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

1/12/2011
10:55 AM
50%
50%

Schwartz On Security: Hack My Ride

Car security exploits are fast, cheap, and out of control. Why don't automotive manufacturers do more to secure their vehicles?

What do car immobilizers, remote tire pressure gauges, and wireless car-key fobs have in common? Beyond the obvious automotive angle, they've all been hacked using relatively low-cost exploits.

Take car immobilizers and keyless entry systems. A group of Swiss researchers from ETH Zurich recently demonstrated an attack -- dubbed the Autoknacker in Swiss German -- against 10 recent car models from eight different manufacturers, all of which use passive keyless entry and start (PKES). Under this system, a key fob only needs to be physically near the car to deactivate the immobilizer, open the doors, and start the engine.

Here's where attackers come in: By using a pair of wireless antennas, they can rebroadcast the key fob's signal in nanoseconds to fool the car into thinking the driver is present. Furthermore, the antenna picking up the key fob's signal needs to be within only 8 meters (26 feet) of it, making the attack difficult to detect.

The Swiss researchers tested two attack scenarios. First, when a driver is in the supermarket, key fob in his pocket. Second, when the key is left inside a house -- but within range of the antenna -- and the car is parked outside. Using the two-antenna approach, all 10 cars were successfully hacked and driven away.

The total cost for the wireless attack, not including graduate students, ranged from $100 to $1,000, depending on the quality of the hardware used. Interestingly, the cryptography used to secure the fob-to-car communications didn't matter. The researchers were able to remotely fool all 10 cars simply by rebroadcasting the signal.

To block such attacks, the researchers suggest that car manufacturers add security checks to confirm that the key really is located next to the car. "I don't see a way around it," said research lead Srdjan Capkun, an assistant professor of computer science in the system security group at ETH Zurich, quoted in MIT's Technology Review. His group is working on new approaches to help.

While the Swiss researchers' attack doesn't require cracking the encryption keys used to secure the fob-to-car communications, that's also an option. According to New Scientist, security researchers have cracked the keys used by multiple types of key fobs, including the Hitag 2 encryption key from NXP Semiconductors present in many recent cars, although that isn't the only one that's been hacked.

"The proprietary encryption keys used to transmit data between the key fob, receiver, and engine are so poorly implemented on some cars that they are readily cracked," Ari Juels of RSA Labs told New Scientist. Notably, only a few car manufacturers use 128-bit Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) keys. The rest use 40- or 48-bit keys, which security experts now regard as ineffective. Semiconductor makers report that they already have stronger approaches, but it's difficult to convince car manufacturers to use them.

Ditto for wireless car tire pressure gauges. Last year, researchers found that the wireless networks built into many cars in the past three years don't perform authentication or input validation. Researchers thus found it easy to spoof a variety of inputs, such as sensor messages indicating a tire pressure failure. According to the researchers, "we validated this experimentally by triggering tire pressure warning messages in a moving vehicle from a customized software radio attack platform located in a nearby vehicle."

What's the end result of poor automotive information security practices? The next time you finish grocery shopping and find that your car's gone, you can ask: Was it the car crypto -- or lack thereof -- that did you in? Unless a Swiss PhD candidate is lurking in the parking lot, the answer is, probably not. When it comes to bang for buck, there are easier attacks.

But wouldn't it be nice if car manufacturers properly secured their vehicles, so that every new convenience or feature doesn't add another information security attack vector?

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 5/22/2020
The Problem with Artificial Intelligence in Security
Dr. Leila Powell, Lead Security Data Scientist, Panaseer,  5/26/2020
How an Industry Consortium Can Reinvent Security Solution Testing
Henry Harrison, Co-founder & Chief Technology Officer, Garrison,  5/21/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: This comment is waiting for review by our moderators.
Current Issue
How Cybersecurity Incident Response Programs Work (and Why Some Don't)
This Tech Digest takes a look at the vital role cybersecurity incident response (IR) plays in managing cyber-risk within organizations. Download the Tech Digest today to find out how well-planned IR programs can detect intrusions, contain breaches, and help an organization restore normal operations.
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-10737
PUBLISHED: 2020-05-27
A race condition was found in the mkhomedir tool shipped with the oddjob package in versions before 0.34.5 and 0.34.6 wherein, during the home creation, mkhomedir copies the /etc/skel directory into the newly created home and changes its ownership to the home's user without properly checking the hom...
CVE-2020-13622
PUBLISHED: 2020-05-27
JerryScript 2.2.0 allows attackers to cause a denial of service (assertion failure) because a property key query for a Proxy object returns unintended data.
CVE-2020-13623
PUBLISHED: 2020-05-27
JerryScript 2.2.0 allows attackers to cause a denial of service (stack consumption) via a proxy operation.
CVE-2020-13616
PUBLISHED: 2020-05-26
The boost ASIO wrapper in net/asio.cpp in Pichi before 1.3.0 lacks TLS hostname verification.
CVE-2020-13614
PUBLISHED: 2020-05-26
An issue was discovered in ssl.c in Axel before 2.17.8. The TLS implementation lacks hostname verification.