Skip to content
By using Twitter’s services you agree to our Cookies Use. We and our partners operate globally and use cookies, including for analytics, personalisation, and ads.

This is the legacy version of twitter.com. We will be shutting it down on June 1, 2020. Please switch to a supported browser, or disable the extension which masks your browser. You can see a list of supported browsers in our Help Center.

  • Home Home Home, current page.
  • About

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Language: English
    • Bahasa Indonesia
    • Bahasa Melayu
    • Català
    • Čeština
    • Dansk
    • Deutsch
    • English UK
    • Español
    • Filipino
    • Français
    • Hrvatski
    • Italiano
    • Magyar
    • Nederlands
    • Norsk
    • Polski
    • Português
    • Română
    • Slovenčina
    • Suomi
    • Svenska
    • Tiếng Việt
    • Türkçe
    • Ελληνικά
    • Български език
    • Русский
    • Српски
    • Українська мова
    • עִבְרִית
    • العربية
    • فارسی
    • मराठी
    • हिन्दी
    • বাংলা
    • ગુજરાતી
    • தமிழ்
    • ಕನ್ನಡ
    • ภาษาไทย
    • 한국어
    • 日本語
    • 简体中文
    • 繁體中文
  • Have an account? Log in
    Have an account?
    · Forgot password?

    New to Twitter?
    Sign up
taviso's profile
Tavis Ormandy
Tavis Ormandy
Tavis Ormandy
Verified account
@taviso

Tweets

Tavis OrmandyVerified account

@taviso

Vulnerability researcher at Google. This is a personal stream, opinions expressed are mine.

California
taviso.decsystem.org
Joined April 2008

Tweets

  • © 2020 Twitter
  • About
  • Help Center
  • Terms
  • Privacy policy
  • Imprint
  • Cookies
  • Ads info
Dismiss
Previous
Next

Go to a person's profile

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @

Promote this Tweet

Block

  • Tweet with a location

    You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more

    Your lists

    Create a new list


    Under 100 characters, optional

    Privacy

    Copy link to Tweet

    Embed this Tweet

    Embed this Video

    Add this Tweet to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Add this video to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Hmm, there was a problem reaching the server.

    By embedding Twitter content in your website or app, you are agreeing to the Twitter Developer Agreement and Developer Policy.

    Preview

    Why you're seeing this ad

    Log in to Twitter

    · Forgot password?
    Don't have an account? Sign up »

    Sign up for Twitter

    Not on Twitter? Sign up, tune into the things you care about, and get updates as they happen.

    Sign up
    Have an account? Log in »

    Two-way (sending and receiving) short codes:

    Country Code For customers of
    United States 40404 (any)
    Canada 21212 (any)
    United Kingdom 86444 Vodafone, Orange, 3, O2
    Brazil 40404 Nextel, TIM
    Haiti 40404 Digicel, Voila
    Ireland 51210 Vodafone, O2
    India 53000 Bharti Airtel, Videocon, Reliance
    Indonesia 89887 AXIS, 3, Telkomsel, Indosat, XL Axiata
    Italy 4880804 Wind
    3424486444 Vodafone
    » See SMS short codes for other countries

    Confirmation

     

    Welcome home!

    This timeline is where you’ll spend most of your time, getting instant updates about what matters to you.

    Tweets not working for you?

    Hover over the profile pic and click the Following button to unfollow any account.

    Say a lot with a little

    When you see a Tweet you love, tap the heart — it lets the person who wrote it know you shared the love.

    Spread the word

    The fastest way to share someone else’s Tweet with your followers is with a Retweet. Tap the icon to send it instantly.

    Join the conversation

    Add your thoughts about any Tweet with a Reply. Find a topic you’re passionate about, and jump right in.

    Learn the latest

    Get instant insight into what people are talking about now.

    Get more of what you love

    Follow more accounts to get instant updates about topics you care about.

    Find what's happening

    See the latest conversations about any topic instantly.

    Never miss a Moment

    Catch up instantly on the best stories happening as they unfold.

    1. Vess‏ @VessOnSecurity 2 Jan 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @VessOnSecurity @KyleHanslovan and

      That code doesn't even have to be part of the normal scanning process, let alone a "signature". It could be an update for the memory-resident part that looks for interesting documents in the background, when the computer is not in use.

      1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
    2. Vess‏ @VessOnSecurity 2 Jan 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @VessOnSecurity @KyleHanslovan and

      Yes, AV programs are privileged and can do a lot of nasty stuff, if they decide to. But doing it by modifying a scan string is a stupid, inefficient, and ineffective way to do it - and nobody would do such a stupid thing, even if they wanted to do mischief.

