Saturday, October 22, 2016

You can alter the contents of an .eml file and leave the header intact...

There's a small conversation about whether DKIM signatures prove that the Wikileaks emails haven't been altered. Somebody said to show that the contents could be altered without affecting the header, so I thought I'd try. Here's what I came up with:

To replicate:

1) Take a .eml file from the Wikileaks archive.
2) Open it with Notepad
3) Replace the content of the message with whatever you want
4) Open it with your mail client (Outlook for me)


I don't have the ability to run the type of check found here:

http://dailycaller.com/2016/10/21/heres-cryptographic-proof-that-donna-brazile-is-wrong-wikileaks-emails-are-real/

But maybe somebody else can. I'm pretty sure, though, that I've altered the contents of the email and left the header intact, which in theory means that from a technical perspective, once Wikileaks had the emails in their possession, they could have done the same.

I need to reiterate, though, you would have to be incredibly short-sighted to do that. There are multiple copies of this email record in existence - at least one in the mailboxes of everyone on this thread, as well as any backups that people might have. To alter your copy and then expect that no one would point it out would be optimistic in the extreme (delusional, really). I think that a reasonable person would start with the hypothesis that these aren't altered based on Wikileaks' record of document integrity, the fact that other evidence is corroborating what's found in the emails (Project Veritas' videos naming the time of a meeting that's found in the email archive, etc.), and other evidence. But that's just my opinion.

What do you think? Again, I'm not an expert in this area, so comments are welcome.

Here is the header:

Delivered-To: john.podesta@gmail.com
Received: by 10.25.88.78 with SMTP id m75csp262190lfb;
        Sat, 13 Feb 2016 12:46:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.98.34.212 with SMTP id p81mr12085412pfj.23.1455396394008;
        Sat, 13 Feb 2016 12:46:34 -0800 (PST)
Return-Path: <gbsperling@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-pa0-x236.google.com (mail-pa0-x236.google.com. [2607:f8b0:400e:c03::236])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id tw2si28165283pab.238.2016.02.13.12.46.33
        (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
        Sat, 13 Feb 2016 12:46:33 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of gbsperling@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400e:c03::236 as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:400e:c03::236;
Authentication-Results: mx.google.com;
       spf=pass (google.com: domain of gbsperling@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400e:c03::236 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=gbsperling@gmail.com;
       dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com;
       dmarc=pass (p=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com
Received: by mail-pa0-x236.google.com with SMTP id yy13so61924271pab.3;
        Sat, 13 Feb 2016 12:46:33 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc
         :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to;
        bh=+28QEQtUrTV+f7iNbIkhVKqZcL0gVrkNHD6d1ZjaavY=;
        b=Mh7fFtVDRubr099eA7VuhM4HhOlpuFXt+BReEPEFiM5dv9RymdXGMxRxvS6O1/2k/w
         ZusjQ0i7nOCo/Ui+9RCR2Qo0fSh/fi0aIxRzc2etoh7YTw4AFFJrNZdAf6/7l1Yw6WfC
         IfH5O0IjS7ovAWg3ZoW4BNocux+YANHMJWTEUA3yNZaEBvMX+O4oGZcvVs95oEAMbrBm
         ZYlgycUeBk+xHDypyBN7nW3VqcRy2i3ghaICVSYjHel512wlhj0DxgbhgSTPhJ4wpnRp
         QwzL325IAuCFIdJ1Ukg5kMWwcfZCFK8Gt1ixH0Y8qkjXVxecNgAHfx1L5jrXvo2pVh1Z
         zQIw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
        h=x-gm-message-state:content-type:mime-version:subject:from
         :in-reply-to:date:cc:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references
         :to;
        bh=+28QEQtUrTV+f7iNbIkhVKqZcL0gVrkNHD6d1ZjaavY=;
        b=h50Po3S/ek8QAME11e2e7TcQMO/NVtGC2QXvpdKjsi8sbTwLSEZbvCXCIww7ocpbzP
         OJYWlEf6P3vAtYgm7WVbJRS5L1B5UfrGEShGwqmMkBBi5tSer+K3D7/i+MUo89f5Zb+b
         p3yiE61ot1mPViPMISSMC8ryXdcnmUrOqbZpC2nZ1lhmctOVOAT1aIhj8xgVxKt4pGQa
         3SMCE6NqD3wZT35W+7YiY82BaufAMcRozK32fVBbw3fUykDosney0uJ0JNeyVVOlruUn
         ZpleGXUODOJhip4+eWCc4MrlskvKsCOVrgocK+J5vJ4Lwmmo94CPigZC1V2cQphy/IUb
         FOaw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOQv1YZaF42PVZtmmnowAjY0DGo9TEdkv2gr9pAcIZhLLyaGmFDsUkzQBVvWWsO3bQ==
X-Received: by 10.66.248.198 with SMTP id yo6mr12033964pac.54.1455396393361;
        Sat, 13 Feb 2016 12:46:33 -0800 (PST)
Return-Path: <gbsperling@gmail.com>
Received: from [192.168.1.8] (27.sub-70-211-16.myvzw.com. [70.211.16.27])
        by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z5sm28115282pas.29.2016.02.13.12.46.31
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Sat, 13 Feb 2016 12:46:32 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary=Apple-Mail-12C54A17-2C76-441A-AAA3-DB0AF4C35185
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Subject: Re: HRC financial proposal
From: Gene Sperling <gbsperling@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (12B436)
In-Reply-To: <5495322817735053152@unknownmsgid>
Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2016 12:46:31 -0800
CC: Neera Tanden <ntanden@gmail.com>, Mike Schmidt <mschmidt@hillaryclinton.com>,
 John Podesta <john.podesta@gmail.com>,
 Michael Shapiro <mshapiro@hillaryclinton.com>,
 David Kamin <davidckamin@gmail.com>, Michael Pyle <pyle_michael@yahoo.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <F771A0FC-6079-4647-8815-0C5A92AF8651@gmail.com>
References: <56BF87F601DA055A00F5017D_0_32030@p171> <7B124F68-F1AD-43E3-A9EA-0489FAC8B0D3@americanprogress.org> <CAJiTYQaXk1PO2E46BLgu+UbeVg917Nj_yM_CAC8F3pW_7-V=6g@mail.gmail.com> <5495322817735053152@unknownmsgid>
To: Jake Sullivan <jsullivan@hillaryclinton.com>

