Comcast man-in-the-middle attack

From: J Edgar Hoover (zorchat_private)
Date: Thu Feb 07 2002 - 20:33:42 PST

  • Next message: Colby Marks: "RE: directory traversal"

    Comcast "transitioned" my city from @home about a month ago. In the past
    week, they implimented what appears to be an Inktomi Traffic-Server
    transparent cache at 68.34.76.99.
    
    This allows them to not only log all http requests, but to also log the
    response. Maybe they want to profile their customer browsing history for
    subsidiaries or resale to marketers. Maybe they want to do their part in
    The War on Freedom. Maybe they just want passwords to porn sites.
    Apparently they aren't using it to maximize bandwidth, because it's not
    configured to serve cached data.
    
    And yes, they have purchased a lot of the specific, unique hardware that
    is required to do all this logging.
    
    If a comcast victim/customer sends a packet to port 80 at any IP address,
    it is intercepted by the Inktomi Traffic-Server, the contents of the
    packet are examined for the GET url and the "Host:" field. The Inktomi
    Traffic-Server then sends the http request on to your destination from
    it's address with modified content and headers. It then caches the
    returned data, changes both the header and the content, and sends the
    packet to your machine with the spoofed IP of the server you had
    requested.
    
    This allows them to monitor and change (or insert ads into) what
    you read.
    
    Interestingly, regardless of what IP you address the packet to, the
    Inktomi Traffic-Server reads the Host: field to determine where to send
    the packet. I sent several packets from my home machine to one of my
    office machines, inside the packet was "Host: www.comcast.net". Comcast
    illegally intercepted, misinterpreted and altered this packet, and sent it
    to www.comcast.com. So, you might say there's a bug in this evil Inktomi
    Traffic-Server thing.
    
    Oh,
    
    
    US Code TITLE 18, PART I, CHAPTER 119, Sec. 2511. (2) (a) (i)
    
    
    "...a provider of wire communication service to the public shall not
    utilize service observing or random monitoring except for mechanical or
    service quality control checks."
    
    Does federal law only apply when a little guy snoops on a big corporation?
    Where are the feds now?
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Feb 07 2002 - 21:27:34 PST