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.

Perimeter

9/1/2010
08:30 AM
John H. Sawyer
John H. Sawyer
Commentary
50%
50%

Finding Exposed Devices On Your Network

When browsing through SHODAN, it never ceases to amaze me what I can find. How is it that people think it's okay to leave their printers, routers, fiber channel switches, and industrial control systems completely open to the Internet?

When browsing through SHODAN, it never ceases to amaze me what I can find. How is it that people think it's okay to leave their printers, routers, fiber channel switches, and industrial control systems completely open to the Internet?In case you're not sure what SHODAN is, I've mentioned SHODAN a few times in previous articles and blogs like "Gaining A Foothold By Exploiting VxWorks Vulns." It's been referred to as a rainbow table for Internet-accessible computers because it provides a searchable index of service banners retrieved from HTTP, HTTPS, FTP, SSH, and telnet services on the Internet without the need to do any of your own scanning.

When I was looking at the VxWorks vulnerability, I found vulnerable printers, network switches, fiber channel switches, and industrial control systems (or SCADA) equipment through some simple searches that are mentioned in this blog.

So I'm left wondering who thought it was a good idea to put these devices on the Internet without some sort of protection in place. Is there no change management procedures at these organizations where someone should be monitoring what's taking place on the network? Surely someone has to provision the public IP for use for the devices. Why aren't they asking what the IP will be used for and if the device is being locked down?

Sure, you can use SHODAN to check your netblocks for exposed devices that you might not be aware of, but why not be a little more proactive? Isn't proactive security better than reactive security? Or more to the point, wouldn't you rather find out about a new exposed device on you network before an attacker does?

There are a couple ways to go about this. The first is setting up some simple network scans using Nmap. It could be done daily or weekly, but I wouldn't recommend going as long as a month in between scans. Be sure to set up the scans to save the output to the Nmap XML format. Once you have more than one scan, you can use the Ndiff utility to compare the two scans and determine if there are any state changes for hosts, ports, service versions, operating systems, and the output of scripts.

The Nmap route is cheap and easy to implement, but if you have a nice netflow analysis solution like Lancope's StealthWatch, it can be done even easier. All of the netflow monitoring tools I've seen have an alert option that will notify admins when a new host is seen communicating on the network. I've also seen alerts for when a host begins acting as a server for the first time. For example, if a host is on the network and begins accepting and responding to requests on TCP port 443 for the first time, admins will receive an alert.

Security teams are often the last ones to know when new systems are brought online, but they don't have to be. Using the tools above, security can know when new systems show up on the network and take appropriate actions such as a vulnerability scan, and confirm that the device is authorized and not some rogue wireless router an employee decided to plug in so they could use their new iPad.

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
Comments
Threaded  |  Newest First  |  Oldest First
RDP Bug Takes New Approach to Host Compromise
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  7/18/2019
The Problem with Proprietary Testing: NSS Labs vs. CrowdStrike
Brian Monkman, Executive Director at NetSecOPEN,  7/19/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Current Issue
Building and Managing an IT Security Operations Program
As cyber threats grow, many organizations are building security operations centers (SOCs) to improve their defenses. In this Tech Digest you will learn tips on how to get the most out of a SOC in your organization - and what to do if you can't afford to build one.
Flash Poll
The State of IT Operations and Cybersecurity Operations
The State of IT Operations and Cybersecurity Operations
Your enterprise's cyber risk may depend upon the relationship between the IT team and the security team. Heres some insight on what's working and what isn't in the data center.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-12162
PUBLISHED: 2019-07-23
Upwork Time Tracker 5.2.2.716 doesn't verify the SHA256 hash of the downloaded program update before running it, which could lead to code execution or local privilege escalation by replacing the original update.exe.
CVE-2018-18669
PUBLISHED: 2019-07-23
GNUBOARD5 5.3.1.9 has XSS that allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via the "board title contents" parameter, aka the adm/board_form_update.php bo_subject parameter.
CVE-2019-10101
PUBLISHED: 2019-07-23
Jsish 2.4.84 2.0484 is affected by: Reachable Assertion. The impact is: denial of service. The component is: function Jsi_ValueArrayIndex (jsiValue.c:366). The attack vector is: executing crafted javascript code. The fixed version is: after commit 738ead193aff380a7e3d7ffb8e11e446f76867f3.
CVE-2019-9815
PUBLISHED: 2019-07-23
If hyperthreading is not disabled, a timing attack vulnerability exists, similar to previous Spectre attacks. Apple has shipped macOS 10.14.5 with an option to disable hyperthreading in applications running untrusted code in a thread through a new sysctl. Firefox now makes use of it on the main thre...
CVE-2019-9816
PUBLISHED: 2019-07-23
A possible vulnerability exists where type confusion can occur when manipulating JavaScript objects in object groups, allowing for the bypassing of security checks within these groups. *Note: this vulnerability has only been demonstrated with UnboxedObjects, which are disabled by default on all supp...