Jump to content
Security Installer Community

Csl Dualcom Cs2300-R Vulnerabilities


Recommended Posts

id of thought that security on a security signalling device is pretty damn important

 

I thought it was a published standard,

 

But its mentioned in a post above about self certificate this is where the whole industry falls down. 

www.nova-security.co.uk

www.nsiapproved.co.uk

No PMs please unless i know you or you are using this board with your proper name.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

But its mentioned in a post above about self certificate this is where the whole industry falls down. 

Agreed

 

What, and take your fun away, never!! I've stayed away from 'this' technology on purpose waiting for this day of reckoning. Whichever the way you look at it it'll only get worse, or more entertaining, before it gets better.

Stayed away from what technology?

securitywarehouse Security Supplies from Security Warehouse

Trade Members please contact us for your TSI vetted trade discount.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stayed away from what technology?

The whole 3rd party monitoring malarkey, the automated heating hardware, again with its fate largely decided by someone else and how good their security is. Alarm apps, another risky minefield. All rather sexy but undoubtedly a bigger risk than without.

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole 3rd party monitoring malarkey, the automated heating hardware, again with its fate largely decided by someone else and how good their security is. Alarm apps, another risky minefield. All rather sexy but undoubtedly a bigger risk than without.

So what do U use?

securitywarehouse Security Supplies from Security Warehouse

Trade Members please contact us for your TSI vetted trade discount.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so what do u use?

What I use is irrelevant. What I don't use is all that matters to me.

Let's hope Andrew can expose more insecure, shoddy security software peddlers to encourage/force them to clean up their act. Furthermore, it'd be good if self certification was made a thing of the past. I will be following with interest.

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed

 

Stayed away from what technology?

 

Problem is, neither CSL or Intertek are going to openly say "The CSL CS2300 board testing to EN50136 had some parts self declared, including the encryption and substitution protection".

 

Testing the boards to the depth I tested them would cost between £10k and £20k. That's about one third of the cost of testing again. If you wanted the problems fixed, and needed in-depth advice, add another £5k at least.

 

I don't know if WebWayOne want to pass comment on the self declared aspects of standards testing?

 

Interestingly, since the research went live, two separate people have contacted me to talk about integrating the CSL protocol into panels. They were both shocked at how basic the protocol was, and how bad the documentation was.

I'm still finding it odd how little has been said by CSL. The post has far exceeded the traffic generated by Heatmiser vulnerabilities.

I have a blog, some of which is about alarm security and reverse engineering:
http://cybergibbons.com/

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How would one verify that?

 

Almost impossible as a third party. As of April 2015, the latest firmware they had available for download suffered from these issues. They don't provide any release notes or changelog, so really hard to tell.

I have a blog, some of which is about alarm security and reverse engineering:
http://cybergibbons.com/

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So 2013 firmware was in your report?

 

Firmware that was on a device installed 2013 - 2.5x. The latest on their site was 3.53 or 3.10 for UDL. This is the version number that flashes up as the board is booting.

 

I'd be interested to hear about other versions of the firmware though.

 

I have two DigiAirs now, so I am presently giving them a once over.

So as of April 2015 your findings are valid?

 

Unless CSL secretly deployed a later firmware version using programmers that no installers have, yes.

 

If one of you still have a valid login to the CSL installer area, you could check what the latest firmware version is. Maybe ask them what the latest version is for the Gradeshift as well...

I have a blog, some of which is about alarm security and reverse engineering:
http://cybergibbons.com/

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Be interesting if that's just 100 affected units? Can't agree that its a round 600 units affected. That is imo bullsh1t

 

Is that grade 3 units, or gradeshift grade 4

 

Most end users won't know, care or give one as their insurer will come back on the maintainer.

I wonder what the insurers think on this.

As usual the insurers will ask for Dualcom plus

securitywarehouse Security Supplies from Security Warehouse

Trade Members please contact us for your TSI vetted trade discount.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Be interesting if that's just 100 affected units? Can't agree that its a round 600 units affected. That is imo bullsh1t

 

Is that grade 3 units, or gradeshift grade 4

 

Most end users won't know, care or give one as their insurer will come back on the maintainer.

I wonder what the insurers think on this.

As usual the insurers will ask for Dualcom plus

 

I can't see any difference between the different units - certainly the ones I have, the grade is just an option set in NVRAM.

 

What is "Dualcom plus" - seen that in insurance docs, but doesn't seem to line up with a product.

I have a blog, some of which is about alarm security and reverse engineering:
http://cybergibbons.com/

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd be interested to hear about other versions of the firmware though.

3.77

Is that grade 3 units, or gradeshift grade 4

It still not clear, but they seem to be all the same hardware.

You can buy spare units and program them to be whatever grade you need.

Most end users won't know, care or give one as their insurer will come back on the maintainer.

Completely agree.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surprised as such maintainers will be liable that it isn't a busier topic. My take is that I needed to remove them. Seems a lot of firms don't care that they are fitting very insecure devices.

securitywarehouse Security Supplies from Security Warehouse

Trade Members please contact us for your TSI vetted trade discount.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.