Live data from Hacker News

Cisco Nexus 9000 Switches Allow SSH As Root

nvd.nist.gov

91–100 of 113 posts

Re: Cisco Nexus 9000 Switches Allow SSH As Root

#91
post #48

I surely can't be the only one who sees open down to the hardware replacements as the only solution to this type of problems.

As a former Cisco employee, I can tell you why companies never want to open source their security-sensitive products: Pros of open sourcing a product: - fewer total number of vulnerabilities Cons of open sourcing a product: - more publicly-known vulnerabilities - less effort required to find new vulnerabilities The product might be more objectively secure, with more bug reports and more fixes. But it will be less pra…

Auditor: "Question 1. Did you manage to add backdoor keys to your production build?"

Auditor: "Big surprise. We once again recommend that you use a build system. Question 2. ..."

Re: Cisco Nexus 9000 Switches Allow SSH As Root

#92
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I heard https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-1804 is Cisco's ninth backdoor so far this year. Not ninth security problem total, ninth backdoor. The ninth security problem Cisco shipped intentionally . Meanwhile, the router that serves my office is from a company that's had fewer than nine security problems in the past ten years. Two, I think, but I confess I don't really keep count (ditto the nine above). The pr…

> I heard https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-1804 is Cisco's ninth backdoor so far this year. Also the 9th they have fixed. > Not ninth security problem total, ninth backdoor. The ninth security problem Cisco shipped intentionally. How can you be sure it was intentional? > Meanwhile, the router that serves my office is from a company that's had fewer than nine security problems in the past ten years. How can y…

Someone at Cisco intentionally created a keypair and intentionally put it in the image build process. They may or may not have intended to put it in production builds, but they clearly intended to set it up in some form, when they could have just ... not. If you take the easy but risky approach, you have certainly intentionally put yourself at risk.

I've worked for a company that built OS images for distribution to customers. Putting my SSH key in development image builds would have been convenient, but there was too much of a risk of exactly this problem; instead we just made it easy enough to download an SSH key on a development build (and start up an sshd) once you've booted it and have physical access to a terminal.

Also, a practical concern with disclosed vulnerabilities is that non-nation-state attackers (which are most of the attackers most people care about) are very unlikely to find and exploit a vulnerability that neither has a public CVE issued now nor will have one issued for years. So even if the alternative vendor has difficult-to-discover vulnerabilities, there is, in a very real sense, reduced exposure from those vulnerabilities compared to things that are disclosed and fixed. And especially if Cisco's disclosed-and-fixed vulnerabilities originate from outside vulnerability reports, there's a definite correlation between whether a vulnerability can be found by someone who would report it and whether a vulnerability can be found by someone who would exploit it.

Re: Cisco Nexus 9000 Switches Allow SSH As Root

#93
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I heard https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-1804 is Cisco's ninth backdoor so far this year. Not ninth security problem total, ninth backdoor. The ninth security problem Cisco shipped intentionally . Meanwhile, the router that serves my office is from a company that's had fewer than nine security problems in the past ten years. Two, I think, but I confess I don't really keep count (ditto the nine above). The pr…

> I heard https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-1804 is Cisco's ninth backdoor so far this year. Also the 9th they have fixed. > Not ninth security problem total, ninth backdoor. The ninth security problem Cisco shipped intentionally. How can you be sure it was intentional? > Meanwhile, the router that serves my office is from a company that's had fewer than nine security problems in the past ten years. How can y…

Backdoors aren't bugs like most others. Buffer overflows happen because someone mistypes or forgets a length check, etc.

Backdoors are unusual: They happen because someone writes code of the form addAccount("s3kr3e", "s3kr3t"), and that's code that's written. You can typo and accidentally omit a bounds check, but you can't typo and accidentally end up with a valid SSH key pair and code that installs it.

It's possible to ship that SSH key pair and the code to customers that as a bug, e.g. if someone writes that code on purpose, intending to add and deploy s3kr3t/s3kr3t but not intending to ever have that code on the branch that's deployed to regular customers, and then someone else mismerged. In that case serving it to customer X is due to a bug, it should only have gone to customer Y or test environment Z. What I'm saying is that shipping those backdoors at all must have been intentional.

(Personally I think shipping backdoors to test environments is fine. Including test environments at customers. Risky.)

Re: Cisco Nexus 9000 Switches Allow SSH As Root

#94
post #87

Are this devices normally left with accessible 22 port in the wild?

A Nexus 9K is an expensive piece of kit, and is not a trivial switch to deploy what with VPC and other configurations being commonplace, so just powering it on will not deliver a workable product. I suspect most if not all deployments follow best practice and have a management VLAN with access lists control limiting the source address of the connecting client, and blocking access to port 22 from other networks.

* Edit * Plus the Nexus the backdoor is only relevant if the switch in using ACI, and not standalone NX-OS mode. ACI training is a 5 day course for advanced engineers. https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/training-events/training-certi...

Re: Cisco Nexus 9000 Switches Allow SSH As Root

#96
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like any other network solutions vendor?

Palo Alto seems to have a good reputation but that could be security through obscurity as no one can actually afford to use it.

Palo Alto (like every vendor) has had similar vulnerabilities in the past with their web management. Typically management of a switch/firewall isn't exposed to directly to the Internet.

Re: Cisco Nexus 9000 Switches Allow SSH As Root

#99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't wait for marketing people to catch up to this and call devices "SIoT" without changing anything about the product.

Perhaps "Security Hardened Internet Things" would be more appropriate?

Relevant: https://twitter.com/internetofshit

Re: Cisco Nexus 9000 Switches Allow SSH As Root

#100
post #3

This is a pretty egregiously editorialized title; what we know is that there's apparently an SSH keypair authorized on these devices, for which the private key is available on the device. That's a terrible, ugly vulnerability, but it's as likely due to stupidity as to malice. The right title is something like: CVS-2019-1804: Cisco Nexus 9000 Switches Allow SSH As Root.

The mods asked me to email comments like this to the hn@yc.c address in the footer (Contact link), and have been responsive (not necessarily agreed, but they do reply!) when I've done so. I emailed them a link to your comment as the edit request with an attempt of my own: > CVS-2019-1804: Cisco Nexus 9000 remote root exploit via SSH-over-IPv6 (Yes, it's a backdoor, I ran out of time sorry)

Clarification - Anyone can email, not just me
Post reply on HN