Database Develop

Do Not Use This..

DO NOT USE THIS!!
http://www.freewarepocketpc.net/ppc-download-pocket-pc-installation-creator-v2-3.html
I tried to use this app to create a cab file. It has an internal virus that changes the username of your phone to a Chinese variant when the created cab is run. (not sure why?)
Knew nothing about this until my Worldmate and Resco shut down on my TyTynII (they check their codes with username everytime you sync online).
Guess AV for WM is something to look at now!!

A virus? I doubt it...
Don't overreact and waste money on virus program for WM6. The experts may correct if I am wrong but I still can remember only 1 test case of a "sample" virus in windows mobile a few years back.
And changing your phone's user name to the chinese equivalent, considering it is possibly written by someone who is, uh, chinese, doesn't constitute a virus.

packetstorm said:
Don't overreact and waste money on virus program for WM6. The experts may correct if I am wrong but I still can remember only 1 test case of a "sample" virus in windows mobile a few years back.
And changing your phone's user name to the chinese equivalent, considering it is possibly written by someone who is, uh, chinese, doesn't constitute a virus.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I did not suggest to anyone to go out and buy AV software but, I can send you the .cab file if you would like to check for youself??
A virus or Trojan would not have to specifically work with onboard comms apps on the WM unit but so many people (especially in the US) are tethering there devices now giving a 'back door' so to speak..
It would not take much for a small packe on your WM device to drop items into your Outbox and when you sync, hey presto, it goes.
Basic PC AV would not see this.
EDIT: OK, for want of a better term, cal it Malware...Take a look at this, it's a bit long winded but gives you some idea. http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/reference/malicious.threats.to.pdas.html

CommMgrPro. Looking for GSM-GPS mappers

HI.
CommMgrPro is and one year old Hermes project. CommMgrPro is:
1) Automatic profile tool based on Location (GSM cell) and schedules.
2) Battery and Current draw monitory tool.
3) Communication manager.
4) -> It allow to upload cell changes to the server and if you have GPS It can take the coordenates so you can track your movements on the server using Google Maps. Apart of this we are creating automatically a big database matching CELL - OPERATOR - GPS coords.
So.....We are giving for free licenses to people interested on the project and interested on increasing the database. Simply install the program, use it to upload cells and if you ve uploaded cells you will get a free license. More info in www.commmgrpro.com
Thanks

It is interesting. However, I am concern about the privacy. Does the program upload ANYTHING else other than the Cells information?
How do you protect the information which user sends to your server? Can we delete the data completely off from your server?
EDIT:
I just checked your website and seems you allow user to login and check the cell info. However, the login and registration pages are not using SSL.

yes, thats truth.
User can choose which fields to be uploaded to the server (8 possible fields). But you can change the URL to test by yourself the data. At least users should upload Location (Cell/Lac), Phone operator, GPS coords and (owner_name and/or Device ID to identify the user who uploaded the data. Well, you can disable owner name and Device ID (imei) but we wont know who is upload that data). There are two main tables.
1) Cell-operator-gps. Thats the interesting table for CMP. No user data.
2) Location changes. Interesting for user to track movements on google maps. Data's rows are deleted each 72 hours but can be removed more frequently if users wants.
NO Https. Yes, we thought data was critial but We will put an special HTTPS port...
Dani

danielherrero said:
yes, thats truth.
User can choose which fields to be uploaded to the server (8 possible fields). But you can change the URL to test by yourself the data. At least users should upload Location (Cell/Lac), Phone operator, GPS coords and (owner_name and/or Device ID to identify the user who uploaded the data. Well, you can disable owner name and Device ID (imei) but we wont know who is upload that data). There are two main tables.
1) Cell-operator-gps. Thats the interesting table for CMP. No user data.
2) Location changes. Interesting for user to track movements on google maps. Data's rows are deleted each 72 hours but can be removed more frequently if users wants.
NO Https. Yes, we thought data was critial but We will put an special HTTPS port...
Dani
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
very interesting application Daniel!!
btw i have a question for you: is it possible to upload before a list of cells with also other informations included (like address, owner, power, or other) to display on screen once the bts is locked?
thanks
ciao
fausto

Well, currently It lets you upload 8 fields but I can more info if needed. This project is alive and I post new releases every two or three weeks.....
Dani

licenses
Are licenses still be given out for free? I already have a paid licence for bandswitch.

