Live data from Hacker News

Hacking millions of modems and investigating who hacked my modem

samcurry.net

241–250 of 282 posts

Re: Hacking millions of modems and investigating who hacked my modem

#241
> there were about 700 different API calls..

That's more API endpoints than some first tier public clouds, wow. For a modem.

Somebody wanted (and sorta deserves) promo..

But also not, because the whole platform turned out to be incredibly insecure! Egregious!!!

Re: Hacking millions of modems and investigating who hacked my modem

#242

What sucks about this situation is when your ISP forces you to use their modem or router. For example, I have AT&T fiber and it does some kind of 802.1X authentication with certificates to connect to their network. If they didn't do this, I could just plug any arbitrary device into the ONT. There are/were workarounds to this but I don't want to go through all those hoops to get online. Instead, I ended up disabling e…

The CPE AT&T router potentially getting hacked doesn't make much difference if you have your own router between your network and the AT&T network. Even if we removed the AT&T CPE router, you'd still be connecting to a black box you don't control that could be hacked or doing any number of inspections on your traffic.

It does matter since it lets an attacker be between your network and the internet. If that black box is a modem- yes it could be hacked, but (maybe luckily for me) the providers I've used don't expose many services from the modem on the public interface so it's much more difficult to compromise. You'd either have to come from the docsis network or the client network.

Re: Hacking millions of modems and investigating who hacked my modem

#243
post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you have the att fiber with the ONT separate from the modem, it's really easy to bypass 802.1X. Plug an unmanaged switch in between the modem and the ONT; let the modem auth; disconnect the modem. You'll likely need to do that again if the ONT reboots, but at least for me, ATT a UPS for the ONT, so reboot frequency should be low. Personally, I built up a rube goldberg of software and hardware with bypass nics so i…

How does that bypass 802.1x? Are the 802.1x packets are responded to by the official modem still? I was under the impression all packets were encrypted or signed with 802.1x, but Ive never had to implement or test it so I could be wrong.

802.1x is a secure login procedure, and then the port is open until link is dropped. There's no encryption or authentication per packet (it would be way too expensive), and if you put a switch between the ont and the modem, when you disconnect the modem, the ont doesn't see the link drop.

Managed switches or software ethernet bridges don't always propigate 802.1x packets, but unmanaged switches don't care.

Re: Hacking millions of modems and investigating who hacked my modem

#244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The CPE AT&T router potentially getting hacked doesn't make much difference if you have your own router between your network and the AT&T network. Even if we removed the AT&T CPE router, you'd still be connecting to a black box you don't control that could be hacked or doing any number of inspections on your traffic.

It does matter since it lets an attacker be between your network and the internet. If that black box is a modem- yes it could be hacked, but (maybe luckily for me) the providers I've used don't expose many services from the modem on the public interface so it's much more difficult to compromise. You'd either have to come from the docsis network or the client network.

But remove the CPE router. Where do you think that fiber goes? To "the internet"? It's going to yet another box owned and managed by your ISP. And from there, probably yet another box owned and managed by your ISP. And then another black box maybe owned by yet another ISP, and then another black box owned by maybe yet another ISP. Each one of these could let an attacker come between your network and "the internet". You have no control over them. You don't patch them, you don't configure them, you have no say over the services running on them. If they're compromised, you likely wouldn't know.

The CPE just moves the first black box inside your home, but there's always some ISP black box you're connecting to. Even if you're a top tier network, it's not like you control every box between you and every other site you want to go to. You're going to eventually have some handoff at some peering location, and once again your traffic goes to a box you don't control just waiting for an attacker to manipulate and mess with your traffic.

Re: Hacking millions of modems and investigating who hacked my modem

#245
post #2

What a great article. Very easy to follow. The best part was that instead of attacking the messenger and denying any problem, Cox seem to have acted like the very model of responsible security response in this kind of situation. I'd love to read a follow up on what the bug was that intermittently permitted unauthorised access to the APIs. It's the kind of error that could easily be missed by superficial testing or de…

agreed, lets hope they dont bloody sue him into the ground for "hacking" Its stuff like this that company's should REWARD people for finding.

