Lunduke
News • Science & Tech
The creator of UNIX built a Trojan Horse which let him log in to any UNIX machine.
And nobody knew about it for years.
May 05, 2024
post photo preview

Back in 1984, the Association for Computing Machinery presented Ken Thompson with a “Turing Award” for his many contributions to the world of computing.

And for good reason.

Ken worked on Multics, co-created UNIX, created multiple programming languages (Bon and B — which directly led to C), co-created the Plan 9 operating system, UTF-8, and on and on.  If anyone deserves an award for advancing computing... it's Ken Thompson.

But we’re not here today to talk about those extraordinary contributions to computing.

No, sir.

We’re here to talk… about his acceptance speech.

Because that speech revealed a truly fascinatin computer virus that Thompson had created years earlier… for the C compiler.  One which gave him a backdoor into UNIX itself.

The Speech

He titled his speech “Reflections on Trusting Trust”, and the basic premise is this:

“To what extent should one trust a statement that a program is free of Trojan horses? Perhaps it is more important to trust the people who wrote the software.”

To prove his point, Ken told the tale of how he had — years earlier — created what was, essentially, a computer virus that infected the C compiler (cc) and the UNIX login program.

Seriously.

This is real.

Ken could gain control of most UNIX systems

It worked, essentially, like this:

Ken modified cc (the C compiler on UNIX systems) so that — only when it was compiling UNIX’s “login” program — it would inject a small “backdoor” (into “login”) that would allow him to log in as any user on the system if he used a predefined “password”.

Which is, obviously, a pretty big security hole.

However…

That sort of "universall password" code would be likely to be found during even a rudimentary code review of the C compiler. Or, heck, even by any casual programmer who happened upon that section of the code.

What Ken did next was… devious.

Hiding his UNIX backdoor

He needed to make sure that, should anyone find his nefarious code in “cc”… that his backdoor would live on.

So he then added functionality to “cc” so that it would detect if it was compiling itself (because the C compiler was compiled… in the C compiler)… and insert code into the compiler that would add… itself.

Which means…

Even if the source code is removed from “cc” project… the code (for adding both the login backdoor and the “keep adding this to the C compiler” bits) would get “invisibly” injected into “cc” every time it got compiled by an already infected build of the compiler.

So… as long as there was an unbroken chain of using the C compiler from that point onward, the UNIX login backdoor was unlikely to be effectively removed.

Brutal.

According to Thompson:

“The actual bug I planted in the compiler would match code in the UNIX "login" command. The replacement code would miscompile the login command so that it would accept either the intended encrypted password or a particular known password. Thus if this code were installed in binary and the binary were used to compile the login command, I could log into that system as any user.”

The Moral of the story

As Ken Thompson put it…

“The moral is obvious. You can't trust code that you did not totally create yourself. (Especially code from companies that employ people like me.) No amount of source-level verification or scrutiny will protect you from using untrusted code. In demonstrating the possibility of this kind of attack, I picked on the C compiler. I could have picked on any program-handling program such as an assembler, a loader, or even hardware microcode. As the level of program gets lower, these bugs will be harder and harder to detect. A well installed microcode bug will be almost impossible to detect.”

Did this make it out into the wild?

I know what you're thinking.  "Is this code still out there?  How many systems were impacted by this?"

What we know: This bit of naughty code was released to at least one machine (used by a UNIX support group). This has been confirmed by Ken, himself.

However, it is believed that the code went no further than that machine.

But... do we know for sure?

Do we actually have a high level of confidence that the modified “cc” and “login” went no further than that support group UNIX box?

No. No, we do not.

In fact, according to Eric S. Raymond

“[I have] heard two separate reports that suggest that the crocked login did make it out of Bell Labs, notably to BBN, and that it enabled at least one late-night login across the network by someone using the login name “kt”.”

BBN.  That's Raytheon.  A critical DARPA researcher -- one which was instrumental in the early days of ARPANET.  A huge amount of software came out of BBN.  Heck, even the first Text Adventure game came from there.

If UNIX machines at Raytheon BBN were infected... the possibility of infected versions of those files making it to other sites is incredibly high.

