Likes Likes:  0
Resultaten 1 tot 2 van de 2
Geen
  1. #1
    Roy Hills
    Cisco VPN Concentrator Groupname Enumeration Vulnerability
    Gast
    n/a Berichten
    Berichten zijn liked



    Thread Starter

    Cisco VPN Concentrator Groupname Enumeration Vulnerability

    Cisco VPN Concentrator Groupname Enumeration Vulnerability

    1. Overview:

    NTA Monitor has discovered a groupname enumeration vulnerability in the
    Cisco VPN 3000 series concentrator products while performing a VPN security
    test for a customer.

    The vulnerability affects remote access VPNs with groupname
    authentication. Site-to-site VPN operation is not affected, nor is remote
    access with certificate authentication. In practice, we find that most
    concentrators are configured for remote access with groupname
    authentication, so this bug will affect the majority of users.

    The vulnerability allows an attacker to use a dictionary attack to
    determine valid group names on the concentrator. Once a valid group name
    is determined, the attacker can then use this to obtain a hash from the
    concentrator, which can then be cracked offline to determine the group
    password.

    Once an attacker has a valid groupname and group password, they can
    potentially mount a Man-in-the-Middle (MitM) attack against the XAUTH user
    authentication mechanism. This allows the attacker to snoop on VPN
    traffic, alter VPN traffic, or gain access to the network protected by the
    VPN. This MitM attack works even if strong authentication such as SecurID
    is used for user authentication.

    2. Vulnerability Details:

    The vulnerability allows an attacker to enumerate valid groupnames on a
    Cisco VPN concentrator through either a dictionary attack, or a brute-force
    attack. The issue exists because the concentrator responds to valid
    groupnames differently to the way in which it responds to invalid groupnames.

    The exploit involves sending an IKE Aggressive Mode packet with the
    groupname to be tested in the Identity (ID) payload. The ID Type is 11,
    which corresponds to ID_KEY_ID. If the specified groupname is valid, the
    concentrator will respond; if it is not valid, then the concentrator will
    not respond. The ike-scan tool can be used to demonstrate this vulnerability.

    The vulnerability is present in both normal IKE over UDP, and also Cisco
    proprietary TCP-encapsulated IKE. The ike-scan tool can use either
    transport type: for Cisco IKE in TCP, you need to specify the option
    --tcp=2. When using TCP encapsulation, an invalid groupname causes the
    concentrator to send a TCP RST packet, which causes ike-scan to return the
    error message "recvfrom: Connection reset by peer".

    The groupname guessing rate depends on the bandwidth between the attacker's
    system and the concentrator. Because most of the group names tried will be
    incorrect, and therefore the concentrator won't respond, it's only the
    bandwidth from the attacker to the concentrator that matters; the bandwidth
    from the concentrator back to the attacker is not important.

    An IKE aggressive mode packet with a single transform, using Diffie-Hellman
    group 2, and having an eight character groupname has an IKE packet size of
    256 bytes. Adding the eight byte UDP header and 20 byte IP header gives a
    total size of 284 bytes or 2,272 bits. Assuming a link speed of
    2Mbits/sec, this gives a guessing rate of 2,000,000 / 2,272 = 880 guesses
    per second.

    A guessing rate of 880 per second is 3,168,000 per hour or 76,032,000 per
    day. This rate is sufficient to perform an extensive dictionary attack, or
    a limited brute-force attack. The concentrator does not limit the
    groupname guessing rate, nor does it blacklist hosts that perform groupname
    enumeration: in tests, it was possible to get a successful response to a
    valid groupname immediately after thousands of incorrect attempts.

    Once a valid groupname is obtained, it is possible to use this groupname to
    obtain a hash from the concentrator, and mount an offline password-guessing
    attack against this hash to obtain the group password. Because the
    password-guessing process is offline, it is fast (hundreds of thousands of
    guesses per second), and will not cause the concentrator to log any
    authentication failures.

