Собственно, лучше данный материал читать в оригинале, в котором раскрывается некоторая суть последних нападок на уязвимые места разных брендов: Hikvison, Dahua, XM, TVT и др.
Here's somecurrent information on the recent 'wave of DVR attacks' (as
documented by IPVM.com and others). I'm hoping it will facilitate the
diagnosing of symptoms of malfunctioning devices.
Attacks against Hikvision units:
* Common logins (12345, 654321, 111111 etc) are attempted via common web
interface ports through the PSIA API. If successful, the unit's network
settings are randomized, and if this does not disconnect the unit then
a factory reset is attempted. The symptoms are either a device which
has lost its usual IP, or a factory reset unit.
* If the above attack does not work, the recently disclosed Montecrypto
authentication bypass (CVE-2017-7921, ICSA-17-124-01) is attempted.
Under this condition only a factory reset is carried out. The symptoms
in this case are a factory reset device.
* If the unit has an exposed telnetd interface, some (to my knowledge
0-day, no CVE exists) attacks are attempted which will either brick or
fork bomb the unit, or prevent it from booting up at next reboot. The
symptoms of this attack vary and are very firmware dependent.
Attacks against Dahua units:
* 'Bashis Generation 2 and 3' authentication bypasses (CVE-2017-7927,
ICSA-17-124-02) are attempted against the web interface. The first
viable-looking account in the userlist is targeted (usually 888888).
If login is successful, camera settings are tampered with to dim the
feeds and display "HACKED" as a watermark. Recently some feeds will
also get the text "UPGRADE" and "FIRMWARE" for additional clarity.
Unit's network settings are tampered with in an attempt to disconnect
the vulnerable unit from the WAN.
* If unit has an exposed telnetd interface some well-known backdoor
account logins (CVE-2013-3612) are attempted, and on successful login
the unit will be bricked. The symptoms in this case will be a bricked
device, all partitions overwritten with random data.
* If port 6789's or 19058's management interface is open to the WAN an
attempt is made to extract the userlist from the data port 37777
(CVE-2013-6117). If a hash is successfully extracted an attempt to
reverse it is carried out (CVE-2013-3615). If hash reversing isn't
successful or port 37777 isn't exploitable then common logins are used
instead. On successful management interface login the unit will be
bricked. The symptoms in this case will be a bricked device, with all
partitions overwritten with random data. Although these vulnerabilities
are now 4 years old there are still sadly some new units appearing
Attacks against XiongMai units (often sold as whitelabeled/noname DVRs):
* Login and password hash is extracted via CVE-2017-7577. If successful
an attempt is made to reverse the hash (which is similarily weak as
Dahua CVE-2013-3615), and some further web commands are carried out
which attempt to tamper with the camera settings through the dvrcmd
API. If the unit has exposed its management interface on port 9527 to
the WAN the reversed hash will be used to log in and attempt to brick
the unit (approx 70% success rate), or tamper with its network settings
to disconnect it from the WAN.
* If the unit has an exposed telnetd interface some well-known backdoor
account logins are attempted, and if successful the unit will be
* If unit is still online after approx 90 minutes then a (to my knowledge
an unknown buffer overflow vulnerability) is used to crash the unit's
daemons non-stop for the next 5-8 hours. This is done in an attempt to
encourage the owner to manually reboot the unit to clear any resident
malware and hopefully re-expose its vulnerable telnetd interface on
The symptoms of the above XiongMai attacks vary. The unit might be
bricked (all partitions overwritten) outright, or it could be in a
constant restart cycle (which might look like the unit is constantly
rebooting but it's just restarting the crashing server process). In
this case it's best to unplug the device from the Internet before
rebooting it as the reboot might expose its telnetd to a bricking
Attacks against TVT units (whitelabeled, many vendors):
* RCE is attempted via the web interface (EDB-ID 39596). If vulnerable
the unit will be bricked and partitions overwritten with random data.
Attacks against Hanbang Gaoke units (typically branded 'Smart DVR'):
* CVE-2017-14335 is attempted to reset the admin password. If web login
is successful, the unit's disk is formatted, the network settings are
tampered with to disconnect it from the WAN, and the watermark
overlays of the first 4 cameras are updated to say "HACKED"
Symptoms and behaviors of some common IP camera-specific attacks:
Attacks against Avtech units:
* Authentication bypass (EDB-ID 40500) is attempted via the web
interface. If login is successful bricking is attempted via associated
RCEs, and if these are unsuccessful the camera's network settings are
scrambled to disconnect it from the WAN. Symptoms range from unit being
bricked (partitions overwritten with random data) or the camera losing
its usual IP.
* As a fallback CVE-2013-4981 is attempted in order to simply crash the
unit until it's manually rebooted.
Attacks against Wificam units (whitelabeled, many vendors):
* CVE-2017-8225 is attempted via the web interface to extract device
configuration. On successful login bricking is attempted via associated
RCEs, and if these are unsuccessful the unit's network settings are
tampered with in an attempt to disconnect it. If the unit is still
online (this happens for approx 15% of units) some additional camera
settings are tampered with in a bid to get the owner's attention (for
example camera's PTZ is configured to endlessly patrol up and down).
My botnet was originally designed to disable systems infected with IoT
and router malware (such as Mirai) so there are payloads for a wide range
of devices but the above are currently the most commonly executed NVR and
camera payloads by far. I'm estimating over 1.1m units affected with the
above payloads since mid-September, and that includes 564k Hikvisions and
379k Dahuas. That may sound like a lot for three weeks but the numbers
pale in comparison to the poorly secured consumer ISP and telco networks
which are still the primary threat. It's in any case noteworthy that so
many vulnerable units were easily accessible on the Internet months after
the manufacturers issued security bulletins and patches. The current
methodology for getting critical security patches to these devices is
clearly dangerously ineffective.
I strongly recommend that any IoT devices such as NVRs and IP cameras are
protected behind a VPN or firewall rather than placed directly on the
Internet. Changing the public listening port of a vulnerable device will
only delay the inevitable and it will sooner or later pose a threat to
the rest of the Internet.
I'm sorry for the inconvenience that has been caused, and I hope this
information helps. I keep seeing postings on CCTV forums where people
describe exact symptoms of these attacks, and in all cases the solution
(and prevention) would simply have been to protect the vulnerable devices
from open Internet access.
As a final thought I believe much of the current IoT security mess could
be fixed or at least significantly improved by establishing badly secured
devices as 'attractive nuisances.' Victims of DDoS with solid legal
support (such as Akamai or Verisign) could in theory accelerate the
matter through our courts (think of your bandwidth savings in 2017 as my
contribution towards your legal costs ). There's generally no doubt
regarding the origin of Layer 7 attacks and all it would take would be
two or three precedents against a negligent device owner to start
changing the liability landscape. Whether or not it's the device owner
or the device manufacturer who actually owns the (liability) problem is
best determined on a case-by-case basis.
http://depastedihrn3jtw.onion.link/show ... 5ec32b1e6f
Раздел содержит статьи по различным тематикам: безопасность и пр.
1 сообщение • Страница 1 из 1