Truly wild

Which leads to a (rather amusing, and mildly terrifying) bit of historical trivia:

Ken Thompson — one of the co-creators of UNIX — intentionally created a trojan horse that infected both the C compiler and the “login” program of UNIX systems.

What’s more… it went undetected for years.  We wouldn't even have known about it, if he hadn't told us he created it.

And we truly have no clue how widespread that trojan became.

community logo
Join the Lunduke Community
To read more articles like this, sign up and join my community today
22
What else you may like…
Videos
Podcasts
Posts
Articles
Internet Archive Takes Another Step Towards Death

Archive.org loses appeal in book copyright case with the Sony / Universal Music lawsuit still looming on the horizon.

The Internet Archive Loses Appeal. As Expected.
https://lunduke.locals.com/post/6079435/the-internet-archive-loses-appeal-as-expected

More from The Lunduke Journal:
https://lunduke.com/

00:30:58
Pop!_OS Lead: Linux Developers are “Patronizing Pedantic Megalomaniacs”

System76’s Principal Engineer doesn’t “even try to contribute to the Linux kernel anymore.”

The article:
https://lunduke.locals.com/post/6052448/pop-os-lead-linux-developers-are-patronizing-pedantic-megalomaniacs

More from The Lunduke Journal:
https://lunduke.com/

00:22:45
Zuck Regrets Censoring Facebook at Request of Democrats

"The White House, repeatedly pressured our teams for months to censor certain COVID-19 content, including humor and satire."

Warning: This show is extremely political. It has to be. There simply is no way to discuss the topic without being political. Just the same, the core of the topic is regarding the usability of digital, online publishing and messaging platforms -- a topic near and dear to the heart of those of us who have lived through the ages of the BBS, Usenet, Geocities, and the like.

More from The Lunduke Journal:
https://lunduke.com/

00:40:29
November 22, 2023
The futility of Ad-Blockers

Ads are filling the entirety of the Web -- websites, podcasts, YouTube videos, etc. -- at an increasing rate. Prices for those ad placements are plummeting. Consumers are desperate to use ad-blockers to make the web palatable. Google (and others) are desperate to break and block ad-blockers. All of which results in... more ads and lower pay for creators.

It's a fascinatingly annoying cycle. And there's only one viable way out of it.

Looking for the Podcast RSS feed or other links? Check here:
https://lunduke.locals.com/post/4619051/lunduke-journal-link-central-tm

Give the gift of The Lunduke Journal:
https://lunduke.locals.com/post/4898317/give-the-gift-of-the-lunduke-journal

The futility of Ad-Blockers
November 21, 2023
openSUSE says "No Lunduke allowed!"

Those in power with openSUSE make it clear they will not allow me anywhere near anything related to the openSUSE project. Ever. For any reason.

Well, that settles that, then! Guess I won't be contributing to openSUSE! 🤣

Looking for the Podcast RSS feed or other links?
https://lunduke.locals.com/post/4619051/lunduke-journal-link-central-tm

Give the gift of The Lunduke Journal:
https://lunduke.locals.com/post/4898317/give-the-gift-of-the-lunduke-journal

openSUSE says "No Lunduke allowed!"
September 13, 2023
"Andreas Kling creator of Serenity OS & Ladybird Web Browser" - Lunduke’s Big Tech Show - September 13th, 2023 - Ep 044

This episode is free for all to enjoy and share.

Be sure to subscribe here at Lunduke.Locals.com to get all shows & articles (including interviews with other amazing nerds).

"Andreas Kling creator of Serenity OS & Ladybird Web Browser" - Lunduke’s Big Tech Show - September 13th, 2023 - Ep 044

Well, it's not like we didn't see THIS coming from a mile away:

https://www.boredpanda.com/family-poisoned-ai-generated-mushroom-identification-book/

What's especially fascinating, is that this article itself sounds like it was partially written by cobbling together the responses to several AI prompts:

post photo preview

Hyprland 0.43.0 is out.

Looks like there are a lot of developers working on dozens of bugs and features. It is impressive the team of ordinary developers this project has attracted. That said, it is impossible to summarize such a large list of updates, fixes, and new features. So, here are a couple categories of updates and fixes:

  • Keyboard control,
  • command line apps,
  • tiling windows in a multi screen and resolution environment, and
  • Wayland / X compatibility.