    A valid groupname and password allows the attacker to complete IKE Phase-1
    and establish an ISAKMP SA to the concentrator. They can then mount a
    Man-in-the-Middle (MitM) attack against the second-stage
    user-authentication process, which is typically XAUTH.

    The offline password guessing process and MitM attack against XAUTH are
    detailed in the VPN flaws whitepaper at
    http://www.nta-monitor.com/news/vpn-...hitepaper.pdf.

    3. Example:

    The example below shows the two different concentrator responses: the first
    is for the valid groupname "finance", and the second is for the invalid
    groupname "administration". We see that the concentrator responds to valid
    groupname, but not to the invalid one. Because of this difference in
    behaviour, it is possible to determine whether a given groupname is valid
    or not.

    The ike-scan options used in this example are:

    -A Specify IKE Aggressive Mode. The default for ike-scan is
    Main Mode.
    --idtype=11 Specify ID Type 11 for the ID payload. This corresponds to
    ID_KEY_ID.
    -M Multiline: Display each payload on a separate line, which
    makes the output easier to read.
    --auth=65001 Specify authentication method 65001, which corresponds to
    XAUTH.
    --id=finance Specify the string to be used for the ID payload.
    10.0.0.1 The IP address of the target VPN concentrator.

    3.1. Response to valid groupname "finance":

    $ ike-scan -A --idtype=11 -M --auth=65001 --id=finance 10.0.0.1
    Starting ike-scan 1.7.2 with 1 hosts (http://www.nta-monitor.com/ike-scan/)
    10.0.0.1 Aggressive Mode Handshake returned
    SA=(Enc=3DES Hash=MD5 Group=2:modp1024 Auth=XAUTH LifeType=Seconds
    LifeDuration=28800)
    KeyExchange(128 bytes)
    Nonce(20 bytes)
    ID(Type=ID_IPV4_ADDR, Value=10.0.0.1)
    Hash(16 bytes)
    VID=12f5f28c457168a9702d9fe274cc0100 (Cisco Unity)
    VID=09002689dfd6b712 (XAUTH)
    VID=afcad71368a1f1c96b8696fc77570100 (Dead Peer Detection)
    VID=4048b7d56ebce88525e7de7f00d6c2d3c0000000 (IKE Fragmentation)
    VID=65963c60eacf802220adccf628738746
    VID=1f07f70eaa6514d3b0fa96542a500400 (Cisco VPN Concentrator)

    Ending ike-scan 1.7.2: 1 hosts scanned in 0.423 seconds (2.36 hosts/sec). 1
    returned handshake;
    0 returned notify

    3.2. Response to invalid groupname "administration":

    $ ike-scan -A --idtype=11 -M --auth=65001 --id=administration 10.0.0.1
    Starting ike-scan 1.7.2 with 1 hosts (http://www.nta-monitor.com/ike-scan/)

    Ending ike-scan 1.7.2: 1 hosts scanned in 0.594 seconds (1.68 hosts/sec). 0
    returned handshake;
    0 returned notify

    4. Affected Versions:

    The issue is believed to affect all models of Cisco VPN 3000 Concentrator:
    3005, 3015, 3020, 3030, 3060 and 3080. We believe that all software
    versions prior to 4.1.7.F are vulnerable.

    5. Solution:

    Upgrade to software version 4.1.7.F or later. Cisco customers with a valid
    login may obtain the new software from the Cisco website. Cisco has stated
    in the release notes that this software version is not vulnerable to the
    issue, but NTA Monitor have not verified this claim.

    Alternatively, use certificate authentication rather than group
    authentication. This vulnerability does not apply to certificate
    authentication.

    6. Timeline:

    The vulnerability was first discovered on 8th July 2004, and was reported
    to Cisco's security team (PSIRT) on 20th September 2004. Cisco were able
    to reproduce the issue using the ike-scan tool, and bug ID CSCeg00323 was
    opened on 11th October 2004. Software version 4.1.7.F, which claims to
    have fixed the issue, was released on 19th May 2005.

