Live data from Hacker News

Your PBX has been hacked

cringely.com

31–40 of 63 posts

Re: Your PBX has been hacked

#31
>They are operating from overseas and can’t be traced.

Not to ad-hominem, by this guy doesn't know what he's talking about. (I've seen his posts before.)

The real problem is that no one cares to push any investigations. I've had many many cases of customers sending "illegal" calls through my network. It's not my customers, it's someone down the line. I'm not going to do anything without a warrant. And when an upstream vendor gets a complaint, you know what they ask for, every single time? "Please block this traffic."

I've even written back and told them, hey, if this is oh-so-serious, please have your customer follow up. Have them get a subpoena, court order, etc. They never do. No one cares.

Even with fake IRS calls, the "investigator" wouldn't bother doing the paperwork. The FCC doesn't seem to care either (look at their moronic anti robo dialing contest). The FCC has teeth, they're just very selectively deployed.

Oh, you can't go back to knowing who is allowed to send what number. Things are too mixed up, and it'd break many services. Including many uses of 9-1-1. It's far more difficult than, for instance, preventing spoofed IP source addresses.

If the FCC really wanted to fix it, they just need to do so. Start fining and being aggressive. Actually go after things, hunt the money down.

Finally, if you're relying on caller ID as anything other than a weak hint of authentication, you're doing it wrong, full stop.

Re: Your PBX has been hacked

#32
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's only because we let that system be gamed. It doesn't have to be that way . Telcos always know who they're billing for a call; they have the capability to make caller ID reliable.

That's not true. Phone companies have to pay fees when they have to pass a phone call through their telco to another. They have entire routing table fees involved and the telcos will pass traffic through the cheapest routes. That's why a call route can go through one set of routing in the morning but by the evening it can go a completely different way, it's cheaper the second time around. The fees are constantly chan…

A good handful of the larger telcos don't bother with least cost routing tables, and will instead just send all their domestic traffic straight through their own networks. The route quality tends to be much higher when they do that.

Re: Your PBX has been hacked

#33

It would be great if there were a * 69 type system that all the carriers supported (i.e. was imposed by the FCC) where dialing * 7786 (* SPAM) or something would flag the previous incoming call as unsolicited spam/scam and allow you to leave a voicemail with the FCC describing what happened. Hopefully the metadata would be fresh enough in the moment that they could meaningfully record the actual route of the call as…

CDRs are kept for quite a while, so it's possible/easy to track these calls down. There are a bunch of intermediaries (I ran one), and each time you need to get them to release customer information. The FCC doesn't care enough; no one investigates.

Re: Your PBX has been hacked

#34

Phone numbers are going to (eventually) disappear. They are inefficient, hard to remember and not human-friendly (they are great for computer-based routing :P ). Easier thing we can do, is to map them down like we do it with IPs and domain names, but as usual, this is far from being a practical solution. Best think is to let conventional telephony die and VoIP take over its place.

> map them down like we do it with IPs and domain names We have been able to map phone numbers to SIP URIs for a long time with E.164 ENUM. Numbers are a hassle, but there's nothing preventing numbers from living alongside proper URIs today. > let conventional telephony die and VoIP take over its place. Many places are still circuit-switched at the last mile, whether over landline or cellular. We can't turn off the P…

> We have been able to map phone numbers to SIP URIs for a long time with E.164 ENUM

yes, because dialing 3.0.3.3.8.4.0.3.5.5.1.2.5.e164.arpa is super easy to do.

I was talking about a proper solution, not patching an existing one.

> We can't turn off the PSTN in favor of VoIP until everybody has switched over

Exactly, but we have to start at some point. We have been doing phone calls for more than 100 years, and it remained practically unchanged since then.

Re: Your PBX has been hacked

#35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, because voip has a reputation for sounding great and being reliable. (/s)

Done well, yes, it does. Just about any corporate call these days is going to be going over VoIP because it provides so much more flexibility. Just because a cheap ISP provides crappy VoIP doesn't mean the system is fundamentally flawed.

Maybe with dedicated fiber links that carry no other traffic, sure. But the vast, vast majority of voip routes tend not to measure up to their circuit switched counterparts. Why do you think things like T.38 and RFC-2833 exist?

Re: Your PBX has been hacked

#36

Phone numbers are going to (eventually) disappear. They are inefficient, hard to remember and not human-friendly (they are great for computer-based routing :P ). Easier thing we can do, is to map them down like we do it with IPs and domain names, but as usual, this is far from being a practical solution. Best think is to let conventional telephony die and VoIP take over its place.

Right, because voip has a reputation for sounding great and being reliable. (/s)

If you do Skype or WhatsApp you can prove yourself wrong.

No one is saying VoIP is as reliable as PSTN. Not even mobile (GSM, CDMA, etc.) is.

Re: Your PBX has been hacked

#37
Voip security seems to be non-existant in practice. I recently spent some time in popular Voip forums because of a planned roll-out here and heard a lot of concerning things. It seems no one has any idea how firewalls work (Voip needs both TCP and UDP) and they just leave listening ports open to the world, instead of locking them down to their SIP trunk provider. Asterisk, and others, by default handle anonymous calls so anyone able top contact the voip port on your server can ring phones. Voicemail and automated attendant hacks are everywhere. The laziness of the community to handle these is frightening, not to mention none of this stuff was built with a security-first mindset, so every fix is just plugging another hole. There will always be more holes in Asterisk based systems.

