Huawie Security Threat

Jbiff

Getting the hang of it
Joined
Nov 28, 2018
Messages
39
Reaction score
32
Location
Austin Texas

Teken

Known around here
Joined
Aug 11, 2020
Messages
1,553
Reaction score
2,801
Location
Canada
This article talks about backdoors in Huawie DVRs, NVRs and cameras.
That was a good read as it offers a nice summary as to the threat. This is very much similar to the Hikvision exploit found by one of our forum members. As it was noted by the article it’s hard to say if this is lazy and incompetence vs willful and planned.

It comes down to how responsive the vendor is and as it relates to Hikvision they worked very quickly to patch the exploit.

This doesn’t seem to be the case with Huawie?!?

As it pertains to the Bloomberg article that called out Supermicro for willful exploits that caused endless headaches for millions of companies and government agencies!!

As far as I’m aware nobody has provided any solid proof Supermicro has ever wilfully done this vs someone found a hole like they have forever in everything man has created!

Think locks, safes, encryption, etc.
 

mat200

IPCT Contributor
Joined
Jan 17, 2017
Messages
13,938
Reaction score
23,238
FYI - in case the article gets moved .. ( happens too often, thus attempting to provide a resource just in case .. )

1633287454365.png

ref:

Huawei Subsidiary Distributes 0-Day Backdoor in DVRs, NVRs, IoT Cameras
By Joel Hruska on February 5, 2020 at 4:34 pm

One issue that’s been of increasing concern to US companies and customers is the fear that Chinese companies will create hard-wired backdoors into the various networking and 5G products they sell in Western markets. Such backdoors could then be exploited for corporate espionage or government surveillance.

Thus far, the evidence for this kind of deliberate backdooring has been mixed. A damning report by Bloomberg last year — one that I initially believed — faded into confused questions over whether the company had accurately reported the situation, along with disagreements over whether the backdoor as described was even technologically possible. A UK report on Huawei’s security practices last year found ample evidence of sloppy coding and poor version control, but turned up no sign of corporate or government backdoors aimed at allowing a coordinated surveillance campaign.

Now, a new report by Vladislav Yarmak explains how Huawei subsidiary HiSilicon has integrated a firmware backdoor into the SoCs it sells to various companies that build digital video cameras (DVRs), network-connected video recorders (NVRs), and other various devices. The backdoor is integrated into the SoC firmware, which means it gets deployed anywhere the SoC is. According to Yarmak, this backdoor has been deployed in at least three different versions since 2013.

Here’s Yarmak:

Earliest known versions of it had telnet access enabled with a static root password which can be recovered from firmware image with (relatively) little computation effort… More recent firmware versions had telnet access and debug port (9527/tcp) disabled by default. Instead they had open port 9530/tcp which was used to accept special command to start telnet daemon and enable shell access with static password which is the same for all devices…

Most recent firmware versions have open port 9530/tcp listening for special commands, but require cryptographic challenge-response authentication for them to be committed.

In other words, the backdoor implementation has become more sophisticated over time. There is a known set of logins and passwords that the hardware will accept for authentication. This bug affects a wide number of brands and models of hardware. So far, all of this sounds pretty bad.

Is This a Deliberate Attack Attempt?
There are reasons to believe this issue is more indicative of bad security practices at Huawei than a deliberate attempt to backdoor hardware. For one thing, the attack only works over a local network. In an update at the end of his post, Yarmak writes:

Other researchers and habr users had pointed out such vulnerability is restricted to devices based on Xiongmai (Hangzhou Xiongmai Technology Co, XMtech) software, including products of other vendors which ship products based on such software. At this moment HiSilicon can’t be held responsible for backdoor in dvrHelper/macGuarder binary.

And that undercuts the idea that this is something Huawei or HiSilicon was specifically and particularly trying to do. It doesn’t let them off the hook — vendors should conduct audits of the code they ship, and Huawei is specifically dealing with perceptions that it works too closely with the Chinese government already.

It’s very difficult to tell the difference between bad security practices and deliberate efforts to build a backdoor. What’s more serious, as Yarmak discusses, is that this isn’t the first or even second time this issue has been reported to Huawei. The entire reason he issued a zero-day report is that Huawei hasn’t previously been responsive to fixing the problem.

From a customer perspective, it seems wise to give Huawei equipment a wide berth, whether the company is spying for the Chinese government or not.
 

Teken

Known around here
Joined
Aug 11, 2020
Messages
1,553
Reaction score
2,801
Location
Canada
Bottom line is to not let cameras or NVRs have access to the internet. VLAN or 2nd NIC are the only way to go.
Agreed, but this also affirms staying aware and being current in updating and patching all electronic hardware when possible.

