Skip navigation
  • RSA Conference Twitter
  • RSA Conference Facebook
  • RSA Conference RSS
  • RSA Conference Youtube
  • RSA Conference Flickr
  • RSA Conference LinkedIn
  • RSA Conference iTunes

Ben Rothke: Security Reading Room

6 Posts tagged with the ligatt tag

Lessons from LIGATT

Posted by Ben Rothke Jul 11, 2011
0

This article of mine originally appeared at https://www.infosecisland.com/blogview/15064-Lessons-from-LIGATT.html

 

 

Lessons from LIGATT

 

I have been writing book reviews on information security and technology books for quite a while.  Topics such as authentication, security design, operational resilience, biometrics and security policy are rather tame and most of the reviews don’t generate a huge amount of controversy.

 

In fact, before June 2010, no book review I wrote ever lead to being interviewed by a major network for an expose of theirs, or a personal attack by the author (including being called a racist and a stock basher) against myself, Chris John Riley, Sam Bowne and others.  These critiques by aforementioned and others were never a personal issue, and this article is simply a record of lessons learned.

 

Writing book reviews is something I do as a pastime, and with that, I generally refrain from writing negative book reviews.  But occasionally, some books are so problematic that one can’t remain silent. 

 

That is what lead to my June 2010 review of How to be the World’s #1 Hacker, written by Gregory D. Evans of LIGATT Security International (and SPOOFEM.COM and High Tech Crime Solutions Inc.) for this blog. I demonstrated (as did Brian Baskin) that significant amounts of the book were plagiarized. This was based on the use of the iThenticate service.  iThenticate is one of the leading plagiarism detection services that provides impartial content analysis.  I published the book review and thought that was the end of it. 

 

For those who need a briefing on the LIGATT saga, Attrition notes that Evans describes himself as a hi-tech hustler, The World’s No. 1 Hacker and a convicted felon. Attrition further writes that Evans has invented himself as some form of hacker with the ability to break into anything and spin that supposed knowledge into advising companies on security.

 

It is the common opinion of industry experts that Evans and his company have little real knowledge beyond pedestrian hacking techniques found in plagiarized books and beginner hacking texts. LIGATT offers products that are simply bloated version of common tools such as ping and nmap.

 

Due to a variety of unexpected events that took place, my book review did not simply end there. I ultimately learned a considerable amount about a number of topics, from fair use to securities law and more, and met a lot of smart people along the way.  I would like to share those lessons with you.


Twitter is a powerhouse for action

 

Details

 

From as early as 2009, the use of Twitter for organized student protests significantly changed the dynamics of mass communications.  In 2011, we saw the use of Twitter to overthrow the corrupt Tunisian government and fight the oppressive Syrian regime.  Twitter is indeed a powerhouse for action. 

 

Twitter and other social media outlets are changing the way business and marketing are done.

 

Lesson

 

While Fox, Bloomberg and other media outlets had Evans on their show, Twitter was often the medium for those that did not view Evans as the number 1 security expert to get the word out via the #Ligatt hash tag.  People and organizations such as Attrition, 0ph3lia, Sam Bowne, Marcus Carey, Chris John Riley and krypt3ia used the #LIGATT hashtag to get their message across.

 

Self-publishing

 

Details

 

Indie movies came about due to the frequent inability for smaller movie producers to get the attention of the major studios. When it comes to books, self-publishing is often a great way to bypass traditional publishers and quickly get a book into print.

But with that ability, many authors will self-publish; bypassing the editing, fact checking and rigorous plagiarism checking that a traditional publishing house will typically perform.

 

Rich O’Hanley, publisher at Auerbach Publications and CRC Press, notes that plagiarism continues to plague both his firm and the entire industry, thanks to the self-publishing and the web, and its ethos that information should be free. The reality is that it is far too easy for authors to use whatever is available.

 

O’Hanley is not sure if the motivation to plagiarize is driven by ignorance of copyright rules, or simply the perception that they won’t be caught.  Even authors whose careers predate the web, fall victim to this and use material they can cut-and-paste that they likely wouldn’t use if they had to retype it.  CRC Press has tightened the whole permissions process, but it’s still a matter of trusting the author and his or her attestations.         

 

Lesson

 

Had How to be the World’s #1 Hacker been sent to a traditional publisher, it likely would have been flagged immediately and never allowed into print.

 

Evans has claimed in interviews and self-made YouTube videos to have had permission from the sources he used.  But as of July 2011, he has yet to show a single document, email or contract that entitled him to re-publish the works of others.

 

Fair use

 

Details

 

The US judicial system (see 17 U.S.C. § 106 and 17 U.S.C. § 106A) allows for the fair use of copyrighted content. While there is no definitive level of where fair use ends and plagiarism begins, How to be the World’s #1 Hacker crosses the line according to a reasonable assessment of what fair use is.

 

In An Independent Plagiarism Review of How to Become the World's No. 1 Hacker, Brian Baskin noted that you will find that many of the references are from NMRC; a site run by Simple Nomad. Simple Nomad developed the basic structure that Evans used to plan his table of contents, as well as originally developed the material used by Evans in his book. This was excellently written material, but is dated originally from 2000.

 

What Evans also did was modify some of the text that Simple Nomad wrote, to make it look like he was in fact the true author.

Ron Coleman, Partner, Head of Intellectual Property Department at Goetz Fitzpatrick LLP and general counsel of the Media Bloggers Association, notes that even seasoned attorneys are often at sea about where a quotation crosses the line from fair use to copyright infringement. 

 

Coleman observed that “fair use is a very fact-specific inquiry, where courts are often asked to weigh a lot of factors at the same time.  The tricky part is that while judges are making very subjective decisions about liability, the copyright statute is designed -- with mandatory awards of attorneys’ fees and in some cases of statutory damages -- to punish every infringer as if he knew in advance how that equation would come out.  In the close cases, that's simply impossible.”

