Perimeter
9/15/2010
10:36 AM
John H. Sawyer
John H. Sawyer
Commentary
50%
50%

Taking USB Attacks To The Next Level

USB devices have many benign, legitimate uses. But put a USB-based device in the hands of a savvy hardware hacker, and that USB device can go from good to evil in no time.

USB devices have many benign, legitimate uses. But put a USB-based device in the hands of a savvy hardware hacker, and that USB device can go from good to evil in no time.Fellow Dark Reading blogger Gadi Evron's recent blog about USB-based attacks with keyboards gave an interesting attack scenario of using a hacked keyboard, Notepad, and custom shellcode to exploit a system. But who needs shellcode when you have a keyboard device?

I mentioned a couple of very interesting hardware hacking presentations given this summer that took USB attacks to the next level. One focused on hacking wireless presentation devices that are no more than USB Human Interface Devices (HID) to the underlying system. When you click on the next button on the remote, it sends a "page down" command via the USB HID keyboard interface.

By reversing the wireless protocol used by the wireless presentation devices, an attacker could inject keystrokes into the system, which could open Notepad, type in a script, save it, then choose Run from the Start Menu and execute the script. Ingenious!

Of course, to be successful you could attack someone only during a presentation. Or you could plant one of these devices on a target machine and communicate with it remotely from outside the office to run your code after hours.

Imagine, instead, that you have a small Arduino-based device that works with the Social Engineering Toolkit to deliver payloads via WSCRIPT and PowerShell. The device emulates a USB HID keyboard and can inject keystrokes into the target system like the attack above. Powerful, right?

The bundling of the Teensy Arduino device with the Social Engineering Toolkit (SET) is an awesome attack vector. It's small and easily planted into a USB port when no one is looking. With SET, an attacker (we'll assume a legit penetration tester) can generate a Metasploit payload and the attack code that gets written to the Teensy device. When the device is plugged into the target, it creates a WSCRIPT file that downloads the Metasploit payload and executes it, as seen in this example.

The other example of using the Teensy HID attack was embedding it into a keyboard since many have built-in USB hubs. If you knew which keyboards were in use in a target's environment, then you could walk in pretending to be the computer repair tech, replace the keyboard, and walk out while your attack happens.

The possibilities are endless when you consider what can be done from just a keyboard alone. And, since USB HIDs are cross-platform, so are the attacks that can be performed.

Check out Dave Kennedy's blog (author of SET) to learn more about it and the Teensy attacks. There are some videos and new documentation available that show examples of what has been included in the latest release.

John H. Sawyer is a senior security engineer on the IT Security Team at the University of Florida. The views and opinions expressed in this blog are his own and do not represent the views and opinions of the UF IT Security Team or the University of Florida. When John's not fighting flaming, malware-infested machines or performing autopsies on blitzed boxes, he can usually be found hanging with his family, bouncing a baby on one knee and balancing a laptop on the other. Special to Dark Reading.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Cartoon
Current Issue
Flash Poll
Title Partner’s Role in Perimeter Security
Title Partner’s Role in Perimeter Security
Considering how prevalent third-party attacks are, we need to ask hard questions about how partners and suppliers are safeguarding systems and data.
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2013-7441
Published: 2015-05-29
The modern style negotiation in Network Block Device (nbd-server) 2.9.22 through 3.3 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (root process termination) by (1) closing the connection during negotiation or (2) specifying a name for a non-existent export.

CVE-2014-9727
Published: 2015-05-29
AVM Fritz!Box allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary commands via shell metacharacters in the var:lang parameter to cgi-bin/webcm.

CVE-2015-0200
Published: 2015-05-29
IBM WebSphere Commerce 6.x through 6.0.0.11 and 7.x before 7.0.0.8 IF2 allows local users to obtain sensitive database information via unspecified vectors.

CVE-2015-0751
Published: 2015-05-29
Cisco IP Phone 7861, when firmware from Cisco Unified Communications Manager 10.3(1) is used, allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service via crafted packets, aka Bug ID CSCus81800.

CVE-2015-0752
Published: 2015-05-29
Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Cisco TelePresence Video Communication Server (VCS) X8.5.1 allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via a crafted URL, aka Bug ID CSCut27635.

Dark Reading Radio
Archived Dark Reading Radio
After a serious cybersecurity incident, everyone will be looking to you for answers -- but you’ll never have complete information and you’ll never have enough time. So in those heated moments, when a business is on the brink of collapse, how will you and the rest of the board room executives respond?