Yeah let’s hope that they don’t prosecute him under the CFAA. He saved the FBI and untold others. He’s a hero.

Re: Hacking millions of modems and investigating who hacked my modem

#246
post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does that bypass 802.1x? Are the 802.1x packets are responded to by the official modem still? I was under the impression all packets were encrypted or signed with 802.1x, but Ive never had to implement or test it so I could be wrong.

802.1x is a secure login procedure, and then the port is open until link is dropped. There's no encryption or authentication per packet (it would be way too expensive), and if you put a switch between the ont and the modem, when you disconnect the modem, the ont doesn't see the link drop. Managed switches or software ethernet bridges don't always propigate 802.1x packets, but unmanaged switches don't care.

> There's no encryption or authentication per packet (it would be way too expensive) […]

It is possible to tie together 802.1X and MACsec, and plenty of (Ethernet) chipsets can do MACsec at wire speed, even up to 400G and 800G:

* https://www.arista.com/assets/data/pdf/Datasheets/7800R3_MAC...

* https://www.juniper.net/us/en/solutions/400g-and-800g.html

I don't know the telco space well enough to know if there's a MACsec-equivalent for GPON, but given the 'only' 25G speeds involved I doubt it would be much of a challenge.

Re: Hacking millions of modems and investigating who hacked my modem

#248

Great writeup. There's just one thing I don't get: the auth part. It seems the author managed to access protected endpoints without any auth, by just repeating the same request over and over until the endpoint randomly accepted it. The part that confuses me is, how could that possibly happen ? What possible architecture could this system have to enable this specific failure mode? I struggle to think of anything, shor…

Test server from early development put into production?

Re: Hacking millions of modems and investigating who hacked my modem

#249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does matter since it lets an attacker be between your network and the internet. If that black box is a modem- yes it could be hacked, but (maybe luckily for me) the providers I've used don't expose many services from the modem on the public interface so it's much more difficult to compromise. You'd either have to come from the docsis network or the client network.

But remove the CPE router. Where do you think that fiber goes? To "the internet"? It's going to yet another box owned and managed by your ISP. And from there, probably yet another box owned and managed by your ISP. And then another black box maybe owned by yet another ISP, and then another black box owned by maybe yet another ISP. Each one of these could let an attacker come between your network and "the internet". Y…

The CPE also moves the first black box under foreign control to (potentially) both sides of your firewall, as most small businesses likely just use the router in that mode, and have very little networking knowledge. That's significantly worse than somewhere on the outside of your firewall because now it can snoop pretty much everything and be used to scan the local network which is often poorly protected because it's assumed to be pretty secure.

Re: Hacking millions of modems and investigating who hacked my modem

#250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But remove the CPE router. Where do you think that fiber goes? To "the internet"? It's going to yet another box owned and managed by your ISP. And from there, probably yet another box owned and managed by your ISP. And then another black box maybe owned by yet another ISP, and then another black box owned by maybe yet another ISP. Each one of these could let an attacker come between your network and "the internet". Y…

The CPE also moves the first black box under foreign control to (potentially) both sides of your firewall, as most small businesses likely just use the router in that mode, and have very little networking knowledge. That's significantly worse than somewhere on the outside of your firewall because now it can snoop pretty much everything and be used to scan the local network which is often poorly protected because it's…

Hence my first comment:

> doesn't make much difference if you have your own router between your network and the AT&T network

And in the end those businesses with no networking knowledge will end up using their ISP's CPE modem/router/WiFi combo regardless of if its required or not. And from my experience it is not even just AT&T requiring their CPE router somewhere in the stack. I previously managed a Spectrum DOCSIS business internet connection where they also required their owned and managed gateway in the stack in order to have any static IP addresses. They wouldn't support any other configurations.

Post reply on HN