Re:Billion-record stolen Chinese database for sale on breach...
by zricethezav on Tuesday July 05, 2022 @04:55PM
(#31993575)
More and more providers have been adding unique prefixes to their tokens and access keys which makes detection much easier. Ex, GitLab adds `glpat-` to their PAT.
A project I maintain, Gitleaks, can easily detect "unique" secrets and does a pretty good job at detecting "generic" secrets too. In this case, the generic gitleaks rule would have caught the secrets [1]. You can see the full rule definition here [2] and how the rule is constructed here [3].
[1] https://regex101.com/r/CLg9TK/1
[2] https://github.com/zricethezav/gitleaks/blob/master/config/g...
[3] https://github.com/zricethezav/gitleaks/blob/master/cmd/gene...
Re:Billion-record stolen Chinese database for sale on breach...
by remram on Tuesday July 05, 2022 @10:55PM
(#31996200)
RFC 8959 registered the 'secret-token:' prefix / URI scheme.
Re:Billion-record stolen Chinese database for sale on breach...
by pitched on Tuesday July 05, 2022 @04:58PM
(#31993607)
How about scanning for any string with high entropy? Might be easier to get buy-in if we don’t all have to bike-shed over what the prefix is.
Re:Billion-record stolen Chinese database for sale on breach...
by CoffeeOnWrite on Tuesday July 05, 2022 @06:17PM
(#31994454)
That’s helpful but the token prefixes are also helpful. You might be interested in GitHub’s reasoning at https://github.blog/2021-04-05-behind-githubs-new-authentica...
Of course, then your secret key checker would need to build that string by concatenating so that it wouldn't set off itself.