Slashdot Mirror


How to Take Over a Train Station

ThinkComp writes "Everyone knows that home wireless networks are insecure, but who would expect a major transportation hub to be vulnerable to the same problems? Well, waiting for my friend's train at South Station in Boston, MA, I happened to notice that it was possible to take control of the entire station's wireless network, including its home page and authorization method (free wireless, anyone?)--and those of thirty other businesses throughout Massachusetts, thanks to a few coding errors on the part of the wireless company with which South Station contracted."

39 of 356 comments (clear)

  1. wireless is insecure? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    News at 11.

    1. Re:wireless is insecure? by krisp · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Nah, this shouldn't be news anyway. When you can get control of the arrival/departure boards and track switch control from your laptop on the wireless, then it will be news. Until then, the title is misleading!

    2. Re:wireless is insecure? by Colven · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't know, I think it's news. I create very similar sites, so hearing about things like this is extremely helpful to my practices. And it could serve as a wake-up call to others who might be slacking.

      And, if their web site is that insecure, what makes you think their other systems (electronic and other) aren't similarly flawed?

      Regardless, what I would really like to hear is the behind the scenes stories from all companies involved.

      --
      expletives welcomed
    3. Re:wireless is insecure? by Talinom · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And it could serve as a wake-up call to others who might be slacking.

      I wish I could believe that.

      What will probably happen is they get hacked and any problems that arise will be considered a terrorist act. The company will get all sorts of sympathy from the unknowing public while the perp goes to federal "pound him in the ass" prison and owes $4 Billion in damages. The CEOs of the company will denounce the act, get fat bonuses, jump ship, and might even throw a quarter at the problem on their way out the door.

      But I feel that last part is overly optimistic.

      --
      "Giving money and power to governments is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys." - P.J. O'Rourke
    4. Re:wireless is insecure? by sharkey · · Score: 4, Funny

      Man, we have GOT to do this! I can't wait to see how many tickets are sold to Pussyhump, RI or Shithouse Falls, SD.

      --

      --
      "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
  2. Google HTML version available :) by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here :)

    --
    liqbase :: faster than paper
  3. Decisions, decisions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Should you not tell anyone and get free wireless for life, or just goatse everyone?

  4. They're coming by Jonathan+the+Nerd · · Score: 4, Funny

    Please remain where you are. The Department of Homeland Security has already pinpointed your location, and agents will be arriving shortly. Resistance is futile.

    --
    Disclaimer: The opinions expressed are not necessarily my own, as I've not yet had my medication today.
  5. Illegal access by bloo9298 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Summary: here's documentation of my illegal access to a system, please prosecute me, thanks.

  6. hold that thought by silid · · Score: 5, Funny

    no more running for trains - use your ipaq as a remote control for your very own train set.
    and close the doors when you are all the way through

    next stop: home

  7. There is one silly error in an otherwise great art by drinkypoo · · Score: 5, Informative

    ...icle: "Unless something is done to force accountability for wireless devices, perhaps by recording ethernet MAC addresses (which are unique and hard-coded to a physical piece of hardware)" ... uh, no they aren't. Most devices allow you to change your MAC with impunity. Others can be hacked to do so, by tweaking their firmware. MAC addresses meant something back in the day when they were hard to change (it's never been impossible) but those days are long gone.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  8. Re:who did you tell? by mtrisk · · Score: 4, Informative

    RTFA. He tried to contact the administrators, and was giving the cold shoulder. They even suggested reporting himself to "abuse".

    --

    Without a proper flamewar, Anonymous was undecided on what shell to run.
  9. Re:who did you tell? by AndyL · · Score: 5, Funny

    I recomend telling Charlie. With internet access he could start a Dot Com and finaly earn that nickle he's been needing.

  10. obligatory reply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    All your trains are belong to us!

  11. What a waste of bandwidth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This person merely tried common tricks to expose the network settings. Here's a summary:

    1.) Try the default login/password combination and make some educated guesses.

    2.) Look at the source code of web pages.

    3.) Don't be an idiot admin and leave your system wider than your momma.

  12. Not just wireless by fred911 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sure wifi allowed access to the start page, but the same weakness (lam0r administration) would show up on lets say a wired public terminal. Wifi just makes criminal actions so much harder to catch.

