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

9/2/2016
09:00 AM
Connect Directly
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Researchers Uncover Car Infotainment Vulnerability

Should an automobile manufacturer have to release a patch for a feature that they never deployed? A newly discovered vulnerability in MirrorLink's infotainment software may force an answer.

A newly uncovered vulnerability in the MirrorLink infotainment software is forcing lots of hard questions about who's ultimately responsible for security in the automobile supply chain.

Damon McCoy, an assistant professor of computer science and engineering at NYU's Tandon School of Engineering, and a group of students at George Mason University found vulnerabilities in MirrorLink, a standard tool for connecting smartphones to in-vehicle infotainment (IVI) systems. Some carmakers disable MirrorLink because they use a different standard or because their version of MirrorLink is a prototype that can be activated later.

MirrorLink was created in 2011 and is overseen by the Car Connectivity Consortium (CCC), which represents 80% of the world's automakers. It's the first industry standard for smartphones-IVI connectivity; Apple has since deployed CarPlay and Google has Android Auto.

"Tuners," a segment of the OEM market that customizes automobiles, are able to activate MirrorLink, thanks to a helpful YouTube instructional video that's already logged more than 60,000 views, according to McCoy. Once active, MirrorLink then allows drivers to use the apps on their IVI -- the touchscreen, audio speakers, and the in-car microphone. "Drivers get improved functionality," McCoy says. "This is something tuners do all the time."

Unfortunately, this tuner activation of MirrorLink also renders the car vulnerable to access by third-parties, who could then mess with the software for the anti-lock braking system, for example, or other critical safety features. The vulnerability was detailed in a paper presented at last month's USENIX Workshop on Offensive Technologies in Austin, Texas. The research was funded by General Motors, the National Science Foundation, and the Department of Homeland Security.

So far, McCoy and his fellow researchers haven't publicly identified the carmaker or the OEM/tuner but are in contact with them. "We don't want to name and shame … it's likely a systemic problem," he said, since manufacturers normally sell to multiple OEMs.

Alan Ewing, president of the CCC, said the group has just begun its analysis of the vulnerability. "The question coming up as we go through the paper is whether this is a vulnerability of MirrorLink proper, or a bad implementation by an auto OEM that left open and stripped out security information that made the hack possible," Ewing says.

While emphasizing that CCC takes security extremely seriously, there is no patch planned for MirrorLink at present, he says.

"We're always about improving, so if there's something that needs fixing in the MirrorLink implementation, we'll close that gap," Ewing says. "But at the end of the day, if it avoids our certification, is implemented incorrectly, and exposes some bad code, we can't prevent that kind of misuse."

The vulnerability and the auto industry's complex supply chain muddy the issue of who's responsible for security or issuing a fix. "Does the manufacturer have to release a patch for a feature that they never deployed?" McCoy says. The answer isn't clear-cut.

One of the researchers' recommendations was for the auto industry to quarantine apps for cars in the same way that apps are confined or isolated with smartphones. "Ideally, the OEMs could build similar sandbox containment technology for these apps," McCoy says.

Regardless of the fix, there needs to be some sort of industry gatekeeper that leverages those further down the supply chain to build secure systems from the start and correct vulnerabilities as they're found, McCoy adds. "I don't know if that means the CCC needs to audit suppliers who use MirrorLink, just as Apple and Google audit suppliers to make sure they all conform to standards for security," he says. And if they find that one of them skips some of the security measures, they should say it doesn't confirm to the protocol.

Related Content:

 

Terry Sweeney is a Los Angeles-based writer and editor who has covered technology, networking, and security for more than 20 years. He was part of the team that started Dark Reading and has been a contributor to The Washington Post, Crain's New York Business, Red Herring, ... View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Mobile Banking Malware Up 50% in First Half of 2019
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  1/17/2020
Active Directory Needs an Update: Here's Why
Raz Rafaeli, CEO and Co-Founder at Secret Double Octopus,  1/16/2020
New Attack Campaigns Suggest Emotet Threat Is Far From Over
Jai Vijayan, Contributing Writer,  1/16/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Current Issue
The Year in Security: 2019
This Tech Digest provides a wrap up and overview of the year's top cybersecurity news stories. It was a year of new twists on old threats, with fears of another WannaCry-type worm and of a possible botnet army of Wi-Fi routers. But 2019 also underscored the risk of firmware and trusted security tools harboring dangerous holes that cybercriminals and nation-state hackers could readily abuse. Read more.
Flash Poll
How Enterprises are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
How Enterprises are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
Organizations have invested in a sweeping array of security technologies to address challenges associated with the growing number of cybersecurity attacks. However, the complexity involved in managing these technologies is emerging as a major problem. Read this report to find out what your peers biggest security challenges are and the technologies they are using to address them.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-5216
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-23
In Secure Headers (RubyGem secure_headers), a directive injection vulnerability is present in versions before 3.9.0, 5.2.0, and 6.3.0. If user-supplied input was passed into append/override_content_security_policy_directives, a newline could be injected leading to limited header injection. Upon seei...
CVE-2020-5217
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-23
In Secure Headers (RubyGem secure_headers), a directive injection vulnerability is present in versions before 3.8.0, 5.1.0, and 6.2.0. If user-supplied input was passed into append/override_content_security_policy_directives, a semicolon could be injected leading to directive injection. This could b...
CVE-2020-5223
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-23
In PrivateBin versions 1.2.0 before 1.2.2, and 1.3.0 before 1.3.2, a persistent XSS attack is possible. Under certain conditions, a user provided attachment file name can inject HTML leading to a persistent Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability. The vulnerability has been fixed in PrivateBin v1.3...
CVE-2019-20399
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-23
A timing vulnerability in the Scalar::check_overflow function in Parity libsecp256k1-rs before 0.3.1 potentially allows an attacker to leak information via a side-channel attack.
CVE-2020-7915
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-22
An issue was discovered on Eaton 5P 850 devices. The Ubicacion SAI field allows XSS attacks by an administrator.