Too many android, cameras, NVR, and other IoT devices now on the market were not designed to be updated or the vendor doesn’t care to do so!

Some of the largest DDoS attacks have been due to existing holes in systems that still have no software to resolve the same. This doesn’t even address the actual users because they don’t care to stay updated as to the current events?!?

I’m normally not in favour of big brother or anyone government regulations because the market has shown it can (generally speaking) work the problems out. Having said that having the government mandate a basic (minimum) requirement that all devices must be updatable and security threats must be prioritized to secure the same.

That makes sense to me!

How that translate to a law, rule, regulations who knows but the government should engage all stakeholders to come to a consensus of what that framework looks like and is easily deployed.
 

Swampledge

Getting comfortable
Joined
Apr 9, 2021
Messages
210
Reaction score
469
Location
Connecticut
….

I’m normally not in favour of big brother or anyone government regulations because the market has shown it can (generally speaking) work the problems out. Having said that having the government mandate a basic (minimum) requirement that all devices must be updatable and security threats must be prioritized to secure the same.

….
Wouldn’t this be a double-edged sword? If a device is not currently exploitable, wouldn’t a mandated updateability leave it susceptible to being exploited?
 

Teken

Known around here
Joined
Aug 11, 2020
Messages
1,553
Reaction score
2,801
Location
Canada
Wouldn’t this be a double-edged sword? If a device is not currently exploitable, wouldn’t a mandated updateability leave it susceptible to being exploited?
No, that’s not what happens in the wild or what is being discussed. The scenario is this. Man 1 makes what ever and later another man (Man 2) finds a weakness in X.

Man 1 identifies the weakness and patches it up. This will initially stop Man 2 from using that hole (exploit) but guess what Man 2 is crafty and has incredible imagination and finds another hole to exploit!

Think any computer OS in existence. Everyday some crafty villain has found something to exploit and do something with it. The only positive thing in this endless bad vs good scenario is the good guy can continue to patch the holes!

A better example is Android devices where the vast majority is designed and built to allow support for maybe 1-2 iterations of the Android OS update. Because the hardware can no longer support the next generation of OS any existing holes will remain unpatched.

This is why the entire world has literally billions of devices that span cellular to IoT that can be taken over by a exploit.

Now, let’s say some widget has no ability to be flashed or upgraded and uses the Android OS. You literally have millions of devices that will always have a door wide open to attack and control by others.

Hope that offers you that insight.
 

alastairstevenson

Staff member
Joined
Oct 28, 2014
Messages
15,962
Reaction score
6,794
Location
Scotland
This article talks about backdoors in Huawie DVRs, NVRs and cameras.
That's old news, and the article itself is a couple of years old.
And all it's really saying is to remind us that it's been common in much of the budget-level CCTV firmware to have a telnet access available with a fixed password.
 

cctv-dave

Getting the hang of it
Joined
Mar 25, 2021
Messages
128
Reaction score
87
Location
yes
I’m normally not in favour of big brother or anyone government regulations because the market has shown it can (generally speaking) work the problems out.
Having said that having the government mandate a basic (minimum) requirement that all devices must be updatable and security threats must be prioritized to secure the same.
For how long ? years.
Because the problem is pretty much of the creation of buzz words like IoT.

Some things just shouldn't be on the internet.
Like your car. Or your electric meter.
How old is your car? How old is your electric meter?
Now fast forward 5 years, 10 years.

That car from 2015 is driving around connected to the internet with an unpatched security flaw and the ability to connect to the CAN over IP and control the brakes.
So we mandate cars older than 10years off the road ? or force manufacturers to keep replacing the IT in them forever... Who pays?

What about all the medical equipment still running windows 95, or the infrastructure stuff running win3.11 ? And thats taking it to the extreme.
Take old windows XP, people have done tests of putting an unpatched XP machine honeypot on the internet and it's taking over in under 60 mins.
Yet XP is still rife, it's driving digital signage in airports, ATM machines and self service tills all over the place for a few examples.

Progress seems to be about making things obsolete earlier and earlier, with less life span than the same product they replaced.
Yet we're all supposed to be recycling, upcycling, making do and mend etc.
But technology is pushing for shorter lifespans, more complexity and connectivity, and you must upgrade "for security" or the latest features are "incompatible".
 