How does this compete with Navizon?

competition
Here's the differences. navizon uses a trial period program that supposedly gives you cash back for usage but the kicker is when the trial expires. CommMgrPro usage gets you a free license to the program itself since the database needs to be updated which is similar to navizon. What you're getting out of it is the difference.

[APP] - FindYourLaptop - A simple solution to finding a lost or stolen laptop

Hello Everyone,
I recently bought an EEE PC as a second computer and seeing as it's about the most easily lost or stolen laptop ever made, I thought it might be an idea to run some software on it that might help me recover it should it ever go missing.
After trying a few existing bits of software and not finding any satisfactory, I resorted to writing my own.
Since it seemed useful to me, I thought I'd make it available to anyone interested. It's a very early version at the moment and very basic, but I don't think there are too many bugs (famous last words!! ).
I thought I would post a message here as I use this forum quite a lot, and I know a lot of people here won't have a problem with editing the config file to set it up, I've tried to make things as simple as possible. However, if you don't know the difference between POP3 and SMTP mail servers, this app is probably not for you!!
If people are interested, I'll continue to develop it further. A few ideas are listed on my website.
Visit www.ajhonline.co.uk for download links and help.
Alex

this isn't hard to circumvent.

Nice app, but wouldn't they probably wipe the HDD?

How would it compare to Lojack's (utilizes Computrace) service? Some laptops have the Computrace service embedded in the bios. I currently use a Dell D410 and Panasonic CF-19, and they both have Computrace built into the bios. If someone formats my hard drive, or installs another harddrive, the bios will rebuild the neccessary files, run in the the background and start reporting the IP address back to Lojack.

Yes, of course the hard drive could be wiped, or it could never be connected to the internet. It is also easy to circumvent, although if I do develop it further, it would be fairly straight forward to make it less obvious and better hidden. This is only a very first version, to gauge interest more than anything,
It's not meant to be 100% foolproof, that probably isn't possible anyway. The advantage is it's free. I really developed it because I couldn't get Adeona to work (it just kept failing to connect to its server), not to compete with commercial solutions.

Hmmm, you know how I said I didn't think there were any bugs....
I just found that the Windows version was not saving the detected IP addresses correctly, so it would email you a "new" IP address message every time the computer was rebooted.
However the problem is now fixed, and a new version 0.1a available for download. The cross platform version wouldn't have been affected, but there's a new version of that too, just for completeness.
Sorry
Alex

I've now made some additions and released a new version which includes the changes below:
Added a separate configuration application to simplify initial setup
Added the ability to encrypt the mail server password for better security
Added a link to DNSTools to the IP Detected email for easy lookup of the WHOIS records for the IP Address
As before, visit www.ajhonline.co.uk and download version 0.2 from there.
Alex
PS - If you are using the Windows version and doing an upgrade from a previous version, make sure you keep a copy of your existing fyl.properties file, otherwise it will be overwritten during the install and any existing known IP addresses will be lost.

huff,.
i wish i have seen this before i lost my friend laptop,.
great help sir,. keep up,.

Version 0.22 is now available for download from www.ajhonline.co.uk.
It's only a small update; you are now able to specify a range of IP addresses as already known so that you don't get an email when one of those is detected.
Alex

[DEVS ONLY] Crack/bypass/trick Boot.img Signature

Ok, so lets get cracking on this bootloader.
boot.img and recovery.img certs (thanks to ntwrkwizard):
http://ponack.net/designgears/atrix/mmcblk0p10 - cert extract.zip
http://ponack.net/designgears/atrix/mmcblk0p11 - cert extract.zip
Flaw in the X.509 certs:
http://www.darkreading.com/security/vulnerabilities/218900008/index.html
Boot.img & Recovery.img
http://www.ponack.net/designgears/dump.7z

DG, afaik, that exploit deals with the md2 hash algorithm. it is a good possible starting point. has the signing cert been found/recovered/viewed yet?
if moto signed it with an md5 hash cert, then that may not be possible.

Well if you guys need any processing power to help crack anything let me know. I am willing to donate my system. Current specs:
i7-970 six core 4.8ghz overclocked
4 gtx580 gpus
24gb ddr3 2000
HSDL 240gb ssd
Like I said, if you guys need any processing power let me know.
Sent from my "5 inch Galaxy Tab"
Atrix here on the 22nd

dtmcnamara said:
Well if you guys need any processing power to help crack anything let me know. I am willing to donate my system. Current specs:
i7-970 six core 4.8ghz overclocked
4 gtx580 gpus
24gb ddr3 2000
HSDL 240gb ssd
Like I said, if you guys need any processing power let me know.
Sent from my "5 inch Galaxy Tab"
Atrix here on the 22nd
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Please don't post here. This is a dev only thread. Post your offer in General.
Thanks!

