This Week In Security: IoT In The Hot Tub, App Double Fail, And FreeBSD BadBeacon

[Eaton Zveare] purchased a Jacuzzi hot tub, and splurged for the SmartTub add-on, which connects the whirlpool to the internet so you can control temperature, lights, etc from afar. He didn’t realize he was about to discover a nightmare of security problems. Because as we all know, in IoT, the S stands for security. In this case, the registration email came from smarttub.io, so it was natural to pull up that URL in a web browser to see what was there. The page presented a login prompt, so [Eaton] punched in the credentials he had just generated. “Unauthorized” Well that’s not surprising, but what was very odd was the flash of a dashboard that appeared just before the authorization complaint. Could that have been real data that was unintentionally sent? A screen recorder answered that question, revealing that there was indeed a table loaded up with valid-looking data.

Digging around in the page’s JavaScript comes up with the login flow. The page uses the Auth0 service to handle logins, and that service sends back an access token. The page sends that access token right back to the Auth0 service to get user privileges. If the logged in user isn’t an admin, the redirect happens. However, we already know that some real data gets loaded. It appears that the limitations to data is all implemented on the client side, and the backend only requires a valid access token for data requests. What would happen if the response from Auth0 were modified? There are a few approaches to accomplish this, but he opted to use Fiddler. Rewrite the response so the front-end believes you’re an admin, and you’re in.

This approach seems to gain admin access to all of the SmartTub admin controls, though [Eaton] didn’t try actually making changes to see if he had write access, too. This was enough to demonstrate the flaw, and making changes would be flirting with that dangerous line that separates research from computer crime. The real problem started when he tried to disclose the vulnerability. SmartTub didn’t have a security contact, but an email to their support email address did elicit a reply asking for details. And after details were supplied, complete radio silence. Exasperated, he finally turned to Auth0, asking them to intervene. Their solution was to pull the plug on one of the two URL endpoints. Finally, after six months of trying to inform Jacuzzi and SmartTub of their severe security issues, both admin portals were secured.

Continue reading “This Week In Security: IoT In The Hot Tub, App Double Fail, And FreeBSD BadBeacon”

This Week In Security: Pacman, Hertzbleed, And The Death Of Internet Explorer

There’s not one, but two side-channel attacks to talk about this week. Up first is Pacman, a bypass for ARM’s Pointer Authentication Code. PAC is a protection built into certain ARM Processors, where a cryptographic hash value must be set correctly when pointers are updated. If the hash is not set correctly, the program simply crashes. The idea is that most exploits use pointer manipulation to achieve code execution, and correctly setting the PAC requires an explicit instruction call. The PAC is actually indicated in the unused bits of the pointer itself. The AArch64 architecture uses 64-bit values for addressing, but the address space is much less than 64-bit, usually 53 bits or less. This leaves 11 bits for the PAC value. Keep in mind that the application doesn’t hold the keys and doesn’t calculate this value. 11 bits may not seem like enough to make this secure, but keep in mind that every failed attempt crashes the program, and every application restart regenerate the keys.

What Pacman introduces is an oracle, which is a method to gain insight on data the attacker shouldn’t be able to see. In this case, the oracle works via speculation attacks, very similar to Meltdown and Spectre. The key is to attempt a protected pointer dereference speculatively, and to then observe the change in system state as a result. What you may notice is that this requires an attack to already be running code on the target system, in order to run the PAC oracle technique. Pacman is not a Remote Code Execution flaw, nor is it useful in gaining RCE.

One more important note is that an application has to have PAC support compiled in, in order to benefit from this protection. The platform that has made wide use of PAC is MacOS, as it’s a feature baked in to their M1 processor. The attack chain would likely start with a remote execution bug in an application missing PAC support. Once a foothold is established in uprivileged userspace, Pacman would be used as part of an exploit against the kernel. See the PDF paper for all the details.

Continue reading “This Week In Security: Pacman, Hertzbleed, And The Death Of Internet Explorer”

This Week In Security: For The Horde, Feature Not A Bug, And Confluence

If you roll way back through the history of open source webmail projects, you’ll find Horde, a groupware web application. First released in 1998 on Freshmeat, it gained some notoriety in early 2012 when it was discovered that the 3.0 release had been tampered with, and packages containing a backdoor had been shipped for three months. While this time around it isn’t an intentional backdoor, there is a very serious problem in the Horde webmail interface. Or more accurately, a pair of problems. The most serious is CVE-2022-30287, an RCE bug allowing an authenticated user to trigger code execution on the connected server.

The vulnerable element is the Turba address book module, which uses a PHP factory method to access a specific address book. The create() method has an interesting bit of code, that first checks the initialization value. If it’s a string, that value is understood as the name of the local address book to access. However, if the factory is initialized with an array, any of the address book drivers can be used, including the IMSP driver. IMSP fetches serialized data from remote servers, and deserializes it. And yes, PHP can have deserialization bugs, and this one runs code on the host.

