Slashdot Mirror
Cable Modem Hackers Release Improved Firmware
FatCat writes "SecurityFocus has a story about a group of hardware and software hobbyists specializing in embeddded systems who've released their own custom firmware for Motorola Surfboard cable modems. The firmware lets you log in to an interactive VxWorks shell, or issue commands from a Web browser through an http interface. You load it by tapping an undocumented console serial port on the circuit board. So far, uncappers are apparently the primary consumers, and they're downloading up to 400 copies a day."
I would think that doing this could put one in dangar of lossing their service. I this more then likely is a violation of the TOS of most cable ISP's and when you violate a contract( TOS's are contracts of a form ) you void it, so then the cable company is not obligated to server you any more. Is the promise of high speed you don't pay for (theft) worth the lose of service, and posable legal action?
So far, uncappers are apparently the primary consumers, and they're downloading up to 400 copies a day.
/. posted the link. Now something like 30,000 downloaded will be registered today.
That was until
You say things that offend me and I can deal with it. Can you?
Thanks to Slashdot, I'm sure it'll be 40,000 sometime today, that is unless Google changes their graphic to some sore of cable modem and beats Slashdot to the punch.
I've always wondered why people go to so much trouble to uncap their cable modems and stuff. I used dialup for years and NEVER had to worry about messing with my modem to uncap it. My connection was burstable and had absolutely no cap!
The anti-salmon
Ok, while I HATE the fact that my cable is capped, and now I have some invisible limit to my cable modem, there isn't a court in the land that will side with me, blatently breaking a few laws, and ignoring the TOS that was agreed to.
Im just going to sit back for a while and hope something good comes of this... maybe cable providers will find that fighting with these people isnt worth the hassle.
"When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
will be quickly disconnected! More bandwidth for me!
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
I'll have to say that with all the draconian rules being put in place with cable providers that I don't see this as being a new playground for crackers. You'll likely get dropped quicker than you can refresh the BIOS on that cable modem of yours. With DOCSIS compliant cable modems you'll be sure to know that the cable modem company DOES know what you're doing with it.
It ain't free like linux is... so not only are they violating their AUP from their service provider, these guys are using software that they didn't pay for? WindRiver is gonna be pissed!
---
Programming is like sex... Make one mistake and support it the rest of your life.
I have heard stories of cable companies coming down *extremely* hard on uncappers, doing things like banning them from having cable service for life and other such actions.
Given this, and the actions of DirectTV towards those who buy smartcards, I wonder what the cable companies will do.
Will they ignore those who download these firmwares for the advanced features like the remote terminals and have no intention of uncapping, or will they treat everyone who re-flashes their firmware as a "criminal".
Let's make a difference
It's a simple question: Just because you can, should you?
I have been pwned because my
now if someone could do this for my cable modem. Although, I have to wonder how many people will use this to uncap their cable modem only to get in trouble by their provider. In this society, i wonder how long until the developers get sued by the people installing it on their cable modems because they got prosecuted by their provider? Sigh... what a nice little circle
Of course you can always setup a compressed SSH tunnel to speed up the text part of web browsing. I've found you get get upto 400% increases which is nice :)
rus
CPanel + Root from $35/mo - 10% off with discount code SLASHDOT
IANAA (I am not an admin) but shouldn't bandwidth capping be handled at the ISP's end, through a transparent proxy? Not through the cable modem? At the very least couldn't they just have the system automagically cut off service when the packets start flowing too fast, rather than getting into the legal minefields? Then they could say "I'm sorry, our system does not support uncapping" when someone tries and finds their machine not getting anything. Seems a more elegant solution than simply hoping nobody will try and then hosing lawyer hours at them when they do.