Teken

Known around here
Joined
Aug 11, 2020
Messages
1,553
Reaction score
2,801
Location
Canada
For how long ? years.
Because the problem is pretty much of the creation of buzz words like IoT.

Some things just shouldn't be on the internet.
Like your car. Or your electric meter.
How old is your car? How old is your electric meter?
Now fast forward 5 years, 10 years.

That car from 2015 is driving around connected to the internet with an unpatched security flaw and the ability to connect to the CAN over IP and control the brakes.
So we mandate cars older than 10years off the road ? or force manufacturers to keep replacing the IT in them forever... Who pays?

What about all the medical equipment still running windows 95, or the infrastructure stuff running win3.11 ? And thats taking it to the extreme.
Take old windows XP, people have done tests of putting an unpatched XP machine honeypot on the internet and it's taking over in under 60 mins.
Yet XP is still rife, it's driving digital signage in airports, ATM machines and self service tills all over the place for a few examples.

Progress seems to be about making things obsolete earlier and earlier, with less life span than the same product they replaced.
Yet we're all supposed to be recycling, upcycling, making do and mend etc.
But technology is pushing for shorter lifespans, more complexity and connectivity, and you must upgrade "for security" or the latest features are "incompatible".
I have no clue why you’re only quoting a fraction of my comments. Because anyone who reads the entire reply would have what - CONTEXT!

Next you’re telling me you know of a Windows 95 / DOS 3.XX computer still running in a hospital - Fuck Off!

Did I really trigger your so badly that you are literally going to spew horseshit in this discussion???

If you made the same comment in 1998 I might have given you a pass. In 2021 you make such a claim that a business or hospital is really doing that?!?
 

wittaj

IPCT Contributor
Joined
Apr 28, 2019
Messages
24,932
Reaction score
48,637
Location
USA
Not a hospital, but many government agencies still run very old computers and software...hardware from the 70s is much older than Windows 95 LOL.

So it wouldn't surprise me if a hospital somewhere isn't running older computers...I mean how else are they supposed to look at their unsecure security cameras on Explorer:lmao:

 

Teken

Known around here
Joined
Aug 11, 2020
Messages
1,553
Reaction score
2,801
Location
Canada
Not a hospital, but many government agencies still run very old computers and software...hardware from the 70s is much older than Windows 95 LOL.

So it wouldn't surprise me if a hospital somewhere isn't running older computers...I mean how else are they supposed to look at their unsecure security cameras on Explorer:lmao:

That isn’t the same as a computer running Windows 95. Our team helped migrate three large financial institutions from COBOL way back when.

To suggest that’s the same in a modern hospital or medical equipment is far from being accurate or factual in 2021. If someone says we’ll I live in some 1950 backwoods town, OK.

Good for you, now move your slow ass into reality and 2021!
 

cctv-dave

Getting the hang of it
Joined
Mar 25, 2021
Messages
128
Reaction score
87
Location
yes
I have no clue why you’re only quoting a fraction of my comments. Because anyone who reads the entire reply would have what - CONTEXT!
The part quoted was the context because it's what I was asking of you. For how long the govt should force people to supply patches for?
it felt like a reasonable question.

But it seems I'm not the one triggered given the rest of your ranting, rather than just answering the question - so who fails to comprehend ?

Next you’re telling me you know of a Windows 95 / DOS 3.XX computer still running in a hospital - Fuck Off!
Ohh well I know of several, since I've worked in hospitals a fair bit as well as attending them. the last time I saw a win95 machine in person was last year on the ultra sound machine at the local place.
Do you have any idea how much an ultrasound machine costs? or what it does? Do you think you can just patch it ? lol
The NHS isn't exactly made of money. Things take time. If you've got a system running a database on a DOS platform and it's working, it might well not be the highest priority to shift it.
Plenty of AS400 systems still chugging away too all over the place.

Or then then my mates who work in various industries, some in military, some in critical infrastructure some just in general business and guess what, we talk about stuff.
I guess you think all business are just made of money? Especially IT. Not how it works in the real world.

Oh yes the vast majority moved away and was stuck on windows XP. In fact a few years back uk govt paid microsoft several million dollars for a special extension to XP to get themselves off that.
Then when wannacry came around the NHS was badly affected due to the many out dated systems it had on XP still and win7.
But it doesn't detract from the fact that there are for "reasons" many systems out there that are utterly out of date because they are too expensive, zero downtime, or just plain impossible to update to newer OS's.
Same goes for the older ATM machines, the ones which tend to be monochrome obviously. - and we tend to have a different system here than you for that.
it's not exactly something widely reported - have a guess why.