    7. References:

    Cisco Bug ID CSCeg00323 "vpn3k - inconsistent behavior on scanning".
    NTA Monitor advisory
    http://www.nta-monitor.com/news/vpn-...ator/index.htm

    8. Other Information:

    This is one of the classes of vulnerability discussed in the VPN flaws
    whitepaper, which was released in January 2005. This whitepaper is
    available at:
    http://www.nta-monitor.com/news/vpn-...Whitepaper.pdf

    Roy Hills


    --
    Roy Hills Tel: +44 1634 721855
    NTA Monitor Ltd FAX: +44 1634 721844
    14 Ashford House, Beaufort Court,
    Medway City Estate, Email: Roy.Hills@nta-monitor.com
    Rochester, Kent ME2 4FA,
    UK WWW: http://www.nta-monitor.com/


  2. #2
    Dario Ciccarone
    Cisco VPN Concentrator Groupname Enumeration Vulnerability
    Gast
    n/a Berichten
    Berichten zijn liked



    Thread Starter

    RE: Cisco VPN Concentrator Groupname Enumeration Vulnerability

    This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

    ------_=_NextPart_001_01C57CD6.0969B4FE
    Content-Type: text/plain;
    charset="us-ascii"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


    Cisco has made public a Security Notice, available at

    http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/707...-grpname.shtml

    which includes information about the issue, mitigation measures and
    fixed software=20
    availability.

    We would like to thank Roy Hills and NTA-Monitor for following
    responsible disclosure practices and working with us on this issue.

    Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur

    Dario Ciccarone
    CCIE #10395=20
    Product Security Incident Response Team (PSIRT)
    Cisco Systems, Inc.
    dciccaro@cisco.com=20