 

Lesson:

Before I wrote my review, I was not aware of the fine details of fair use.  With How to be the World’s #1 Hacker, objective analysis demonstrated that there was lot of use, and very little of it fair.

 

Copyrights

 

Details

 

A copyright is a set of exclusive rights granted by a state to the creator of an original work or their assignee for a limited period of time in exchange for public disclosure of the work. This includes the right to copy, distribute and adapt the work. 

 

Without copyright protection, most artists and authors would not create music or books, if their works could not be protected. 

 

With that, copyright owners have the exclusive statutory right to exercise control over copying and other exploitation of the works for a specific period of time, after which the work is said to enter the public domain. Uses covered under limitations and exceptions to copyright, such as fair use, do not require permission from the copyright owner. All other uses require permission.

 

The notion of a copyright has its roots in the United States Constitution; where it states in Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 (known as the Copyright Clause) that empowers the United States Congress to “promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries”.

 

Lesson

 

As detailed in Gregory D. Evans, Copyright Violations for Over a Year, Evans has been plagiarizing content for his Twitter feed and associated web sites, here and here  

 

The copyright violations are that the LIGATT sites scrape entire news articles, including the graphics, without permission. While LIGATT ultimately gave give credit to the original source at the end of the article; that does not justify what he is doing or make it legal. Reproducing an entire piece of work without permission is a copyright violation.

 

One site LIGATT scraped a significant amount of content from is the Krypt3ia blog.  Note that the following statement on the blog site leaves little room for ambiguity:  All content of this site is copyright of Krypt3ia (Scot A. Terban) and not to be copied unless express consent is given in writing by its author.  LIGATT never received permission to use the content.

 

Blog owner Scot Terban observed that “it seems to be the standard of practice on the LIGATT sites that no original content is ever posted by Mr. Evans.  There are quite a few PR pieces and links to interviews he has done in the past.  But as far as his own original content, there is none.   Instead, there is an overabundance of scraped content from well-known information security web sites and noted authors; many of whom likely don’t know that their content has been copied”.

 

Penny stocks

 

Much of the spam you get is around weight loss and various schemes to make money.  Rarely will a day go by that you won’t receive numerous spam emails touting a hot stock tip.

 

Often these emails are used in pump-and-dump schemes (P&D).  The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) define P&D as “the touting of a company's stock (typically microcap companies) through false and misleading statements to the marketplace. After pumping the stock, fraudsters make huge profits by selling their cheap stock into the market”.

 

Since most of these companies being pumped are listed on the Pink Sheet (an unregulated market), a stock moving up just one cent (since these companies have as many as 5 billion shares of stock or more) can bring significant money to those pumping it, when they finally dump it.

 

How to Identify a Pump and Dump Stock Scam notes that if the stock trades on the OTC (Over The Counter) or Pink Sheet Exchanges, it is often an indicator of a scam. Stocks traded on these exchanges do not fulfill the rigorous requirements of the NYSE, NASDAQ, or American Stock Exchanges.

 

In Tips To Identify Pump And Dump Schemes at Motley Fool, a few quick tips to help identify P&D schemes are to:

  •          look at the structure of the company
  •          examine the trading and price history
  •          take a close look at the founders of the company (previous experience, background, etc.)
  •          look at the percentage ownership of the company (insider, retail, institutional)
  •          look at any VC investors that have made investments in the company

 

 

Harry Domash writes in Beware of pump-and-dump stocks that promoters pump the stock by issuing copious media releases announcing the firm’s entry into a variety of promising businesses.

Domash notes that in truth, it is relatively easy to spot these risky stocks and lists six checks you can use to quickly rule out dangerous stocks, whether pump-and-dumpers or just bad ideas. He suggests ruling out any stock that fails to meet the following:

 

  • Last price above 50 cents
  • Last-quarter sales at least $10 million
  • Market capitalization at least $50 million.
  • Institutional ownership at least 15%
  • Debt/equity ratio less than 3
  • Maximum price/book ratio of 30

 

Ryk Edelstein, veteran entrepreneur and CEO at Cicada Security Technology has seen the dark side of P&D, having observed a well-intentioned business owner partner with less well intentioned partners who offered a promise of riches and success by simply letting them take the company public. To those in the high tech sector, there is no shortage of charlatans who will approach unsuspecting business owners, stoking their egos, and appealing to greed.

 

Consequently, as in the case of the well intentioned business owner, at the end of his partner’s cycle of P&D, he was left sucked dry holding a valueless corporate shell, debt, and facing the prospect of serious legal repercussions.

 

Lesson

 

Like many companies listed on the pink sheets, LIGATT (while not necessarily a P&D stock) seemed to consistently use myriad press releases as a method of garnering attention to the company, which would ostensibly serve to increase the perceived value of the company.

 

LIGATT press releases are somewhat unique in that many of them are unidirectional; in that the other party does not issue a corresponding press release.

 

One of countless examples of bidirectional press releases is the June 2011 strategic partnership of Juniper Networks and OnLive under which Juniper will be the exclusive networking provider for OnLive's network infrastructure.  This was announced on both Juniper’s web site and correspondingly on OnLive’s web site.

 

When it comes to LIGATT, I could not find a company or organization mentioned in their press releases that has reciprocated with a similar press release.

 

Notice the following:

 

 

Regulation has its limits

 

Details

 

Even with SOX, GLBA and other regulations, the consumer and investor ultimately can’t be fully protected. The finance system and financial markets in this country are so complex, with so many layers and with so many interrelated parts, that it is ripe for abuse.

