Feeds

Cisco slip puts hardware at risk

Borg announces weak password feature

Providing a secure and efficient Helpdesk

Cisco has issued a security advisory revealing that it mis-coded the implementation of a new password hashing algorithm.

Its “Type 4” password implementation was supposed to salt passwords and then run them through 1,000 iterations of SHA-256 for storage, following the Password-Based Key Derivation Function (PBKDF) version 2 described in RFC 2898.

In what Cisco calls an “implementation issue”, its engineers forgot to salt passwords, and set the SHA-256 iteration count to 1. As its advisory states: “This approach causes a Type 4 password to be less resilient to brute-force attacks than a Type 5 password of equivalent complexity.”

The problem was discovered by Philipp Schmidt and Jens Steube from the Hashcat project. Because of the weak protection, they were able to decode a hash that had been posted to inetpro.org, and as noted by Ars, enough information has leaked to permit “millions” of hashes to be cracked in hours, if anyone gets their hands on the stored hashes.

The vulnerability affects kit running Cisco IOS and Cisco IOS XE releases based on the Cisco IOS 15 code base, the advisory says, along with instructions for determining whether a user is running vulnerable code.

Adding insult to injury, the implementation of the broken Type 4 password also disabled the Type 5 hashing it replaced. From the advisory:

“A device running a Cisco IOS or IOS XE release with support for Type 4 passwords lost the capability to create a Type 5 password from a user-provided plaintext password.

“Backward compatibility problems may arise when downgrading from a device running a Cisco IOS or IOS XE release with Type 4 password support and Type 4 passwords configured to a Cisco IOS or Cisco IOS XE release that does not support Type 4 passwords. Depending on the specific device configuration, the administrator may not be able to log in to the device or to change into privileged EXEC mode, requiring a password recovery process to be performed.”

Cisco says a new password type will be introduced. “This will allow Cisco customers to gradually migrate to the new password type, while allowing them to use the existing syntax to preserve backward compatibility. The exact syntax for the new commands is yet to be determined.” ®

Choosing a cloud hosting partner with confidence

More from The Register

next story
SMASH the Bash bug! Apple and Red Hat scramble for patch batches
'Applying multiple security updates is extremely difficult'
Shellshock: 'Larger scale attack' on its way, warn securo-bods
Not just web servers under threat - though TENS of THOUSANDS have been hit
Apple's new iPhone 6 vulnerable to last year's TouchID fingerprint hack
But unsophisticated thieves need not attempt this trick
Hackers thrash Bash Shellshock bug: World races to cover hole
Update your gear now to avoid early attacks hitting the web
Oracle SHELLSHOCKER - data titan lists unpatchables
Database kingpin lists 32 products that can't be patched (yet) as GNU fixes second vuln
Who.is does the Harlem Shake
Blame it on LOLing XSS terroristas
Researchers tell black hats: 'YOU'RE SOOO PREDICTABLE'
Want to register that domain? We're way ahead of you.
prev story

Whitepapers

A strategic approach to identity relationship management
ForgeRock commissioned Forrester to evaluate companies’ IAM practices and requirements when it comes to customer-facing scenarios versus employee-facing ones.
Storage capacity and performance optimization at Mizuno USA
Mizuno USA turn to Tegile storage technology to solve both their SAN and backup issues.
High Performance for All
While HPC is not new, it has traditionally been seen as a specialist area – is it now geared up to meet more mainstream requirements?
Beginner's guide to SSL certificates
De-mystify the technology involved and give you the information you need to make the best decision when considering your online security options.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.