|
Member 8762977 wrote: the legitimate user know the honeypot files and he'll never select them
The "legitimate user" will be the only person ever selecting them. It merely takes a screensaver and a certain point of focus.
Member 8762977 wrote: the files will named with attractive names like "credit card details"...
Why would I click a file? Most hackers will not be using RDP, there's little to click from a command-line. I will not be looking for "attractive filenames", I'll be going for all that resembles logfiles to hide my arse! Once the attacker is feeling secure, they might download data. Not activate it, but download it. That is, assuming that they're even looking for data, as opposed to uploading a keylogger.
Member 8762977 wrote: only one click, if he select the file i want to lock the system, how can i check if honeypot file like: C:\credit_card.txt was selected?
Windows does not inform other applications on which files are selected from a random dialog. This would be complex to achieve, without helping much.
..that is, unless you are trying to "secure" an insecure desktop, where multiple people have physical access to the desktop. Is there a by any chance a Post-It note on the monitor with the password? 
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
|
|
|
|
|
Member 8762977 wrote: only against unauthorized user that use my PC or laptop without my acception to extract worth data.
What should I be imagining under that? You going to the bathroom without locking your computer or what?
Press [Windows key] + [L].
You could create a virtual drive[^] using the Dokan libraries. Acts as a regular drive, but gets its data from a .NET application.
Other options might include a Shell-extension that provides a custom tooltip for something with your own file-extension, or try to hook into the system at a deeper level.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
|
|
|
|
|
Member 8762977 wrote: i don't need that the unlegitimate user will open this file, only one click, if
he select the file i want to lock the system, how can i check if honeypot file
like: C:\credit_card.txt was selected?
BTW this project not suppose to defend
against hackers, only against unauthorized user that use my PC or laptop without
my acception to extract worth data.
I doubt that this is a valid design.
Security has two aspects: prevention and detection.
If you want to prevent it then you use methods that prevent access in the first place. If you want to detect it then you want to be able to identity the party.
So if you want to protect access then you should look into schemes that lock the computer when the legitimate owner is not present - period.
|
|
|
|
|
Member 8762977 wrote: this project not suppose to defend against hackers, only against unauthorized user that use my PC or laptop without my acception to extract worth data.
So how do you protect against non-legitimate users who do not click on any of your honeypot files? By the time your PC gets locked they will already have stolen all the real secret data.
Binding 100,000 items to a list box can be just silly regardless of what pattern you are following. Jeremy Likness
|
|
|
|
|
What happens if a legitimately clicks on one of these files? It could easily happen.
|
|
|
|
|
The legitimate user will know all honeypot files on his system, and if he'll click then it depend on other variables, we build the legitimate user profile and compare it to the current user every interval of time and in additional we planting honeypot files so it's not black and white answer to what happend if he'll click on the honeypot file.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, if you're trying to do this, you need to be running at a deeper level because trying to do this at a high level means that it can be circumvented. Why write it in C# - effectively you need to be writing something that sits almost at the Kernel level, so you need to use something like C or C++, especially if your users want their systems to still be relatively performant?
|
|
|
|
|
Pete O'Hanlon wrote: users want their systems
If he cared about his users he would not be pissing them off by doing this at all.
Why is common sense not common?
Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level where they are an expert.
Sometimes it takes a lot of work to be lazy
Please stand in front of my pistol, smile and wait for the flash - JSOP 2012
|
|
|
|
|
i think Wes Aday is here just to say some jokes every question. if u cant be useful, atleast keep quite.
|
|
|
|
|
WHAT?! This has got to be the worst hair-brained scheme I've heard of in quite a long time.
This isn't going to protect anything at all since you're still leaving the drive in the machine and the data on it unprotected. Also, if someone does get their hands on the machine you can't possibly identify the person using it based on what they click on.
Ever heard of BitLocker?? It's free. Install it and you can encrypt the entire hard drive.
Now, if someone leaves their machine unlocked, that's on them, not the guy who's not authorized to use it. In most companies I've been at, if you leave your machine unattended and unlocked, that's a terminatable offense.
|
|
|
|
|
This is a hilariously bad idea.
|
|
|
|
|
Honeypot files came out of the old days when
a) a box was known to be compromised
b) the box contained sensitive data (government)
c) the logs showed the user had particular interest in certain types of files
The files planted would be fakes aimed at providing a spy with false information that would potentially reveal spies within the country.
Your concept won't catch anyone at all. If a true hacker saw your box unlocked and wanted to find these 'honeypot' files they'd open a command prompt and use dir /s to locate the files of interest then copy them to a usb disk.
