• Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Search
  • Register
  • Login
Netgate Discussion Forum
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Search
  • Register
  • Login

Security vulnerabilities?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Off-Topic & Non-Support Discussion
9 Posts 3 Posters 5.1k Views
Loading More Posts
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • M
    merald
    last edited by Apr 1, 2014, 2:34 PM

    What is the process of reporting security vulnerabilies? Or get confirmed that they is fixed in release?

    Are going to put in pfsense in a PCI DSS environment and made a nessus scan. Got this results:

    4/1/2014 Nessus / Scans / Hosts / Vulnerabilities

    HIGH lighttpd < 1.4.34 Multiple Vulnerabilities
    HIGH lighttpd < 1.4.35 Multiple Vulnerabilities
    MEDIUM NTP monlist Command Enabled
    MEDIUM SSL Certificate Cannot Be Trusted
    MEDIUM SSL Certificate with Wrong Hostname
    MEDIUM SSL SelfSigned Certificate
    MEDIUM Web Server Allows Password AutoCompletion
    LOW SSL Certificate Chain Contains RSA Keys Less Than 2048 bits
    LOW SSL RC4 Cipher Suites Supported
    INFO Service Detection
    INFO Nessus SYN scanner
    INFO CGI Generic Injectable Parameter

    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
    • P
      peersu
      last edited by Apr 1, 2014, 6:20 PM

      The only ones that are actually an issue are the LIGHTTPD ones; everything else you can fix with having an actual SSL cert or manual server configurations.  Not sure of the procedure to patch the web server vulns without breaking anything… caveat being I'm also pretty new to Pfsense in general.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • J
        jimp Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate
        last edited by Apr 1, 2014, 8:07 PM

        2.1.1 is coming soon (days at most) and contains a newer lighttpd

        Remember: Upvote with the 👍 button for any user/post you find to be helpful, informative, or deserving of recognition!

        Need help fast? Netgate Global Support!

        Do not Chat/PM for help!

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • M
          merald
          last edited by Apr 2, 2014, 12:11 PM Apr 2, 2014, 12:08 PM

          I am very impressed of your fast response to this. If we take it in production I will buy support from you guys.

          SSL is of course fixed by using certs from our own CA. My main concern is 3things;

          1.
          HIGH lighttpd < 1.4.34 Multiple Vulnerabilities
          HIGH lighttpd < 1.4.35 Multiple Vulnerabilities

          MEDIUM Web Server Allows Password AutoCompletion (PCI-DSS variant)

          Description
          The remote web server contains at least HTML form field containing an input of type 'password' where 'autocomplete' is not set to 'off'.

          While this does not represent a risk to this web server per se, it does mean that users who use the affected forms may have their credentials saved in their browsers, which could in turn lead to a loss of confidentiality if any of them use a shared host or their machine is compromised at some point.

          Solution
          Add the attribute 'autocomplete=off' to these fields to prevent browsers from caching credentials.

          Output
          Page : /
          Destination Page: /index.php

          Page : /index.php
          Destination Page: /index.php
          Port Hosts
          443 / tcp / www
          10.1

          3. MEDIUMNTP monlist Command Enabled

          Description

          The version of ntpd on the remote host has the 'monlist' command enabled. This command returns a list of recent hosts that have connected to the service. As such, it can be used for network reconnaissance or, along with a spoofed source IP, a distributed denial of service attack.
          Solution

          If using NTP from the Network Time Protocol Project, either upgrade to NTP 4.2.7-p26 or later, or add 'disable monitor' to the 'ntp.conf' configuration file and restart the service. Otherwise, contact the vendor.

          Otherwise, limit access to the affected service to trusted hosts.
          See Also

          https://isc.sans.edu/diary/NTP+reflection+attack/17300
          http://bugs.ntp.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1532
          http://kb.juniper.net/InfoCenter/index?page=content&id=JSA10613
          Output

          If you can fix number 2 also it will be a fully PCI compliant device! More than your fellows Barracuda Networks can do ;) Number 3 counld be fixed by just disable the ntp service, but if you want… :)

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • J
            jimp Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate
            last edited by Apr 2, 2014, 12:42 PM

            @merald:

            1.
            HIGH lighttpd < 1.4.34 Multiple Vulnerabilities
            HIGH lighttpd < 1.4.35 Multiple Vulnerabilities

            Fixed in 2.1.1

            @merald:

            MEDIUM Web Server Allows Password AutoCompletion (PCI-DSS variant)

            Fixed by going to System > Advanced and checking "Disable webConfigurator login autocomplete"

            @merald:

            3. MEDIUMNTP monlist Command Enabled

            Fixed on 2.1.1

            Remember: Upvote with the 👍 button for any user/post you find to be helpful, informative, or deserving of recognition!

            Need help fast? Netgate Global Support!

            Do not Chat/PM for help!

