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.

Analytics

5/4/2006
04:45 AM
Connect Directly
Twitter
LinkedIn
Google+
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Yes, Virginia, VOIP Can Be Secure

A live demo at Interop shows that with app-level gateways, deep packet inspection, and VPN, VOIP can be hardened from attack

One of the biggest knocks on VOIP technology is its lack of security. But at the Interop show this week, a group of vendors and technicians has quietly been demonstrating secure, multivendor VOIP connections -- both from within the LAN and from remote users over a VPN.

The InteropLabs VOIP demo focuses on two major areas of security: protecting the SIP gateway from attack and supporting remote users connecting via a VPN. The demo shows that it is possible to support VOIP within the closed confines of a single enterprise, though it also exposes potential problems with network address port translation (NAPT) that will need to be solved in live deployments.

In the demo, border protection starts with a SIP-aware application layer gateway or deep packet inspection. During call setup, the phones negotiate the call parameters they are willing to accept and what UDP ports, or ephemeral ports, they will use for voice packets. A non-SIP-aware firewall can't handle the ephemeral ports, and the voice connection between the phones could never be completed.

As Craig Johnson, systems engineering manager for Check Point, explains, "the SIP firewall has to be session-aware so that when a call ends -- either through a hang-up or a time-out -- the ephemeral ports are closed. Otherwise, avenues for malicious activity like toll fraud are possible."

The SIP-aware firewall also can stop denial-of-service attacks, which bombard the SIP gateway with registration and call requests, effectively cutting off legitimate calls or sending malformed SIP packets to the SIP gateway.

In addition to supporting ephemeral ports, SIP-aware firewalls and routers -- especially in remote offices -- must also be aware of NAPT, rewriting both the UDP packets and the network information in the SIP packets. Unlike IPSec, SIP offers no standards for NAPT traversal. In SIP networks, NAPT is achieved through packet rewriting or by changing routes within the receiving phone's network. The former is the less intrusive option.

What about encryption?
The InteropLabs VOIP demonstration used IPSec and an SSL VPN to encrypt the traffic between the remote user and central LAN, but it did not include encryption of SIP and voice traffic. The IETF has drafted some standards for encryption of SIP and RTP, and some products, including Sipera's IPCS310, support TLS and secure RTP. But vendors and other experts disagree on the immediate need for VOIP encryption.

Executives at Nortel acknowledge that encrypting VOIP eventually will be necessary. But as Aziz Khadbai, general manager of Converged Nortel Networks, observes, "VOIP installations today are within closed networks managed by a single entity. In the context of an internal network, the need for encryption is less critical than if the traffic passes over untrusted networks."

Robert Moskowitz, senior technical director at ICSA Labs, disagrees. "The CSI/FBI study shows that 80 percent of [VOIP] attacks are from insiders," he says. "Consider the ease of SIP hijacking and the ease of header manipulation. It's easy to become a man-in-the-middle and effectively wiretap all VOIP communications." Moskowitz cites an article on Voipinder entitled "Examining Two Well-Known Attacks on VOIP," which demonstrates such an attack.

Experts say the decision on whether to encrypt VOIP depends on how the VOIP travels over the network, the enterprise's need for security, and the state of the building's physical security.

— Mike Fratto, Editor at Large, Dark Reading

Organizations mentioned in this story

  • Check Point Software Technologies Ltd. (Nasdaq: CHKP)
  • Computer Security Institute (CSI)
  • ICSA Labs
  • Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
  • Nortel Networks Ltd. (NYSE/Toronto: NT)
  • Sipera Systems

    Mike Fratto is a principal analyst at Current Analysis, covering the Enterprise Networking and Data Center Technology markets. Prior to that, Mike was with UBM Tech for 15 years, and served as editor of Network Computing. He was also lead analyst for InformationWeek Analytics ... View Full Bio

    Comment  | 
    Print  | 
    More Insights
  • Comments
    Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
    COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
    Dark Reading Staff 9/21/2020
    Hacking Yourself: Marie Moe and Pacemaker Security
    Gary McGraw Ph.D., Co-founder Berryville Institute of Machine Learning,  9/21/2020
    Startup Aims to Map and Track All the IT and Security Things
    Kelly Jackson Higgins, Executive Editor at Dark Reading,  9/22/2020
    Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
    White Papers
    Video
    Cartoon
    Current Issue
    Special Report: Computing's New Normal
    This special report examines how IT security organizations have adapted to the "new normal" of computing and what the long-term effects will be. Read it and get a unique set of perspectives on issues ranging from new threats & vulnerabilities as a result of remote working to how enterprise security strategy will be affected long term.
    Flash Poll
    How IT Security Organizations are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
    How IT Security Organizations are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
    The COVID-19 pandemic turned the world -- and enterprise computing -- on end. Here's a look at how cybersecurity teams are retrenching their defense strategies, rebuilding their teams, and selecting new technologies to stop the oncoming rise of online attacks.
    Twitter Feed
    Dark Reading - Bug Report
    Bug Report
    Enterprise Vulnerabilities
    From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
    CVE-2020-13991
    PUBLISHED: 2020-09-24
    vm/opcodes.c in JerryScript 2.2.0 allows attackers to hijack the flow of control by controlling a register.
    CVE-2020-15160
    PUBLISHED: 2020-09-24
    PrestaShop from version 1.7.5.0 and before version 1.7.6.8 is vulnerable to a blind SQL Injection attack in the Catalog Product edition page with location parameter. The problem is fixed in 1.7.6.8
    CVE-2020-15162
    PUBLISHED: 2020-09-24
    In PrestaShop from version 1.5.0.0 and before version 1.7.6.8, users are allowed to send compromised files. These attachments allowed people to input malicious JavaScript which triggered an XSS payload. The problem is fixed in version 1.7.6.8.
    CVE-2020-15843
    PUBLISHED: 2020-09-24
    ActFax Version 7.10 Build 0335 (2020-05-25) is susceptible to a privilege escalation vulnerability due to insecure folder permissions on %PROGRAMFILES%\ActiveFax\Client\, %PROGRAMFILES%\ActiveFax\Install\ and %PROGRAMFILES%\ActiveFax\Terminal\. The folder permissions allow "Full Control" t...
    CVE-2020-17365
    PUBLISHED: 2020-09-24
    Improper directory permissions in the Hotspot Shield VPN client software for Windows 10.3.0 and earlier may allow an authorized user to potentially enable escalation of privilege via local access. The vulnerability allows a local user to corrupt system files: a local user can create a specially craf...