Separator

Detective work reveals PSN servers up to date

N27502567_30338975_4931
Sunday, May 08, 2011
EDITOR'S NOTEfrom Dan "Shoe" Hsu

I was just talking to a Sony contact of mine about all the misinformation swirling about out there, so Brad's story is great timing. Read on to see what the news outlets are not saying about the PSN outage.

PSNWe've all been hearing over and over again for the last week that Sony was running an outdated version of the Apache web-server software on its webservers. The implication, of course, was that this represents Sony's laissez-faire attitude toward the protection of customer information, making it easy for the hackers to gain entry to the PlayStation Network.

But the funny thing about this kind of "common knowledge" in the age of the Internet is the way rumors have an unfortunate tendency to be repeated as fact. Just a week ago it was "common knowledge" that Sony stored every PSN password in plain text. It was also "common knowledge" that Sony Online Entertainment hadn't been compromised. Neither of those things proved true.

One member of the Beyond3D forum, deathindustrial, was curious about the outdated server software claim and did a very brief amount of very interesting research into the issue....

 

(Beyond3D's community has a unique combination of technically knowledgeable users with a low rate of console fanboyism, allowing for an honest discussion of things like the PSN data breach without the conversation devolving into another proxy battle in the great fanboy wars.)

As it turns out, it is fairly simple to use Google's webcache to show what version of Apache the PSN servers were using back in March. According to a page request archived by Google on March 23, 2011, at that time Sony was running version 2.2.17 of the software. You can see from Apache's website that 2.2.17 is the latest stable version of the webserver available even today. This is a direct repudiation of the claims being made that Sony's webservers were out of date by as much as five years.

Poster deathindustrial also goes on to point out the folly in using "security expert" Dr. Eugene Spafford's testimony before Congress as a source for the claims that the servers were outdated and that Sony knew about it. In the written statement which accompanied his testimony, Spafford clearly states:

I have no information about what protections they had in place, although some news reports indicate that Sony was running software that was badly out of date and had been warned about that risk.

So he had no first-hand knowledge of the state of Sony's servers or Sony's knowledge about possible exploits, and he was literally repeating claims that he read in the media, which might have stemmed from IRC chat logs that were being passed around back in February. He didn't even do the very basic detective work it would've taken to completely repudiates the claims.

It's sad to say, but many are so eager to see Sony's eye blackened that they are willing to believe any rumor that puts the PlayStation in a negative light. We are in a backwards world where everything Sony says is assumed to be a lie or conspiracy, and anonymous IRC chat logs of dubious origins have miraculously become the most trusted news source in the industry. Here we have a concrete example of why it's important to actually verify your source before repeating something as fact.

 
Problem? Report this post
BRAD GRENZ'S SPONSOR
Comments (48)
Mobpic
May 08, 2011

Great work, if only Sony put out some more information of their own these rumours might not gain as much traction.

Default_picture
May 08, 2011

TOTALLY untrue they only looked at 1 of the 8 servers sony had for different functions with the PSN and only ONE of them had an up to date version. just happnes to be the ONLY 1 out of the 8 servers that the supposed "SOURCE" listed.........funny

Sounds like propaganda mill.

The link so you can see for yourselfs is:

http://www.quartertothree.com/game-talk/showthread.php?p=2673198

POST #912 Just read the nMap logs from the pastebin for your proof.

Default_picture
May 08, 2011

I have sent e-mails over 1 1/2 hours ago as of writing this and have yet to recieve a reply to even confirm that they recieved my e-mail..... i sent them out to @N4G which has linked this blog post and the editors of this ste @Bitmob

When I called in response to getting no reply I was greeted with the explanation why no retraction has been posted amd that i have not recieved an e-mail yet, "It is Mother's Day they are probably having lunch with their mothers."

 

in todays world i KNOW you got those tweets at your smartphone the second i tweeted them........some news reporting you guys due.

N27502567_30338975_4931
May 08, 2011

Here is my reply to Teiman: http://www.quartertothree.com/game-talk/showpost.php?p=2673715&postcount=961

In short, that log he linked to shows dozens and dozens of playstation.net servers using the most current stable version of Apache, and a small subset using an older version. Assuming the log is credible, we still can't draw any conclusions since we don't know what the "rc" servers do, are for and contain.

Default_picture
May 08, 2011

Just ONE of the nMAP entries there are more go see for yourself and decide if this blog is full of shit.

 

Nmap scan report for auth.rc.ac.playstation.net (199.108.4.136)                                
Host is up (0.075s latency).                                                                  
Scanned at 2011-04-05 22:53:40 MDT for 428s                                                    
Not shown: 999 filtered ports                                                                  
PORT    STATE SERVICE  VERSION                                                                
443/tcp open  ssl/http Apache httpd 2.2.11 ((Unix) mod_ssl/2.2.11 OpenSSL/0.9.8i)       
N27502567_30338975_4931
May 08, 2011

Yes, I'm aware of the nmap logs posted by Teinman on QuartertoThree (a site I've been an active member of for 10 years). Unfortunately, his information has the same problem as the original IRC logs, that of providence. The source is anonymous and there is no way to verify their accuracy.

