peda VS CyberChef

Looks like they are using PEDA.

There are a lot of these types of tools already in the reverse engineering community (in order of lowest chance of breaking when you throw really weird stuff at it):

GEF: https://gef.readthedocs.io/en/master/

PWNDBG: https://github.com/pwndbg/pwndbg

PEDA: https://github.com/longld/peda

They also come with a slew of different features to aid in RE/exploit dev, but many of them are also useful for debugging really weird issues.

PEDA - GDB plugin (only python2.7).

peda - Python Exploit Development Assistance for GDB.

Did you follow the instructions? Step 2 adds PEDA to your ~/.gdbinit so it will/should load every time you open gdb. So if it doesn't work check your ~/.gdbinit file.

Then we take the encrypted text and use CyberChef to decrypt it.

Let's go to CyberChef and insert our pieces of evidence.

A parameter was changed from '2AMBCgIQBg' to 'CgIIAdgDAQ%3D%3D' which is just the correct base64 encoding they should have been using the entire time.

I don't think this was a hostile action by Google, I think someone just added better input validation for security reasons and it accidently broke the bad requests they were sending.

https://gchq.github.io/CyberChef/#recipe=URL_Decode()From_Ba...

❗This is indeed the flag, but the text is encrypted with Base64. Usually, the presence of padding character "=" indicates that's Base64 type of encoding (but that's only one of the hints). To decrypt it, we can use CyberChef. Copy-paste the text and we either:

It uses a combination of magic bytes (like the `file` command), entropy analysis and character frequency detection to determine whether an output is likely to be of interest to the user.

The file type mechanism is written here[0]. There's a list of all signatures we detect here[1].

[0] https://github.com/gchq/CyberChef/blob/master/src/core/lib/F...

I think this can be deciphered using CyberChef...