This list is extensive, and I can't wait to test it out. If you're a fan or just curious, it might be time to get the Hyprland ecosystem a spin.

https://github.com/hyprwm/Hyprland/releases/tag/v0.43.0

I purchased this last night. It's absolutely fascinating. The author is a neuroscientist and uses the process of learning to play the banjo as the major example, but the applications are really limitless. Learn to code, learn to be a woodworker, whatever.

I'm about 1/5 through it, and I've been rereading quite a bit of it. I'll probably go back to the beginning and read it again once I've finished "skimming" it. From a personal perspective, he really nails some of the roadblocks I encountered while learning to play the tuba and electric bass.

Y'all should check it out. And no, it's not on archive.org....

https://www.kobo.com/us/en/ebook/the-laws-of-brainjo-the-art-science-of-molding-a-musical-mind

post photo preview
September 07, 2024
post photo preview
Funny Programming Pictures Part LIV
The Roman Numerals makes ‘em fancy.

Fun fact: I hit CTRL-C at least 7 times when copying each of these pictures.

You know.  Just to be sure.

You're welcome.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read full Article
September 04, 2024
post photo preview
Mount a drive image from a remote server... on DOS.
Want your D:\ to point to an image running on a Linux box across the world? Yeah, you do.

I'm a sucker for software which makes aging operating systems more useful.  As such, I am absolutely enamored with a new DOS utiltity called "mTCP NetDrive".

What is NetDrive?

"NetDrive is a DOS device driver that allows you to access a remote disk image hosted by another machine as though it was a local device with an assigned drive letter. The remote disk image can be a floppy disk image or a hard drive image."

Yeah.  Mount -- read and write -- a drive image remotely (anywhere in the world).  From DOS.

 

 

mTCP -- a suite of networking tools for DOS (like Ping, a DHCP client, an FTP client, etc.) -- has been around for a long time.  The developer, Michael Brutman, has truly done a phenomenal job building and mainting all of those tools.

But NetDrive really turns things up to 11.

  • You can place disk image on a server (remote or local) and mount it from any DOS machine.  The whole thing uses UDP.
  • The DOS driver uses less than 6 KB of RAM.  Keeping driver overhead low on DOS machines is important.
  • The drive images are simple raw disk images -- which means we can mount and manipulate them easily.
  • You can even mount multiple images at once -- from multiple different servers.

Oh!  The server is a lightweight application that runs (with no need for root access) on Linux or Windows.  Want to host your DOS images on a Raspberry Pi?  Yes.  You do.

 

 

What's more, the local DOS system simply recognizes the mounted drive as a standard hard drive (mounted as a configurable drive letter).  Which means that just about any software should work on it without difficulty.

Even disk management and optimization tools, like Norton Utilities, work fantastically.

 

 

As you can imagine, using NetDrive over the Internet can get a bit pokey.  Especially on a less-than-speedy connection.  But over a local network?  The darn thing runs at a very usable speed.

And -- even with potential speed issues when running on a remote server -- I absolutely love the idea of having a set of DOS drive images which I can mount from anywhere.  Heck.  I could even share some of those images with friends -- to use as a sort of DOS repository.

The developer has even added features like "undo" and "checkpoints" to make it easy to roll back "woopsies".  On a DOS drive image.  Mounted on a remote server.

Come on.

That's just nifty.

Read full Article
September 05, 2024
post photo preview
The Internet Archive Loses Appeal. As Expected.
With more legal action on the horizon, how long before Archive.org closes?

The United States Court of Appeals (Second Circuit) just issued a ruling against the Internet Archive (Archive.org) -- rejecting their appeal, and upholding a previous ruling against them in the Hachette vs Internet Archive legal battle.

Make no mistake: This is very bad news for both the Internet Archive, Archive.org users, as well as other archival projects.

 

 

 

Hachette v. Internet Archive: The Short, Short Version

 

To make sure everyone is up to speed, here is the short, short version of this legal battle.