 

Even with the SEC in place to regulate such entities, publicly traded companies on the Pink OTC Markets (Pink Sheets) are lower priority for investigations, for many reasons. 

 

Even the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) often finds itself limited, even with its regulatory powers.  As I wrote in New York News Radio, the Voice Of Bad Science, for the consumer, whenever they hear the following mandated FDA disclaimer, they should immediately be suspicious:  These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.  After such a disclaimer, an able person should ask himself or herself, if the product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease, why use it?  Nonetheless, even such regulatory disclaimers seem to go in one ear and out the other of most consumers.

 

Part of the reason regulation won’t work is that an investor with an insatiable appetite for profits, often finds that their ability to reason is occluded.  Combine this with the flash of mega-gains that the P&D maker’s supply and people will invariably find themselves on the losing end of the deal, with no recourse in which to recoup their losses.

 

Corresponding to what Ryk Edelstein observed earlier about the well-intentioned business owner; there are many entities required to make a P&D work; from lawyers, securities underwriters, transfer agents and much more.  Any regulation that would encompass all of the myriad entities would have to be so draconian as to stop all market activities.  And such a thing will never happen.

 

Lesson

 

Even with the many LIGATT lawsuits, including many frivolous cases filed by Evans, the most recent case on April 11, 2011,the legal case LIGATT filed was thrown out of court and the firm ordered to pay over $29,000 in legal costs to the other party. 

With all of this, as of July 2011, the SEC has not announced any sort of investigation against LIGATT.  Nor have any securities lawyers I consulted said they expect any investigation against the firm any time soon. 

 

Pink sheets are not for girls’ beds

 

While there is the NYSE, NASDAQ and other reputable exchanges, it should be noted that the Pink Sheets is not a stock exchange. In fact, firms have very little requirements in order to be quoted in the Pink Sheets.  Since many of these firms do not submit timely financial statements, nor perform third-party audits, it makes it difficult for the investor to really understand what they are getting into.

 

It is questionable why any novice investor would want to invest in a firm that can’t afford or won’t submit an audited financial statement. It is for these reasons and more, that Pink Sheet firms are extremely risky. Read: a place where naïve investors can lose their entire investment quickly and effortlessly.

 

This does not mean to imply that all Pink Sheet stocks should be avoided, as there are certainly many legitimate Pink Sheet companies.  Many are smaller firms with legitimate intentions of starting small and growing big.  But given there are so many that are not like that, the novice investor in the Pink Sheet market is going down a road fraught with financial risk.

 

Much of the hype of some of these Pink Sheet companies is often based on the charisma and hyperbole of the financial people and executives at the companies. Uneducated and unsophisticated investors, who lack the most basic financial wherewithal and fail to perform due diligence, become victims to these charlatans.

 

As noted in the previous paragraph, the very nature of Pink Sheets means they can never be fully and properly regulated. With that lack of common financial sense of basic investors, and Barnum’s observations, those people are for the most part doomed to losing their investment. 

 

Investors who are not comfortable with the underlying mechanics of how the financial markets operate should consider the pink sheet market just like a Vegas Casino; where the odds are stacked against them from the start. 

A market maker who works in the pink sheet world succinctly told me that “these stocks are garbage.  You buy a stock for a half a cent and hope if goes to a penny”.

 

Lesson:

 

LIGATT (LGTT.PK) is a pink sheet stock, better known as a penny stock. As to LIGATT and Pink Sheets, the following screen shot says it all.

 

1.jpg

 

 

Media needs content

 

Details

 

On any given day, hundreds of media outlets need content to fill their airwaves.  Radio stations, newspapers, periodicals and a never ending supply of cable channels need people they can interview on the air to use for external expertise.

Over the last year, LIGATT PR solicited numerous media outlets, who in turn had Evans appear as an expert and provide commentary.  Just a few weeks ago, their PR department sent the following email to many media outlets:

 

2.jpg

 

 

Lesson

 

Numerous media outlets had Evans on air, irrespective of his false associations (Atlanta Hawks, Atlanta Thrashers, Los Angeles Clippers, Phillips Arena and more), false certifications, and authorship of plagiarized books to make him seem like he was indeed the “worlds #1 hacker”.

 

With that, one can pose the question – if the  major media outlets such as Fox, CNN, Bloomberg, et al, can’t get it right with a guest on technology, what does that say about their approach for foreign policy, investment news and more pressing concerns.

While the major media players ignored Evan’s qualifications, it is worth noting that the smaller media outlets such as The Register, Tech Herald  and CBS Atlanta affiliate did run exposes about the firm and its titular #1 hacker.

 

Racism in the USA

 

Not a Miley Cyrus song, but racism is a serious transgression.  It wasn’t that long ago that an African American couldn’t use a public restroom or drinking fountain in this country.  These racist inequalities were the driving force behind the establishment of the NAACP and other such organizations. 

 

In the 100 years since the founding of the NAACP, a lot has changed.  Take a look at the former Secretary of State, the current President and Attorney General; it is clear that state-sponsored racism is no longer an issue.

 

Perhaps fighting racism is no longer the raison d'être of the NAACP.  To a degree, the organization has been reduced to a business that produces the NAACP Image Awards.

 

The irony is that in March of this year, the NAACP had its image tarnished, as it found itself on the receiving end of a boycott, since Kid Rock received the NAACP Great Expectations award at the Detroit NAACP gala.

 

This award caused a dispute by some who believe that he should not have received the award.  Their opinion is that he is an inappropriate choice given his affiliation with the Civil War-era Confederate Army flag, which has been adopted by white supremacists, and have irked many civil rights activists. In fact, some supporters of the civil rights organization boycotted the annual fundraiser on May 1 because of the issue.