But it’s not that bad, it’s only authenticated users, right? That would be bad enough, but that second bug is a Cross-site Request Forgery, CSRF, triggered by viewing an email. So on a vulnerable Horde server, any user viewing a malicious message would trigger RCE on the server. Oof. So let’s talk fixes. There is a new version of the Turba module that seems to fix the bugs, but it’s not clear that the actual Horde suite has pushed an update that includes it. So you may be on your own. As is pointed out on the Sonar Blog where the vulnerability was discovered, Horde itself seems to be essentially unmaintained at this point. Maybe time to consider migrating to a newer platform.
Continue reading “This Week In Security: For The Horde, Feature Not A Bug, And Confluence”

This Week In Security: Follina, Open Redirect RCE, And Annoyware

Depending on who you ask, there’s either 2 vulnerabilities at play in Follina, only one, or according to Microsoft a week ago, no security problem whatsoever. On the 27th of last month, a .docx file was uploaded to VirusTotal, and most of the tools there thought it was perfectly normal. That didn’t seem right to [@nao_sec], who raised the alarm on Twitter. It seems this suspicious file originated somewhere in Belarus, and it uses a series of tricks to run a malicious PowerShell script.
Continue reading “This Week In Security: Follina, Open Redirect RCE, And Annoyware”

This Week In Security: Good Faith, Easy Forgery, And I18N

There’s a danger in security research that we’ve discussed a few times before. If you discover a security vulnerability on a production system, and there’s no bug bounty, you’ve likely broken a handful of computer laws. Turn over the flaw you’ve found, and you’re most likely to get a “thank you”, but there’s a tiny chance that you’ll get charged for a computer crime instead. Security research in the US is just a little safer now, as the US Department of Justice has issued a new policy stating that “good-faith security research should not be charged.”

While this is a welcome infection of good sense, it would be even better for such a protection to be codified into law. The other caveat is that this policy only applies to federal cases in the US. Other nations, or even individual states, are free to bring charges. So while this is good news, continue to be careful. There are also some caveats about what counts as good-faith — If a researcher uses a flaw discovery to extort, it’s not good-faith.
Continue reading “This Week In Security: Good Faith, Easy Forgery, And I18N”

This Week In Security: IPhone Unpowered, Python Unsandboxed, And Wizard Spider Unmasked

As conspiracy theories go, one of the more plausible is that a cell phone could be running malicious firmware on its baseband processor, and be listening and transmitting data even when powered off. Nowadays, this sort of behavior is called a feature, at least if your phone is made by Apple, with their Find My functionality. Even with the phone off, the Bluetooth chip runs happily in a low-power state, making these features work. The problem is that this chip doesn’t do signed firmware. All it takes is root-level access to the phone’s primary OS to load a potentially malicious firmware image to the Bluetooth chip.

Researchers at TU Darmstadt in Germany demonstrated the approach, writing up a great paper on their work (PDF). There are a few really interesting possibilities this research suggests. The simplest is hijacking Apple’s Find My system to track someone with a powered down phone. The greater danger is that this could be used to keep surveillance malware on a device even through power cycles. Devices tend to be secured reasonably well against attacks from the outside network, and hardly at all from attacks originating on the chips themselves. Unfortunately, since unsigned firmware is a hardware limitation, a security update can’t do much to mitigate this, other than the normal efforts to prevent attackers compromising the OS.
Continue reading “This Week In Security: IPhone Unpowered, Python Unsandboxed, And Wizard Spider Unmasked”

This Week In Security: F5 Twitter PoC, Certifried, And Cloudflare Pages Pwned

F5’s BIG-IP platform has a Remote Code Execution (RCE) vulnerability: CVE-2022-1388. This one is interesting, because a Proof of Concept (PoC) was quickly reverse engineered from the patch and released on Twitter, among other places.

HORIZON3.ai researcher [James Horseman] wrote an explainer that sums up the issue nicely. User authentication is handled by multiple layers, one being a Pluggable Authentication Modules (PAM) module, and the other internally in a Java class. In practice this means that if the PAM module sees an X-F5-Auth-Token, it passes the request on to the Java code, which then validates the token to confirm it as authentic. If a request arrives at the Java service without this header, and instead the X-Forwarded-Host header is set to localhost, the request is accepted without authentication. The F5 authentication scheme isn’t naive, and a request without the X-F5-Auth-Token header gets checked by PAM, and dropped if the authentication doesn’t check out.

So where is the wiggle room that allows for a bypass? Yet another HTTP header, the Connection header. Normally this one only comes in two varieties, Connection: close and Connection: keep-alive. Really, this header is a hint describing the connection between the client and the edge proxy, and the contents of the Connection header is the list of other headers to be removed by a proxy. It’s essentially the list of headers that only apply to the connection over the internet. Continue reading “This Week In Security: F5 Twitter PoC, Certifried, And Cloudflare Pages Pwned”