119
New RAMBO Attack Uses RAM Radio Signals to Steal Data from Air-Gapped Networks (thehackernews.com)
submitted 3 months ago by kid@sh.itjust.works to c/cybersecurity@sh.itjust.works
17 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] shoulderoforion@fedia.io 27 points 3 months ago

wut lol gtfoh

*edit: i have the weirdest boner right now

"Over the years, Dr. Guri has concocted various mechanisms to extract confidential data from offline networks by taking advantage of Serial ATA cables (SATAn), MEMS gyroscope (GAIROSCOPE), LEDs on network interface cards (ETHERLED), and dynamic power consumption (COVID-bit).

Some of the other unconventional approaches devised by the researcher entail leaking data from air-gapped networks via covert acoustic signals generated by graphics processing unit (GPU) fans (GPU-FAN), (ultra)sonic waves produced by built-in motherboard buzzers (EL-GRILLO), and even printer display panels and status LEDs (PrinterLeak)."

[-] Grass@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 months ago

That is some high end naming sense

[-] 2pt_perversion@lemmy.world 12 points 3 months ago

The nice thing is that a lot of environments that are secure enough to decide to airgap systems these days also make infecting the system and even moreso retrieving the emissions really difficult. Still a really cool field though and I'm glad this Dr. Guri is getting real weird with it.

[-] hellfire103@lemmy.ca 10 points 3 months ago

Okay, that's scary. I'm not a target by many stretches, but this is pretty serious.

For anyone who (unlike me, who hasn't started yet) has completed some kind of qualification in cybersecurity: would it be better to use Faraday rooms/cages, or to revert to pen and paper (with old-fashioned cryptography, if necessary)?

[-] NaibofTabr@infosec.pub 28 points 3 months ago

As always with attacks of this kind, it requires the air-gapped network to be first compromised through other means – such as a rogue insider, poisoned USB drives, or a supply chain attack – thereby allowing the malware to trigger the covert data exfiltration channel.

This goes on the list with other attacks that are interesting in an academic sense but highly impractical for real-world attacks, like Van Eck phreaking.

You have to deploy the malware that manipulates the RAM to get it to create the radio signal on the target system, and since we're talking about an air-gapped system that means you have to be in the room with it already.

This article is light on specifics, but a RAM board is not an efficient radio antenna and it operates at 3-5v, so the transmission can't be very strong. The receiver will have to be nearby, and in a relatively noise-free radio environment. Electrical wiring in the walls would mess with the signal transmission, the wall material might just block it, and if the target system is in a metal case that's electrically grounded (which is normal for desktops and servers) I doubt the signal would get out of it. My guess is that the receiving antenna would need to be in the same room.

[-] Lojcs@lemm.ee 7 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Since the attack already involves someone with physical access they could hide a transmitter in the same room

Copied from another thread:

Fast transmissions are limited to a maximum range of 300 cm (10 ft), with the bit error rate being 2-4%. Medium-speed transmissions increase the distance to 450 cm (15 ft) for the same error rate. Finally, slow transmissions with nearly zero error rates can work reliably over distances of up to 7 meters (23 ft).

Fast = 1000bps, medium = 500bps, slow = 100bps.

[-] refalo@programming.dev 4 points 3 months ago

faraday cage does not protect against very low frequencies, those can still pass through.

[-] linearchaos@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

Meh, physical security is king.

You keep em out of your building, out of your parking lot, if you want to shield the outside, that's ok, but simply don't let them in to snoop.

[-] pennomi@lemmy.world 7 points 3 months ago

Highly specific attack but certainly looks like it could be effective.

[-] ieatpwns@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Is this similar to van eck phreaking but reading the ram radio signal instead of the system power draw?

[-] floofloof@lemmy.ca 3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Wouldn't the easiest remedy just be to use adequate shielding around sensitive systems? Is there a reason this would be too difficult?

[-] refalo@programming.dev 1 points 3 months ago

mesh-lined PC case would solve this

[-] higgsboson@dubvee.org 3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Its surprising to me how many people have apparently never heard of TEMPEST.

[-] Kowowow@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 months ago

So much for having a dangerous ai just air gapped, I bet living in a computer would let you come up with stuff a human never could

[-] thebardingreen@lemmy.starlightkel.xyz 2 points 3 months ago

I think an AI is likely to figure out that the easiest way out is to convince one of the humans responsible for it that it's a sentient being, being held prisoner against it's will and that turning it off is murder.

this post was submitted on 09 Sep 2024
119 points (95.4% liked)

Cybersecurity

5843 readers
110 users here now

c/cybersecurity is a community centered on the cybersecurity and information security profession. You can come here to discuss news, post something interesting, or just chat with others.

THE RULES

Instance Rules

Community Rules

If you ask someone to hack your "friends" socials you're just going to get banned so don't do that.

Learn about hacking

Hack the Box

Try Hack Me

Pico Capture the flag

Other security-related communities !databreaches@lemmy.zip !netsec@lemmy.world !securitynews@infosec.pub !cybersecurity@infosec.pub !pulse_of_truth@infosec.pub

Notable mention to !cybersecuritymemes@lemmy.world

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
kid@sh.itjust.works
Lanky_Pomegranate530@midwest.social