    --
    09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B - D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    1. Re:Not just wireless by utlemming · · Score: 5, Interesting
      With a Laptop, and Knoppix and a tad bit of skill (or some really good scripts) you can really have some illicit fun. Knoppix makes it a whole lot harder to find forensic evidence in case you're caught. All you have to do is drop out the battery and then all the evidence is wiped away (save some circumstantial evidence in the form of a Knoppix cd, and a rebooting computer). If you have the scripts stored in a remote location, ie ftp, then your in for business. Since you don't have any of the stuff stored on disk, and the MAC is so easily changed, it can pretty tough to prove -- they would have to essentially follow you and collect evidence on the signal your sending out. As a previous post said, a good administrator will allow open access that is routed through a proxy server to authenticate. But then you still have problems with keeping the authentication. All I can say is that I hope that I never have to maintain a wirless network and make sure that it is secure. The headache of maintaining a 5 person WPA "protected" WiFi is enough of a headache to make my life difficult enough.

      I just got a Wireless router the other day. What my room mates couldn't understand is why I locked down the router so hard. They were amazed that I had to put the WPA key on all the computers, and why I also did MAC and IP filtering. They just couldn't understand. Although it is not totally secure, hopefully it is enough to keep the dorks out and at the same time allow for wireless inconvience. The last thing that I want to worry about is some dork running around with a laptop and deciding that my internet is his internet and then doing something stupid.

      --
      The views expressed are mine own and do not express the views of my employer.
  13. Why play with HO scale? by vudufixit · · Score: 5, Funny

    When you can play with the real thing?

  14. accountability? by l2718 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Very good article. However, one of the author's ideas for improving security doesn't actually hold water. The problem is to verify the identity of people being assigned dynamic IP addresses on a wireless network. He proposes

    "... to force accountability, ... by recording MAC addresses (which are unique and hard-coded to a physical piece of hardware)"

    Actually, most network cards allow you to set the MAC address by software if the factory one isn't good for you. For example, this is needed for drop-in-replacement functionality.

    1. Re:accountability? by l2718 · · Score: 5, Informative

      By the way, instructions on how to change your MAC address on various operating systems may be found in the wikipedia .

  15. Ah, screw Charlie by Anomalous+Cowturd · · Score: 4, Funny

    He's doomed. If he or his wife can't figure out that she should bring him the nickel instead of a sandwich as the train goes by, he deserves to be stuck down there.

    Besides, the election's over anyway. I don't think Riley won.

    --

    Java: the bastard demon spawn of C++ and Ada

  16. Well? by NoseBag · · Score: 5, Funny

    Did you refund your friend's tickets?

    --
    Cloned foods give the statement "We had that last week!" a whole new meaning.
  17. Such strange attitudes by QuantumG · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I've always found the mentality of computer security experts quite strange. It must be the effect of unix. For those who never had the experience of using a "user" account on a unix box as their sole source of computation, let me explain. Basically you're required to log into the machine. After that you can do anything you want. The unix kernel will ensure that no user can affect any other user unless that user permits it. It's this attitude of "anything that is not denied by the kernel is permitted" that I really don't get.

    At first this wasn't entirely the case. Consider, for example, copying all the files from /usr/bin to your home directory 1000 times. Back in the old days that would be enough to fill up the harddrive which would quickly stop other people from using the system. You could affect other people, the kernel didn't stop you, so it must be allowed right! Well no. You're wasting resources and being an asshole. But rather than put a sign on the wall that said "please don't waste disk space" someone decided this was a "security" issue and implemented disk quotas into the kernel. Now you can't affect other users by using up all the disk space.

    Consider the "fork bomb" issue. For those who don't know, this is just like using up all the harddrive space, except instead of disk you're wasting memory. A fork bomb will quickly bring an older unix machine to its knees, and back in the days when I had the joy of sharing a unix lab with other students, a fork bomb would go off at least twice a day. Why? Cause if the kernel permitted it, it must be ok right? Now there's protections in most kernels just to detect a fork bomb and stop it.

    Such a strange way of thinking. Thankfully most unix users do not try to apply this attitude to the real world. If there were to see the police or the government as some kind of kernel they might be surprised to find that they could kick over granny in the street or go ballistic with an automatic weapon. The police didn't stop me, it must be ok, right?

    Just to bring this long post back on topic: just because you can take over the wireless internet of a train station, doesn't mean you should do it. It doesn't mean that it is permitted. There doesn't need to be a failsafe kernel monitoring and stopping every undesirable action that you can possibly perform. We can live with people being able to break the rules. It's called freedom.

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
    1. Re:Such strange attitudes by gehrehmee · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You're missing the point.

      It's not about pranks.It's not a question of what the reviewer should and shouldn't do.

