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.

Endpoint

4/7/2015
04:00 PM
Connect Directly
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
100%
0%

3 Internet Of Things Devices That Threaten More Than Your Data

Veracode study of IoT devices show how vulnerabilities in our always-on households can have dire real-world consequences.

As more households take advantage of the benefits that non-traditional Internet-connected devices can provide in convenience, cost savings, and entertainment, the additional risks should also be considered when plugging into the Internet of Things (IoT). A new study out today by researchers with Veracode offers insight into such risks by taking a look at six popular IoT consumer devices and showing how vulnerabilities in these devices could potentially leave users open to burglary, eavesdropping, and stalking.  

“It’s hard to not be excited about what the IoT has enabled and will bring in the future, although that doesn’t mean cybersecurity should be sacrificed in the process,” said Brandon Creighton, Veracode security research architect. “We need to look at the IoT holistically to ensure that the devices, as well as their web and mobile applications and back-end cloud services, are built securely from their inception. Security should not be treated as an afterthought or add-on, or we risk putting our personal information in jeopardy or even opening the door to physical harm.”

All the devices picked by Veracode for examination had three common characteristics. They are all marketed to end users who don't need special technical expertise to use them, they're all always on and connected to the Internet permanently, and they all significantly interact with the physical environment in some way or another through built-in sensors or communication with important household devices. Each of the devices were subjected to a uniform battery of tests that included checks on authentication, encryption, and protocol security. Some of the issues found were open debugging interfaces that could allow remote arbitrary code execution, protocol weaknesses that would allow attackers to access sensitive data from the device and lack of enforcement of strong passwords. In particular, the following three devices provide the opportunity for some scary attack scenarios.

 

MyQ Garage

This Internet-based remote control for control of garage doors does not enforce strong passwords, has an unprotected debugging environment, doesn't secure sensitive data sent between the device and mobile applications, and is potentially open to man-in-the-middle (MiTM) attacks. According to researchers, attackers might steal data about when the door is opened and closed -- in order to plan the best time for break-ins -- or even obtain the capability to remotely open the door to gain access once the owner is gone.

 

Ubi

Ubi -- an always-on device designed to answer questions, connect to home automation devices, and perform tasks like sending texts or turning on music on devices -- doesn't protect against MiTM, has weaknesses in encryption at rest and in motion, and is vulnerable to replay attacks. Veracode says that a compromise of an Ubi account would give attackers the ability to steal contact list information held by the user or spy on their Google calendar for stalking or corporate spying. Similar to the MyQ, a compromise would give an attacker historical information on the user's home about temperature, humidity, air pressure, ambient light, and sound levels that could be used to build a profile for future break-ins.

 

Wink Relay

A combination hub and control device for home automation sensors and products, Wink Relay has a number of flaws, most critical of which is the ability for remote arbitrary code execution. This means that potential attackers could not only collect information about the user's activity but also control the device remotely. For example, an attacker could turn on the microphone on the device to listen in and record private conversations, giving them the ability to blackmail users or collect information for corporate espionage.

Ericka Chickowski specializes in coverage of information technology and business innovation. She has focused on information security for the better part of a decade and regularly writes about the security industry as a contributor to Dark Reading.  View Full Bio
 

Recommended Reading:

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
RaiderRoss
100%
0%
RaiderRoss,
User Rank: Apprentice
4/7/2015 | 5:03:24 PM
Need for a centralized DB
I am personally an adopter of many things in the 'connected home'. However, I do not allow connections out to the Internet for the very reason that these devices often think of security as something that happens somewhere else in the network - if at all.

That being said, I'd love to see these manufacturers all get together and publish a centralized database or forum where the pitfalls can be discussed and corrected. It is in EVERYONE'S best interest to get the information out there and the proper protections in place.

 
Thomas Claburn
50%
50%
Thomas Claburn,
User Rank: Ninja
4/7/2015 | 4:24:37 PM
IoT breach cases?
Are there any documented cases of people's IoT devices being hacked that resulted in any serious consequences (physical harm, harassment, or theft but not the exposure of personal information)?
COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 6/5/2020
Abandoned Apps May Pose Security Risk to Mobile Devices
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  5/29/2020
How AI and Automation Can Help Bridge the Cybersecurity Talent Gap
Peter Barker, Chief Product Officer at ForgeRock,  6/1/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: What? IT said I needed virus protection!
Current Issue
How Cybersecurity Incident Response Programs Work (and Why Some Don't)
This Tech Digest takes a look at the vital role cybersecurity incident response (IR) plays in managing cyber-risk within organizations. Download the Tech Digest today to find out how well-planned IR programs can detect intrusions, contain breaches, and help an organization restore normal operations.
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-9074
PUBLISHED: 2020-06-05
Huawei Smartphones HONOR 20 PRO;Honor View 20;HONOR 20 have an improper handling of exceptional condition Vulnerability. A component cannot deal with an exception correctly. Attackers can exploit this vulnerability by sending malformed message. This could compromise normal service of affected phones...
CVE-2020-9859
PUBLISHED: 2020-06-05
A memory consumption issue was addressed with improved memory handling. This issue is fixed in iOS 13.5.1 and iPadOS 13.5.1, macOS Catalina 10.15.5 Supplemental Update, tvOS 13.4.6, watchOS 6.2.6. An application may be able to execute arbitrary code with kernel privileges.
CVE-2020-11975
PUBLISHED: 2020-06-05
Apache Unomi allows conditions to use OGNL scripting which offers the possibility to call static Java classes from the JDK that could execute code with the permission level of the running Java process.
CVE-2020-12723
PUBLISHED: 2020-06-05
regcomp.c in Perl before 5.30.3 allows a buffer overflow via a crafted regular expression because of recursive S_study_chunk calls.
CVE-2020-1883
PUBLISHED: 2020-06-05
Huawei products NIP6800;Secospace USG6600;USG9500 have a memory leak vulnerability. An attacker with high privileges exploits this vulnerability by continuously performing specific operations. Successful exploitation of this vulnerability can cause service abnormal.