In my area, Comcast is the ONLY option (outside of extremely expensive satellite alternatives). If they want to shut you off, they can. Then, you're screwed. I try not to do anything that will get me in trouble with them. Losing my cable, internet, etc. would be far worse than the tyranny of having my cable modem capped or my speed tiered. The problem is that they know this as well. That's why they can and do take these steps. My solution was the same one that Utah and others were going to do - city/state run broadband. It'd be just another utility and they could certainly offer it cheaper than Comcast. Plus, with the profits going back to the city or state, it would probably help lower/cut taxes. It's probably a simplistic view, and I realize that there are issues with letting the government control your internet access, but it would probably benefit the consumer much more than letting a monopolistic cable company charge $45 for crappy television and $45 more for internet access that goes down for "unscheduled maintenance."
Here in Sweden the caps aren't in the modems and quite frankly what kind of idiot ISP would do it this way? We are capped at the router or somesuch. I got 8 Mbit on my ADSL though which is maximum for ADSL so im not complaining.
It would be nice if these enhanced firmware systems provided some level of content filtering on outgoign packets. A simple test would see if key passwords, financial account numbers, or a honeypot file name were in any outgoign packets. If so, the modded device would kill the outgoing packet and log the destination.
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
Could the cable company not quickly whip something together to scan all of their subscribers modems, and have a list of uncapped/hacked boxes in their hands within a few minutes, hours tops?
Or even better, can hackers reach this shell from the outside?
Sounds like a good way to lose your service and wind up in court.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
If everybody "uncapped", would the result be enough net congestion that everyone would wind up getting "capped" speeds again? Is this a netizenship question?
As far as the ISP detecting "uncapped" cable modems, which has already been mentioned on this topic, I'd have to offer that my local cable provider employs so many utterly inept techs that they have trouble detecting when someone hooks up an unauthorized line to the pole, much less a change in the modem itself. That's why I've stuck with DSL -- 2 years with zero downtime, including a hurricane, while my cable service is down 3-4 times a week.
"Obviously, I'm not an IBM computer any more than I'm an ashtray" (Bob Dylan)
Lesson learned:
Don't stake your business on being able to place artificial limits on how users use a product they buy.
DivX learned this. The RIAA are learning this. the MPAA will learn it. And looks like broadband providers will soon learn it too.
So cable modem lines are shared.
If you got a shell from the modem, could you then sniff the traffic?
Just curious.
It's interesting today, but it won't last. I wouldn't really bother with it. If the ISP is capping it at the modem and users find a way around it, the ISP will just figure out a way to cap it in a different place - they'll probably put the cap on the other end of the pipe where they have absolute control of the firmware/hardware.
I do think it's an interesting attack on the Cable providors who have an undocumented bandwidth limitation that they enforce. One would think that a potential benefit would be an increase in the number of people who are diconnected due to this invisible marker, and some court enforced clarification/disclosure of limitations. Sadly, the activity is obviously illegal, and therefore any potential long term gains from this kind of activity are rendered unachievable.
As soon as someone from Motorola reads this, they'll be popping out new firmware to cable ISP's right quick. It's quite easy for the ISP's to push this out in a night or two. I do it for a living :)
-KS2k3
With caps inside the cable company's network, there would be no oppurtunity for legal disputes and the resulting lawyer's fees....
For engineers eager to gain VxWorks experience inexpensively, how reasonable a development platform is this modem?
Why do this on a shared medium, particularly one you have to share with your neighbors? I like my neighbors, and I get almost 3.5 megabits down, which is pretty quick. Plus, my neighbors know I'm the cul-de-sac computer geek, and they'd probably come to me if their connections slowed to a crawl. What am I supposed to do? Play dumb when they ask me if I know what's up with their slow connections? That's pretty weak... and looks even weaker when the cable company tells my neighbors that someone in the neighborhood uncapped their cable modem... Hmmm... wonder who that person could be?
Sorry, but there's very few things worse than being a weasel.
Yeah, it's great to have m4d bandwidth, but you're really paying for a shared resource, and I think most people know that. Don't get me wrong... I appreciate the value of a good hardware hack as much as the next geek, but if you're using it to siphon huge amounts of bandwidth from your neighborhood node, that's a problem.
If you need huge, dedicated bandwidth, I'd say buy a T-1 line, or pay for a business-class account.
Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.
I'm not the SysAdmin, just a concerned employee.
