Skip to main content

SIP extension enumeration in Bluebox-ng

There are some well known SIP extension enumeration vulnerabilities in different VoIP servers, specially in Asterisk. This brute-force vector is based on the study of the authentication responses of the target server. Sometimes its replies are different in the case that the client uses a valid extension, so it's easy to discover them.

This vector is normally classified as a low security risk. Moreover we're moving towards a federated SIP environment, in which the extension is the public email address of the user. But it's still important in some cases:
  • To guide next steps during a penetration test. In example, you can use the discovered extension to reduce the number of attempts in the phase of SIP extensión brute-force.
  • Some RCE (Remote Code Execution) exploits need a valid extension to work.
After a little research, these are the known vulns:
  • CVE-2009-3727: It's quite old and it's practically not present in real environments. It's still not implemented in Bluebox-ng, waiting for the complete re-write of the SIP stack in which is working Damián.
  • CVE-2011-2536: It's much more common than the last one. The option "alwaysauthreject", which the CVE speaks about, is disabled by default in old versions of Asterisk and a common bad practice in actual ones. Bluebox-ng implements it in the "sip-brute-ext" module. In this old post I deep a bit more in the used method.
  • (There is no CVE): This technique uses INVITE packets, there are some situations in which Asterisk allows the same goal even with the parameter "alwaysauthreject" enabled. They were discovered by Francesco Tornieri and published in packet storm. Now, the same Bluebox-ng module implements it. So @dvirus, you can now use it against your Busy Tone VulnPBX virtual machine ;).
  • CVE-2011-4597: It's similar to the other ones, but this time the server (Asterisk) answer to a different port when a valid extension exists due to an specific NAT related setup. This technique is supported through "sip-brute-ext-nat" module.
Finally I've also solved an important problem with the asynchrony in "sip-brute-pass" module which was very annoying to deploy a serious penetration test. :)

Popular posts from this blog

ISO 27001: Inventario de los activos de información

Uno de los primeros pasos que debe seguir la entidad para adaptarse a la norma ISO 27001 es realizar el inventario de activos que contendrá todos aquellos activos de información que tienen algún valor para la organización y que quedan dentro del alcance del SGSI . En un principio puede parecer un poco abrumador para un principiante(como yo) por la enorme cantidad de activos que se te van ocurriendo por eso decidí empezar por clasificarlos de alguna forma, de entre las múltiples maneras que me encontré elijo la definida por los expertos del foro ISO27k ya que me parece la más completa, mostrando ejemplos de cada tipo y es válida para entidades de muy distinta naturaleza. Éste podría ser un buen punto para comenzar siempre teniendo en cuenta lo que nos aconsejan también en ese foro: "Debido a que los activos son algo cambiante, incluso si pudieras cubrir absolutamente todo lo que hay hoy, mañana la situación sería un poco diferente y más en unas semanas, meses o años. Así que

SIP INVITE attack with Metasploit

Some days ago my friend  @pepeluxx  wrote  another post  about INVITE attacks. He spoke about a  @sinologic   project  which allows to everybody passing some security tests to SIP servers. Furthermore he also published a perl script to do the same task. So I implemented it on Metasploit because I think It could be really useful during a pentesting. It’s interesting because these attacks are really dangerous, normally, attackers try to call to expensive locations. This target numbers often have special charges and they make money with this. Here there are two well known examples: http://blog.sipvicious.org/2010/12/11-million-euro-loss-in-voip-fraud-and.html http://snapvoip.blogspot.com.es/2009/02/calls-to-cuba-and-voip-attacks.html I’m not going to deep in this vector because of being a well known (and old!!) one. Basically the attacker tries to make a call using a misconfigured PBX. This is allowed because  SIP RFC  says that an extension has not to be registered to be abl