESTING IT, THERE ARE NO RESULTS TO REPORT one way or the other.

The perception of survivability due to the lack of testing does not automatically make it a secure browser.

And it is an Out Right LIE to state as much.

These are hackers at a hacking conference. Their pride is on the line. They are being offered $20,000 dollars if they can crack Google Chrome. Imagine the noteriety of being the first one to drop Google Chrome.

It's not that Google Chrome is not being touched or tested, but it's 100% freaking clear that these hackers don't have a known exploit to take advantage of it and win their $20,000. Microsoft fans just need to accept the fact that from a security standpoint, there are better options than IE out there. Firefox and Chrome are past the first two days, Safari was dropped in seconds and IE within minutes.

Do you really freaking think that somebody is there saying, well I could exploit Chrome and get $20,000...but instead I'm going to just pick my nose and watch YouTube while at this conference.

 

[Stormkitty]

Not just $20,000. $35,000, 15k from the P2O organisers, and 20k from Google themselves. 35k is a lot of pizza.

 

[Tepid]

For the record, I use FF quite a lot.
I still call BS.