You can not select more than 25 topics
Topics must start with a letter or number, can include dashes ('-') and can be up to 35 characters long.
227 lines
11 KiB
227 lines
11 KiB
7 years ago
|
WPA packet number reuse with replayed messages and key reinstallation
|
||
|
|
||
|
Published: October 16, 2017
|
||
|
Identifiers:
|
||
|
- CERT case ID: VU#228519
|
||
|
- CVE-2017-13077
|
||
|
- CVE-2017-13078
|
||
|
- CVE-2017-13079
|
||
|
- CVE-2017-13080
|
||
|
- CVE-2017-13081
|
||
|
- CVE-2017-13082
|
||
|
- CVE-2017-13084 (not applicable)
|
||
|
- CVE-2017-13086
|
||
|
- CVE-2017-13087
|
||
|
- CVE-2017-13088
|
||
|
Latest version available from: https://w1.fi/security/2017-1/
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
Vulnerability
|
||
|
|
||
|
A vulnerability was found in how a number of implementations can be
|
||
|
triggered to reconfigure WPA/WPA2/RSN keys (TK, GTK, or IGTK) by
|
||
|
replaying a specific frame that is used to manage the keys. Such
|
||
|
reinstallation of the encryption key can result in two different types
|
||
|
of vulnerabilities: disabling replay protection and significantly
|
||
|
reducing the security of encryption to the point of allowing frames to
|
||
|
be decrypted or some parts of the keys to be determined by an attacker
|
||
|
depending on which cipher is used.
|
||
|
|
||
|
This document focuses on the cases that apply to systems using hostapd
|
||
|
(AP) or wpa_supplicant (station), but it should be noted that the
|
||
|
generic vulnerability itself is applicable to other implementations and
|
||
|
may have different impact in other cases.
|
||
|
|
||
|
This vulnerability can in theory apply to any case where a TK (the
|
||
|
pairwise/unicast encryption key used with TKIP, CCMP, GCMP), a GTK
|
||
|
(group/multicast encryption key), or an IGTK (group management frame
|
||
|
integrity protection key) is configured by the Authentication/Supplicant
|
||
|
component to the WLAN driver/firmware taking care of the TX/RX path and
|
||
|
encryption/decryption of frames.
|
||
|
|
||
|
If the same key is configured multiple times, it is likely that the
|
||
|
transmit and receive packet numbers (PN, IPN, RSC/TSC, etc.) are cleared
|
||
|
to a smaller value (zero in case of pairwise keys, zero or at least a
|
||
|
smaller value than the last used value in case of group keys). When this
|
||
|
happens with the same key, this breaks replay protection on RX side and
|
||
|
can result in reuse of packet numbers on TX side. The former may allow
|
||
|
replaying of previously delivered packets (without the attacker being
|
||
|
able to decrypt them or modify their contents) while the latter may
|
||
|
result in more severe issues on the TX side due to resulting CCM nonce
|
||
|
replay and related issues with GCMP and TKIP. The TX side issue may make
|
||
|
it significantly easier for the attacker to decrypt frames and determine
|
||
|
some parts of the keys (e.g., a Michael MIC key in case of TKIP).
|
||
|
|
||
|
Impact on AP/hostapd
|
||
|
|
||
|
On the AP side, this generic issue has been determined to be applicable
|
||
|
in the case where hostapd is used to operate an RSN/WPA2 network with FT
|
||
|
(Fast BSS Transition from IEEE 802.11r) enabled. Replaying of the
|
||
|
Reassociation Request frame can be used to get the AP reinstalling the
|
||
|
TK which results in the AP accepting previously delivered unicast frames
|
||
|
from the station and the AP reusing previously used packet numbers
|
||
|
(local TX packet number gets reset to zero). This latter issue on the TX
|
||
|
side can result in CCM nonce reuse which invalidates CCMP security
|
||
|
properties. In case of TKIP this can result in the attacker being able
|
||
|
to determine part of the TK more easily and with GCMP, result in similar
|
||
|
issues.
