This security camera was infected by malware 98 seconds after it was plugged in
1–10 of 37 posts
Re: This security camera was infected by malware 98 seconds after it was plugged in
#2I wonder how many of these cheap things are going to get plugged in this holiday season with default login/passwords.
Re: This security camera was infected by malware 98 seconds after it was plugged in
#3> Better-quality devices will almost certainly be better protected against this kind of thing, and may for example block all incoming traffic until they’re paired with another device and set up manually. Still, this is a good reminder that it really is a jungle out there.
This seems like a bold claim, unless they define "better quality".
Re: This security camera was infected by malware 98 seconds after it was plugged in
#4News flash: If you expose a device web-accessible port to an internet IP with no firewall and leave the default user name and password intact, it will get hacked.
Put your shit behind firewalls and change the default user name and password to something secure. This is common sense stuff, people. Port scanners have existed for ages.
Re: This security camera was infected by malware 98 seconds after it was plugged in
#5How would the malware even know that the camera was connected in? Especially if you're on a home network (which is firewalled / has NAT on).
I suspect that it must be the central server that this camera reports to that is infected, either directly, or indirectly with some program sitting at a nearby router listening for traffic.
Re: This security camera was infected by malware 98 seconds after it was plugged in
#6What is a good security camera? Who makes good ones?
I haven't been able to find a company who provides a quality POE device that allows me to control the feed into something like Zoneminder.
Do I have to use something more analog to be "safer" from something like this?
Re: This security camera was infected by malware 98 seconds after it was plugged in
#7Previous discussion on the original tweets: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12985974
Re: This security camera was infected by malware 98 seconds after it was plugged in
#8News flash: If you expose a device web-accessible port to an internet IP with no firewall and leave the default user name and password intact, it will get hacked. Put your shit behind firewalls and change the default user name and password to something secure. This is common sense stuff, people. Port scanners have existed for ages.
I was just wondering how 98 seconds compared to any device...
Re: This security camera was infected by malware 98 seconds after it was plugged in
#9How would the malware even know that the camera was connected in? Especially if you're on a home network (which is firewalled / has NAT on). I suspect that it must be the central server that this camera reports to that is infected, either directly, or indirectly with some program sitting at a nearby router listening for traffic.
Because the camera requests port forwarding from your firewall using UPnP. Now your mobile app connects directly to port 83785 and streams video from the camera without any firewall hassles. The problem now is that hackers can also connect to port 83785 and exploit unpatched security holes.
If a firmware update exists, its probably too technically challenging for Joe User to find and install. For a lot of these devices, there isn't even a published fix. These manufacturers are just rebranding some generic camera from a larger manufacturer or using the same camera and IoT guts and putting them into different cases. These companies probably don't even have a software developer on staff who has access to these firmwares, just perhaps a binary blob, assuming they have any software people on staff at all.
Re: This security camera was infected by malware 98 seconds after it was plugged in
#10It almost looks like the camera producer/someone from an internal team was responsible for either giving out backdoor or actually infecting the camera...