what you don't know can hurt you
Home Files News &[SERVICES_TAB]About Contact Add New

cisco-3000.txt

cisco-3000.txt
Posted Jul 12, 2002
Authored by Master Phi

The Cisco VPN3000 gateway lets remote client dictate which maximum MTU to use when sending back ESP frames, regardless of the transmitting capabilities of the physical medium. This can lead to denial of service conditions.

tags | remote, denial of service
systems | cisco
SHA-256 | c02c5efceb3de66f0063f72ec5186d0b3d0fd4ffbf6f7b6b4cc5f61471cc7661

cisco-3000.txt

Change Mirror Download

('binary' encoding is not supported, stored as-is) Cisco VPN3000 gateway MTU overflow
==================================

Bug class: Conceptual/bad protocol implementation
Equipments affected: Cisco/VPN 3000 Concentrator with
software vpn3000-3.5.Rel-k9.bin

FACTS
The Cisco VPN3000 gateway lets remote client dictate
which maximum MTU to use when sending back ESP
frames, regardless of the transmitting capabilities
of the physical medium.

IMPACT
* Oversized frames get silently discarded by
equipements linked to the gateway's public
interface and retransmissions occur.
* Other disturbances or DoS against neighboring
equipements may occur, especially as many IP
stacks on routers and sniffers etc ... are
poorly implemented.

DETAILS
We have witnessed this phenomena after establishing
tunnels with the "VPN dialer" over a modem
connexion: when the target sends back ethernet
frames with size close to the max ethernet MTU
(1500), the gateway encrypts the frames adding
ESP headers and stupidly tries to send a
1580-bytes frame back to the client.

RESOLUTION
-> From the official documentation there is no way
to enforce a maximum MTU on the VPN gateway.
-> Hence: a gateway software patch by Cisco is
necessary: if MTU negociation occurs, the gateway
should set a max-MTU threshold (the physical medium's !).

PSEUDO WORKAROUNDS

* client side: For Windows-based OS (likely Unix and
Linux-based OS too), Cisco released a tool
called setMTU.exe that can prevent ill MTU
negociation from happening.

* target side: artificially lowering the max MTU
on the interfaces.

-> But such a policy is not acceptable:
The VPN client, as well as remote targets,
should not have to be aware of
the gateway's interface configuration !

The bug does not lie in client software, but
in the gateway's software.

Master Phi

---
Today's statement:
Networking software robustness isn't worth the tenth
of that of arcade game engines.
Let's call it junk software.
Login or Register to add favorites

File Archive:

April 2024

  • Su
  • Mo
  • Tu
  • We
  • Th
  • Fr
  • Sa
  • 1
    Apr 1st
    10 Files
  • 2
    Apr 2nd
    26 Files
  • 3
    Apr 3rd
    40 Files
  • 4
    Apr 4th
    6 Files
  • 5
    Apr 5th
    26 Files
  • 6
    Apr 6th
    0 Files
  • 7
    Apr 7th
    0 Files
  • 8
    Apr 8th
    22 Files
  • 9
    Apr 9th
    14 Files
  • 10
    Apr 10th
    10 Files
  • 11
    Apr 11th
    13 Files
  • 12
    Apr 12th
    14 Files
  • 13
    Apr 13th
    0 Files
  • 14
    Apr 14th
    0 Files
  • 15
    Apr 15th
    30 Files
  • 16
    Apr 16th
    10 Files
  • 17
    Apr 17th
    22 Files
  • 18
    Apr 18th
    45 Files
  • 19
    Apr 19th
    8 Files
  • 20
    Apr 20th
    0 Files
  • 21
    Apr 21st
    0 Files
  • 22
    Apr 22nd
    11 Files
  • 23
    Apr 23rd
    68 Files
  • 24
    Apr 24th
    23 Files
  • 25
    Apr 25th
    16 Files
  • 26
    Apr 26th
    0 Files
  • 27
    Apr 27th
    0 Files
  • 28
    Apr 28th
    0 Files
  • 29
    Apr 29th
    0 Files
  • 30
    Apr 30th
    0 Files

Top Authors In Last 30 Days

File Tags

Systems

packet storm

© 2022 Packet Storm. All rights reserved.

Services
Security Services
Hosting By
Rokasec
close