    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: Roy Hills [mailto:Roy.Hills@nta-monitor.com]=20
    > Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 9:51 AM
    > To: bugtraq@securityfocus.com
    > Subject: Cisco VPN Concentrator Groupname Enumeration Vulnerability
    >=20
    > Cisco VPN Concentrator Groupname Enumeration Vulnerability
    >=20
    > 1. Overview:
    >=20
    > NTA Monitor has discovered a groupname enumeration=20
    > vulnerability in the=20
    > Cisco VPN 3000 series concentrator products while performing=20
    > a VPN security=20
    > test for a customer.
    >=20
    > The vulnerability affects remote access VPNs with groupname=20
    > authentication. Site-to-site VPN operation is not affected,=20
    > nor is remote=20
    > access with certificate authentication. In practice, we find=20
    > that most=20
    > concentrators are configured for remote access with groupname=20
    > authentication, so this bug will affect the majority of users.
    >=20
    > The vulnerability allows an attacker to use a dictionary attack to=20
    > determine valid group names on the concentrator. Once a=20
    > valid group name=20
    > is determined, the attacker can then use this to obtain a=20
    > hash from the=20
    > concentrator, which can then be cracked offline to determine=20
    > the group=20
    > password.
    >=20
    > Once an attacker has a valid groupname and group password, they can=20
    > potentially mount a Man-in-the-Middle (MitM) attack against=20
    > the XAUTH user=20
    > authentication mechanism. This allows the attacker to snoop on VPN=20
    > traffic, alter VPN traffic, or gain access to the network=20
    > protected by the=20
    > VPN. This MitM attack works even if strong authentication=20
    > such as SecurID=20
    > is used for user authentication.
    >=20
    > 2. Vulnerability Details:
    >=20
    > The vulnerability allows an attacker to enumerate valid=20
    > groupnames on a=20
    > Cisco VPN concentrator through either a dictionary attack, or=20
    > a brute-force=20
    > attack. The issue exists because the concentrator responds to valid=20
    > groupnames differently to the way in which it responds to=20
    > invalid groupnames.
    >=20
    > The exploit involves sending an IKE Aggressive Mode packet with the=20
    > groupname to be tested in the Identity (ID) payload. The ID=20
    > Type is 11,=20
    > which corresponds to ID_KEY_ID. If the specified groupname=20
    > is valid, the=20
    > concentrator will respond; if it is not valid, then the=20
    > concentrator will=20
    > not respond. The ike-scan tool can be used to demonstrate=20
    > this vulnerability.
    >=20
    > The vulnerability is present in both normal IKE over UDP, and=20
    > also Cisco=20
    > proprietary TCP-encapsulated IKE. The ike-scan tool can use either=20
    > transport type: for Cisco IKE in TCP, you need to specify the option=20
    > --tcp=3D2. When using TCP encapsulation, an invalid groupname=20
    > causes the=20
    > concentrator to send a TCP RST packet, which causes ike-scan=20
    > to return the=20
    > error message "recvfrom: Connection reset by peer".
    >=20
    > The groupname guessing rate depends on the bandwidth between=20
    > the attacker's=20
    > system and the concentrator. Because most of the group names=20
    > tried will be=20
    > incorrect, and therefore the concentrator won't respond, it's=20
    > only the=20
    > bandwidth from the attacker to the concentrator that matters;=20
    > the bandwidth=20
    > from the concentrator back to the attacker is not important.
    >=20
    > An IKE aggressive mode packet with a single transform, using=20
    > Diffie-Hellman=20
    > group 2, and having an eight character groupname has an IKE=20
    > packet size of=20
    > 256 bytes. Adding the eight byte UDP header and 20 byte IP=20
    > header gives a=20
    > total size of 284 bytes or 2,272 bits. Assuming a link speed of=20
    > 2Mbits/sec, this gives a guessing rate of 2,000,000 / 2,272 =3D=20
    > 880 guesses=20
    > per second.
    >=20
    > A guessing rate of 880 per second is 3,168,000 per hour or=20
    > 76,032,000 per=20
    > day. This rate is sufficient to perform an extensive=20
    > dictionary attack, or=20
    > a limited brute-force attack. The concentrator does not limit the=20
    > groupname guessing rate, nor does it blacklist hosts that=20
    > perform groupname=20
    > enumeration: in tests, it was possible to get a successful=20
    > response to a=20
    > valid groupname immediately after thousands of incorrect attempts.
    >=20
    > Once a valid groupname is obtained, it is possible to use=20
    > this groupname to=20
    > obtain a hash from the concentrator, and mount an offline=20
    > password-guessing=20
    > attack against this hash to obtain the group password. Because the=20
    > password-guessing process is offline, it is fast (hundreds of=20
    > thousands of=20
    > guesses per second), and will not cause the concentrator to log any=20
    > authentication failures.
    >=20
    > A valid groupname and password allows the attacker to=20
    > complete IKE Phase-1=20
    > and establish an ISAKMP SA to the concentrator. They can=20
    > then mount a=20
    > Man-in-the-Middle (MitM) attack against the second-stage=20
    > user-authentication process, which is typically XAUTH.
    >=20
    > The offline password guessing process and MitM attack against=20
    > XAUTH are=20
    > detailed in the VPN flaws whitepaper at=20
    > http://www.nta-monitor.com/news/vpn-...hitepaper.pdf.
    >=20
    > 3. Example:
    >=20
    > The example below shows the two different concentrator=20
    > responses: the first=20
    > is for the valid groupname "finance", and the second is for=20
    > the invalid=20
    > groupname "administration". We see that the concentrator=20
    > responds to valid=20
    > groupname, but not to the invalid one. Because of this difference in=20
    > behaviour, it is possible to determine whether a given=20
    > groupname is valid=20
    > or not.
    >=20
    > The ike-scan options used in this example are:
    >=20
    > -A Specify IKE Aggressive Mode. The default for=20
    > ike-scan is=20
    > Main Mode.
    > --idtype=3D11 Specify ID Type 11 for the ID payload. This=20
    > corresponds to=20
    > ID_KEY_ID.
    > -M Multiline: Display each payload on a separate=20
    > line, which=20
    > makes the output easier to read.
    > --auth=3D65001 Specify authentication method 65001, which=20
    > corresponds to=20
    > XAUTH.
    > --id=3Dfinance Specify the string to be used for the ID payload.
    > 10.0.0.1 The IP address of the target VPN concentrator.
    >=20
    > 3.1. Response to valid groupname "finance":
    >=20
    > $ ike-scan -A --idtype=3D11 -M --auth=3D65001 --id=3Dfinance 10.0.0.1
    > Starting ike-scan 1.7.2 with 1 hosts=20
    > (http://www.nta-monitor.com/ike-scan/)
    > 10.0.0.1 Aggressive Mode Handshake returned
    > SA=3D(Enc=3D3DES Hash=3DMD5 Group=3D2:modp1024 Auth=3DXAUTH =