Default_picture
May 08, 2011

please messge me privatly as i can show you proof of what you need, uncensored

Default_picture
May 08, 2011

ALSO why not put in an update that the google cache only shows 1 of 8 servers and that you have no way of verifying tyhe other ones untill youi had proof, WHY did you run with it and just FAIL to mention the other 7 servers? you could have atleast mentioned them, or PERHAPS questioned the guy from Beyond3D as to why he didn't google cache the other ones too?

 

could it be that he probably did but they didn't fit into his or your agenda for trying to be the FIRST to break a story?

N27502567_30338975_4931
May 08, 2011

The only one with an agenda appears to be you. See my follow up to Teiman above.

Mobpic
May 08, 2011
Jeez
Default_picture
May 08, 2011

Seems to me that Anon released MOST but not all of the logs pertaining to it the hack uncensored........ do you care to retract your statement now?

 

Proof enough Yet?

Default_picture
May 08, 2011

In a strange way, I'm kind of happy to see someone defending Sony.  I'm still not totally sold on everything they tell us (or fail to tell us for that matter) because they ARE  a large corporation and ofcourse they ARE going to try and cover their assets as much as possible.  However, this article brings up a good point: you can't believe everything you read.  Lots of people are willing to believe any old rumor they here because it's natural for people to want to nail down a culprit, someone to "pin the blame on".  It makes life easier if you can just say "so and so is to blame, so he should fix it".  Ofcourse, life usually isn't black and white like that.  I just hope consumers will listen objectively to both sides and pay attention to actual facts before pointing a finger (this applies not only to this scenario but in politics, etc.) 

But most of all I want my PSN back... in the meantime, enough rumors, we need answers!

Default_picture
May 08, 2011

that link is the UNCENSORED chat with timestamps and to go one further that isn't in the link is that those logs are from EFnet #PS3Dev.............      call me a liar i dare you.

Default_picture
May 08, 2011

Can i have my retraction statement now please!!!

Fo1_hires_power_armour-1-2
May 08, 2011

Psycho LogiKal is true to his name.

Default_picture
May 08, 2011

Sorry if i come of harsh but I take this as a personal attack on my integrity because i have knowledge through means most don't even know exist.

I've known about how this all went down since BEFORE sony even admitted it was hackers. and have had the proof to back it. showed the proof to a few of my cisco buddies and explained how the hack happened on the 23rd on APR to them.

So you reporting this and using trumped up sources was an attack on my integrity of which i have no need to prove to you anymore because anon has leaked everyting i said was true :)

Thank you much, now can i have my retraction statement since this blog was quoted as the source around the world for this BOGUS story.

N27502567_30338975_4931
May 08, 2011

What about your link do you think disproves anything in this story? What do you think needs to be retracted?

Default_picture
May 08, 2011

are you serious? you are quoted as saying "In short, that log he linked to shows dozens and dozens of playstation.net servers using the most current stable version of Apache, (and a small subset using an older version.)" you go on to say that because YOU don't know what those servers do you can't comment so what does that mean? "NOT ALL SERVERS ARE UP TO DATE" thats what that means.

You go on attacking Dr. Eugene Spafford's testimony due to these IRC logs that are "anonymous IRC chat logs of dubious origins have miraculously become the most trusted news source in the industry." 

Yet they are not annoymous logs anymore now are they?

they have been posted to the world for all to see with names and timestamps.

Then i went on to tell you that those logs come from EFnet #PS3Dev channel in which anyone who knows anything about IRC servers knows that there are logs kept of everything said on every channel archived.....not hard to find......what would that accoumplish?

I dunno mabe some nicknames tied with timestamps to Domains reversed back to IP addresses = *Knock* *Knock* *Knock* *FBI Open Up*

yes i undertand about BNC servers for re-directs and all that but once you have a pot to begin your lead from, its not that hard to trace back through the hops.

Hmmmmm...............

N27502567_30338975_4931
May 08, 2011

The fact that the logs now have psuedonyms attached doesn't change my opinion of their veracity. In any case that log is from over 2 months before the PSN breach occured and the state of PSN security was not static over the intervening period.

Default_picture
May 08, 2011

Ok ... well Brad ... from what i have read on what you have posted ... is that from your "Reliable" Sony contact is that, this "Detective" has gone and said all of sonys servers were up to date .... 

