A little bit of discussion going on Mikrotik forum.  One guy says exploit 
didn't work with Mikrotik SIP ALG enabled, but I wouldn't take that to the 
bank, he doesn't give any details of what he tried.
https://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=168372


-----Original Message-----
From: AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> On Behalf Of Adam Moffett
Sent: Monday, November 2, 2020 9:15 AM
To: af@af.afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] NAT Slipstreaming - or how to attack any internal host 
behind NAT

I read a little deeper just now.  I was wondering how he avoided having the 
browser toss errors or ask permission to run the javascript, or what not.  
Apparently the javascript figures out the MTU and maximum segment size, then 
sends an HTTP post with data large enough to be fragmented. The data portion is 
crafted so that the second fragment starts with something that looks like a SIP 
REGISTER.  The Netgear is parsing the beginnings of packets and watching for 
things that look like SIP messages, and apparently this process is simple 
enough to mistake this artificial SIP REGISTER in the beginning of a packet 
fragment for the real thing.

Since the attacker controls the web server, he can respond back from port 5060 
as if he really received a SIP REGISTER.  In the SIP REGISTER if he has 
"Contact: <sip:samy@192.168.0.109:1234;transport=TCP>" then he responds back 
using dst port 1234 and now that port is open to the victim.

The Javascript never doesn't open a real connection, it does an HTTP POST which 
it's normally allowed to do.  The ALG is tricked by an imaginary connection 
attempt in the second packet fragment. It's not explicitly stated to be a Linux 
vulnerability, but he informed his attack strategy with knowledge of how Linux 
Netfilter behaves.....which implies other devices with Linux OS's could exhibit 
the same issue as the Netgear R7000.

It's slicker than greased owl shit.....but it's worth reiterating that you also 
need something to exploit on the target device.


On 11/2/2020 9:36 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
> I believe in the SIP world the advice is always turn off the SIP ALG.  But on 
> customer managed routers, the customer is never going to change it from the 
> default, they don't even update the firmware.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> On Behalf Of Adam Moffett
> Sent: Monday, November 2, 2020 8:22 AM
> To: af@af.afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] NAT Slipstreaming - or how to attack any internal host 
> behind NAT
>
> It seems to exploit behavior of the application layer gateway. That allows 
> stuff like RTP and FTP which use dynamic ports to operate through NAT.  The 
> script tricks the gateway into forwarding an arbitrary port number to the 
> target device. Presumably you then attack a vulnerable service on the target 
> device, or DOS him, or what have you.
>
> He's specifically doing this with a Netgear R7000.  It's not clear to me 
> whether it was a Netgear bug, or a bug in the kernel, or with ALG's in 
> general.
>
>
> On 11/1/2020 10:47 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
>> I didn't have time to read all the comments (or the brain cells to
>> digest them), but there's a discussion here:
>> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24955891
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> On Behalf Of fiber...@mail.com
>> Sent: Sunday, November 1, 2020 9:23 AM
>> To: af@af.afmug.com
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] NAT Slipstreaming - or how to attack any internal
>> host behind NAT
>>
>> The URL points to the security researcher's writeup on the attack and
>> the page contains a link to proof of concept source code on github.
>>
>>> Sent: Sunday, November 01, 2020
>>> From: "Robert" <i...@avantwireless.com>
>>> To: af@af.afmug.com
>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] NAT Slipstreaming - or how to attack any
>>> internal
>> host behind NAT
>>> Was that site a source of the "evil javascript"?
>>>
>>> On 11/1/20 5:39 AM, fiber...@mail.com wrote:
>>>> Synopsis: NAT Slipstreaming allows an attacker to remotely access
>>>> any
>> TCP/UDP service bound to a victim machine, bypassing the victim's
>> NAT/firewall (arbitrary firewall pinhole control), just by the victim
>> visiting a website.
>>>> https://samy.pl/slipstream/
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> AF mailing list
>>> AF@af.afmug.com
>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>>>
> --
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>
>
>

-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com



-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Reply via email to