      1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes
    3. Ryan Duff‏ @flyryan 2 Jan 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @VessOnSecurity @KyleHanslovan and

      I could not disagree more with this statement. Moding a sig in memory seems to be one of the more stealthy ways to do this IMO. Make the signature silent and alter the exfil location to something you control and you have a pretty infallible and undetectable collection system.

      1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes
    4. Vess‏ @VessOnSecurity 2 Jan 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @flyryan @KyleHanslovan and

      Scanners update themselves. It doesn't matter if they are going to change one signature or some code component - it's equally normal (or stealthy). So it's not worth it doing it like this at the price of only catching a small subset of documents.

      1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
    5. Ryan Duff‏ @flyryan 2 Jan 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @VessOnSecurity @KyleHanslovan and

      You are taking a very narrow use case and treating it as if it’s the ONLY use. He showed you could manipulate signatures in memory to gather things you care about. Just because he only targeted an RTF doesn’t mean it can’t be used otherwise. Patrick was just proving a concept.

      2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
    6. Vess‏ @VessOnSecurity 3 Jan 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @flyryan @KyleHanslovan and

      No, you are missing the point. His method is limited to what he did precisely because scanners don't work as he seems to think they do. He CANNOT "modify a signature" to "make the scanner detect a string anywhere in any document".

      1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
    7. Ryan Duff‏ @flyryan 3 Jan 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @VessOnSecurity @KyleHanslovan and

      You’ve laid out a lot of “CANNOT”s mixed in with “stupid way to do it”s (which conflict with each other) but you haven’t discussed the reason WHY you think he is missing the mark. What did Patrick miss if what he’s shown doesn’t actually work?

      1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
    8. Vess‏ @VessOnSecurity 3 Jan 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @flyryan @KyleHanslovan and

      The two are related. Scanning the whole file (while doing normal scanning) is a STUPID way to proceed (regardless of the goal) which means that a scanner CANNOT use this approach to look for secret documents - because people will stop using the scanner (due to the slowdown).

      2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
    9. Ryan Duff‏ @flyryan 3 Jan 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @VessOnSecurity @KyleHanslovan and

      In the classified document use case, it doesn’t have to scan the whole document. Just the header. Even so, if it doesn’t scan the whole document, how does it detect malicious content embedded within? I’ve read @matalaz’s book on AV hacking and what you’re saying doesn’t jive…

      2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
    10. Joxean Koret‏ @matalaz 3 Jan 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @flyryan @VessOnSecurity and

      Hi Ryan! The troll @VessOnSecurity got me blocked but, nevertheless: he is wrong, as always. Scanning the whole file is common and finding a string anywhere in a file is common. It's usually done by finding a prefix and calculating a CRC of a given size. He is full of it.

      3 replies 0 retweets 11 likes
      Tavis Ormandy‏Verified account @taviso 3 Jan 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation
      Replying to @matalaz @flyryan and

      Yep, unlike Vess, Joxean actually knows what he's talking and has actually looked. Vess worked on "F-PROT" a *long* time ago, and guesses about everything else. (I haven't read what Vess wrote, I blocked him).

      7:10 AM - 3 Jan 2018
      • 1 Retweet
      • 11 Likes
      • Omri Segev Moyal STUͣͬͭ ͣ ͬ ͭ abdou Stefano Zanero David Martínez Mobinja Joxean Koret It's a-me, Mario!
      1 reply 1 retweet 11 likes
        1. New conversation
        2. Ryan Duff‏ @flyryan 3 Jan 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation
          Replying to @taviso @matalaz and

          He was basically saying that AV engines don’t scan entire files in real time because that would cause too much of a slowdown for the user (which would discredit the feasibility/practicality of @patrickwardle’s Kaspersky POC).

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        3. Tavis Ormandy‏Verified account @taviso 3 Jan 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation
          Replying to @flyryan @matalaz and

          Hah, Translation: F-PROT didn't do that on DOS 6.22 in 1984. I wrote an exploit for Kaspersky that *appended* a ZIP file to a DLL https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2015/09/kaspersky-mo-unpackers-mo-problems.html …😛

          0 replies 0 retweets 14 likes
        4. End of conversation

      Loading seems to be taking a while.

      Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.

        Promoted Tweet

        false

        • © 2020 Twitter
        • About
        • Help Center
        • Terms
        • Privacy policy
        • Imprint
        • Cookies
        • Ads info