 

Nmap scan report for auth.rc.ac.playstation.net (199.108.4.136)                                
Host is up (0.075s latency).                                                                  
Scanned at 2011-04-05 22:53:40 MDT for 428s                                                    
Not shown: 999 filtered ports                                                                  
PORT    STATE SERVICE  VERSION                                                                
443/tcp open  ssl/http Apache httpd 2.2.11 ((Unix) mod_ssl/2.2.11 OpenSSL/0.9.8i)

sorry but from this posted and what psycho has provided in a link ... debunks all credibillity your person has ... that is from 2 weeks before the "Attack" and the servers are NOT up to date ... with what is reported as the "UPDATED" apache ...
Default_picture
May 08, 2011

debunks all credibillity your person has ... that is from 2 weeks before the "Attack" and the servers are NOT up to date ... with what is reported as the "UPDATED" apache ...

N27502567_30338975_4931
May 08, 2011

It's from a nmap log no one knows who generated that shows literally dozens and dozens of PSN servers all running the most current stable version of Apache and like 7 that weren't. But since we don't know what those 7 out of date servers actually do we can't draw that many conclusions. This article was only ever intended to demonstrate that Sony was up to date on the majority of the PSN servers. Previously it has been suggested by many, erroneously, that Sony had not been updating Apache at all.

Default_picture
May 08, 2011

And another thing you are quoted as saying;

"And there are many more than the board will let me paste in. These seem to duplicate the functionality of the out of date "rc" servers, so it's not like one server was current and everything else was boned. We have everything looking current and a subset of servers with this "rc" in their address that aren't. *****We can't draw any conclusions from that without knowing what the "rc" servers are for.*****"

so then WHY ohhhhh WHY did you draw the conclusion that as the title reads is;

"Detective work reveals PSN servers up to date"

when clearly not ALL of them are, that is a misleading title and you go on to state OVER and OVER that the version they are running is 2.2.17 which is the latest version but fail to mention even ONCE that there WERE servers found running 2.2.11 as the reports suggest.

Default_picture
May 08, 2011

You are also quoted saying;

"This article was only ever intended to demonstrate that Sony was up to date on the majority of the PSN servers"

 

REALLY, not from the title and lack of ANY acknowledment of ANY not being up to date is diliberate misleading of the public and warping the headlines of stories to increase your hit count.

Default_picture
May 08, 2011

wow i am just disecting this thing APART you are also quoted as saying;

 

"This is a direct repudiation of the claims being made that Sony's webservers were out of date by as much as five years"

what version was it that everyone said was outdated that they were running, wait i know 2.2.11.

would you like to know when this build was released into the wild?    Dec. 15th 2008 6:08 p.m. GMT+0

http://freshmeat.net/projects/apache/releases/290269

hardly the five years your report was saying. and you yourself admint to looking at the nMap logs so you know the version said 2.2.11 which even a coffe boy journalist could cross check that fact, yet you failed to do so. or was it deliberatly inflated number to make the truth as hard as it is to believe that sony could be that dumb, seem all that more askew from the real world?

for what to increase your rep? i think you have suceeded in lowering your credibility with your flip flop wish wash: paraphrasing "The servers are all up to date, wait not some of them aren't, wait no but they don't count?"

Shoe_headshot_-_square
May 08, 2011

Hey guys,

To be honest, I'm having trouble following this comment thread. It's way too technical and over my head. Psycho: Do you want to post a rebuttal or anything? You can post your own story on Bitmob like Brad did, and we'll take a look at it for front-page consideration. Just make sure you source (and link to) everything carefully to back up your claims as thoroughly as possible? We want to present all sides of the story as fairly as possible, so you're welcome to do that.

One thing, however: We require users to use their real names in their Bitmob registration if they want to be considered for front-page publication (or to win any of our Giveaways). So if you insist on leaving your name "Psycho LogiKal," while you can still post to Bitmob's Mobfeed, we wouldn't consider it for the front page of the site. FYI.

Thanks for being a part of the discussion. Even though I don't understand it all, it's very interesting to me.

N27502567_30338975_4931
May 08, 2011

The 5 year figure stems from the linux kernel version number from the same irc log and has been thrown around in many forums and comment threads.

Default_picture
May 10, 2011

I retract what i said about the five year figure i just figured since you made no mention to the linux kernel itself anywhere else in the article that you were refering to the 2.2.11 version (Dec 15th 2008 6:08 p.m. GMT+0) of apache which has JUST now been patched in the past few days.

This is PsychoLogiKal and I approved this message.

Default_picture
May 10, 2011

Thats ok though i would prefer you NOT have my real information. thank you for the opportunity anyways but I had someone else write a blog on a credible site.

Jayhenningsen
May 11, 2011

Psycho - I find it a bit disingenuous that you create an account here under an assumed name, repost secondhand "logs" (whose veractiy can never be verified) that were created by someone else who is also posting under a pseudonym, and then imply that it is this site that is lacking in credibility.

