This morning DHS ICS-CERT published five advisories for
industrial control system vulnerabilities. The affected systems come from GE,
Elipse, SCADA Engine, ABB, and CIMON.
GE Advisory
This advisory
describes a predictable TCP sequence vulnerability in GE Digital Energy’s
Hydran M2 device. The vulnerability was reported by Raheem Beyah, David Formby,
and San Shin Jung of Georgia Tech. GE has eliminated this vulnerability in
versions of the product produced after October 2014. There is no indication
that the researchers have verified that the vulnerability has been removed from
newer versions of the device. This vulnerability was originally reported on the
US-CERT Secure Portal on February 10th.
ICS-CERT reports that a relatively low skilled attacker
could remotely exploit this vulnerability to send counterfeit packets as if
they came from the device.
Since the vulnerable devices cannot be fixed they either
have to be replaced or protected by other measures which would isolate them
from the attack.
Elipse Advisory
This advisory
describes a process control vulnerability in the Elipse E3 application; the
vulnerability is actually located in a third-party (Telerik) DLL. The
vulnerability was reported by Ivan Sanchez from Nullcode Team. Elipse has
produced a new version which mitigates the vulnerability. ICS-CERT reports that
Sanchez has verified the efficacy of the fix.
ICS-CERT reports that the vulnerability could not be
remotely exploitable but goes on to explain that a social engineering attack
could cause an authorized operator to load a compromised DLL.
ICS-CERT reports that Telerik has notified its other affected
customer of the problem with its DLLs and has provided them with updated
version that do not include the vulnerability. Hopefully those other un-named
vendors will notify their customers of the vulnerability.
SCADA Engine Advisory
This advisory
describes three vulnerabilities in the SCADA Engine BACnet OPC Server. These
vulnerabilities were reported by Josep Pi Rodriguez. SCADA Engine has produced
a new software version that mitigates the vulnerabilities. ICS-CERT reports
that Rodriquez has verified the efficacy of the fix.
The three vulnerabilities are:
● Heap-based buffer overflow - CVE-2015-0979;
● Input validation - CVE-2015-0980;
and
● Authentication - CVE-2015-0981
ICS-CERT reports that a relatively low skilled attacker
could remotely exploit these vulnerabilities to execute arbitrary code or
modify the OPC Server database.
ABB Advisory
This advisory
reports on the CodeWright HART DTM vulnerability in ABB products. The base
information provided in this advisory is the same as that found in the latest
version of the CodeWright
advisory. ICS-CERT reports that ABB has begun to integrate the new
CodeWright library but ABB
reports that they have updated versions for the affected products which
include the corrected CodeWright libraries.
CIMON Advisory
This advisory
describes a DLL hijacking vulnerability in the CIMON CmnView.exe application.
The vulnerability was reported by Ivan Sanchez of Wise. CIMON has produced a
patch that mitigates the vulnerability but there is no indication that Sanchez
has verified the efficacy of the patch.
ICS-CERT reports that the vulnerability is remotely
exploitable via a social engineering attack. No exploit is publicly available
for this specific system but there are publicly available exploits for this
‘attack vector’.
Fix Verification
Some people have asked me why I make a big deal out of
announcing whether or not the researcher who discovered a vulnerability has
verified the efficacy of the fix. After all, I am asked, isn’t it in the best
interest of the vendor for the fix to work? Today a
report from the Zero Day Initiative showed why it may be important for an
outsider to verify fixes.
One of the key vulnerabilities exploited by Stuxnet was the
now infamous Microsoft MS10-046 vulnerability. This vulnerability allowed
systems to automatically run DLL files from USB devices without the operator initiating
the action or even knowing that it took place. Microsoft patched that
vulnerability four years ago. Earlier this year Michael Heerklotz reported that
the patch did not work.
If Microsoft can convince themselves that a flawed patch
mitigates a vulnerability then anyone can. A researcher that discovers a
vulnerability looks at it in a different light than does a software engineer
that is fixing it under a deadline. Two ways of looking at the problem may not
actually be enough, but it is certainly better than just one way.
I’ll continue to be the gadfly that reports whether or not
ICS-CERT is reporting that an outsider has verified the efficacy of the
mitigation measure being reported.
No comments:
Post a Comment