... and I can tell you that this wouldn't work on our service. Nor almost any cable service. You would get cut off within the day you started to exceed your bandwidth cap.
As for the question "why is the bandwidth capping happening at the cable modem?", I beleive the answer is that it has to so that the CMTS bandwidth (the bandwidth on the cable plant between the modem and the cable router) is not used up. But that's not to say that the bandwidth you use at the cable router end isn't closely monitored. Hence why you will get shut off in no time flat when you start to exceed your provisioned bandwidth.
----- sXe
SEE!
c>ping -t www.google.com
Reply from 216.239.41.104: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=244
Reply from 216.239.41.104: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=244
Reply from 216.239.41.104: bytes=32 time=7ms TTL=244
Reply from 216.239.41.104: bytes=32 time=4ms TTL=244
Wooho^C^C%%$*&$%.Destination host unreachable
It's funny that you said "huge, dedicated bandwidth" and T1 in the same sentence, especially in this context. If you opted for a T1, you'd be limited to around half your current shared bandwidth, so your reasoning confuses me.
SearchIRC - Now with live chat directory!
Their site was pulled completely just moments after this story was posted:
http://www.tcniso.net/
"War makes me sad." - Me
Is a hoobyist someone who discriminates against hoobys?
If so will all companies eventually be forced by law to employ a certain number of hoobys in some sort of perverse positive discrimination?
Will we get "hooby rights marches" and will Holland allow two hoobys to get married?
Enquiring minds etc etc
troc
Troc's dubious podcast and blog: http://www.trocnet.net
"So far, uncappers are apparently the primary consumers, and they're downloading up to 400 copies a day."
If they just downloaded it once, maybe they wouldn't exceed their cap?
SCO employee? Check out the bounty
I know for a fact they don't run another line, because I purchased one of their business-class accounts for my corporation.
Why? Running servers for one, and I also get priority for bandwidth on the node, as well as better tech support (which I basically never use... calling tech support is a sign of weakness). Yes, it costs more, but I knew my utilization would be a good deal more than average, so I paid for the next level of service.
I personally suspect the uncappers are after some better upstream pipe... that's where residential accounts are seriously lacking compared to a T-1.
Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.
As I own that hardware, I feel I have a right to see how well it's working. Many issues (Like signal loss) would likely be within my own home and something I could fix. This software would probably let me read this information, however, as I don't own one of the modable products I'll probably look for one with all the info I want on a web page rather than getting a hackable one.
256K UP. Frankly I'd like a little more upside bandwidth. I would LOVE to be able to setup a small FPS gaming server but the low bandwidth going up prevents many of the interesting games from being played. I have IDSL also because my cable company won't allow hosting of content either - that sux. IDSL is only 144K and while it can do some VOIP stuff it's not enough for FPS games either. I would GLADLY pay extra for the bandwidth I desire but COMCAST says no such plans exist...
Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org
"...group of hardware and software hobbiests..." that's spelled hobbits, thank you very much.
-Lucas
What kind of cable modem do you own? The surfboards have always (from at least the SB3100 and up, from my personal experience) had a web interface (192.168.100.1) that displays upstream and downstream power levels, frequency locks, SNR, as well as an event log. I have Charter cable. SNMP would be nice if it were accessible to the customers (to set threshold monitors, etc.) but having the web interface is much better than nothing at all. I don't know if they have the capability to lock out the web interface, but there's really no point in it.
Enlighten us, then, oh wise Yoda, how to call these wondrous devices?
:P
Cable or DSL modems are called modems, because they are essentially signal MOdulators/DEModulators. They function essentially the same way as an analog modem. DSL modems even use the same physical line, but communicate over a different set of frequencies then analog modems. Ditto for cable modem, the main difference being that cable modem taps into the cable line, while DSL modem taps into more-or-less standard phone lines.
So yeah, us illiterate slashdroids call these mystical devices cable or DSL modems, 'cause we are so ILLITERATE.
If only basic literacy came with obligatory logic and general knowledge module attached. Alas, the wonders of classical education, now long gone.