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • M
              merald
              last edited by Apr 2, 2014, 9:46 PM

              Awesome! As fast as 2.1.1 is released it going in to production in a PCI DSS environment. Not many appliances you can remove initial user as "admin", do comply with requirement "No vendor accounts" and just use AD-accounts instead. Great work you all! Any last tips about running it on virtual server as VMware?

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • M
                merald
                last edited by Apr 7, 2014, 11:55 AM

                Hi all

                New scan of 2.1.1

                Unfortunately some new one came up:

                Not sure how to handle this, false positive?

                CGI Generic Cross-Site Request Forgery Detection (potential)
                Description

                The spider found HTML forms on the remote web server. Some CGI scripts do not appear to be protected by random tokens, a common anti-cross-site request forgery (CSRF) protection. The web application might be vulnerable to CSRF attacks.

                Note that :

                • Nessus did not exploit the flaw,
                • Nessus cannot identify sensitive actions – for example, on an online bank, consulting an account is less sensitive than transferring money.

                You will have to audit the source of the CGI scripts and check if they are actually affected.
                Solution

                Restrict access to the vulnerable application. Contact the vendor for a patch or upgrade.
                See Also

                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross-site_request_forgery
                Output
                The following CGIs are not protected by a random token :
                /index.php

                And then for the squid package that did not got any vulnerabilites before:

                Squid 2.x / 3.x < 3.1.22 / 3.2.4 / 3.3.0.2 cachemgr.cgi DoS
                Description

                According to its banner, the version of Squid running on the remote host is 2.x or 3.x prior to 3.1.22 / 3.2.4 / 3.3.0.2. The included 'cachemgr.cgi' tool reportedly lacks input validation, which could be abused by any client able to access that tool to perform a denial of service attack on the service host. Note that Nessus did not actually test for this issue, but instead has relied on the version in the server's banner.
                Solution

                Either upgrade to Squid version 3.1.22 / 3.2.4 / 3.3.0.2 or later, or apply the vendor-supplied patch.

                Alternatively, restrict access to this CGI or limit CGI memory consumption via the host web server's configuration options.
                See Also

                http://www.squid-cache.org/Advisories/SQUID-2012_1.txt
                Output
                Version source    : Server: squid/2.7.STABLE9
                  Installed version : 2.7.STABLE9
                  Fixed version    : 3.1.22 / 3.2.4 / 3.3.0.2

                Squid 2.x / 3.x < 3.1.23 / 3.2.6 / 3.3.0.3 cachemgr.cgi DoS
                Description

                According to its banner, the version of Squid running on the remote host is 2.x or 3.x prior to 3.1.23 / 3.2.6 / 3.3.0.3. The included 'cachemgr.cgi' tool reportedly lacks input validation, which could be abused by any client able to access that tool to perform a denial of service attack on the service host.

                Note this fix is a result of an incomplete fix for CVE-2012-5643.
                Further note that Nessus did not actually test for this issue, but instead has relied on the version in the server's banner.
                Solution

                Either upgrade to Squid version 3.1.23 / 3.2.6 / 3.3.0.3 or later, or apply the vendor-supplied patch.

                Alternatively, restrict access to this CGI or limit CGI memory consumption via the host web server's configuration options.
                See Also

                http://www.squid-cache.org/Advisories/SQUID-2012_1.txt
                Output
                Version source    : Server: squid/2.7.STABLE9
                  Installed version : 2.7.STABLE9
                  Fixed version    : 3.1.23 / 3.2.6 / 3.3.0.3

                Squid 2.x / 3.x < 3.1.22 / 3.2.4 / 3.3.0.2 cachemgr.cgi DoS
                Description

                According to its banner, the version of Squid running on the remote host is 2.x or 3.x prior to 3.1.22 / 3.2.4 / 3.3.0.2. The included 'cachemgr.cgi' tool reportedly lacks input validation, which could be abused by any client able to access that tool to perform a denial of service attack on the service host. Note that Nessus did not actually test for this issue, but instead has relied on the version in the server's banner.
                Solution

                Either upgrade to Squid version 3.1.22 / 3.2.4 / 3.3.0.2 or later, or apply the vendor-supplied patch.

                Alternatively, restrict access to this CGI or limit CGI memory consumption via the host web server's configuration options.
                See Also

                http://www.squid-cache.org/Advisories/SQUID-2012_1.txt
                Output
                Version source    : Server: squid/2.7.STABLE9
                  Installed version : 2.7.STABLE9
                  Fixed version    : 3.1.22 / 3.2.4 / 3.3.0.2

                What you experts say?

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • M
                  merald
                  last edited by Apr 9, 2014, 12:01 PM

                  bump  :o

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • M
                    merald
                    last edited by Apr 17, 2014, 7:35 AM

                    Bump again. I offer my Help to do Security scans of new releases, anyone intrested?

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • First post
                      Last post
                    Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.
                      This community forum collects and processes your personal information.
                      consent.not_received