Did I really trigger your so badly that you are literally going to spew horseshit in this discussion???
You really are an odious piece of shit.

I guess you think your post count means something?
Well if this is yet another forum where bullying is rife and facts are unimportant then I beginning to understand why you post so much.


If you made the same comment in 1998 I might have given you a pass. In 2021 you make such a claim that a business or hospital is really doing that?!?
And once again you narrow little mind shows you up for the lack of experience, education and understanding you have beyond what you think you know of the world from within your small circle.
Besides which in 1998 windows 95 was 3 years old. lol
 
Last edited:

Teken

Known around here
Joined
Aug 11, 2020
Messages
1,553
Reaction score
2,801
Location
Canada
FWIW .. Windows XP still exists in the medical fields .. often tied to expensive equipment which is tied to the PC running windows XP ..
Absolutely, embedded XP is everywhere depending upon the business sector. But isn’t the same as saying Windows 95, 98, 98SE, Media, 2000 is in mass.

The oldest system I’ve ever laid eyes on was from CP Rail. They had banks of little 4” monitors that did whatever it is they do. I asked the guy how come if the hardware isn’t used why is it still on?!?

He laughs and says it’s not - on. Its the burnt latent phosphorus image that you see burnt into the screen!

Just knowing we were upgrading this 1970’s system that literally managed the tracks in the RR yard was humbling.
 

Teken

Known around here
Joined
Aug 11, 2020
Messages
1,553
Reaction score
2,801
Location
Canada
The part quoted was the context because it's what I was asking of you. For how long the govt should force people to supply patches for?
it felt like a reasonable question.

But it seems I'm not the one triggered given the rest of your ranting, rather than just answering the question - so who fails to comprehend ?


Ohh well I know of several, since I've worked in hospitals a fair bit as well as attending them. the last time I saw a win95 machine in person was last year on the ultra sound machine at the local place.
Do you have any idea how much an ultrasound machine costs? or what it does? Do you think you can just patch it ? lol
The NHS isn't exactly made of money. Things take time. If you've got a system running a database on a DOS platform and it's working, it might well not be the highest priority to shift it.
Plenty of AS400 systems still chugging away too all over the place.

Or then then my mates who work in various industries, some in military, some in critical infrastructure some just in general business and guess what, we talk about stuff.
I guess you think all business are just made of money? Especially IT. Not how it works in the real world.

Oh yes the vast majority moved away and was stuck on windows XP. In fact a few years back uk govt paid microsoft several million dollars for a special extension to XP to get themselves off that.
Then when wannacry came around the NHS was badly affected due to the many out dated systems it had on XP still and win7.
But it doesn't detract from the fact that there are for "reasons" many systems out there that are utterly out of date because they are too expensive, zero downtime, or just plain impossible to update to newer OS's.
Same goes for the older ATM machines, the ones which tend to be monochrome obviously. - and we tend to have a different system here than you for that.
it's not exactly something widely reported - have a guess why.



You really are an odious piece of shit.

I guess you think your post count means something?
Well if this is yet another forum where bullying is rife and facts are unimportant then I beginning to understand why you post so much.




And once again you narrow little mind shows you up for the lack of experience, education and understanding you have beyond what you think you know of the world from within your small circle.
Besides which in 1998 windows 95 was 3 years old. lol
Ultrasound machine using Windows 95 - Got it!
 

TonyR

IPCT Contributor
Joined
Jul 15, 2014
Messages
16,748
Reaction score
38,997
Location
Alabama
Ultrasound machine using Windows 95 - Got it!
FWIW, I repaired an ivory / bone-colored Win 95 tower running a digital image, patient X-ray machine in a small town clinic not 5 years ago. The clinic closed down 3 years ago and knowing the Dr. that ran it, he'd still be using that machine. Fortunately, it was not on the Internet.
 

Smilingreen

Known around here
Joined
Sep 17, 2021
Messages
3,603
Reaction score
14,390
Location
Tennessee USA
I know of a large distribution warehouse who's floor processing PC's were all XP....when I left there 2 years ago. They had about 300 of them. They had no plans of upgrading. Most of the programs were written in VB 6 classic. I spent 60% of my time soldering on new caps on ancient Dell GX270 motherboards as they wouldn't invest in new hardware. I know of 3 of the process machines that were still running: Win95. They even had some old industrial computers that were still running OS/2 Warp 4. They has some vision systems that were running NT4.0 All of the XP machines had capability to be connected to the internet. So yes, there are still many companies running ancient OS's on their PC's and many of them are still connected to the internet.
 
Top