 

The singer has argued that the flag stands as a symbol of southern rock and roll, but many protesters don’t quite see it that way.  Dr. Boyce Watkins, Professor at Syracuse University writes that if anyone ever wants to understand why so many in the black community have lost faith in certain elements of the NAACP, you need to look no further than this incident.  He notes that It’s one thing for the NAACP to remain quiet about Kid Rock’s use of one of the most traumatic symbols in American history, but quite another for them to step up and give him an award for it.

 

Lesson

 

The NAACP presented Evans with its NAACP humanitarian award in 2002.

 

But LIGATT used press releases to accuse respected professionals who did deeper investigations and analysis into its activities of having a racist agenda and being some of the world’s worst cyberbullies.  Some examples include a blog posting in June 2010, How Can Computer Nerds Be Racist, where LIGATT accused this author and Chris John Riley of being racist, and emphasized the claims that criticism leveled at Evans' and LIGATT are all racially motivated.  

 

For a full account, see Security firm fights racism in InfoSec while apparently profiting from it and World's No. 1 hacker' tome rocks security world - Plagiarism, racism, and fake Mitnickism alleged.

 

LIGATT even accused CBS Atlanta of having a racist agenda when they ran an expose against the firm.  While CBS Atlanta posted the response from LIGATT, it was somewhat ironic that portions of the response had to be redacted because of racially offensive language from LIGATT themselves.

 

Yet when his charges of racism where brought to the attention of the NAACP, they did not seem receptive to the issue, nor did they revoke the award.  Furthermore, despites our attempts to contact them they never return a phone call or replied to email.

Despite numerous emails, phone calls, conversations with the executive assistant to the president of the NAACP, or messages directly to the President of the organization would be invoke even the gesture of a courtesy reply. 

 

But big organizations have politics and bureaucracies like the best of them.  As for the NAACP, I was disappointed to see the organization ignore a complaint about one of their award winners making baseless accusations of racism.

 

Conclusion

 

I am currently writing a review on a book about cloud computing.  Something tells me (and I certainly hope) that it won’t be as much as an adventure as this review was. On the upside, I learned a lot more by writing the review than by reading Evans’ book.

 

 

 

 

Ben Rothke CISSP, CISA (@benrothke) works in the information security field, writes the Security Reading Room blog and is the author of Computer Security: 20 Things Every Employee Should Know (McGraw-Hill).

 

0

One can sum up all of Social Engineering: The Art of Human Hacking in two sentences from page 297, where author Christopher Hadnagy writes “tools are an important aspect of social engineering, but they do not make the social engineer.  A tool alone is useless; but the knowledge of how to leverage and utilize that tool is invaluable”.   Far too many people think that information security and data protection is simply about running tools, without understanding how to use them.  In this tremendous book, Hadnagy shows how crucial the human element is within information security.

 

With that, Social Engineering: The Art of Human Hacking is a fascinating and engrossing book on an important topic.  The author takes the reader on a vast journey of the many aspects of social engineering.  Since social engineering is such a people oriented topic, a large part of the book is dedicated to sociological and psychological topics.  This is an important area, as far too many technology books focus on the hardware and software elements, completely ignoring the people element.  The social engineer can then use that gap to their advantage.

 

By the time that you start chapter 2 on page 23, it is abundantly clear that the author knows what he is talking about.  This is in stark contrast with How To Become The Worlds No. 1 Hacker, where that author uses plagiarism to try to weave a tale of being the world’s greatest security expert.  Here, Hadnagy uses his real knowledge and experience to take the reader on a long and engaging ride on the subject. Coming in at 9 chapters and 360 pages, the author brings an encyclopedic knowledge and dishes it out in every chapter.

 

Two of the most popular books to date on social engineering to date have been Kevin Mitnick’s The Art of Deception: Controlling the Human Element of Security and The Art of Intrusion: The Real Stories Behind the Exploits of Hackers, Intruders and Deceivers.  The difference between those books and Hadnagy, is that Mitnick for the most part details the events and stories around the attacks; while Hadnagy details the myriad specifics on how to carry out the social engineering attack. 

 

The book digs deep and details how the social engineer needs to use a formal context for the attack, and breaks down the specific details and line-items on how to execute on that.  That approach is much more suited to performing social engineering, than simply reading about social engineering. 

 

Chapter 1 goes though the necessary introduction to the topic, with chapter 2 detailing the various aspects of information gathering.  Once I started reading, it was hard to put the book down. 

 

Social engineering is often misportrayed as the art of asking a question or two and then gaining root access.  In chapter 3 on elicitation, the author details the reality of the requirements on how to carefully and cautiously elicit information from the target.  Elicitation is not something for the social engineer alone, even the US Department of Homeland Security has a pamphlet that is uses to assist agents with elicitation.

 

After elicitation, chapter 4 details the art of pretexting, which is when an attacker creates an invented scenario to use to extract information from the victim.

 

Chapter 5 on mind tricks starts getting into the psychological element of social engineering.  The author details topics such as micro expressions, modes of thinking, interrogation, neuro-linguistic programming and more.

 

Chapter 6 is on influence and the power of persuasion.  The author notes that people are trained from a young age in nearly every culture to listen to and respect authority.  When the social engineer takes on that role, it becomes a most powerful tool; far more powerful than any script or piece of software. 

 

The author wisely waits until chapter 7 to discuss software tools used during a social engineering engagement.  One of the author’s favorite and most powerful tools is Maltego, which is an open source intelligence and forensics application.  While the author concludes that it is the human element that is the most powerful, and that a great tool in the hand of a novice is worthless; the other side is that good tools (of which the author lists many), in the hands of an experienced social engineer, is an extremely powerful and often overwhelming combination.

