Juan Perez-Etchegoyen (@jp_pereze) and Mariano Nunez (@marianonunezdc) from Onapsis here, thrilled to be troopers for the third time! In this post we want to share with you a glimpse of what you will see regarding SAP security at this amazing conference.
Last week we released advisories regarding several vulnerabilities affecting SAP platforms. Some of these vulnerabilities are in fact very critical, and their exploitation could lead to a full-compromise of the entire SAP implementation – even by completely anonymous attackers. Following our responsible disclosure policy, SAP released the relevant SAP Security Notes (patches) for all these vulnerabilities a long time ago, so if you are an SAP customer make sure you have properly implemented them!
Reverse engineering is generally thought of as using debuggers, disassemblers and hex editors. Much as I love hex editors, IDA and staring at opcodes for the last few years I have been focused on applying my reverse engineering methodology to larger, composed systems. At Troopers TelcoSec day this year I will be presenting Bluevoxing which demonstrates how this approach works. Bluevoxing is about reverse engineering how web based “audio one time password” systems work. Simply put audio one time password systems use a short audio file as an authentication token. When I discovered these systems I was intrigued as reversing them would involve a range of techniques and tools from web testing, audio tools, signal analysis, phreaking and cryptanalysis. The disassembler would be of no use instead I would have to employ audio tools such as audacity and ruby-processing.
My methodology was:
collect a large sample set of audio one time passwords
Mobile devices play an important role in the business world. Yet with increased emphasis on the Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) model, defenses are not where they need to be to slow the loss of valuable intellectual property.
Corporate defenses have traditionally focused on the network, the endpoints, and not necessarily on the ecosystem of how these devices interact outside of network sockets. Smartphones bring unique network connectivity, an array of sensors, and can be overlooked by resources invested on IDS/IPS not being effectively leveraged.
Getting to the core of an exemplar attack, a Mobile Remote Administration Tool (RAT) is devastating. With access to the microphone, GPS/network location, camera, and an accelerometer, having control of a mobile device in a corporate setting is a dream for an attacker. We’ve improved an open source RAT and introduced a new feature, the ability to turn the mobile device into a virtual person sitting at the computer, able to type commands into the console.
Using a USB device to gain access to a computer is not new and the dangers of an unprotected port are extraordinary (see upcoming troopers talk, You wouldn’t share a syringe. Would you share a USB port? Bratus & Goodspeed). The takeaway from this particular talk is that the attack need not be performed from a specialized device (Teensy, Facedancer), like a thumb drive. The attack can be mounted from a common device that is routinely plugged into computers for charging or data transfer purposes… the Android mobile phone in your employee’s pocket!
IPv6 introduces a lot of new features and consequently, a lot of new capabilities. Obviously, the most significant of them is the huge address space that it offers. However, this is not the only one. IPv6 also introduces the use of the IPv6 Extension Headers. The IPv6 header has been considerably simplified in comparison with IPv4 one. On the other hand, the IPv6 Extension Headers, not only do the “job” of most of the fields which were removed from the main header, but, additionally, they add many more. However, any new “technology” creates new attack opportunities and a “new” protocol, such as IPv6 could not be an exception, especially since its design and implementation is more complicated than it’s predecessor.
It has been a year since fragmentation attacks in IPv6 were last examined publicly (in Black Hat Europe 2012). Issues well known from the IPv4 era appeared again in IPv6. Surprisingly enough, some of the most popular Operating Systems (OS), included ones considered “secure”, were proven to be vulnerable to such attacks, although fragmentation overlapping is strictly forbidden in IPv6 since 2009 (RFC5722). Some other OS, although in a better shape, still appeared to have some issues in specific cases.
But a year has already passed since then and the vendors should have fixed these issues now; or not? Definitely, a significant progress (in some cases) has been made but, is this enough? In the IPv6 Security Summit that will take place during Troopers13, in the “Fragmentation Overlapping Attacks Against IPv6: One Year Later” presentation, various fragmentation overlapping scenarios will be tested to examine if such attacks can still be successful or not. Detailed results of extensive tests will be presented and any non-compliant behaviors will be further discussed regarding the potential security implications.