These downloads look like just CA certs. Could someone extract the x.509 cert embedded in the beginning of the boot.img and post it to this thread? I'm out and about this weekend and don't have a box with a hex editor handy.

perdurabo2 said:
These downloads look like just CA certs. Could someone extract the x.509 cert embedded in the beginning of the boot.img and post it to this thread? I'm out and about this weekend and don't have a box with a hex editor handy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you could tell me how to do that I will be more than happy to get those for you. I'm the go to guy, remember?

Here is the extracted cert from within mmcblk0p10.img. This hex dump is extracted from 7FF7FC through 7FFDF9.
Also is the extracted cert from within mmcblk0p11.img. This hex dump is extracted from 7FF7FC through 7FFE79.
Not sure the value of an extracted public side of the x.509 is post signature but I'm sure someone will define that.
Good luck..
NW

back on topic please.

Mr. Clown said:
back on topic please.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Who are you talking to? The cert conversation is applicable.

Hi friend,
is the bootloader encrypten the same as defy or milestone?
Or a new one?
Maybe we could get all a free bootloader if this would work?
Or other technical?
Thanks

perdurabo2 said:
Who are you talking to? The cert conversation is applicable.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
He deleted some unnecessary posts which were getting off topic. That's all.

The structure of an X.509 v3 digital certificate is as follows:
Certificate
Version
Serial Number
Algorithm ID
Issuer
Validity
Not Before
Not After
Subject
Subject Public Key Info
Public Key Algorithm
Subject Public Key
Issuer Unique Identifier (optional)
Subject Unique Identifier (optional)
Extensions (optional)
...
Certificate Signature Algorithm
Certificate Signature
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The extensions they come in are:
pem - (Privacy Enhanced Mail) Base64 encoded DER certificate, enclosed between "-----BEGIN CERTIFICATE-----" and "-----END CERTIFICATE-----"
.cer, .crt, .der - usually in binary DER form, but Base64-encoded certificates are common too (see .pem above)
.p7b, .p7c - PKCS#7 SignedData structure without data, just certificate(s) or CRL(s)
.p12 - PKCS#12, may contain certificate(s) (public) and private keys (password protected)
.pfx - PFX, predecessor of PKCS#12 (usually contains data in PKCS#12 format, e.g., with PFX files generated in IIS)
PKCS#7 is a standard for signing or encrypting (officially called "enveloping") data. Since the certificate is needed to verify signed data, it is possible to include them in the SignedData structure. A .P7C file is a degenerated SignedData structure, without any data to sign.
PKCS#12 evolved from the personal information exchange (PFX) standard and is used to exchange public and private objects in a single file.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Flaws in the X509 Certificate:
Specification: Complexity and lack of quality
The X.509 standard was primarily designed to support the X.500 structure, but todays use cases center around the web. Many features are of little or no relevance today. The X.509 specification suffers from being over-functional and underspecified and the normative information is spread across many documents from different standardization bodies. Several profiles were developed to solve this, but these introduce interoperability issues and did not fix the problem.
Architectural flaws
Use of blacklisting invalid certificates (using CRLs and OCSP) instead of whitelisting
CRLs are particularly poor because of size and distribution patterns
Ambiguous OCSP semantics and lack of historical revocation status
Revocation of root certificates not addressed
Aggregation problem: Identity claim (authenticate with an identifier), attribute claim (submit a bag of vetted attributes) and policy claim are combined in a single container. This raises privacy, policy mapping and maintenance issues.
Delegation problem: CAs cannot technically restrict subCAs to issue only certificates within a limited namespaces and attribute set – this feature of X.509 in not in use. Therefore a large number of CAs exists in the Internet, and classifying them and their policies is an insurmountable task. Delegation of authority within an organization cannot be handled at all, like it is common business practice.
Federation problem: Certificate chains that are the result of sub-CAs, bridge- and cross-signing make validation complex and expensive in terms of processing time. Path validation semantics may be ambiguous. Hierarchy with 3rd-party trusted party is the only model. This is inconvenient when a bilateral trust relationship is already in place.
Problems of Commercial Certificate Authorities
Flawed business model: The subject, not the relying party, purchases certificates. The RA will usually go for the cheapest offer; quality is not being paid for in the competing market.
CAs deny almost all warranties to the user.
Expiration date: Should be used to limit the time the key strength is deemed sufficient. Abused by CAs to charge the client an extension fee. Places unnecessary burden on user with key roll-over.
Client certificates have zero protection value against dedicated attackers.
In browsers, the security is that of the weakest CA. There are very weak CAs.
“Users use an undefined certification request protocol to obtain a certificate which is published in an unclear location in a nonexistent directory with no real means to revoke it.“
Implementation issues
Implementation suffer from design flaws, bugs, different interpretations of standards and lack of interoperability of different standards. Some problems are:
Many implementations turn off revocation check:
Seen as obstacle, policies are not enforced
Would it be turned on in all browsers by default, including code signing, it would probably crash the infrastructure.
DNs are complex and little understood (lack of cononicalization, i18n problems, ..)
rfc822Name has 2 notations
Name and policy constraints hardly supported
Key usage ignored, first certificate in a list being used
Enforcement of custom OIDs is difficult
Attributes should not be made critical because it makes clients crash.
Unspecified length of attributes lead to product-specific limits
Exploits
In 2005, Arjen Lenstra and Benne de Weger demonstrated "how to use hash collisions to construct two X.509 certificates that contain identical signatures and that differ only in the public keys", achieved using a collision attack on the MD5 hash function.
In 2008, Alexander Sotirov and Marc Stevens presented at the Chaos Communication Congress a practical attack that allowed them to create a rogue Certificate Authority, accepted by all common browsers, by exploiting the fact that RapidSSL was still issuing X.509 certificates based on MD5.
X.509 certificates based on SHA-1 had been deemed to be secure up until very recent times. In April 2009 at the Eurocrypt Conference , Australian Researchers of Macquarie University presented "Automatic Differential Path Searching for SHA-1" . The researchers were able to deduce a method which increases the likelihood of a collision by several orders of magnitude.
Domain-validated certificates („Junk certificates“) are still trusted by web browsers, and can be obtained with little effort from commercial CAs.
EV-certificates are of very limited help, because Browsers do not have policies that disallow DV-certificates,
There are implementation errors with X.509 that allow e.g. falsified subject names using null-terminated strings or code injections attacks in certificates.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From the sound of it, the X.509 cerificate the Atrix uses will be in .p12 format, although I could be wrong.
Example of a Decoded X509 cert: http://pastie.org/1590676

