Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Attacks/Breaches

1/3/2008
06:45 AM
Connect Directly
Google+
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Urban WiFi Routers at Risk

Indiana University researchers say densely populated wireless routers could be the next method for spreading pharming, script injection, and bot infections

Your crazy next-door neighbor could also be your biggest WiFi security risk: If his wireless router gets infected, it could spread malware to your router as well.

Researchers at Indiana University in Bloomington recently built an epidemiological model of the feasibility of malware rapidly spreading among WiFi routers in a densely populated area. They found in their simulations that tens of thousands of WiFi routers could be infected in two weeks -- and most were infected within 24 to 48 hours.

The researchers then tested their model as a launching pad for drive-by pharming, an attack method demonstrated last year by several of their colleagues in a proof-of-concept attack they co-developed with Symantec. That's where an attacker uses a broadband router vendor's default password to control the router, after first luring the victim to a malicious Website to infect them with malicious JavaScript code. (See New 'Drive-By' Attack Is Remote.)

"I [wondered], why would you be content with that when you could make it self-replicating and attack neighboring routers?" says Steven Myers, assistant professor of Indiana University's School of Informatics, and one of the members of the research team.

So Myers, along with university colleagues Hao Hu, Vittoria Colizza, and Alessandro Vespignani, gathered wireless data from seven urban areas in the U.S. -- Chicago, Boston, New York City, San Francisco Bay Area, Seattle, Northern Indiana, and Southern Indiana – and modeled a malware viral epidemic among WiFi routers akin to the spread of a biological virus.

They found that only 21 percent to 40 percent of wireless routers in those regions used encryption, and they focused on "attacking" those without encryption or with the notoriously weak Wireless Encryption Protocol (WEP). The researchers concluded that WEP can always be broken as long as the attacker has access to sufficient encrypted data.

"This can be achieved by waiting for the router to be used by legitimate clients, or by deploying more advanced active attacks," they wrote. "Bypassing WEP encryption is therefore feasible and only requires a given amount of time."

WEP's weaknesses are well documented. McAfee researchers found that half of the home WLANs they sniffed in war-driving tests over a year ago were unprotected and unencrypted. The team was able to crack those that had WEP encryption on their WiFi routers in less than two minutes. (See Hacking Home WLANs.)

Once WEP is cracked, the attacker is practically "in": Many WiFi routers still use their manufacturer's default password. The researchers weren't able to nail down the number of those users, but used estimates which state that 25 percent of users don't change their router's default SSID. An infected router would then interface with another router over an administrative interface, according to the researchers, who tested that out as well.

Myers says the danger of this type of attack is that, unlike a PC, a wireless LAN is typically "on" all the time, and no security tools today specifically protect WiFi router infection. Still, it's not an active threat at this time: The goal of the researchers is to help get ahead of this type of threat before it becomes a problem.

"I don't think it's a threat right now -- there's so much more lower-hanging fruit" for attackers to exploit, he says. But this attack would be attractive for script injection, pharming, and for botnet operators to build out their botnets, he says.

"This is a whole other platform to infect and attack," Myers says.

Have a comment on this story? Please click "Discuss" below. If you'd like to contact Dark Reading's editors directly, send us a message.

Kelly Jackson Higgins is the Executive Editor of Dark Reading. She is an award-winning veteran technology and business journalist with more than two decades of experience in reporting and editing for various publications, including Network Computing, Secure Enterprise ... View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Why Cyber-Risk Is a C-Suite Issue
Marc Wilczek, Digital Strategist & CIO Advisor,  11/12/2019
Unreasonable Security Best Practices vs. Good Risk Management
Jack Freund, Director, Risk Science at RiskLens,  11/13/2019
6 Small-Business Password Managers
Curtis Franklin Jr., Senior Editor at Dark Reading,  11/8/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: This comment is waiting for review by our moderators.
Current Issue
Navigating the Deluge of Security Data
In this Tech Digest, Dark Reading shares the experiences of some top security practitioners as they navigate volumes of security data. We examine some examples of how enterprises can cull this data to find the clues they need.
Flash Poll
Rethinking Enterprise Data Defense
Rethinking Enterprise Data Defense
Frustrated with recurring intrusions and breaches, cybersecurity professionals are questioning some of the industrys conventional wisdom. Heres a look at what theyre thinking about.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-18986
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-15
Pimcore before 6.2.2 allow attackers to brute-force (guess) valid usernames by using the 'forgot password' functionality as it returns distinct messages for invalid password and non-existing users.
CVE-2019-18981
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-15
Pimcore before 6.2.2 lacks an Access Denied outcome for a certain scenario of an incorrect recipient ID of a notification.
CVE-2019-18982
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-15
bundles/AdminBundle/Controller/Admin/EmailController.php in Pimcore before 6.3.0 allows script execution in the Email Log preview window because of the lack of a Content-Security-Policy header.
CVE-2019-18985
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-15
Pimcore before 6.2.2 lacks brute force protection for the 2FA token.
CVE-2019-18928
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-15
Cyrus IMAP 2.5.x before 2.5.14 and 3.x before 3.0.12 allows privilege escalation because an HTTP request may be interpreted in the authentication context of an unrelated previous request that arrived over the same connection.