    LifeType=3DSeconds=20
    > LifeDuration=3D28800)
    > KeyExchange(128 bytes)
    > Nonce(20 bytes)
    > ID(Type=3DID_IPV4_ADDR, Value=3D10.0.0.1)
    > Hash(16 bytes)
    > VID=3D12f5f28c457168a9702d9fe274cc0100 (Cisco Unity)
    > VID=3D09002689dfd6b712 (XAUTH)
    > VID=3Dafcad71368a1f1c96b8696fc77570100 (Dead Peer Detection)
    > VID=3D4048b7d56ebce88525e7de7f00d6c2d3c0000000 (IKE Fragmentation)
    > VID=3D65963c60eacf802220adccf628738746
    > VID=3D1f07f70eaa6514d3b0fa96542a500400 (Cisco VPN Concentrator)
    >=20
    > Ending ike-scan 1.7.2: 1 hosts scanned in 0.423 seconds (2.36=20
    > hosts/sec). 1=20
    > returned handshake;
    > 0 returned notify
    >=20
    > 3.2. Response to invalid groupname "administration":
    >=20
    > $ ike-scan -A --idtype=3D11 -M --auth=3D65001 --id=3Dadministration =

    10.0.0.1
    > Starting ike-scan 1.7.2 with 1 hosts=20
    > (http://www.nta-monitor.com/ike-scan/)
    >=20
    > Ending ike-scan 1.7.2: 1 hosts scanned in 0.594 seconds (1.68=20
    > hosts/sec). 0=20
    > returned handshake;
    > 0 returned notify
    >=20
    > 4. Affected Versions:
    >=20
    > The issue is believed to affect all models of Cisco VPN 3000=20
    > Concentrator:=20
    > 3005, 3015, 3020, 3030, 3060 and 3080. We believe that all software=20
    > versions prior to 4.1.7.F are vulnerable.
    >=20
    > 5. Solution:
    >=20
    > Upgrade to software version 4.1.7.F or later. Cisco=20
    > customers with a valid=20
    > login may obtain the new software from the Cisco website. =20
    > Cisco has stated=20
    > in the release notes that this software version is not=20
    > vulnerable to the=20
    > issue, but NTA Monitor have not verified this claim.
    >=20
    > Alternatively, use certificate authentication rather than group=20
    > authentication. This vulnerability does not apply to certificate=20
    > authentication.
    >=20
    > 6. Timeline:
    >=20
    > The vulnerability was first discovered on 8th July 2004, and=20
    > was reported=20
    > to Cisco's security team (PSIRT) on 20th September 2004. =20
    > Cisco were able=20
    > to reproduce the issue using the ike-scan tool, and bug ID=20
    > CSCeg00323 was=20
    > opened on 11th October 2004. Software version 4.1.7.F, which=20
    > claims to=20
    > have fixed the issue, was released on 19th May 2005.
    >=20
    > 7. References:
    >=20
    > Cisco Bug ID CSCeg00323 "vpn3k - inconsistent behavior on scanning".
    > NTA Monitor advisory=20
    > http://www.nta-monitor.com/news/vpn-...VPN-Concentrat
    > or/index.htm
    >=20
    > 8. Other Information:
    >=20
    > This is one of the classes of vulnerability discussed in the=20
    > VPN flaws=20
    > whitepaper, which was released in January 2005. This whitepaper is=20
    > available at:=20
    > http://www.nta-monitor.com/news/vpn-...Whitepaper.pdf
    >=20
    > Roy Hills
    >=20
    >=20
    > --
    > Roy Hills Tel: +44 1634 721855
    > NTA Monitor Ltd FAX: +44 1634 721844
    > 14 Ashford House, Beaufort Court,
    > Medway City Estate, Email:=20
    > Roy.Hills@nta-monitor.com
    > Rochester, Kent ME2 4FA,=20
    > UK WWW: http://www.nta-monitor.com/ =20
    >=20


