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.

Vulnerabilities / Threats

4/19/2018
11:30 AM
Connect Directly
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
100%
0%

First Public Demo of Data Breach via IoT Hack Comes to RSAC

At RSA Conference, senior researchers will show how relatively unskilled attackers can steal personally identifiable information without coming into contact with endpoint security tools.

RSA CONFERENCE 2018 – San Francisco – Many security professionals acknowledge that Internet of Things (IoT) devices have the potential to be an avenue into their enterprise networks — but for most, breach-by-refrigerator or DDoS-by-coffeepot is a theoretical flight of fancy and not a genuine threat. That might change Thursday, when researchers will present here the first public demonstration of an IoT hack resulting in a breach of personally identifiable information.  

The vice president of research, M. Carlton, and chief technology officer, Stephen Ridley, of IoT security company Senrio will present "Lateral Attacks between Connected Devices in Action" on the RSA Sandbox's IoT stage Thursday. 

"'Chained attacks on IoT security' — it's only been uttered as this platitude," says Ridley, "but have you actually seen a camera get popped" and used to compromise other systems?

"We all know IoT is vulnerable," says Carlton. "We don't all know what the impact of one vulnerable IoT device in an enterprise can be. ... It is a profound impact."

This particular attack can also be a danger to organizations with good security measures in place. In the demo, the IoT device need not be directly connected to the target network device. It doesn't require sophisticated hacking skills — Metasploit tools or the Linux command line will suffice. 

And the attacker never interacts with the endpoint, where most enterprises invest most of their security protections. As the Senrio team puts it, by staying away from the endpoint, the attacker doesn't need to come up against Carbon Black or CrowdStrike.

"This could be done on a company that has spent millions on security," says Ridley. "If I was a bad guy, I'd be doing nothing but IoT. Straight up." 

The attack begins with an exploit of a surveillance camera via the Devil's Ivy vulnerability — a remote code execution vulnerability in an open source gSOAP library that was discovered by the Senrio team last summer. A patch for the vulnerability already exists but was not applied to this camera model — and that's not unusual. 

"In the IoT world, most patches do not get applied," says Ridley. That's due in part to the complexity of the IoT supply chain and the fact that most organizations do not know what IoT devices are connected to their network in the first place.

Once the camera is compromised, the attackers then have a bird's-eye view of an employee at his workstation and the items on his desk — which include a router and a network access server (NAS). The attackers can then watch the user's keystrokes when logging in to the NAS.

The attackers then send a request to the router to obtain its exact model number (so it can retrieve the proper exploit for it), which the router obligingly sends. 

The exploited router sends the attackers encrypted text containing the end user's concatenated username and password. Then, using Rainbow Tables, the attackers can reverse the hash function and determine the administrator credentials for the router. (In this case, username: admin and password: admin.) 

With those credentials in hand, the attackers have full access to the router, which allows them to, among other things, change network settings — which thereby lets them open a secure SSH communication to the NAS and enjoy privileged access to all of the files it contains. 

Owning the NAS, the attackers can thus access all manner of sensitive data, from financial records to personally identifiable information. They copy it and exfiltrate it back through the router, through the video camera, and back home to the attackers.  

How can enterprises defend against attacks like these? Carlton takes a deep breath. 

"First, find what [IoT] devices are on your network," she says. "Then we'll talk."    

 Related content:

 

Interop ITX 2018

Join Dark Reading LIVE for an intensive Security Pro Summit at Interop ITX and learn from the industry’s most knowledgeable IT security experts. Check out the agenda here. Register with Promo Code DR200 and save $200.

Sara Peters is Senior Editor at Dark Reading and formerly the editor-in-chief of Enterprise Efficiency. Prior that she was senior editor for the Computer Security Institute, writing and speaking about virtualization, identity management, cybersecurity law, and a myriad ... View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
The Problem with Proprietary Testing: NSS Labs vs. CrowdStrike
Brian Monkman, Executive Director at NetSecOPEN,  7/19/2019
How Attackers Infiltrate the Supply Chain & What to Do About It
Shay Nahari, Head of Red-Team Services at CyberArk,  7/16/2019
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-2019-10102
PUBLISHED: 2019-07-22
The Linux Foundation ONOS 1.15.0 and ealier is affected by: Improper Input Validation. The impact is: The attacker can remotely execute any commands by sending malicious http request to the controller. The component is: Method runJavaCompiler in YangLiveCompilerManager.java. The attack vector is: ne...
CVE-2019-10102
PUBLISHED: 2019-07-22
Frog CMS 1.1 is affected by: Cross Site Scripting (XSS). The impact is: Cookie stealing, Alert pop-up on page, Redirecting to another phishing site, Executing browser exploits. The component is: Snippets.
CVE-2019-10102
PUBLISHED: 2019-07-22
Ilias 5.3 before 5.3.12; 5.2 before 5.2.21 is affected by: Cross Site Scripting (XSS) - CWE-79 Type 2: Stored XSS (or Persistent). The impact is: Execute code in the victim's browser. The component is: Assessment / TestQuestionPool. The attack vector is: Cloze Test Text gap (attacker) / Corrections ...
CVE-2019-9959
PUBLISHED: 2019-07-22
The JPXStream::init function in Poppler 0.78.0 and earlier doesn't check for negative values of stream length, leading to an Integer Overflow, thereby making it possible to allocate a large memory chunk on the heap, with a size controlled by an attacker, as demonstrated by pdftocairo.
CVE-2019-4236
PUBLISHED: 2019-07-22
A IBM Spectrum Protect 7.l client backup or archive operation running for an HP-UX VxFS object is silently skipping Access Control List (ACL) entries from backup or archive if there are more than twelve ACL entries associated with the object in total. As a result, it could allow a local attacker to ...