Mikeshadesbitmob0611
May 09, 2011

A lesson for us all: Go outside once in awhile. If you don't get some fresh air and sunshine... well, scroll up.

Jayhenningsen
May 09, 2011

I do understand what's being said in this conversation. The problem with posting logs as proof of anything is that logs can easily be modified before they're shared in a public forum. There is no way to prove those logs are legitimate (or that the person posting those logs doesn't have an agenda of their own, for that matter.)

Google's cache, on the other hand, can generally be considered a reliable source. And while it may not demonstrate that every single Sony server was up to date, it does provide proof that at least some of them were up to date. As a result, it also lends credence that these quotes we're seeing about Sony's servers being horribly out of date from people who have no knowledge of such things are perhaps a tad overblown.

Wile-e-coyote-5000806
May 09, 2011

If it was indeed people within Anonymous that were behind this attack, the goal was almost certainly to destroy Sony's credibility (and hopefully there is no real desire to use or release the stolen info).  Maybe this is just some kind of paranoia, but I have been wondering if the people behind the attack are spreading false rumors to maximize the damage.

Shoe_headshot_-_square
May 09, 2011

Thanks for helping to clear that up, Jay.

Default_picture
May 09, 2011

Great investigative work, Brad. If only more journalists could follow your lead--seeking the truth and verifying one's sources.

I've defended Sony from the perspective that certain people and factions hold a grudge against them, and it goes far beyond the security breach. Any comment, any snippet of information is taken as proof that Sony. I don't harbor such fanatical hatred for any corporation or organization.

Default_picture
May 09, 2011

*that Sony is the devil. Dangit! No edit :P

Shoe_headshot_-_square
May 09, 2011

Sorry! We already fixed that on our test code. Fixing a few more things, then QA testing, then will roll that update out. Hopefully soon! (No ETA, though.)

Default_picture
May 09, 2011

Cool, thanks!

L_c2190f9bee5fe40dffa673d9a8cc0493
May 09, 2011

It is starting to seem more likely that Anonymus is behind the attacks, even though they denied direct involvement, and this is all a part of their strategy. It's actually a clever strategy if you think about it. Hack Sony, blame Sony for not protecting their users and then spread rumors of Sony's incompetend defences. On second thought this might also be to elaborate for a non-centralized group of hackers.

@Brad Good work and always good to see people do their research.

Shoe_headshot_-_square
May 09, 2011

Jay (from Bitmob) sent this around this morning: http://www.thinq.co.uk/2011/5/9/anonymous-civil-war-anonops-sites-are-hacked/

Anonymous splinter group?

L_c2190f9bee5fe40dffa673d9a8cc0493
May 09, 2011

Interesting, so possibly the non-centralized Anonymous might have a small focused group with in it's ranks, determined to take more direct action.

L_c2190f9bee5fe40dffa673d9a8cc0493
May 09, 2011

Interesting, so possibly the non-centralized Anonymous might have a small focused group with in it's ranks, determined to take more direct action.

Default_picture
May 09, 2011

Anonymous has a loose hierarchical structure to evade the authorities. It bites them in the ass when a member commits an act not deemed acceptable by the "official" branch of Anon. This is their fault. In their latest statement, Anonymous admits that "there is no membership to Anonymous and anyone can claim to be a "member". It could be said that "Anonymous is anonymous to Anonymous"."
 
http://www.destructoid.com/anonymous-am-disappoint-accuses-sony-of-deflecting-blame-200691.phtml

So as long as someone claims to be "with" Anonymous, then they're with Anonymous. The alternative is to drop the anonymity and open themselves to prosecution. We know that won't happen.

Shoe_headshot_-_square
May 09, 2011

That's a great quote, Jason! "Anonymous is anonymous to Anonymous."

Default_picture
May 10, 2011

Actually, it now appears that the perpetrator believes that Anonymous had become too centralized, despite the group's credo.

http://www.industrygamers.com/news/anonymous-gets-hacked-by-anonymous/

The closest Anonymous has to "leaders" would have to be their forum moderators, or whoever's in charge of their twitter account and facebook page.

Default_picture
May 10, 2011

Actually i would go to say the anon's that are SysOp's on the anon run and owned IRC network used for coordination would be the leaders of sorts if you would like to look at it this way.

Default_picture
May 18, 2011

I'm a bit late to this party..

if anything can be gained from this though.. I would like to think at the very least it should be the problem here is absolutes.

Media implies all servers are out of date.

Someone points out that they aren't at the very least *all* of the servers aren't out of date.

A urine contest results over what is and isn't out of date.

For whatever its worth... I think the main points of this article are dead on the spot. A. media is reporting on something it has absolutely no understanding of and with no thought tossing out serious accusations. B. We can't speak in absolutes.. especially in terms of complex data structures. 

You must log in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.