 

Every chapter in the book is superb, but chapter 9 – Prevention and Mitigation stands out.  After spending 338 pages about how to use social engineering; chapter 9 details the steps a firm must put in place to ensure they do not become a victim of a social engineering attack.  The chapter lists the following six steps that must be executed upon:

 

·       Learning to identify social engineering attacks

·       Creating a personal security awareness program

·       Creating awareness of the value of the information that is being sought by social engineers

·       Keeping software updated

·       Developing scripts

·       Learning from social engineering audits

 

The author astutely notes that security awareness is not about 45- or 90-minute programs that only occur annually; rather it is about creating a culture and set of information security standards that each person in the organization is committed to using their entire life. This is definitely not a small undertaking.  Firms must create awareness and security engineering programs to deal with the above six items.  If they do not, they are them placing themselves at significant risk of being unable to effectively deal with social network attacks.

 

As to awareness, if nothing else, Social Engineering: The Art of Human Hacking demonstrates the importance of ensuring that social engineering is an integral part of an information security awareness program.  This can’t be underemphasized as even the definitive book on security awareness Managing an Information Security and Privacy Awareness and Training Program only has about 10 pages on social engineering attacks.

 

There are plenty of security books on hardware, software, certification and more.  Those were perhaps the easy ones to write.  Until now, very few have dealt with the human element, and the costs associated with ignoring that have been devastating.  Social Engineering: The Art of Human Hacking is a book that is a long time in coming, but worth every page. 

 

While seemingly geared to the information security staff, this is a book should be read by everyone, whether they are in technology or not.  Social engineering is not something that just occurs behind a keyboard.  Social attackers know that.  It is about time everyone else did also.

 

 

Ben Rothke is Computer Security: 20 Things Every Employee Should Know.

 

 

 

 

 

0

In mid-August, I received a copy of The Security Policy Cookbook: A Guide for IT and Security Professionals.  As someone who has seen his fair share of information security policies and is on the Information Security Policy Expert Panel, my initial thought was that this is not an original work. 

 

Before I even got to the content, the author notes his acceptance into the Marquis Who’s Who is his bio.  I wrote in What's What with the Who's Who? that Marquis, like most who’s who firms accept nearly everyone who applies, including serial killers.  Most of the who’s who organizations are in it for the money with zero concern for the so-called honorees.  Security professionals looking to advance themselves will find no value in having their names in a who's who, and could in fact be showing their naiveté by promoting their inclusion.

 

In the book, various policies are detailed, yet lack a sense of cohesiveness.  It is as the policies were simply thrown together in a haphazard manner, which is indeed evident in this book.  Not the text of the policies are not ineffective, rather the cut and paste approach, which the author did, and advocates, is a surefire way to ensure that information policies won’t work.  Policy creation is just one part of an effective security policy project, and focusing strictly on the text of the policies is simply inadequate.

 

Of the books 32 chapters, 20 were direct copies from State of Texas Department of Information Resources (DIR) Guidelines, Checklists & Templates.  This book seems to follow the same course of action How To Become The Worlds No. 1 Hacker took, copy the content without attribution.  For a complete list of the chapters and sources, see the listing at Attrition.

 

The DIR wants their templates to be used for the greater good, but with attribution.  According to their Link Policy, “they shall not misinform users about the origin or ownership of DIR content. Certain information on DIR may be trademarked, service-marked, or otherwise protected as intellectual property. Protected intellectual property must be used in accordance with state and federal laws and must reflect the proper ownership of the intellectual property”.

 

The Security Policy Cookbook is proof that we live in an era where content is effortless to obtain.  Googling information security policy with filetype:pdf results in over 17,000 hits.  That is a lot of content in which to freely use.  The corollary is that those who try to claim such content as their own will just as easily be found.

 

Many people write books for the fame.  Yet that fame turns into infamy when it is discovered that the author is a plagiarist.

 

The Security Policy Cookbook and like it How To Become The Worlds No. 1 Hacker were both self-published, and therefore lack the editorial scrutiny which is to be expected from an established publishing house.

 

Richard O’Hanley, Publisher at CRC Press in the IT, Business & Security Group, notes that he has seen plagiarism as a steadily escalating problem. So much so, that they frequently run manuscripts through a plagiarism checker. O’Hanley said “it seems that just as people expect web content to be free, they expect to be able to use it freely as well, without concern for rights and attribution. The ease with which people can cut-and-paste from multiple sources only exacerbates the problem”.


For those that want to write books on security, there is plenty of opportunity and numerous publishing houses that desperately want good content.  Of course, such an approach takes time and effort.  But the industry does reward such efforts.


Attempting to bypass those practices via plagiarism, especially in an industry where ethics and trust are paramount, ultimately begs the question: what was he thinking?.

0

This is an excellent piece of legal analysis by Kurt Opsahl of the EFF.   


My book review of How to Become the World's No. 1 Hacker is referenced in the analysis below


LIGATT Security Tries to Silence its Online Critics With an Unsubstantiated Lawsuit

LIGATT Security, a controversial Georgia-based computer security firm, is embroiled in an ongoing flame war with its online detractors, who question the firm's legitimacy and stock prospects. Earlier this month, LIGATT upped the ante by filing suit in a Georgia court, threatening about 25 anonymous commenters on Yahoo! Message Boards and demanding a $5 million judgment and a court order prohibiting criticism. LIGATT CEO warned that he hoped the lawsuit would "set a trend" for other OTC companies facing online critics.


We hope not. EFF is frequently called upon to help protect the rights of anonymous speakers in similar suits, and the world does not need more facially deficient lawsuits targeting online critics. As we explain below, this complaint is a prime example of a case that should be dismissed. And, if LIGATT attempts to use this complaint to subpoena Yahoo! for the identities of its critics, the subpoenas might not only fail, but LIGATT may be forced to pay its critics' attorneys' fees.