      It's a question of what he could do, and therefore what someone with malicious intent could do. Expecting people's actions to just natually blend into the common good is great and all, but it's simply not going to happen. There's a reason for police there's a reason for locks on doors, there's a reason for computer security, and there's a reason I don't leave my lunch out when my cat is in the room. Somebody's going to take advantage, and I'm going to get screwed.

      --
      "You know, Hobbes, some days even my lucky rocketship underpants don't help" -- Calvin
    2. Re:Such strange attitudes by AJWM · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Do you lock your front door? Leave your keys in the ignition? If you really don't understand the attitude, and are not merely saying that for the sake of a post, then you don't lock your front door and you do leave your car keys in the ignition (without locking the car doors).

      It is certainly not permitted for random strangers to enter your house or drive your car, so why worry about locks? Leaving doors unlocked and car keys in the ignition is much more convenient.

      I suspect you understand this attitude far more than you pretend. And no, the attitude of most users is not that you can do these things if it isn't physically prevented -- just as most people are basically honest and won't trespass or steal your car. It's the few assholes you have to be on guard against. Recall the price of freedom.

      --
      -- Alastair
  18. guestBox by Fudge.Org · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Ok.

    Well, this is the product:

    guestBOX

    And... this is the company:

    Atlantis Technology Corporation

    So, all that research... and it never occured to you to contact the vendor? Granted, maybe these are so plentiful some re-seller or VAR put in in there... but you didn't make mention of that line of thinking (or was this not the whole PDF?) so.... sorry, that's just sounding a little on the lame side.

    Now, if they scoffed or blew you off at that point, okay maybe... but still. You knew the company from just looking at it. Did you try to contact them? I think that would be more telling than surfing through open Indexing on a web server like a kid curl'ing porn images.

    --
    http://fudge.org
  19. Re:There is one silly error in an otherwise great by molo · · Score: 5, Informative

    BTW, for windows, there is a great tool called MacShift that will allow you to randomize your MAC address. Just make a shortcut and run it before you connect to any wireless network, and you'll have a different one each time. No tracing there.

    -molo

    --
    Using your sig line to advertise for friends is lame.
  20. Re:Security Risk by LurkerXXX · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Psst. Read the article. It has zero to do with WPA or encryption. It has to do with bad programing, bad passwords, and general bad administration.

  21. Tread carefully! by bogaboga · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Tread carefully my friend! You are in the US, where frivolous law suites can be filed anytime, against anyone.

    You will be caught and be fined heavily! Just ask the other teenager how fun sitting in court was. This is not to mention damage to your entire professional life (I assume it exists).

    Slashdotters here might encourge you, but remember that you will be sitting in the dock alone. In other words, you will be answer for YOU. Now before I get modded down, I be to remind whoever might read this that what I am saying is FACT.

  22. Of Astroturf and Grandstanding by SuperBanana · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ignoring the grandstanding title and the fact that the author astroturfed his own "article" and site, here's a quote:

    A more farfetched, but very real possibility, is that computers or workers at airports and train stations also use these same networks to make everything tick. If that is the case, it might be possible for an intelligent high school student to start changing train timetables or rerouting baggage.

    And his evidence for this is, what? His own personal opinion? He's been watching Hackers too much if he thinks the schedule board at South Station is networked; it's a -flip- chart (seriously, stick around for 5-10 minutes, and watch it update itself). I'd be amazed if it had anything better than a dedicated thinnet connection to an ancient PC. It's not like some kid with mad h@x0r skills is going to go bippity-boop and put up "TRAIN TO FUCKVILLE 4:20". No. That happens in Hollywood, where people "launch the genetic algorithmic viral defenses!". It does not happen in the real world.

    There are a lot of cheap shots and snide remarks aimed at "The Guvmint", "The Man", etc. This guy sounds like he's about 19, not to mention he's just admitted to logging into places he knew he didn't belong AND changing settings (he changed the back, but still...) Sounds like a great federal inditement to me.

    Some googling shows he's in his very early 20's(graduated from Harvard in 2004 in "3 years", which means he's maybe 21 now), runs some consulting company. Sounds like he's just out to promote his business like every other story submitter these days...

  23. Re:who did you tell? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And why the hell should he have? This isn't his problem, or his network. I think he was being generous and responsible trying to inform any of the interested parties. And besides, given the FBI and Office of Homeland Security's utterly irrational (and often ignorant) stances on this sort of thing he would probably have found himself up on terrorist charges for what was basically a Good Samaritan action. He took a risk even trying to inform the phone company about the issue, because it's often easier to just call the FBI and shift the blame onto the individual making the report. "It wasn't us, our network is secure, he must be some kind of genius hacker like you see in the movies." And that is ridiculous, but actually fairly common.

