←back to thread

460 points kennedn | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.273s | source
Show context
micah94 ◴[] No.45252395[source]
So we're at the point that finding hardcoded admin passwords is no big deal.
replies(5): >>45252452 #>>45252526 #>>45253010 #>>45253096 #>>45254073 #
mtlynch ◴[] No.45253010[source]
It's a hardcoded default password, not a permanent backdoor. If I'm understanding the post correctly, the user changes it as part of the onboarding flow.

This is the way most apps work if they have a default password the user is supposed to change.

replies(2): >>45253178 #>>45253581 #
bri3d ◴[] No.45253178[source]
The device should ideally have some kind of secret material derived per device, like a passphrase generated from an MCU serial number or provisioned into EEPROM and printed on a label on the device.

Some form of "enter the code on the device" or "scan the QR code on the device" could then mutually authenticate the app using proof-of-presence rather than hardcoded passwords. This can still be done completely offline with no "cloud" or other access, or "lock in"; the app just uses the device secret to authenticate with the device locally. Then the user can set a raw RTSP password if desired.

This way unprovisioned devices are not nearly as vulnerable to network-level attacks. I agree that this is Not Awful but it's also Not Good. Right now, if you buy this camera and plug it into a network and _forget_ to set it up, it's a sitting duck for the time window between network connection and setup.

replies(7): >>45253258 #>>45253284 #>>45253613 #>>45254911 #>>45255062 #>>45258381 #>>45259653 #
mtlynch ◴[] No.45253613[source]
I agree that would be nice, but it also doesn't sound all that practical for a small vendor.

I used to sell a home networking device,[0] and I wouldn't do what you're describing. If there were an issue where the labels calculate the wrong password or the manufacturer screws up which device gets which label, you don't find out until months later when they're in customer hands and they start complaining, and now you have to unwind your manufacturing and fulfillment pipeline to get back all the devices you've shipped.

All that to protect against what attack? One where there's malicious software on the user's network that changes the device password before the user can? In that case, the user would just not use the camera because they can't access the feed.

[0] https://mtlynch.io/i-sold-tinypilot/

replies(3): >>45253684 #>>45253900 #>>45254710 #
kelnos ◴[] No.45253684[source]
TP-Link is far from being a small vendor, though.
replies(2): >>45253758 #>>45253854 #
creeble ◴[] No.45253854[source]
I think he has it backwards: Easy for a small vendor, very hard for a large one.
replies(1): >>45259210 #
1. stephen_g ◴[] No.45259210[source]
For a large manufacturer, it can be flashed onto the device automatically by a machine as part of the production line. That's not easy to set up, but basically something they already need to have set up (you don't want to have humans have to plug in boards to flash firmware and load serial numbers, etc. on to every unit).