How does your scheme cover that?
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I have an application (C#) with SQL 2008.
the end user have one server and 10 clients.
i should install app in all client and server.
the database is only in server.
now the problem is here that :
when i change the app version i should go and paste the updated file to the server and each client(its very hard and takes a lot time) so what is the solution to have this something like this:
Only i change the server version and when each client run the application ,automatically updates it.(So no needs to copy the files each time)
I wanna something like ClickOnce but the problem with clickonce is you cannt change the app installation path.
|
|
|
|
|
If it's on a lan, and you are in control of the location on server for the binarries, then make your own solution.
Create something like a launcher app that checks for updates, updates(copies the new files on clients) if necessary...
and then starts/launches the actuall app/exe.
All the best,
Dan
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for reply!
But i have some problems with windows 7 authentication for sharing folder.
I wanna something like update of ClickOnes that doesnt check authentication.
How it updates the App.
Can we only use the update strategy of clickOnce?
|
|
|
|
|
1) Why do you ask yourself?
2) what kind of problem. It's a basic sharing stuff. Easy as bacon.
3) Is your app on lan, workgruop, do you have AD... Are you in control or the IT admin/resp? ...
All the best,
Dan
|
|
|
|
|
I know that but i have lots of problem with the authentication in win7.
How can i solve the authentication like ClickOnce.
(How to share the folder and connect to it without any authentication)
|
|
|
|
|
Hi.
I need some help  How to stop downloading progress in WebClient ? The CancelAsync() and Dispose() methods don't work . I read in other sources that I can't stop the downloading progress while it is in progress, it's true?
What is the best way to download a file/multiple files ?
I am sorry for my bad english.
Thank you in advance.
|
|
|
|
|
amx_tiger wrote: How to stop downloading progress in WebClient ? The CancelAsync() and Dispose() methods don't work .
Using CancelAsync[^]; what does "don't work" mean, did they throw an exception?
amx_tiger wrote: I read in other sources that I can't stop the downloading progress while it is in progress, it's true?
For some of the methods of the WebClient class, yes. You should be able to cancel the async versions though.
amx_tiger wrote: What is the best way to download a file/multiple files ?
"BITS", there's even an article on a nice wrapper[^] here on CodeProject
Bastard Programmer from Hell
|
|
|
|
|
No, CancelAsync don't make anything. It don't stop the downloading progress.
Thank you for response .
|
|
|
|
|
amx_tiger wrote: No, CancelAsync don't make anything. It don't stop the downloading progress.
It only does if one of the Async-versions of the methods was used to start the download. How about posting some relevant code?
Bastard Programmer from Hell
|
|
|
|
|
I hope you understand:
public WebClient webClient = new WebClient();
webClient.DownloadFileCompleted += new AsyncCompletedEventHandler(Completed);
webClient.DownloadProgressChanged += new DownloadProgressChangedEventHandler(ProgressChanged);
Uri url = new Uri(file_name);
file_name = Path.GetFileName(url.LocalPath);
string location = textBox2.Text + "\\" + file_name;
webClient.DownloadFileAsync(new Uri(link), location);
And in an user control I have a button called Stop:
private void stop_button_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
Form1 form1 = new Form1();
form1.webClient.CancelAsync();
form1.webClient.Dispose();
}
Something like this. The CancelAsync() methods don´t work even if i make a button in main form (form1).
|
|
|
|
|
amx_tiger wrote: Something like this.
Something like that should work. The one below has been tested and works;
WebClient wc = new WebClient();
public Form1()
{
InitializeComponent();
}
void Button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
wc.DownloadFileCompleted += delegate { Text="Done"; };
wc.DownloadProgressChanged += new DownloadProgressChangedEventHandler(wc_DownloadProgressChanged);
wc.DownloadFileAsync(
new Uri(@"http://dumps.wikimedia.org/nnwiki/20120430/nnwiki-20120430-pages-meta-history.xml.bz2"),
"test.data");
}
void wc_DownloadProgressChanged(object sender, DownloadProgressChangedEventArgs e)
{
Text = e.BytesReceived.ToString();
}
void Button2_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
wc.CancelAsync();
}
Bastard Programmer from Hell
|
|
|
|
|
I did that but without a button in main form which cancel the async and didn't work. The button which cancel the async was in user control...
I tried now with the button which cancel async in the main form and it´s work  ...
I am very confused  ... why didn't work in user control?
|
|
|
|
|
How did you pass the WebClient object to the usercontrol?
Bastard Programmer from Hell
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
