Couple Can Sue Laptop-Tracking Company (LoJack) for Spying on Sex Chats

[Dustin]

G. Morgan <G_Morgan@easy.com> wrote in
news:mrk367ls6vh2qhorf7b7j0igjpdldqcjb7@Osama-is-dead.net:

> I was actually thinking of the PCI database. But the FCC has one
> too on NIC's.
>
> http://www.pcidatabase.com/search.ph...=4315&device_s
> earch.x=0&device_search.y=0
>
> Wouldn't LoJack be able to recognize a NIC in this manner and still
> work on Linux?

It can't drop the exe on linux. So, it will try one of two things: Wait
for your net to get hot and try to call home; using optionrom2 code base.
Failing that, it will bios lock the system until it's got the OK to
proceed. Either way, you have a paperweight for a laptop.


--
I am a sinner
Hold my prayers upto the sun
I am a sinner
Heaven's closed for what I've done.

[Dustin]

G. Morgan <G_Morgan@easy.com> wrote in
news:22q267ljnoidi32ea0nf56vtc3hvhltk04@Osama-is-dead.net:

> Dustin wrote:
>
>
>>> Doesn't matter what O/S, they can halt the boot process before it
>>> even gets to the OS loader.
>>
>>being an optionrom does have it's benefits, eh?
>
> If you're the one in control, otherwise it sucks!

I feel if you installed this thing, it's your fault. lol.


--
I am a sinner
Hold my prayers upto the sun
I am a sinner
Heaven's closed for what I've done.

[Dustin]

"FromTheRafters" <erratic.howard@gmail.com> wrote in
news:j3rvm3$l8b$1@dont-email.me:

> "Dustin" <bughunter.dustin@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns9F54BFBC4E2EAHHI2948AJD832@no...
>> "FromTheRafters" <erratic.howard@gmail.com> wrote in
>> news:j3mbin$4p4$1 @dont-email.me:
>>
>>>> Vanguard, You can flatten and rebuild a lojacked system all day
>>>> long, it's still going to be lojacked when you reload windows.
>>>> [g]
>>>
>>> Would it only persist if it was reloaded with the same OS
>>> that it was originally installed to work with? Like if it came
>>> with XP pro and you wiped it and loaded Vista would it only
>>> have limited functionality or is it capable of upgrading with
>>> the new OS when it phones home?
>>
>> Nope. The dropped exe will happily install as a service on any NT
>> based OS. doesn't matter if you had vista and downgraded it to XP
>> pro. You're still going to get ****ed in the ass about 10 minutes
>> after it sees an internet connection go hot. It waits a few
>> minutes, to make sure the coast is clear. And really, if you don't
>> know lojack, and many don't, you aren't going far with the stolen
>> lappy. You can switch to linux and avoid the dropped exe tho. For
>> now. [g]
>
> It would still phone-home with the current IP on every boot though
> too.

Yes, using the optionrom. And, when it phones home and is told it's
stolen, even linux is worthless; bios boot lock. If you deny it the
right to phone home a pre configured amount of times, it goes ahead and
assumes the worst. I have unconfirmed report that a later version of
the software has hardware level encryption it'll employ on your hard
disk. to protect your data from thiefs. I don't know what cypher is
being used yet, but if its like the my book WD drive, could be a real
hassle for someone wanting that data. Ransom possibilities if the
lojack was tricked into thinking the worst by a malware file that
detected it's presence and took advantage.




--
I am a sinner
Hold my prayers upto the sun
I am a sinner
Heaven's closed for what I've done.

[David H. Lipman]

From: "Dustin" <bughunter.dustin@gmail.com>

> G. Morgan <G_Morgan@easy.com> wrote in
> news:mrk367ls6vh2qhorf7b7j0igjpdldqcjb7@Osama-is-dead.net:
>
>> I was actually thinking of the PCI database. But the FCC has one
>> too on NIC's.
>>
>> http://www.pcidatabase.com/search.ph...=4315&device_s
>> earch.x=0&device_search.y=0
>>
>> Wouldn't LoJack be able to recognize a NIC in this manner and still
>> work on Linux?
>
> It can't drop the exe on linux. So, it will try one of two things: Wait
> for your net to get hot and try to call home; using optionrom2 code base.
> Failing that, it will bios lock the system until it's got the OK to
> proceed. Either way, you have a paperweight for a laptop.
>

Ahhhh....
If can't phone home, how would it know it was stolen ?



--
Dave
Multi-AV Scanning Tool - http://multi-av.thespykiller.co.uk
http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp

[G. Morgan]

Dustin wrote:

>possibilities if the
>lojack was tricked into thinking the worst by a malware file that
>detected it's presence and took advantage.

A new attack vector, suggest you?

That would be a nasty one.

[FromTheRafters]

"Dustin" <bughunter.dustin@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9F558CA9A208AHHI2948AJD832@no...
> "David W. Hodgins" <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> wrote in
> newsp.v07k0xqda3w0dxdave@hodgins.homeip.net:
>
>> On Fri, 02 Sep 2011 18:50:54 -0400, Dustin
>> <bughunter.dustin@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Oh, and switching to linux still ****s you, when the optionrom2
>>> calls home on your internet connection and finds out she's stolen.
>>> Which it will do, when it cannot drop the exe file. LOL. Whan
>>> happens next is a
>>
>> If it's using a windows executable, to phone home, that won't work.
>
> You seem to be missing something important. It can use the windows
> executable, but in the event it cannot drop it in a specified amount of
> time, it halts the boot process.
>
>> Are you saying the option rom can establish an internet connection
>> before the operating system boots?
>
> I'm not only saying that, but, being as I've extracted a viable sample of
> the option rom and have since learned how to remove it, I *know* the
> company is lying about the products limitations and abilities.

Have you been analyzing the OEM partnered persistence version or just
the software CD loadable version?

[FromTheRafters]

"Dustin" <bughunter.dustin@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9F558D9167502HHI2948AJD832@no...
> "FromTheRafters" <erratic.howard@gmail.com> wrote in
> news:j3rvm3$l8b$1@dont-email.me:
>
>> "Dustin" <bughunter.dustin@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:Xns9F54BFBC4E2EAHHI2948AJD832@no...
>>> "FromTheRafters" <erratic.howard@gmail.com> wrote in
>>> news:j3mbin$4p4$1 @dont-email.me:
>>>
>>>>> Vanguard, You can flatten and rebuild a lojacked system all day
>>>>> long, it's still going to be lojacked when you reload windows.
>>>>> [g]
>>>>
>>>> Would it only persist if it was reloaded with the same OS
>>>> that it was originally installed to work with? Like if it came
>>>> with XP pro and you wiped it and loaded Vista would it only
>>>> have limited functionality or is it capable of upgrading with
>>>> the new OS when it phones home?
>>>
>>> Nope. The dropped exe will happily install as a service on any NT
>>> based OS. doesn't matter if you had vista and downgraded it to XP
>>> pro. You're still going to get ****ed in the ass about 10 minutes
>>> after it sees an internet connection go hot. It waits a few
>>> minutes, to make sure the coast is clear. And really, if you don't
>>> know lojack, and many don't, you aren't going far with the stolen
>>> lappy. You can switch to linux and avoid the dropped exe tho. For
>>> now. [g]
>>
>> It would still phone-home with the current IP on every boot though
>> too.
>
> Yes, using the optionrom. And, when it phones home and is told it's
> stolen, even linux is worthless; bios boot lock. If you deny it the
> right to phone home a pre configured amount of times, it goes ahead and
> assumes the worst. I have unconfirmed report that a later version of
> the software has hardware level encryption it'll employ on your hard
> disk. to protect your data from thiefs. I don't know what cypher is
> being used yet, but if its like the my book WD drive, could be a real
> hassle for someone wanting that data. Ransom possibilities if the
> lojack was tricked into thinking the worst by a malware file that
> detected it's presence and took advantage.

You're thinking like a blackhat again. )

A simple program that takes advantage of the already there crypto
to lock you out of your data. All one need do is provide the trigger
event. sweee...I mean that's terrible.

I assume only the folks at LoJack could reverse that encryption,
so no actual fix by the perp after the ransom is paid.

[FromTheRafters]

"G. Morgan" <G_Morgan@easy.com> wrote in message
news:bpa567htcc7gjh397mqavi9op949v96270@Osama-is-dead.net...
> Dustin wrote:
>
>>possibilities if the
>>lojack was tricked into thinking the worst by a malware file that
>>detected it's presence and took advantage.
>
> A new attack vector, suggest you?
>
> That would be a nasty one.

More a payload than an attack vector. Like the old cryptovirology
angle, with a twist. You want your data back, pay me. Upon payment
I *might* just tell you how - and it involves LoJack and you getting a
root key of some sort from them - nothing to do with me at all, as it
wasn't *my* key being used.

[G. Morgan]

FromTheRafters wrote:

>sweee...I mean that's terrible.

lol...

[Jenn]

On 9/3/2011 6:10 PM, FromTheRafters wrote:
> "G. Morgan"<G_Morgan@easy.com> wrote in message
> news:bpa567htcc7gjh397mqavi9op949v96270@Osama-is-dead.net...
>> Dustin wrote:
>>
>>> possibilities if the
>>> lojack was tricked into thinking the worst by a malware file that
>>> detected it's presence and took advantage.
>>
>> A new attack vector, suggest you?
>>
>> That would be a nasty one.
>
> More a payload than an attack vector. Like the old cryptovirology
> angle, with a twist. You want your data back, pay me. Upon payment
> I *might* just tell you how - and it involves LoJack and you getting a
> root key of some sort from them - nothing to do with me at all, as it
> wasn't *my* key being used.
>
>
Would you put lojack on your laptop?

--
Jenn
(posting from Thunderbird)