For many years, the Internet Archive has been creating digital copies of physical books (by scanning them) -- then allowing people to "borrow" those digital versions from Archive.org (in theory limiting the total digital books being "lent out" to the count of the physical books in the Archive's possession).

They never obtained permissions from the authors or publishers to do any of this.

In 2020, during the Covid lockdowns, the Internet Archive launched the "National Emergency Library" -- where they removed that "1 physical book : 1 digital book lent out" restriction.  Meaning anybody on the Internet could obtain digital scans of physical books... and the Archive could "Lend Out" an unlimited number of digital copies based on a single physical copy.

Again.  No permission was obtained from the writers or publishers.

Thus -- to the surprise of absolutely nobody -- the "Hachette v. Internet Archive" legal battle began.

And... The Internet Archive lost.  The judge ruled in favor of the publishers (including Hachette, Wiley, Penguin Random House, & HarperCollins).

Naturally, Internet Archive appealed that ruling.  But, boy-howdy, was their appeal a strange one which was destined to fail.

 

The Strange Appeal of The Internet Archive

 

On April 19th of 2024, the Internet Archive filed their final brief in their attempt to appeal this ruling against them.

In that ruling, one of the Internet Archive's core arguments was that it cost the Internet Archive a lot of money to make so many digital copies of books without permission... so, therefore, the Internet Archive should be allowed to do it.

That is neither a joke nor an exaggeration.  It sounds weird, because it is weird.

The Internet Archive truly attempted to make the case that spending a lot of money committing a crime... should make that crime legal.  (Could you imagine the mafia making that case?  Wild.)

You can read the full analysis, by The Lunduke Journal, of the appeal (including the appeal itself) for yourself for more details.

The reality is... there was never any chance that the Internet Archive's attempted appeal was going to be successful.  Their defensive arguments were highly illogical (bordering on flights of fancy), and brought nothing new or noteworthy to the case.  This was all painfully obvious.

 

The Lost Appeal

 

On Wednesday, September 4th, 2024, the opinion was handed down from the United States Court of Appeals.

While the full ruling is roughly 64 pages long, this single paragraph -- from the second page -- summarizes things quite well:

 

"This appeal presents the following question: Is it “fair use” for a nonprofit organization to scan copyright-protected print books in their entirety, and distribute those digital copies online, in full, for free, subject to a one-to-one owned-to-loaned ratio between its print copies and the digital copies it makes available at any given time, all without authorization from the copyright-holding publishers or authors? Applying the relevant provisions of the Copyright Act as well as binding Supreme Court and Second Circuit precedent, we conclude the answer is no. We therefore AFFIRM."

 

To call out the truly important parts:

"Question: Is it 'fair use' ... to scan copyright-protected print books in their entirety, and distribute those digital copies online, in full, for free ... all without authorization from the copyright-holding publishers or authors? ... we conclude the answer is no."

You can read the entire 64 page ruling for yourself.  Heck.  You can even read it on Archive.org.  But that line, right there, sums it all up.

Naturally, the Internet Archive has issued a statement.  Albeit... a short one.

 

"We are disappointed in today’s opinion about the Internet Archive’s digital lending of books that are available electronically elsewhere. We are reviewing the court’s opinion and will continue to defend the rights of libraries to own, lend, and preserve books."

 

What Happens Now?

 

The Internet Archive gets sued by some of the biggest book publishers... and loses.

The Internet Archive appeals... and loses.

What happens next?  Well.  Unfortunately -- for both the Internet Archive, and its users -- the future looks rather bleak.

First and foremost: Has the Internet Archive made, and distributed, digital copies of work you own?  This ruling will certainly not hurt your case should you decide to take legal action against Archive.org.

And -- holy smokes -- the amount of copyrighted material on Archive.org is absolutely massive.

The Archive.org software repository alone contains millions of items.  With a very large number of them being copyrighted material, posted there without permission of the copyright owner.

Simply going by the numbers, here's how much material is available on Archive.org (roughly):

  • 832 Billion archived webpages.
  • 38 Million printed materials (magazines, books, etc.).
  • 2.6 Million pieces of software
  • 11.6 Million videos files.
  • 15 Million audio files.
  • 4.7 Million images.