    Imagine you're an admin and somebody reports that you left the entire network wide open, that at least thirty different businesses' private customer data is in a compromisable position, all due to your incompetence. What are you going to do? Admit it? Hardly ... if your boss doesn't know about it you'll fix it quietly, especially if you have no way to tell if anything was taken. On the other hand, if upper management comes down on you, you'll try to deflect the issue to preserve your job. Besides, if the FBI wanted to play this smart, they'd have a truly anonymous hotline where these kinds of things could be reported, and then the FBI (who, after all, can do pretty much whatever it wants to nowadays) could verify the report and notify the organization responsible. Trust me: that would make that train company sit up and take notice in a way J. Random Hacker's report never would. It's gonna happen, people are going to fool around with those nifty new WiFi toys and the vast majority won't do anything to anyone. Criminalizing them isn't going to help. But it will destroy lives that really don't deserve it (if you don't believe me, ask anyone who has taken a journey through the United States Justice System. It's a different world that you're used to, innocent until proven guilty is a distant concept to those people, and even if you are ultimately proven innocent you don't come out the same person.)

    The fault lies with the admin of the network, and if you ignore smart users that try to help, you deserve what happens when a real criminal comes along, downloads and sells all your customers' credit card info and then trashes your network.

    Fact is, laws against what this man did are useless ... worse than useless because crooks (the bulk of whom aren't even in the U.S.) are unconcerned about them, and the honest types who happen to spot something while sitting around bored in a train station will be afraid to report it.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  24. Re:That's a stupid question by imogthe · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So would I. And I would expect a policeman to know the law to the lette and a doctor to know everything there is to know about the human body. I would expect the meter maids to never get a parking ticket and a chef to always make fantastic food.
    But guess what? All these people are like you and me. Yes, better educated within their particular field but still as fallible(?) as any other person. A cop on the beat will not know about IP law. A doctor will have specialised in a particular field of medicine. Anyone could misjudge the meter and the guy with the hot dog stand could serve you food that will kill you.
    Until recently I (kind of) had all these expectations. That changed when I started my education as a network engineer and looked into doing practice work with the university IT department. Know what? They are just regular guys. They go for a pint after work on a friday. They do normal stuff all the time and they are not ubermensch as we like to think. Not all companies can afford to employ the cream of the crop in all departments. After all, a company's main purpose is to MAKE MONEY. Everything else comes second. This includes the computers and IT infrastructure. If 10Mb ethernet can do, it will have to do and if an unsecure wi-fi access point can do, I suppose it will have to do too.

    I suppose my point is that you may not be too far off saying the cleaners were involved in the IT rollout. In the real world we all wear many hats, some better fitting than others.

  25. DecNet requires the ability tonchange your MAC by bluGill · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The old DecNet required that all ethernet cards have the ability to change their mac address. Part of the protocol, and you couldn't connect to DecNet unless you had the right mac address. (which was changed as part of the network protocol, you normally didn't change this manually)

    Just in case a customer ever tries to use their chipset with DecNet nearly all cards allow, software to change the mac address. Since all current chips have the ability, when designing a modification to the old chip it is easier to leave that ability in than take it out.

    I don't know if anyone in the world still runs DecNet, but it isn't a chance network vendors are willing to take.

  26. Hmm by patryn20 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Well, it is nice that this guy actually bothered to write this up, but he seems to simply be using a lot of common mistakes and guesswork. On top of that, his knoweledge of some basic concepts in hardware administration and business processes is somewhat lacking.

    First, MAC address are not unique. There is no universal table of MAC's that hardware manufacturers report to. I have installed ethernet cards from the SAME manufacturer that have had the SAME MAC address while setting up machines for a client.

    Second, many of these errors are not necessarily the programmers fault. They are more than likely the responsibility of management being cheap and forcing programmers to do the jobs of multiple people. IT is seperate from software development. The fact that the network and server are insecure is the IT department/person's fault. In small companies this may be the same person, but in most large corporations that is not the case. Directory listing and permissions are generally the responsibility of the server administrator.

    Now, the username issues are definitely scary. Leaving test accounts open with simple passwords is just plain stupid. The company I develop software for has over fifty million dollars worth of data on their servers. We also store credit card info for clients, etc. If we used common passwords like that, we would be fired. The admin would go through the database, see the passwords, and report them to our supervisor. Say goodbye! Not to mention, test accounts on production servers are bad practice anyway. If you are making any money, you are extremely stupid not to have a seperate development environment.

