Jump to content



Photo

Test your router to see if its vulnerable to the UPnP Exploit.

upnpvulnerabilitytest

  • Please log in to reply
75 replies to this topic

#16 Thrackerzod

Thrackerzod

    Neowinian Senior

  • Tech Issues Solved: 4
  • Joined: 14-November 01

Posted 04 February 2013 - 08:23

My TP-Link TL-R860 passed with UPnP enabled, even though I normally disable it anyway since I don't use it for anything.


#17 ashpowell

ashpowell

    Neowinian

  • Joined: 13-November 06
  • Location: UK
  • OS: Windows 8.1
  • Phone: Nexus 5

Posted 04 February 2013 - 08:28

THE EQUIPMENT AT THE TARGET IP ADDRESS
DID NOT RESPOND TO OUR UPnP PROBES!

I have the cheapest netgear router I could find, and uPnP is enabled..

#18 LUTZIFER

LUTZIFER

    Resident Evil

  • Joined: 09-January 02
  • Location: Vancouver Island, BC CANADA

Posted 04 February 2013 - 08:29

THE EQUIPMENT AT THE TARGET IP ADDRESS
DID NOT RESPOND TO OUR UPnP PROBES!

Why would you disable uPnP anyways? It allows internal hosts to dynamically open ports like XBL or PSN for gaming and voice. Without it you'd have to manually open every single port those services and similar ones use. Just keep your internal hosts clean.

Yeah I agree with keeping uPnP enabled also.
I ran many different servers over the years, long time ago now, so I had many ports opened for access, and that site's port tests always showed me as being safe and secure.
All depends on what type of security you're running on your computers.

#19 The_Decryptor

The_Decryptor

    STEAL THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE

  • Tech Issues Solved: 5
  • Joined: 28-September 02
  • Location: Sol System
  • OS: iSymbian 9.2 SP24.8 Mars Bar

Posted 04 February 2013 - 08:48

There should be no issue with running UPnP/NAT-PMP on your router if it's properly configured, I knew mine would pass this test from the start since it exposes it's configuration in a good manner (It only allows hosts on the 192.168/16 subnet to create a forwarding rule, and said rule has to point at the host that requested it, otherwise it's rejected), and shows what ports are forwarded on what protocol.

Never mind the fact that the firewall should reject outside communication before it even gets to the UPnP/NAT-PMP daemon anyway, if it isn't being blocked you have bigger issues.

#20 Luc2k

Luc2k

    Neowinian

  • Tech Issues Solved: 4
  • Joined: 16-May 09

Posted 04 February 2013 - 09:00

So, did anyone find their router vulnerable?

#21 +BudMan

BudMan

    Neowinian Senior

  • Tech Issues Solved: 106
  • Joined: 04-July 02
  • Location: Schaumburg, IL
  • OS: Win7, Vista, 2k3, 2k8, XP, Linux, FreeBSD, OSX, etc. etc.

Posted 04 February 2013 - 13:26

"Without it you'd have to manually open every single port those services and similar ones use."

So -- your talking a handful of ports at most.. UPnP is to allow unsolicted inbound traffic to get through your nat router. Traffic initiated by you, or in answer to your traffic is allowed.

Most people have no use of UPnP, it has been a nightmare since it was created -- who in their right mind thought, hey lets allow ports to be opened on your gateway/firewall without any sort of auth at all!!

And no UPnP should not be reachable via your public IP that is for damn sure.

#22 TheExperiment

TheExperiment

    Reality Bomb

  • Tech Issues Solved: 1
  • Joined: 11-October 03
  • Location: Everywhere
  • OS: 8.1 x64

Posted 04 February 2013 - 13:32

I disable it anyway. The fact that UPnP, by design, lets any application communicate with the router and open ports should make any security conscious user uneasy.

If you trust what's in your network and have the routers firewall up I don't see how it could.