--Apple-Mail-12C54A17-2C76-441A-AAA3-DB0AF4C35185
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Two thoughts for discussion:

1. We're the most corrupt people ever - except for the people who might have altered this email.

2. It looks this email could have been altered without affecting the email header.

--Apple-Mail-12C54A17-2C76-441A-AAA3-DB0AF4C35185--




Friday, October 21, 2016

DKIM does not provide protection after message delivery.

This is a very important point, and must be considered in any analysis...

In my opinion you would have to be really, really careless to take an email that has intact headers and then modify just the message content when you knew that the original was sitting out in somebody else's inbox(es), though. To say it simply, you'd have to be beyond dumb to attempt that kind of forgery.

We'll see, though... history is full of people doing really dumb things. Heck, I do three really dumb things a day just to stay humble.

Thursday, October 20, 2016

Why Bother Looking at an Email Header?

Love this:

Why Bother Looking at an Email Header?

This is a very good question. For the most part, you really wouldn’t ever need to unless:
  • You suspect an email is a phishing attempt or spoof
  • You want to view routing information on the email’s path
  • You are a curious geek
http://www.howtogeek.com/108205/htg-explains-what-can-you-find-in-an-email-header/

-----------

I'll take door #3...

What does phx.gbl mean (in the Message ID)?

"phx.gbl is an internal Active Directory domain that Microsoft uses to manage datacenter machines.  It gets added to message headers as a way to trace what machines actually saw a message when Microsoft needs to diagnose specific problems.  The name is equivalent to a *.local domain some organizations use for AD management.  It is by design that these machines are not addressable from the internet as part of Microsoft's defense in depth security planning."

Jomi SchellPrinciple Developer Lead

https://www.quora.com/Network-Protocols-Where-does-phx-gbl-in-all-Microsoft-e-mail-headers-derive-from

To Whom Was the Email Sent?

Answer: "podesta@law.georgetown.edu" <podesta@law.georgetown.edu>

It appears that the reason the email ended up in the Wikileaks archive is that somebody had set up Mr. Podesta's Georgetown emails to automatically forward to his Gmail account.

Was the MessageID of the email a valid Microsoft MessageID?

Answer: Although it can't be determined conclusively (meaning I don't have access to all the emails in the world to make sure this is a unique id) the message id does follow Microsoft naming conventions and appears to be valid...

Link to tool I used to perform analysis:

Using Message ID to see if message was forged

What was the MessageID (the unique identifier) of the email?

<SNT150-W75F932A59B6A19648914E9C31D0@phx.gbl>