    ------_=_NextPart_001_01C57CD6.0969B4FE
    Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
    name="cisco-vpn-grpname-adv.txt.asc"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
    Content-Description: cisco-vpn-grpname-adv.txt.asc
    Content-Disposition: attachment;
    filename="cisco-vpn-grpname-adv.txt.asc"

    Ci0tLS0tQkVHSU4gUEdQIFNJR05FRCBNRVNTQUdFLS0tLS0KSG FzaDogU0hBMQoKVGhpcyBpcyBp
    biByZXNwb25zZSB0byB0aGUgcG9zdGluZyBieSBSb3kgSGlsbH MgZnJvbSBOVEEtTW9uaXRvciBm
    cm9tIEp1bmUgMjAsIDIwMDUsIGVudGl0bGVkICdDaXNjbyBWUE 4gQ29uY2VudHJhdG9yIEdyb3Vw
    bmFtZSBFbnVtZXJhdGlvbiBWdWxuZXJhYmlsaXR5JwoKQ2lzY2 8gaGFzIG1hZGUgcHVibGljIGEg
    U2VjdXJpdHkgTm90aWNlLCBhdmFpbGFibGUgYXQKCmh0dHA6Ly 93d3cuY2lzY28uY29tL3dhcnAv
    cHVibGljLzcwNy9jaXNjby1zbi0yMDA1MDYyNC12cG4tZ3Jwbm FtZS5zaHRtbAoKd2hpY2ggaW5j
    bHVkZXMgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24gYWJvdXQgdGhlIGlzc3VlLCBtaX RpZ2F0aW9uIG1lYXN1cmVzIGFu
    ZCBmaXhlZCBzb2Z0d2FyZSAKYXZhaWxhYmlsaXR5LgoKQXQgdG hlIHNhbWUgdGltZSwgd2Ugd291
    bGQgbGlrZSB0byB0aGFuayBSb3kgSGlsbHMgYW5kIE5UQS1Nb2 5pdG9yIGZvciBmb2xsb3dpbmcg
    cmVzcG9uc2libGUgZGlzY2xvc3VyZSBwcmFjdGljZXMgYW5kIH dvcmtpbmcgd2l0aCB1cyBvbiB0
    aGlzIGlzc3VlLgoKUXVpZHF1aWQgbGF0aW5lIGRpY3R1bSBzaX QsIGFsdHVtIHZpZGl0dXIKCkRh
    cmlvIENpY2Nhcm9uZQpDQ0lFICMxMDM5NSAKUHJvZHVjdCBTZW N1cml0eSBJbmNpZGVudCBSZXNw
    b25zZSBUZWFtIChQU0lSVCkKQ2lzY28gU3lzdGVtcywgSW5jLg pkY2ljY2Fyb0BjaXNjby5jb20K
    Ci0tLS0tQkVHSU4gUEdQIFNJR05BVFVSRS0tLS0tClZlcnNpb2 46IFBHUCA4LjEKCmlRQS9Bd1VC
    UXJ4VmdZeVZHQis2R3VEd0VRSzdwZ0NneGpMZDQrWEJydGhXa3 FhUGZhSkpwWXFBTlFzQW9NcTgK
    SHdkWG1wYWFhTG5OOHlyQlVPbW5OTnNrCj1BZ1VlCi0tLS0tRU 5EIFBHUCBTSUdOQVRVUkUtLS0t
    LQo=

    ------_=_NextPart_001_01C57CD6.0969B4FE--

Webhostingtalk.nl

Contact

  • Rokin 113-115
  • 1012 KP, Amsterdam
  • Nederland
  • Contact
© Copyright 2001-2026 Webhostingtalk.nl.
Web Statistics