#23 +BudMan

BudMan

    Neowinian Senior

  • Tech Issues Solved: 106
  • Joined: 04-July 02
  • Location: Schaumburg, IL
  • OS: Win7, Vista, 2k3, 2k8, XP, Linux, FreeBSD, OSX, etc. etc.

Posted 04 February 2013 - 13:54

^ the point is UPnP can remove your firewall settings. Without even a nod to you that its doing so, nor any sort of auth method to allow it.

There really needs to be some form of notification and auth to the mechanism - and then sure it would be a valid tool in opening firewall ports for the masses.

#24 +BeLGaRaTh

BeLGaRaTh

    Been here since year .

  • Joined: 09-August 01
  • Location: Liverpool, England Name: John
  • OS: WIn 7 Pro x64
  • Phone: Samsung Galaxy S3

Posted 04 February 2013 - 14:14

Steve Gibson, the person who creates the most FUD on the internet with his crazy rants and observations!!!

#25 xendrome

xendrome

    In God We Trust; All Others We Monitor

  • Tech Issues Solved: 13
  • Joined: 05-December 01
  • OS: Windows 8.1 Pro x64

Posted 04 February 2013 - 14:42

THE EQUIPMENT AT THE TARGET IP ADDRESS
DID NOT RESPOND TO OUR UPnP PROBES!

Why would you disable uPnP anyways? It allows internal hosts to dynamically open ports like XBL or PSN for gaming and voice. Without it you'd have to manually open every single port those services and similar ones use. Just keep your internal hosts clean.


It would allow any malicious program to actively contact your router, open whatever ports it wants, and then transmit data through those ports all without your knowledge.... pretty big security hole if you ask me.

Steve Gibson, the person who creates the most FUD on the internet with his crazy rants and observations!!!


I'm not going to argue that the fact that he is crazy, which he probably is, but he is also very smart. And Facts do not = FUD.

Are you up to date on this UPnP issue? The typical way UPnP works is, an active program on one of the systems on your network will contact the router and open ports for whatever program/service to pass data through. Sounds ok right, well there is an exploit on a TON of routers that allows that request to be made from the OUTSIDE over the WAN, so if you have one of these affected routers, anyone outside your network, can open up ports into your network using a little bit of packet "magic". It's a pretty big deal.

#26 COKid

COKid

    Neowinian Senior

  • Joined: 07-April 10
  • Location: Loveland, CO

Posted 04 February 2013 - 14:46

THE EQUIPMENT AT THE TARGET IP ADDRESS
DID RESPOND TO OUR PROBES!

It asked to be probed more often, as it hasn't been getting any lately.


:)

#27 Klownicle

Klownicle

    I get a custom title? Sweett.

  • Joined: 22-June 02

Posted 04 February 2013 - 19:04

UPNP just asks for trouble, why would I want some phantom application allowing itself in and out of my firewall. Not to mention left over ports being left open. If I have anything that needs opened I do it myself.

#28 Obi-Wan Kenobi

Obi-Wan Kenobi

    "You were the chosen one!"

  • Joined: 11-November 02
  • Location: West-Central Texas

Posted 04 February 2013 - 19:11

My main router is an old (and I mean REALLY old) Netgear RP614 v2, and it is not vulnerable. :huh:

Edit: Happy Birthday, Budman!!!! :punk: :pint: :pint: :pint: :pint: :pint: :pint: :pint: :pint: :pint: :pint: :pint: :pint:

#29 Crisp

Crisp

    To infinity and beyond

  • Tech Issues Solved: 2
  • Joined: 06-May 10
  • Location: 127.0.0.1

Posted 04 February 2013 - 19:20

pfSense, enough said.

#30 _dandy_

_dandy_

    Neowinian Senior

  • Joined: 07-May 04

Posted 04 February 2013 - 19:43

To those who don't get it and want the short version:

The problem is that some routers will respond to UPnP requests, wherever they're coming from. If they're coming from the LAN--no problem (unless you don't trust other machines/devices within your own LAN). If they're coming from the WAN port--then that's bad and you should disable it.

If you need more details than that, then listen to the podcast on the GRC site.