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.

IoT
9/2/2020
07:00 PM
Connect Directly
Twitter
LinkedIn
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Most IoT Hardware Dangerously Easy to Crack

Manufacturers need to invest more effort into protecting root-level access to connected devices, security researcher says.

A vast majority of IoT hardware in homes and offices is vulnerable to attacks that allow devices to be easily taken over and manipulated for malicious purposes.

Few device manufacturers or security researchers are paying nearly as much attention to this issue as they are to software vulnerabilities, according to Marc Rogers, white hat hacker and executive director of cybersecurity at Okta.

In a presentation at Okta's virtual Disclosure security conference on Wednesday, Rogers described most IoT hardware as having very weak to no protections against attacks aimed at prying secrets from device firmware.

Related Content:

How to Assess More Sophisticated IoT Threats

Third-Party IoT Vulnerabilities: We Need a Cybersecurity Paradigm Shift

Rogers claimed he was able to gain complete root level access, including the ability to re-flash firmware, on 10 out of 12 devices he tested. Most were cracked in less than five minutes, he said. The products he tested included home routers, switches, card access readers, and other commonly installed Internet-connected devices.

The issue with all of these systems, and indeed all IoT devices, is that most proprietary information about the device — including certificates, keys, and communication protocols — is typically stored in poorly secured flash memory. Anyone with access to an IoT device and some basic knowledge of hardware hacking can easily access the firmware and look for data, including vulnerabilities that could potentially allow them to launch attacks against similar devices without requiring physical access, Rogers explained.

According to Rogers, the techniques he used to hack into these devices are well understood and have been around for a long time. "What is less known is how easily accessible and devastatingly effective they are," he explained. "I don't think I have seen one IoT device where at least one of these techniques doesn't apply," Rogers said in an interview with Dark Reading.

In his talk, Rogers outlined a few approaches that are available to hackers to pry proprietary information from an IoT device and take control of it in a manner not intended by the device manufacturer.

The UART and JTAG Routes

One of the easiest methods is to gain access to UART, or Universal Asynchronous Receiver/Transmitter, a serial interface used for diagnostic reporting and debugging in all IoT products, among other things. An attacker can use the UART to gain root shell access to an IoT device and then download the firmware to learn its secrets and inspect for weaknesses.

"UART is only supposed to be used by the manufacturer. When you get access to it, in most cases you get complete root access," Rogers said. 

Protecting access to UART, or at least configuring it against interactive access, should be a fairly straightforward task for manufacturers; however, most don't make the effort. "They simply allow you to have complete interactive shell. It is the easiest way to hack every piece of IoT hardware," Rogers noted. Several devices even have UART pin names labeled on the board so it is easy to find the interface. Multiple tools are available to help find them if they are not labeled.

Another, only slightly more challenging, route to completely pwning an IoT device is via JTAG, a microcontroller-level interface that is used for multiple purposes including testing integrated circuits and programming flash memory. As with UART, an attacker with access to JTAG can alter flash memory, access debug tools, and extract other proprietary information about the device.

Though the JTAG interface can be slightly harder to find than UART, it still is easy enough to discover for those who know what to look for or have the tools to do it for them, according to Rogers. There are steps that manufacturers can take to lock JTAG down, and indeed they do for some modern devices, but most still provide relatively easy access to JTAG, he said.

When manufacturers have tried to make access to UART and other interfaces harder, their attempts have been amateurish. As one example, Rogers pointed to an IoT device manufacturer that disguised the UART interface as an HDMI port. He cited another example in which the programming interface for a microcontroller, which stored the master key for a widely used access card reader, was hidden under a piece of black electrical tape at the back.

"Hardware manufacturers have got to stop trying to hide these hardware problems," he emphasized.

Just as security researchers' intense scrutiny on smart car technologies is driving change, there is need for similar focus on IoT hardware weaknesses. Technologies are available that allow manufacturers to build more secure hardware, and costs to do so are dropping. "We really don't have much excuse not to implement some security into hardware," Rogers said. 

Jai Vijayan is a seasoned technology reporter with over 20 years of experience in IT trade journalism. He was most recently a Senior Editor at Computerworld, where he covered information security and data privacy issues for the publication. Over the course of his 20-year ... View Full Bio
 

Recommended Reading:

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 9/25/2020
Hacking Yourself: Marie Moe and Pacemaker Security
Gary McGraw Ph.D., Co-founder Berryville Institute of Machine Learning,  9/21/2020
Startup Aims to Map and Track All the IT and Security Things
Kelly Jackson Higgins, Executive Editor at Dark Reading,  9/22/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
Special Report: Computing's New Normal
This special report examines how IT security organizations have adapted to the "new normal" of computing and what the long-term effects will be. Read it and get a unique set of perspectives on issues ranging from new threats & vulnerabilities as a result of remote working to how enterprise security strategy will be affected long term.
Flash Poll
How IT Security Organizations are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
How IT Security Organizations are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
The COVID-19 pandemic turned the world -- and enterprise computing -- on end. Here's a look at how cybersecurity teams are retrenching their defense strategies, rebuilding their teams, and selecting new technologies to stop the oncoming rise of online attacks.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-15208
PUBLISHED: 2020-09-25
In tensorflow-lite before versions 1.15.4, 2.0.3, 2.1.2, 2.2.1 and 2.3.1, when determining the common dimension size of two tensors, TFLite uses a `DCHECK` which is no-op outside of debug compilation modes. Since the function always returns the dimension of the first tensor, malicious attackers can ...
CVE-2020-15209
PUBLISHED: 2020-09-25
In tensorflow-lite before versions 1.15.4, 2.0.3, 2.1.2, 2.2.1 and 2.3.1, a crafted TFLite model can force a node to have as input a tensor backed by a `nullptr` buffer. This can be achieved by changing a buffer index in the flatbuffer serialization to convert a read-only tensor to a read-write one....
CVE-2020-15210
PUBLISHED: 2020-09-25
In tensorflow-lite before versions 1.15.4, 2.0.3, 2.1.2, 2.2.1 and 2.3.1, if a TFLite saved model uses the same tensor as both input and output of an operator, then, depending on the operator, we can observe a segmentation fault or just memory corruption. We have patched the issue in d58c96946b and ...
CVE-2020-15211
PUBLISHED: 2020-09-25
In TensorFlow Lite before versions 1.15.4, 2.0.3, 2.1.2, 2.2.1 and 2.3.1, saved models in the flatbuffer format use a double indexing scheme: a model has a set of subgraphs, each subgraph has a set of operators and each operator has a set of input/output tensors. The flatbuffer format uses indices f...
CVE-2020-15212
PUBLISHED: 2020-09-25
In TensorFlow Lite before versions 2.2.1 and 2.3.1, models using segment sum can trigger writes outside of bounds of heap allocated buffers by inserting negative elements in the segment ids tensor. Users having access to `segment_ids_data` can alter `output_index` and then write to outside of `outpu...