|
||
|
|
||
|
It should be noted that the AP side issue with FT would be close to
|
||
|
applying to FILS authentication (from IEEE 802.11ai) in hostapd with
|
||
|
replaying of (Re)Association Request frames. However, due to a different
|
||
|
handling of the repeated association processing with FILS, this would
|
||
|
actually result in the station getting immediately disconnected which
|
||
|
prevents this attack in practice. In addition, the FILS implementation
|
||
|
in the current hostapd version is still experimental and documented as
|
||
|
being discouraged in production use cases.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Another area of potentially reduced security was identified when looking
|
||
|
into these issues. When AP/Authenticator implementation in hostapd is
|
||
|
requested to rekey the PTK without performing EAP reauthentication
|
||
|
(either through local periodic rekeying or due to a request from an
|
||
|
association station), the ANonce value does not get updated. This
|
||
|
results in the new 4-way handshake depending on the station/supplicant
|
||
|
side generating a new, unique (for the current PMK/PSK) SNonce for the
|
||
|
PTK derivation to result in a new key. While a properly working
|
||
|
supplicant would do so, if there is a supplicant implementation that
|
||
|
does not, this combination could result in deriving the same PTK
|
||
|
again. When the TK from that PTK gets configured in the driver, this
|
||
|
would result in reinstalling the same key and the same issues as
|
||
|
described above for the FT protocol case.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Impact on station/wpa_supplicant
|
||
|
|
||
|
On the station side, this generic issue has been determined to be
|
||
|
applicable in the cases where wpa_supplicant processes a group key (GTK
|
||
|
or IGTK) update from the AP. An attacker that is able to limit access
|
||
|
to frame delivery may be able to extract two update messages and deliver
|
||
|
those to the station with significant time delay between them. When
|
||
|
wpa_supplicant processes the second message, it may end up reinstalling
|
||
|
the same key to the driver and when doing this, clear the RX packet
|
||
|
number to an old value. This would allow the attacker to replay all
|
||
|
group-addressed frames that the AP sent between the time the key update
|
||
|
message was originally sent and the time when the attacker forwarded the
|
||
|
second frame to the station. The attacker would not be able to decrypt
|
||
|
or modify the frames based on this vulnerability, though. There is an
|
||
|
exception to this with older wpa_supplicant versions as noted below in
|
||
|
version specific notes.
|
||
|
|
||
|
For the current wpa_supplicant version (v2.6), there is also an
|
||
|
additional EAPOL-Key replay sequence where an additional forged
|
||
|
EAPOL-Key message can be used to bypass the existing protection for the
|
||
|
pairwise key reconfiguration in a manner that ends up configuring a
|
||
|
known TK that an attacker could use to decrypt any frame sent by the
|
||
|
station and to inject arbitrary unicast frames. Similar issues are
|
||
|
reachable in older versions as noted below.
|
||
|
|
||
|
PeerKey / TDLS PeerKey
|
||
|
|
||
|
As far as the related CVE-2017-13084 (reinstallation of the STK key in
|
||
|
the PeerKey handshake) is concerned, it should be noted that PeerKey
|
||
|
implementation in wpa_supplicant is not fully functional and the actual
|
||
|
installation of the key into the driver does not work. As such, this
|
||
|
item is not applicable in practice. Furthermore, the PeerKey handshake
|
||
|
for IEEE 802.11e DLS is obsolete and not known to have been deployed.
|
||
|
|
||
|
As far as the TDLS PeerKey handshake is concerned (CVE-2017-13086),
|
||
|
wpa_supplicant implementation is already rejecting TPK M2 retries, so
|
||
|
the reconfiguration issue cannot apply for it. For TPK M3, there is a
|
||
|
theoretical impact. However, if that frame is replayed, the current
|
||
|
wpa_supplicant implementation ends up tearing down the TDLS link
|
||
|
immediately and as such, there is no real window for performing the
|
||
|
attack. Furthermore, TPK M3 goes through the AP path and if RSN is used
|
||
|
there, that frame has replay protection, so the attacker could not
|
||
|
perform the attack. If the AP path were to use WEP, the frame could be
|
||
|
replayed, though. That said, if WEP is used on the AP path, it would be
|
||
|
fair to assume that there is no security in the network, so a new attack
|
||
|
vector would be of small additional value.
|
||
|
|
||
|
With older wpa_supplicant versions, it may be possible for an attacker
|
||
|
to cause TPK M2 to be retransmitted with delay that would be able to
|
||
|
trigger reinstallation of TK on the peer receiving TPK M2
|
||
|
(CVE-2017-13086). This may open a short window for the attack with v2.3,
|
||
|
v2.4, and v2.5; and a longer window with older versions.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Vulnerable versions/configurations
|
||
|
|
||
|
For the AP/Authenticator TK (unicast) reinstallation in FT protocol
|
||
|
(CVE-2017-13082):
|
||
|
|
||
|
hostapd v0.7.2 and newer with FT enabled (i.e., practically all versions
|
||
|
that include full FT implementation). FT needs to be enabled in the
|
||
|
runtime configuration to make this applicable.