Great post, this is def a way to go and explore , i have been messsing with NVIDIAFlash all day so far.. i think if i can get a bootstrap or something on here so that i can mount and add some files to system folder with phone off i may be on to something ..

t0dbld said:
Great post, this is def a way to go and explore , i have been messsing with NVIDIAFlash all day so far.. i think if i can get a bootstrap or something on here so that i can mount and add some files to system folder with phone off i may be on to something ..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Adding things to the system folder means nothing, the system partition is only check when a new system is flashed via (sbf_flash, rsdlite, or flashing a CG via an update.zip) otherwise you can add/remove items from the /system partition with no worries of the signatures.

I've got a question. Since we are dealing with a closed system. Can we not validate -enddate of the signed boot image. Make note of the exact date and time. Then change the system clock to less than 24 hrs. after this date. This will allow the entire system to think that the bootloader and cert have done their job and simply needs updated. Now we simply need to insert new boot.img that has a valid -startdate within that 24 hr period. The system should simply stop using the expired image and boot the "updated image". Once this generic image is booted, it can simply be swapped out with any further custom roms that we feel the need to use. Once all is done, the system clock will need to be restored to appropriate time. If I knew how to code, I would simply try this myself. But I don't, so I hope this might at least provide some insight to the possibility. I would love to work with developers on finding a solution to this problem, so feel free to ask questions.

jimmydafish said:
Adding things to the system folder means nothing, the system partition is only check when a new system is flashed via (sbf_flash, rsdlite, or flashing a CG via an update.zip) otherwise you can add/remove items from the /system partition with no worries of the signatures.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I 100% agree i didnt say that was the end all.... the reason for doing this is so that the computer recoginizes the device in NVIDIAFlash mode and i than can hopefully overwrite the bootloader with the dev version of bootloader.bin

t0dbld said:
I 100% agree i didnt say that was the end all.... the reason for doing this is so that the computer recoginizes the device in NVIDIAFlash mode and i than can hopefully overwrite the bootloader with the dev version of bootloader.bin
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That will not work, the bootloader is just one piece of a longer chain..changing that out "will" just have the phone reboot and use the backup bootloader. The problem to cracking it lies in all parts. Especially the NvRam where it begins and the MBR.