It is not surprising that LIGATT has attracted controversy and commentary. The publicly traded company is headed by Gregory Evans, a self-described "media personality" who calls himself the "World's #1 Hacker." Evans' books include "Memoirs of a Hi-Tech Hustler," an account of the exploits that landed him in federal prison, and "How to Become the World's No. 1 Hacker," an allegedly plagiarized introduction to computer security. LIGATT has published provocative online videos advertising its services. And this is not the first time LIGATT has been criticized over its litigation.


The important legal question at this point, however, is not whether LIGATT's critics are right or wrong, but whether the complaint sets forth a valid claim. It does not. LIGATT and Evans' complaint asserts three primary claims: defamation, commercial disparagement, and "tortuous interference with contractual relations," which is a way of accusing the defendants of hurting its business relationships. The company also seeks an injunction against the defendants from posting any further defamatory comments against LIGATT Security, its subsidiary SPOOFEM.COM, or its CEO Evans, and demands $5 million dollars in damages. The alleged damages are double the most recent "Estimated Market Cap" for the whole company listed on its investor relations page.


Curiously, while LIGATT's press release announcing the lawsuit and the accompanying video claim the suit was filed against "stock bashers," the complaint never once references the company's stock or alleges stock manipulation. While federal and state law prohibit certain forms of stock manipulation, criticizing a publicly traded company and its CEO is not a valid legal cause of action in and of itself.


In its complaint, LIGATT claims the defendants posted "false and defamatory statements" on the Yahoo Technology message board and a few other websites. But the purported defamatory statements are never identified in the complaint, much less set forth. There is no attempt to tie each of the defendants to particular statements. Under long-standing Georgia law, failure to clearly identify defamatory statements in a complaint is grounds for dismissing a defamation claim (with leave to amend). The allegation in this complaint is insufficient because it is just a bald conclusion that the unidentified statements are "false and untrue and defamed Plaintiffs." Under Georgia law, libel complaints are subject to a strict standard, and "allegations ... characterizing the publication as libelous and libelous per se are mere conclusions not supported by the pleaded facts" that must be dismissed.


Similarly, if the defendants were to move this case to a federal court (which may be possible if the defendants are not from Georgia), allegations of specific statements would be required and the complaint would be dismissed under the federal pleading standard that requires more than "conclusory allegations" and "legal conclusions masquerading as facts" (recently explained in two Supreme Court decisions, commonly known as Iqbal and Twombly).


LIGATT's "commercial disparagement" claim is simply a variation of the original defamation claim, and hangs on the same unidentified "false and defamatory statements" thread. The court should dismiss the claim for the same reasons. Moreover, even if the actual statements were pled, a federal court in Georgia recently noted that Georgia law does not support this type of claim, and a Georgia Supreme Court opinion both refused to recognize the similar tort of injurious falsehood and held that plaintiffs could not recover twice under two theories.


The complaint’s final substantive claim, accusing the defendants of interfering with LIGATT's business contracts, would also fail because LIGATT must identify wrongful conduct and provide facts, not legal conclusions, to support the cause of action. The complaint, however, does not identify any wrongful conduct on the part of the defendants beyond the deficient defamation claim. This claim should fall with the rest of the house of cards.


California’s anti-SLAPP law is another hurdle for LIGATT. Most of the defendants are anonymous Does, who have exercised their constitutional right to speak pseudonymously online. To the extent that LIGATT wants to issue subpoenas to Yahoo!, located in California, to uncover the identities of the posters on the message board, LIGATT would be wise to realize that California law mandates attorneys' fees for anyone who prevails in quashing or modifying such a subpoena, if the underlying action involves the person's online free speech rights and the plaintiff does not make a prima facie showing of the cause of action.


When courts, both in California and throughout the country, consider whether to allow a subpoena to unmask an anonymous speaker, they use a First Amendment test that requires the plaintiffs to show they have a real case. As explained above, the complaint fails to allege sufficient facts to do so. Moreover, since the plaintiffs would likely be considered public figures for purposes of this lawsuit, LIGATT would have to show a prima facie case for actual malice--a significant and difficult hurdle to overcome.


Through this lawsuit and its press release, LIGATT is affirmatively seeking to encourage and extend a disturbing trend of using the legal system as a weapon to intimidate online critics. Often, these deficient lawsuits are used to unmask online critics, even when those critics are engaged in constitutionally protected speech. LIGATT's complaint is rife with conclusory allegations and exemplifies the deficiencies with most of these lawsuits. LIGATT should voluntarily dismiss this lawsuit, and not refile unless and until it can state a valid claim that a critic has actually violated the law, quoting specifically the allegedly defamatory speech and alleging facts that show how the quoted speech is false, defamatory and was made with actual malice.


0

O'Reilly Media is one of the premier technology publishing companies, who like all serious publishing houses have strong policies and guidelines regarding plagiarism.  They also have a Missing Manuals series of books.  The goal of the Missing Manual series, is to “produce sterling, beautifully written manuals for popular consumer software and hardware products”

 

So with license, perhaps this post should be titled How To Become The World’s No. 1 Hacker – The Missing Bibliography.

 

In my initial review of How To Become The Worlds No. 1 Hacker, I noted that the author plagiarized most of his sources. 

 

Of the books 26 chapters, I used iThenticate plagiarism checker from iParadigms to check the 13 largest chapters.  Many of the smaller chapters were 1-2 pages in length, and were not analyzed.

 

The following iThenticate screen shot speaks for itself.  The report field is an overall similarity index for each submission.  This index determines the percentage of similarity between a submission and information existing in the iThenticate databases selected as search targets.

