Vulnerabilities / Threats

6/18/2018
05:28 PM
Connect Directly
Twitter
LinkedIn
RSS
E-Mail
100%
0%

Exposed Container Orchestration Systems Putting Many Orgs at Risk

More than 22,600 open container orchestration and API management systems discovered on the Internet.

New research confirms that many organizations are deploying workloads to the public cloud without adequate security controls and processes in place first.

Lacework recently used the Shodan search engine, SSL data mining techniques, and some internally developed tools to uncover as many as 22,672 open container orchestration dashboards and API management systems on the Internet. The applications that Lacework discovered during its research were Kubernetes, Mesos Marathon, Swagger API, Red Hat Openshift and Docker Swarm's Portainer and Swarmpit.

Some 95% of the exposed dashboards and management systems were hosted inside of Amazon Web Services. More than half of those exposed services were hosted on AWS regions in the US. Though a vast majority of the open container orchestration interfaces had credentials for controlling access, the fact that they were exposed to the Internet at all is troublesome, says Dan Hubbard, chief security at Lacework.

The dashboard provides top-level access to all the functions required to manage and administer container clusters. Anyone with access to the dashboard can carry out tasks like starting and stopping workloads, adding or modifying applications and setting key security controls.

Container management interfaces that are not properly configured and are exposed on the Internet pose a major risk for enterprises. "Even with credentials set up, information related to the organization might be disclosed," Hubbard points out. This includes information contained in host headers or SSL certificates. Lacework researchers, for instance, were relatively easily able to derive company names from certificates and hostnames without even having to access the exposed container interfaces.

Weak authentication schemes - like inadequate credential requirements - can allow an attacker to brute-force the password of an exposed container management interface. Similarly, not using SSL can allow an attacker to gain access via clear text authentication. Any vulnerabilities in the container application itself are also likely to be easier to exploit via exposed management dashboards.

Lacework's research also uncovered some 300 container management dashboards with no authentication at all, giving attackers a way to easily spin up and stop containers, delete or destroy information, and harvest data about the infrastructure, Hubbard says. Such completely open dashboards also give attackers a way to potentially move laterally to other cloud resources, log into cloud instances and launch new instances for abuse like Bitcoin mining and DDoS. In addition, attackers can exploit the dashboards to set up a backdoor or to drop malicious code for performing command-and-control and other activities.

Because Kubernetes is currently one of the most popular and fastest-growing container orchestration and management systems, Lacework researchers decided to drill down into some of the issues related to the use of these dashboards in public clouds. Although Kubernetes comes with security features like default SSL use and default authentication, Lacework researchers discovered many open Kubernetes dashboards that were still in the process of being set up; dashboards with no authentication; dashboards that could be brute-forced and those that were leaking information about the organization.

Researchers also discovered 38 servers running a container health check service called "healthz" for Kubernetes environments, live on the Internet with no authentication at all. Besides potentially giving attackers a way to potentially perform full remote code execution capabilities, the app also provides a way to monitor workloads and stop them from running via the dashboard.

The data highlights the need for organizations to follow fundamental security best practices when deploying containers in the public cloud. Examples include protecting them behind a proxy, using multifactor authentication and role-based models to control access, and enforcing the use of SSL, Hubbard says. Limiting the scope of what you can do via a management interface is also a good idea. For example, it is not a great idea to have one management hub for all workloads because if one pod is compromised, all workloads get put at risk, he says.

"The general theme of our discoveries is that there needs to be a bridge in communication, process, and technology between DevOps and security," Hubbard notes. "The operating model here is very different and that needs to be acknowledged."

Related Contents:

  

 

Top industry experts will offer a range of information and insight on who the bad guys are – and why they might be targeting your enterprise. Click for more information

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

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Tips for the Aftermath of a Cyberattack
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  4/17/2019
Former Student Admits to USB Killer Attack
Dark Reading Staff 4/18/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
5 Emerging Cyber Threats to Watch for in 2019
Online attackers are constantly developing new, innovative ways to break into the enterprise. This Dark Reading Tech Digest gives an in-depth look at five emerging attack trends and exploits your security team should look out for, along with helpful recommendations on how you can prevent your organization from falling victim.
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-11332
PUBLISHED: 2019-04-18
MKCMS 5.0 allows remote attackers to take over arbitrary user accounts by posting a username and e-mail address to ucenter/repass.php, which triggers e-mail transmission with the password, as demonstrated by 123456.
CVE-2019-9161
PUBLISHED: 2019-04-18
WAC on the Sangfor Sundray WLAN Controller version 3.7.4.2 and earlier has a Remote Code Execution issue allowing remote attackers to achieve full access to the system, because shell metacharacters in the nginx_webconsole.php Cookie header can be used to read an etc/config/wac/wns_cfg_admin_detail.x...
CVE-2019-11015
PUBLISHED: 2019-04-18
A vulnerability was found in the MIUI OS version 10.1.3.0 that allows a physically proximate attacker to bypass Lockscreen based authentication via the Wallpaper Carousel application to obtain sensitive Clipboard data and the user's stored credentials (partially). This occurs because of paste access...
CVE-2019-11331
PUBLISHED: 2019-04-18
Network Time Protocol (NTP), as specified in RFC 5905, uses port 123 even for modes where a fixed port number is not required, which makes it easier for remote attackers to conduct off-path attacks.
CVE-2019-9160
PUBLISHED: 2019-04-18
WAC on the Sangfor Sundray WLAN Controller version 3.7.4.2 and earlier has a backdoor account allowing a remote attacker to login to the system via SSH (on TCP port 22345) and escalate to root (because the password for root is the WebUI admin password concatenated with a static string).