jimmydafish said:
That will not work, the bootloader is just one piece of a longer chain..changing that out "will" just have the phone reboot and use the backup bootloader. The problem to cracking it lies in all parts. Especially the NvRam where it begins and the MBR.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I very much respect all of the work you and your team has put into this situation with other devices, and i very much appreciate the help given by you guys to this forum, and no one including myself wants to waste time, so that being said i have not seen any ideas contributed ... only negative posts on what isnt going to work, i agree that you guys know more than me on this situation perhaps if you could share some of your ideas or the approach or direction you are going i and others could be of some help. We our fresh and not quite so beat up , its like when debuging a program thats driving you nuts and you cant figure out whats going wrong , sometimes a break, sleep, etc is in order so that when you come back your whole train of thought has been altered and you see something differently because you were not looking there before.
I follow instructions well, so lead... i am willing to donate my time my resources, and more than likely my device (at least for the next 29 days )

t0dbld said:
I very much respect all of the work you and your team has put into this situation with other devices, and i very much appreciate the help given by you guys to this forum, and no one including myself wants to waste time, so that being said i have not seen any ideas contributed ... only negative posts on what isnt going to work, i agree that you guys know more than me on this situation perhaps if you could share some of your ideas or the approach or direction you are going i and others could be of some help. We our fresh and not quite so beat up , its like when debuging a program thats driving you nuts and you cant figure out whats going wrong , sometimes a break, sleep, etc is in order so that when you come back your whole train of thought has been altered and you see something differently because you were not looking there before.
I follow instructions well, so lead... i am willing to donate my time my resources, and more than likely my device (at least for the next 29 days )
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am not being negative just helping you all steer clear of dead ends. We are looking over some files now and may have some useful tidbits soon. I think we can tell the boot chain from start to finish.

Great!! thanks for the update... on a side note esp in loom of this whole ps3 thing i hope motorola uses the same signing keys for all devices, so that if our day ever comes its x-mas for all

WP8 MDM: how to hack?

After enrolling my Lumia 920 to the corporate Exchange email, new MDM (mobile device management) policies are applied to my phone. It's OK but company administrator(s) set the unlock password (pin) expiration time too short. Every damn month I should choose and remember a new pin... And I can not use the old pins (or I don't know what is the time for "clearing" my old passwords).
Do you know/could you suggest any tricks/hacks to get around this situation? I want to reuse my old pins.

Hey Dude,
I don't think that you can do anything. And this is not the correct thread for such questions.
In the MS World the recommended value for reusing old passwords is 24 so after 2 years
(if 4 weeks was choosen) you can use the first one again.

Why do you think it's an incorrect forum? This forum is about "hacking", and I need a hack. It's definitely not a "Q&A" or "General" forums question...

Hmmm this WOULD fall under the Q&A because it is technically asking a how-to although it involves hacking. Typically the threads under the Development and Hacking are threads that start projects with the hopes of hacking instead of asking how to. With that said, I'll move that over there for now and if there is some development that comes out of this, it can be renamed and moved back to Development and Hacking.

If you have a registry editor, it's pretty easy to tweak those settings. Unfortunately, you're on a Lumia so right now that's not possible (we're working on it!)
The only other option I can think of right now is to try intercepting the communication between the phone and the corporate server. Exchange ActiveSync uses HTTPS, so any standard HTTPS proxy (like Fiddler or Burp Suite) should work. You may need to set the proxy to use a client certificate (if one was provided for your phone), and you definitely need to install the proxy's certificate on the phone (so the phone trusts it to spoof the corporate server). Anyhow, once you have interception set up, it should be pretty easy to modify the policy rules that get pushed down.
In either case, though, the changes will only last until the next time the phone checks its policy rules. I don't know how often that happens - it *might* even be only at initial enrollment, in which case if you un-enroll and then re-enroll you should be fine - but it could be a problem.

GoodDayToDie, thanks for reply. Could you remind me: is it possible to just read values from registry on the Lumia handsets? At least I want to know value of the DevicePasswordHistory settings (according to this article).
[UPDATE] I installed Fiddler's root certificate on the phone, and able to catch & decode https traffic; however there is nothing about provisioning xml in the content, account synchronization produces 3 https requests, first response is a short binary data, second contains an email body (or header) etc. , no xml at all. Looks like MDM policies are applied only on service discovery (I should google for that). Will try to remove this Exchange account and add it again. By the way, I'm not very familiar with the Fiddler: can I change https XML response on the fly?