Every PBX is just a copy of the old school analog PBX systems, so everything is ugly and a configuration nightmare. I'm not even sure if its even possible to secure these things. PBX's have all the liabilities of the POTS system and a TCP/IP system. Obscure dial presses and IVR hackers are everywhere. No one really understands this stuff and making sure an attacker can't break out of the IVR is actually fairly difficult as these things are designed to do their best to route calls and there are so many ways to do that.

The most popular PBX is FreePBX which runs on a dated CentOS distro where using yum to update breaks things, so everyone waits for a shell script released by Schmooze to do package updates. Of course, they will not be as fast as the distro mirrors so you have to wait for your managed updated while the hackers are loose with exploits for your platform. Then hope to Alexander Grahame Bell that the script doesn't break the Jenga-like system that is Asterisk-based PBX's. Spoiler: they usually do.

Encryption is borderline non-existant as anything that can interfere with the precious jitter and latency limitations of voip is disregarded, so everything is plain-text and open to trivial sniffing. No IPS/IDS out of the box. No botnet filtering out of the box. No captchas on logins for users. No SELinux. No modsecurity. No OSSEC. No nothing really, these distos are not made by people who grok security. They seem to be made by ex-big iron phone cowboys who came from managed Cisco and Avaya environs and think linux is a magical unhackable black box. Spoiler: it isnt.

I was going to write a security guide for the FreePBX distro but gave up when any little change broke something. Other than seriously firewalling these things off behind something that can run IPS/IDS and having Voip on its own vlan with nothing else, there's not much you can do. They're really delicate and easy to hack.

Lastly, in regards to the article, there is zero proof that all these scammers are all using stolen voip servers. They probably are in some cases, but its trivial to sign up with an international provider and make calls from Mumbai to the USA for pennies per minute. The tolls are trivial compared to what you can get just out of one person scammed. Most hacked boxes seem to be lone hackers getting free long distance or small operators reselling that long distance to shady-market buyers using bitcoin.

Re: Your PBX has been hacked

#38
post #14
post #3

I've been wondering increasingly often over the past few years why we tolerate a phone network that allows for caller ID spoofing. I don't see how a system analogous to BCP38 would have any significant downsides, and there's a huge demand for anything that stems the rising tide of fraudulent robocalls.

There are significant downsides to technically prohibiting caller ID spoofing. First, you would no longer be able to preserve caller ID when forwarding calls. Consider how much less useful Google Voice would have been if you couldn't see the caller ID of calls forwarded to you. Second, in VoIP, outgoing calls (termination) and incoming calls (origination) are completely decoupled services. This is really nice because…

As a Google Voice user, the downside would be sad but totally worth it if it meant I could have GV accurately screen my calls. I could still get full caller ID information for GV calls received through VoIP, and when receiving calls through POTS I could at least know that the call is from somebody I'm willing to take calls from.

The other use case applies pretty much only to people I don't want to hear from in the first place, so I have no sympathy for how it would hurt their bottom line.

Re: Your PBX has been hacked

#39
post #29

This article is making all sorts of illogical conclusions from the stories it's telling. First, how was the company hacked "through their corporate phone system"? They were hacked through social engineering and malware. The phone network was just used for reconnaissance. I'm sure hackers have been mining phone networks for decades. Not that this story isn't interesting, but the conclusion doesn't lead from the tale.…

That depends on the phone system. Asterisk isn't particularly reliable; it actually crashes at 100 concurrent calls. If you're talking about a good CO switch like a 5ESS or DMS-100, they're extremely reliable, well engineered machines. They consistently meet and exceed five nines reliability.

Not that I have any love for Asterisk, but modern versions can handle that load. As can FreeSWITCH despite its... interesting... threading model, as can OpenSIPS. On top of that, who cares what a single process can run? It's better to run one per core anyways. I had several servers, each running several FS instances and scaling wasn't really an issue.

I even ran a 5 nines 9-1-1 service off Asterisk, as embarrassing as that is. We missed one call in 18 months during a hard maintenance cutover, but handled it manually, but of course it was only one part and relied on the rest of the PSTN.

With a SIP proxy in an HA setup, almost surely the biggest downtime is going to be operator error or IP connectivity issues. Or someone changing their signalling subtly, but OTOH 5ESS and DMS aren't totally identical in behavior either.

(Though fair enough, the "software" guys haven't shown the same uptimes, overall, as the old style switching, true.)

Re: Your PBX has been hacked

#40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Done well, yes, it does. Just about any corporate call these days is going to be going over VoIP because it provides so much more flexibility. Just because a cheap ISP provides crappy VoIP doesn't mean the system is fundamentally flawed.

Maybe with dedicated fiber links that carry no other traffic, sure. But the vast, vast majority of voip routes tend not to measure up to their circuit switched counterparts. Why do you think things like T.38 and RFC-2833 exist?

> vast majority of voip routes tend not to measure up to their circuit switched counterparts

That's because circuit switching is literally setting up a wired connection between two points.

Good luck trying to be that reliable with a population the size of the Internet, and if you can, good luck being able to pay and maintain an infrastructure of that size.

> T.38 and RFC-2833 exist

Really? The last time I sent a fax was 2006.

Post reply on HN