|
||
|
|
||
|
For the AP/Authenticator missing ANonce during PTK rekeying:
|
||
|
|
||
|
All hostapd versions.
|
||
|
|
||
|
For the station/Supplicant side GTK/IGTK reinstallation and TK
|
||
|
configuration:
|
||
|
|
||
|
All wpa_supplicant versions. The impact on older versions can be more
|
||
|
severe due to earlier changes in this area: v2.3 and older can also
|
||
|
reinstall the pairwise key and as such have similar impact as the AP FT
|
||
|
case (CVE-2017-13077); v2.4 and v2.5 end up configuring an all-zero TK
|
||
|
which breaks the normal data path, but could allow an attacker to
|
||
|
decrypt all following frames from the station and to inject arbitrary
|
||
|
frames to the station. In addition, a different message sequence
|
||
|
involving 4-way handshake can result in configuration of an all-zero TK
|
||
|
in v2.6 and the current snapshot of the development repository as of the
|
||
|
publication of this advisory.
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
Acknowledgments
|
||
|
|
||
|
Thanks to Mathy Vanhoef of the imec-DistriNet research group of KU
|
||
|
Leuven for discovering and reporting this issue. Thanks to John A. Van
|
||
|
Boxtel for finding additional issues related to this topic.
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
Possible mitigation steps
|
||
|
|
||
|
- For AP/hostapd and FT replay issue (CVE-2017-13082), it is possible to
|
||
|
prevent the issue temporarily by disabling FT in runtime
|
||
|
configuration, if needed before being able to update the
|
||
|
implementations.
|
||
|
|
||
|
- Merge the following commits to hostapd/wpa_supplicant and rebuild them:
|
||
|
|
||
|
hostapd and replayed FT reassociation request frame (CVE-2017-13082):
|
||
|
hostapd: Avoid key reinstallation in FT handshake
|
||
|
|
||
|
hostapd PTK rekeying and ANonce update:
|
||
|
Fix PTK rekeying to generate a new ANonce
|
||
|
|
||
|
wpa_supplicant and GTK/IGTK rekeying (CVE-2017-13078, CVE-2017-13079,
|
||
|
CVE-2017-13080, CVE-2017-13081, CVE-2017-13087, CVE-2017-13088):
|
||
|
Prevent reinstallation of an already in-use group key
|
||
|
Extend protection of GTK/IGTK reinstallation of WNM-Sleep Mode cases
|
||
|
|
||
|
wpa_supplicant (v2.6 or newer snapshot) and known TK issue:
|
||
|
Prevent installation of an all-zero TK
|
||
|
|
||
|
Additional protection steps for wpa_supplicant:
|
||
|
TDLS: Reject TPK-TK reconfiguration
|
||
|
WNM: Ignore WNM-Sleep Mode Response without pending request
|
||
|
FT: Do not allow multiple Reassociation Response frames
|
||
|
|
||
|
These patches are available from https://w1.fi/security/2017-1/
|
||
|
(both against the snapshot of hostap.git master branch and rebased on
|
||
|
top of the v2.6 release)
|
||
|
|
||
|
For the TDLS TPK M2 retransmission issue (CVE-2017-13086) with older
|
||
|
wpa_supplicant versions, consider updating to the latest version or
|
||
|
merge in a commit that is present in v2.6:
|
||
|
https://w1.fi/cgit/hostap/commit/?id=dabdef9e048b17b22b1c025ad592922eab30dda8
|
||
|
('TDLS: Ignore incoming TDLS Setup Response retries')
|
||
|
|
||
|
- Update to hostapd/wpa_supplicant v2.7 or newer, once available
|
||
|
* it should be noted that there are number of additional changes in
|
||
|
the related areas of the implementation to provide extra layer of
|
||
|
protection for potential unknown issues; these changes are not
|
||
|
included in this advisory as they have not been identified to be
|
||
|
critical for preventing any of the identified security
|
||
|
vulnerabilities; however, users of hostapd/wpa_supplicant are
|
||
|
encouraged to consider merging such changes even if not fully
|
||
|
moving to v2.7
|