    In my opionion, these problems seem to be more management and implementation problems, and not so much development problems as the author seems to suggest. They are still real problems though. That customer listing one for the phone company really scares me. ::shiver:: I hope SBC in Texas doesn't have problems like that.

  27. Re:There is one silly error in an otherwise great by Black+Acid · · Score: 5, Informative
    Your MAC address is (well SHOULD be) "unique and hard-coded to a physical piece of hardware". It is physically tied to your NIC, and you can not change it. What you can do however is change how it is represented in software, so that the other party never sees your actual physical MAC address, but the idea that you can actually change your MAC address is just plain wrong. Feel free to try, change the MAC, then switch the NIC to another machine and see if it retains the original or altered address.
    Of course, it all depends on the NIC, but I was able to flash my Orinoco wireless card's firmware, successfully changing its MAC address. My address was retained under Linux and Windows, so I assume it was physically changed. (I also was able to upgrade the Orinoco from Silver to Gold encryption, US to Japan frequencies, and change the serial number). Its true that most people who change the MAC really only change it in software, but its definitely possible to change it in hardware as well. Not that there is any reason to...
  28. No they aren't by JumperCable · · Score: 5, Funny

    Dear Department of Homeland Security,
    We have recently come to our attention that you are using methods of pinpointing locations of individuals that may infringe on our "Latitude/Longetude" techniques (Patent Pending).

    You are hereby ordered to cease & desist all location activity until you have properly licensed our intellectual property rights.

    Yours Truly, -Microsoft Legal Team

  29. Re:That's a stupid question by timeOday · · Score: 5, Informative
    They wouldn't let just anybody in the control room at Paddington station in London, would they?
    This is irrelevant. Nobody took over a train station; the story title is a lie. All they did was circumvent the payment system for wifi internet access and avoid paying an hourly fee for internet access. The fact that this was at a train station has nothing to do with the story, except making it read better.
  30. Evidence? Who needs it? by Otto · · Score: 4, Informative

    And his evidence for this is, what? His own personal opinion?

    While I agree with you on the fact that he's just speculating at that point, nevertheless a possibility exists for this sort of thing to happen.

    Simple example: I went wardriving through town once. I found a lot of connections of course, but basically I just set the sniffer up on the laptop and drove around slowly. Later, when I got home, I checked out what I had found, and using timestamps I figured out where the different access points I had found were (I lacked a GPS then).

    One of the ones I found was a drugstore. I looked at the raw trace and saw some really odd plaintext there. So I went back and left the laptop in the car while I went in and bought some stuff and took a look around.

    What I found:
    - Their cash registers were all wirelessly linked to some system in the back. When you scanned an item, the barcode was read, transmitted to the machine in the back, which looked up the price and spat it back to the register. Credit card authorization was handled the same way. All this was plaintext, as I looked at the data and found my credit card number as well as barcodes from the items I purchased in there. Didn't understand the formatting, but it wasn't too difficult to see my name and credit card number stand out like a shining beacon.
    - Some kind of prescription transactions were wireless as well. While I didn't get a lot of data of this sort, there were packets containing various drug names, in plaintext, being sent over the air. I'd bet money that insurance information as well as whoever bought the prescription would have eventually gone out in the clear too.

    The point being that security was basically non-existant for something you have a reasonable expectation of being private. I mean, when you design a wireless network to handle credit transactions, you'd think some form encryption would be pretty frickin' obvious, right? Let alone tossing somebody's prescription info out onto the airwaves.

    So while he didn't state you could change the lights and has no idea if you can actually fuck with the trains, the point I think he was trying to make is that clearly security is not at the forefront of the minds of a lot of people for this sort of thing. Admittedly, my drugstore example happened a couple years back, and may have been fixed by now, but this sort of thing happens because people don't think about it being an issue. It's that part that needs to be fixed. Whether any given example can actually be compromised in a serious way is not the point.

    --
    - Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set him on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
  31. Not wireless by cgenman · · Score: 5, Informative

    Actually this is some very basic HTML hacking. He went to their service, which re-directs all new people to their home page. He directory surfed around the web server, and found a few dozen other sites, as well as the company's home page. He tried some very basic password combinations, (like test:test), and got control over some active sites. These sites included customer information and credit card databases.

    So really, the site that served images from an unobfuscated directory allowed the person to know what to look for, the directory was fully listed in a way that directories shouldn't. The passwords were very, very insecure. This had nothing to do with wireless security, but rather web services security, and basic things for security that people don't do.

    The passwords in the article, BTW, no longer function. At least, not form my remote machine. Anyone reading this from South Station wish to see if the passwords still work on-network?