Web-fraud is one of the most unpleasant features of today's Internet. Two well-known examples of fraudulent activities on the web are phishing and typosquatting. Their effects range from relatively benign (such as unwanted ads) to downright sinister (especially, when typosquatting is combined with phishing). This paper presents a novel technique to detect web-fraud domains that utilize HTTPS. To this end, we conduct the first comprehensive study of SSL certificates. We analyze certificates of legitimate and popular domains and those used by fraudulent ones. Drawing from extensive measurements, we build a classifier that detects such malicious domains with high accuracy.
User studies analyzing the effectiveness of browser warning messages indicated that an overwhelming percentage (up to 70-80 ---confirmed by recent research results (e.g., @cite_33 and @cite_2 )--- might explain the unexpected high percentage of expired and self signed certificates that we found in the results of all our data sets. In @cite_42 , the authors proposed a solution to simplify the process (for the users) of authenticating the servers' public keys (or SSL certificates) by deploying a set of semi-trusted collection of network servers that continuously probed the servers and collected their public keys (or SSL certificates). When the user was exposed to a new public key (SSL certificate), he referred to these semi-trusted servers to verify the authenticity of public keys (SSL certificates).
@cite_42 @cite_33 @cite_2
1550000763 2550748725 1976919795 2889555490
Web users are shown an invalid certificate warning when their browser cannot validate the identity of the websites they are visiting. While these warnings often appear in benign situations, they can also signal a man-in-the-middle attack. We conducted a survey of over 400 Internet users to examine their reactions to and understanding of current SSL warnings. We then designed two new warnings using warnings science principles and lessons learned from the survey. We evaluated warnings used in three popular web browsers and our two warnings in a 100- participant, between-subjects laboratory study. Our warnings performed significantly better than existing warnings, but far too many participants exhibited dangerous behavior in all warning conditions. Our results suggest that, while warnings can be improved, a better approach may be to minimize the use of SSL warnings altogether by blocking users from making unsafe connections and eliminating warnings in benign situations. SSL and TLS are used to secure the most commonly used Internet protocols. As a result, the ecosystem of SSL certificates has been thoroughly studied, leading to a broad understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of the certificates accepted by most web browsers. Prior work has naturally focused almost exclusively on "valid" certificates--those that standard browsers accept as well-formed and trusted--and has largely disregarded certificates that are otherwise "invalid." Surprisingly, however, this leaves the majority of certificates unexamined: we find that, on average, 65 of SSL certificates advertised in each IPv4 scan that we examine are actually invalid. In this paper, we demonstrate that despite their invalidity, much can be understood from these certificates. Specifically, we show why the web's SSL ecosystem is populated by so many invalid certificates, where they originate from, and how they impact security. Using a dataset of over 80M certificates, we determine that most invalid certificates originate from a few types of end-user devices, and possess dramatically different properties than their valid counterparts. We find that many of these devices periodically reissue their (invalid) certificates, and develop new techniques that allow us to track these reissues across scans. We present evidence that this technique allows us to uniquely track over 6.7M devices. Taken together, our results open up a heretofore largely-ignored portion of the SSL ecosystem to further study. Modern network security rests on the Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) and Transport Layer Security (TLS) protocols. Distributed systems, mobile and desktop applications, embedded devices, and all of secure Web rely on SSL TLS for protection against network attacks. This protection critically depends on whether SSL TLS clients correctly validate X.509 certificates presented by servers during the SSL TLS handshake protocol. We design, implement, and apply the first methodology for large-scale testing of certificate validation logic in SSL TLS implementations. Our first ingredient is "frankencerts," synthetic certificates that are randomly mutated from parts of real certificates and thus include unusual combinations of extensions and constraints. Our second ingredient is differential testing: if one SSL TLS implementation accepts a certificate while another rejects the same certificate, we use the discrepancy as an oracle for finding flaws in individual implementations. Differential testing with frankencerts uncovered 208 discrepancies between popular SSL TLS implementations such as OpenSSL, NSS, CyaSSL, GnuTLS, PolarSSL, MatrixSSL, etc. Many of them are caused by serious security vulnerabilities. For example, any server with a valid X.509 version1 certificate can act as a rogue certificate authority and issue fake certificates for any domain, enabling man-in-the-middle attacks against MatrixSSL and GnuTLS. Several implementations also accept certificate authorities created by unauthorized issuers, as well as certificates not intended for server authentication. We also found serious vulnerabilities in how users are warned about certificate validation errors. When presented with an expired, self-signed certificate, NSS, Safari, and Chrome (on Linux) report that the certificate has expired - a low-risk, often ignored error - but not that the connection is insecure against a man-in-the-middle attack. These results demonstrate that automated adversarial testing with frankencerts is a powerful methodology for discovering security flaws in SSL TLS implementations. The security of Internet-based applications fundamentally relies on the trustworthiness of Certificate Authorities (CAs). We practically demonstrate for the first time that even a weak off-path attacker can effectively subvert the trustworthiness of popular commercially used CAs. Our attack targets CAs which use Domain Validation (DV) for authenticating domain ownership; collectively these CAs control 99 of the certificates market. The attack utilises DNS Cache poisoning and tricks the CA into issuing fraudulent certificates for domains the attacker does not legitimately own -- namely certificates binding the attacker's public key to a victim domain. We discuss short and long term defences, but argue that they fall short of securing DV. To mitigate the threats we propose Domain Validation++ (DV++). DV++ replaces the need in cryptography through assumptions in distributed systems. While retaining the benefits of DV (automation, efficiency and low costs) DV++ is secure even against Man-in-the-Middle (MitM) attackers. Deployment of DV++ is simple and does not require changing the existing infrastructure nor systems of the CAs. We demonstrate security of DV++ under realistic assumptions and provide open source access to DV++ implementation.