Today this is not about a new disclosure but about some new
information on an
ICS-CERT advisory that was published this week. SEC Consult published additional information
on the Siemens SICAM vulnerabilities on the FullDisclosure web site.
The ICS-CERT advisory reported that publicly available
exploits were available, but did not provide a link. This report from SEC
Consult provides proof of concept code for exploiting the first two vulnerabilities
and a link to a very old (2003) link to an earlier report on the
code injection vulnerability. That link leads to a report by Luigi Auriemma, a
name that hasn’t been seen on this blog in quite some time.
The Luigi report is about the GoAhead web server that was
apparently used by Siemens in the affected versions of the SICAM devices. This
is not noted in either the ICS-CERT advisory or the Siemens security
advisory. Luigi describes GoAhead this way:
“Goahead (sic) webserver is an embedded
OpenSource server that can be build (sic) on a lot of systems (CE, Ecos,
GNU/Linux, Lynx, MacOS, NW, QNX4, VXWORKS, Win32 and others).
“It is supported by a lot of
companies that use it for their projects and it is also used like ‘base’ for
other webservers, furthermore it has been developed for be very tiny and to run
on embedded systems.”
Apparently, Siemens used an unpatched version of the
webserver (Luigi reported that the vulnerability he reported was fixed in
December 2003) in the affected versions of the SICAM devices. Since Siemens
(and almost all other ICS vendors) did not start to take control system
security seriously until after 2010 (STUXNET), it is not surprising that a
newer version of the webserver was not incorporated in these devices; in fact,
it is quite possible that they were not informed of the vulnerability.
This is an old, but continuing problem, with third party
software used in many of the control system devices used still today. If the
original vendor does not have an active method for sharing vulnerability information
with all of its customers, the using vendor may not become aware of the
vulnerability until some third-party researcher discovers the problem.
More disturbing in this case is the fact that neither
ICS-CERT nor Siemens mentioned that the vulnerabilities (apparently all three) in
the SICAM devices were based upon vulnerabilities in a GoAhead web server. If
it were not for this separate SEC Consult disclosure, the community would not
realize that that there was a third-party vulnerability involved that may still
exist in other non-Siemens devices.
1 comment:
Interesting. Optimizing legacy vulnerabilities for present day initiatives.
Post a Comment