RE: snmp vulnerablities

From: Petruzel, Oliver (OliverPat_private)
Date: Wed Jul 18 2001 - 06:27:31 PDT

  • Next message: Langa Kentane: "recommendation."

    this brings to mind the question which I always ask the thin air around me
    when discussing SNMP: 
    
    why the heck are security software vendors developing NEW versions of their
    software WITHOUT snmpv3 capabilities??  Is it truly too difficult to assign
    a developer to change the entire trap module over to v3?  New "updates" and
    entire new "versions" of some of today's most popular devices and software
    still use v1 only... I wont name names.
    
    from a penetration perspective, ty for making my job easier.
    from the consulting perspective, FIX IT, NOW!
    
    -Oliver p.
    Computer Intrusion Analyst
    Aegis Research Corp.
    
    
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Dave Ryan [mailto:dave.ryanat_private]
    Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 3:47 PM
    To: Peter Van Epp
    Cc: pen-testat_private
    Subject: Re: snmp vulnerablities
    
    
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1
    
    Peter Van Epp said the following on Tue, Jul 17, 2001 at 11:06:17AM -0700, 
    > 	My guess would be that the original poster is trying to exploit the 
    > Solaris SNMP hole (where an echo might make some sense since its a Unix
    box)
    > but didn't know it (or at least didn't articulate it). It came across
    bugtraq
    > some time ago so a search in the bugtraq archives may be productive. I
    didn't
    > look closer than to make sure we had already disabled the program involved
    > (probably by removing the SUID bit from the program) so I didn't check the
    > details.
    
    Correct, for general consumption:
    
    http://www.hack.co.za/download.php?sid=1377
    
    As for comments on protecting SNMPv1 with ACL's and obfuscated Community
    Strings, that is laughable at best. A better solution is to run with SNMPv3
    using AuthPriv functionality, seems like some of the popular management
    systems don't yet support v3 capabilities. 
    
    Other solution is to tunnel SNMPv1/2c over IPSec, varyig configurations, I
    would be more concerned with management<->host authentication than going
    full
    ESP, but circumstances dictate.
    
    Regards.
    
    - -- 
    Dave Ryan		Computer Incident Response Team	
    dave.ryanat_private	Eircom Multimedia
    
    "I see dumb people. All the time." - Simple Nomad
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (OpenBSD)
    Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
    
    iEYEARECAAYFAjtUli8ACgkQHSjBCI+q2yJ9wwCfaBS5NmARFGCii2bOgBnub0v3
    g8QAniWiI1bL8R6IWkB8emwFJ0wLAM5Q
    =lNbC
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
    
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    This list is provided by the SecurityFocus Security Intelligence Alert (SIA)
    Service For more information on SecurityFocus' SIA service which
    automatically alerts you to the latest security vulnerabilities please see:
    https://alerts.securityfocus.com/
    
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    This list is provided by the SecurityFocus Security Intelligence Alert (SIA)
    Service For more information on SecurityFocus' SIA service which
    automatically alerts you to the latest security vulnerabilities please see:
    https://alerts.securityfocus.com/
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Jul 18 2001 - 10:07:52 PDT