1.jpg

So how much can an author legitimately copy under the fair use doctrine?  As to the notion of fair use, the U.S. Copyright Office notes that the doctrine of fair use has developed through a substantial number of court decisions over the years and has been codified in section 107 of the copyright law. 

 

Section 107 contains a list of the various purposes for which the reproduction of a particular work may be considered fair, such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Section 107 also sets out four factors to be considered in determining whether or not a particular use is fair, namely the:

 

1.       purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes
2.       nature of the copyrighted work
3.       amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole
4.       effect of the use upon the potential market for, or value of, the copyrighted work

 

The distinction between fair use and infringement is not easily defined, and in fact, seems to almost defy definition. There is no specific number of words, lines, or notes that may safely be taken without permission. Anytime a specific number or percentage is used, that refers to general guidelines, not the copyright law.   

 

But even before the plagiarized text begins in the book, there is misrepresentation of the truth.  The following is a screen shot from page 24:

2.jpg

 

The author states that LIGATT is the official cyber security provider for the Phillps Arena, Atlanta Hawks basketball team, and Atlanta Thrashers hockey team.  The firm also noted this in a October 2009 press release, which was then picked up as a news story by the Atlanta Business Chronicle and Sports Business Journal. 

 

But no such deal ever took place.  Tracy White, Chief Sales Officer and Senior VP of Sales and Marketing for Atlanta Spirit LLC, the parent company of the Atlanta  Thrashers, stated that “LIGATT doesn’t provide (nor have they ever provided) services for the Hawks, Thrashers or Philips Arena.”

 

With that, the following are the sources copied in the book:

 

Chapter 2
Number of wordsSource
1392http://www.auditmypc.com/freescan/readingroom/port_scanning.asp
1109http://securityfocus.com/archive/101/310004/2003-01-29/2003-02-04/0
1094http://www.grc.com/oo/packetsniff.htm
823http://www.cromwell-intl.com/security/monitoring.html
468http://www.realexam.net/ciscoport-scans-ping-sweeps/394.html
312http://www.itbuzz.co.cc/2008/11/developing-your-ethical/
193http://www.valuesys.net/content/view/191/50/

 

Chapter 4
Number of wordsSource
3219 (plus screen shots)http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/s-crack/
2867http://host14.ipowerweb.com/~hackerth/org/texts/hacking/howtobrute.php
1302http://starbase.airweb.net/tech/hack-faq.html
892http://sectools.org/crackers.html
327 (plus screen shots)http://www.raymond.cc/blog/archives/2006/09/02/how-to-hack-into-a-windows-xp-computer-without-changing-password/

 

Chapter 5 – Single source makes up the entire chapter
Number of wordsSource
1081http://starbase.airweb.net/tech/hack-faq.html

 

Chapter 7
Number of wordsSource
2658http://www.securiteam.com/securityreviews/5OP0B006UQ.html
577http://searchsecurity.techtarget.com/searchSecurity/downloads/WebappattacksLG.pdf
399http://starbase.airweb.net/tech/hack-faq.html
367http://www.e-secure-db.us/dscgi/ds.py/Get/File-8852/Writing_Buffer_Overflow_Exploits_-_a_Tutorial_for_Beginners.txt
223http://arhiva.elitesecurity.org/t132220-Insecure-Programming
589http://searchsecurity.techtarget.com/news/article/0,289142,sid14_gci1048483_mem1,00.html

 

Chapter 8
Number of wordsSource
2559 (includes screen shots)http://www.squidoo.com/spyphone_flexispy
1239http://www.securityfocus.com/infocus/1829
756http://www.spyphoneguy.com/page/4/
666http://www.spectorsoft.co.uk/products/index.html?UK=true
500http://www.keyloggers2010.com/index.html

 

Chapter 9
Number of wordsSource
2195http://www.nmrc.org/pub/faq/hackfaq/hackfaq-08.html
1750 (includes 29 screen shots)http://www.ethicalhacker.net/content/view/106/24/
942 (includes 20 screen shots)http://www.dedoimedo.com/computers/backtrack.html

 

Chapter 10 – Single source makes up the entire chapter
Number of wordsSource
2940http://starbase.airweb.net/tech/hack-faq.html

 

Chapter 11         
Number of wordsSource
1967http://docs.athenawebsecurity.com/ceh_athena/CEH.pdf
1870http://starbase.airweb.net/tech/hack-faq.html

               

Chapter 12
Number of wordsSource
5894http://www.informit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=472323&seqNum=5
59http://www.nmrc.org/pub/faq/hackfaq/hackfaq-19.html

 

Much of the last half of the book is single chapter cut and paste, in which a single large source makes up the entire text of chapters 13, 14, 15, 18, 19, 20, and 21.

 

Chapter 13
Number of wordsSource
696http://www.nmrc.org/pub/faq/hackfaq/hackfaq-27.html

 

Chapter 14
Number of wordsSource
1488http://www.nmrc.org/pub/faq/hackfaq/hackfaq-28.html

 

Chapter 15
Number of wordsSource
677http://www.nmrc.org/pub/faq/hackfaq/hackfaq-29.html

 

Chapter 18         
Number of wordsSource
2962http://ethicalhacking.org.ua/8794final/lib0063.html

 

Chapter 19
Number of wordsSource
2025http://hacker-dox.net/Que-Certified.Ethical.Hacker.E/0789735318/ch07lev1sec4.html http://docs.athenawebsecurity.com/ceh_athena/CEH.pdf

 

Chapter 20
Number of wordsSource
3593http://docs.athenawebsecurity.com/ceh_athena/CEH.pdf

 

Chapter 21
Number of wordsSource
4106http://www.cnhacker.com/bbs/read.php?tid=161454&fpage=8

 

Chapter 23
Number of pagesSource
6Scanned article directly from http://hakin9.org/magazine/995-hardware-keylogger-a-serious-threat

 

 

 

Ben Rothke, CISSP is the author of Computer Security: 20 Things Every Employee Should Know, and now knows more about section 107 of the copyright law than he would like to admit.