How many of those items do you think are there without permission (or possibly even knowledge) of the owners or creators?

Every single one now has an increasingly strong case when looking at potential legal action.

And it's about to get even worse for the Internet Archive.

 

UMG Recordings v. Internet Archive

 

That's right, the book publishers weren't the only ones taking legal action against Archive.org. 

Universal Music Group and Sony have an ongoing lawsuit against the Internet Archive -- regarding the distribution of 2,749 audio recordings (with potential damages upwards of $412 Million USD).

Seriously.

 

"Plaintiffs bring this suit to address Defendants’ massive ongoing violation of Plaintiffs’ rights in protected pre-1972 sound recordings. As part of what Defendants have dubbed the “Great 78 Project,” Internet Archive, Blood, and GBLP have willfully reproduced thousands of Plaintiffs’ protected sound recordings without authorization by copying physical records into digital files. Internet Archive then willfully uploaded, distributed, and digitally transmitted those illegally copied sound recordings millions of times from Internet Archive’s website."

 

Sound familiar?  Digital copies.  No permission from the artists or publishers.  Free downloads for everyone.

Naturally, the Internet Archive attempted to have this suit dismissed... but their attempt was denied in May of 2024.  (Because if there's one constant in life... it's that the Internet Archive always loses in court.)  That case is going forward.

 

 

What happens if the Internet Archive loses this UMG / Sony case?  What happens if they are ordered to pay $412 Million in damages?

To put it simply: Archive.org doesn't have that kind of money.  They bring in roughly $20 Million (give or take) per year.  That type of legal liability would absolutely destroy the Internet Archive.

 

 

And, here's the thing, the Internet Archive is almost assuredly going to lose that lawsuit as well.

Regardless of what you, I, or anyone else thinks of the Internet Archive -- and, make no mistake, I use that service several times a week (and love it) -- the law here is incredibly clear and well tested.

The Internet Archive runs one of the largest (if not the largest) website of pirated and stolen digital material on the planet.  Sure, it may also provide extremely valuable (and often, very legal) services as well.. but that doesn't make those crimes go away.

With each legal defeat, the Internet Archive grows increasingly vulnerable to additional attacks.

Simply being logical about it... it seems highly likely that we'll see additional suits brought against the Internet Archive in the months ahead.  Books, music, TV shows, software... Archive.org contains a massive mountain of copyrighted material in all areas.  These are suits which the Internet Archive would be almost certain to lose.

With this reality looming, how long until Archive.org will be forced to shut down entirely?  That day is likely not far off... and a sad day it will be.

 

The Archive Had to Know This Was Coming

 

The truly sad part?  The leadership of the Internet Archive had to know exactly what they were doing.

Every step of the way, it was obvious that they were going to lock horns with publishers (and lose).

Heck, I told them.  Repeatedly.

But, even if The Lunduke Journal hadn't pointed this out... it was a brutally obvious certainty to anyone even mildly familiar with copyright law and the workings of Archive.org.

Which means: The Internet Archive knowingly put their entire service at risk (including the Wayback Machine, the massive archive or pre-copyright audio recordings, etc.) because they wanted to publish copyrighted material against the wishes of the authors or publishers.

Despite this, they continue to push a public perception campaign where they pretend that publishers and authors are burning their own books.  When the reality is... the books are still available a wide variety of ways.  Archive.org simply got in trouble for copying and distributing them without permission.

 

 

Something I find truly fascinating about all of this, is that The Lunduke Journal will -- as usual -- get yelled at (rather extensively) for this article.  For simply pointing out the current reality of copyright law and how the Internet Archive has, knowingly, violated it.

People love Archive.org.  Heck, I love Archive.org.

And people are allowing their love for that website to convince them that anyone being critical of it... must, necessarily, be bad and evil.  An enemy.

But it is not The Lunduke Journal who is putting The Internet Archive in danger of being shut down.

Neither is it Sony, Hachette, Random House, or HarperCollins who are putting The Internet Archive in danger.

No, sir.

The only one putting The Internet Archive in danger... is The Internet Archive.

Read full Article
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals