Month: July 2018

Posted on by Arnon Erba in News

(Editor’s note: This post has been updated since publication.)

As announced in February this year, Google Chrome’s design is being evolved to more clearly indicate to users that websites using plain HTTP are not loaded securely and that HTTPS connections should be expected instead. Today, Chrome is pushing a change that affects all HTTP sites worldwide: starting in version 68, Chrome will display a “Not Secure” warning in the address bar for all sites loaded over HTTP.

This isn’t the first change Chrome has made to clearly indicate that HTTP is not secure. Chrome has been marking HTTP traffic as “Not Secure” in Incognito mode as far back as version 62. The “Not Secure” warning has also been appearing for HTTP sites in Chrome’s normal mode when a page contains a password field or when the user interacts with any input field.

Although Chrome has taken the lead, Mozilla Firefox is also on board with the effort to visually flag HTTP pages as insecure. Firefox currently displays an address bar warning for HTTP sites that contain login forms and displays a visible warning message next to login forms that are served insecurely.

What’s Next

The future will bring more changes for the way Chrome visually handles HTTP and HTTPS connections. As I covered back in May, Chrome is scheduled to remove the “Secure” text from HTTPS connections in September with the release of Chrome 69. One month later, in October 2018, Chrome will color the HTTP “Not Secure” warning red when users enter data into insecure sites in Chrome 70. Ed: A previous version of this post inaccurately reflected the circumstances in which the “Not Secure” warning will be colored red in Chrome 70. The color will only change when users enter data on HTTP pages.

Posted on by Arnon Erba in Server Logs Explained

(Editor’s note: This post has been updated since publication.)

Some log entries are particularly bizarre, like the one we’ll be looking at today: - - [26/Jun/2016:00:35:26 -0700] "\xD5H\xC5p*\xB7:\x8F\x91\x8A\xE1\xAA\xE0p\xD9\xF2[;\xAE\xE7c\xF7\x9C\xAB~\x98\xCB\xAD\xCB\xBE\xCE\xED\xAF\xEC\x8B\x19\xC6\x08D\xEB\xA8\x91\x1De\x10\x18 u\x01zHj\x00\x8D|\x15\x8B;\x98\x08RaSH" 400 166 "-" "-"

My server responded with 400 Bad Request, but the most interesting part is the giant $request portion, which doesn’t include any of the normal components you would expect in an HTTP request:

\xD5H\xC5p*\xB7:\x8F\x91\x8A\xE1\xAA\xE0p\xD9\xF2[;\xAE\xE7c\xF7\x9C\xAB~\x98\xCB\xAD\xCB\xBE\xCE\xED\xAF\xEC\x8B\x19\xC6\x08D\xEB\xA8\x91\x1De\x10\x18 u\x01zHj\x00\x8D|\x15\x8B;\x98\x08RaSH

Note: See my first Server Logs Explained post for an example of how to interpret the entire log entry.

Wait, What?

If your first thought was that this looks like 64 bytes of garbage, then you’d be exactly right. As it turns out, I wasn’t the first person to see one of these bizarre log entries. According to this Information Security StackExchange question and answer, this server request is from an Internet-wide research scan led by the Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences (EECS) department at the University of California at Berkeley.

A reverse DNS lookup of the IP address led to an illuminating hostname, researchscan1.EECS.Berkeley.EDU. It turns out there’s actually several machines related to the project:

  •, or researchscan0.EECS.Berkeley.EDU
  •, or researchscan1.EECS.Berkeley.EDU
  •, or researchscan2.EECS.Berkeley.EDU
  •, or researchscan3.EECS.Berkeley.EDU
  •, or researchscan4.EECS.Berkeley.EDU

If you access any of those IP addresses or hostnames in a web browser, you’ll see a brief description of the project. However, according to this answer on StackExchange, the text on those webpages has changed over time, so the most concise explanation comes in the form of a quote from the project leaders at Berkeley that’s reproduced in that answer:

We are performing a measurement study of a particular phenomenon on the Internet. To accurately asses the behavior we’re performing a daily scan of the IPv4 space by sending a single benign packet to every IP on port 80 consisting of 64 random bytes of data. […] No, we are not attempting to gain unauthorized access. […] It’s simply randomly generated data that conforms to a certain set of criteria.

I contacted the project team a few months ago as well, but have not heard anything back. Given that the StackExchange answer and my log entry both date back to 2016, it’s possible that the research project is already over and is now just Internet history. Either way, it’s interesting to finally know what it is.