 

 

 

 

 

/

1
[For an update to this issue and a comprehensive list of the plagiarized text, see Fair use, plagiarism and the World’s No. 1 Hacker book]

 

When I first saw the title of How To Become The Worlds No. 1 Hacker by Gregory Evans, it reminded me a pitch I get from people trying to hawk Amway.  But just as there is a limit to the amount of people who can buy and sell soap, there can only be a single #1 hacker in the world.  With that, let’s hope no one buys this book, so Neo can keep his title.

 

The book does get your attention with its audacious title.  But a more appropriate title, albeit less flashy, would be The Not So Refined Art of Cut and Paste.

 

Using Princeton University’s definition of plagiarize of “take without referencing from someone else’s writing”, the book is a poster child for plagiarism. This is somewhat ironic in that the book has a disclaimer of “All rights reserved. No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever without written permission except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical articles and reviews”. 

 

This is a 342 page book, of which the first 25 pages are somewhat self-serving with an extended biography of the author, and dated letters of praise from former clients.

 

In short, this is merely a work of cut and paste.  In the parts of the book where the author attempts to write original text, it’s ripe with various errors.  I could list many such errors, but why bother.  In fact, the errors start in the preface, where the author calls GLBA the “Gramm-Leach-Billey Act”.

 

On page 5, the author states “first before you start any hack, security audit or any other computer security testing you must have all the write tools in place”.  Ironic that he meant to use the word right.

 

On the next page, he recursively writes about Wireshark when he says it was “originally named Wireshark, in May 2006 the project was renamed Wireshark due to trademark issues”.  It was actually originally named Ethereal.  But this is just one of many spelling, grammar, and factual errors in the book.  If nothing else, this book screams out for editorial review.  But it was self-published, with seemingly no oversight.

 

But the real offense is the author’s blatant use of unattributed sources.  I am not talking about a paragraph here or there, it is about wholesale plagiarism, often taking the form of an entire chapter.

 

Here are a few of the many examples of where the author copies extensively without attribution:

 

Page/Section

Source

Page   16:  section 2.3 - port scanning?.

Over 1,700   words taken verbatim from http://www.auditmypc.com/port-scanning.asp

Page 22 – section 2.5 – packet sniffing

Over 260   words from http://www.grc.com/oo/packetsniff.htm

Page   25 – section 2.8  - wireless LAN/WAN monitoring

Over 300   words from http://www.cromwell-intl.com/security/monitoring.html. 

 

The book   states “also see the COMSEC section of another page of mine for details on   how GSM encryption can be broken”. 

 

But   “another page of mine” refers to Bob Cromwell, the site’s author.

Page   29 – section 3.1 - What are Accounts?

over 400   words directly from http://www.nmrc.org/pub/faq/hackfaq/hackfaq-03.html

Page 31 – section 4.0 - What are Some   password basics?

Over 1,600 words http://www.nmrc.org/pub/faq/hackfaq/hackfaq-04.html

Page 61 – section 7.1 - Buffer overflows

Direct copy of the entire 589 word article Buffer-overflow   attacks: How do they work? by Brien Posey

Page 65  -   section 7.2 - How do I write a buffer overflow?

Copy of the entire 3,100 word article Writing   Buffer Overflow Exploits.

 

My approach until page 70 was to check the text against a Google search.  The results were immediate, apparent and undeniable: this book is a systematic cut and paste effort. 

 

Wanting a more sophisticated approach, I used the iThenticate plagiarism checker from iParadigms.  The iThenticate scan of the book confirmed what was obvious.  In fact, some sections averaged as high as a 95% plagiarism rate, with one chapter coming in at 100%.

 

While there is no hard and fast definition of where fair use ends and plagiarism begins, Bob Creutz, General Manager at iParadigms told me that “if I had to offer an average, I would say a 10% or greater similarity index warrants editorial scrutiny.”

 

Plagiarism.org notes that it comes down to the amount you've used.  The more you've borrowed, the less likely it is to be considered fair use. What percentage of your work is borrowed material? What percentage of the original did you use? The lower the better.

 

iThenticate is a powerful and fascinating tool, as it shows exactly what web sites the author copied from.  It identified the biggest plagiarized section, namely the 5,354 words, which is the entire chapter 12.  The author never mentions that he copied it verbatim from the Hacker’s Center Security Portal.

 

Even when plagiarizing, most authors will attempt to cover their tracks somewhat by making even trivial changes to the text; Evans never does that.  In the areas the original text has hyperlinks, he neglects to modify his text, in which the paragraph ends on a loose end, confusing the reader.

 

The author scoured the web and copied information from hundreds of web sites. And therein is the problem of such plagiarism; the output, in which the author calls a book, is a confused assortment of ideas, lacking a coherent stream of thought.

 

The books failure is not that it is plagiarized; even if the author would have attributed his myriad sources, the book still would have been equally incoherent.  This so called step by step guide is simply a disjointed set of topics, slurred together. 

 

For anyone who wants to learn the art of hacking, this book will only serve to give them a lukewarm taste at best, while confusing them the entire time.  Used copies of first edition of Hacking Exposed are available for 1 cent plus shipping in the used book section on Amazon.com.  Even though it is a decade old, it will serve you much better than this title.  As to How To Become The Worlds No. 1 Hacker, it’s an epic fail of a book.