Abstract:IoT devices are becoming popular. Meanwhile, researchers are actively working on improving the security of IoT devices. However, previous works ignore the insecurity caused by a special category of devices, i.e., the End-of-Life (EoL) devices. Once a product becomes End-of-Life, vendors tend to no longer maintain its firmware or software, including fixing bugs and patching vulnerabilities. This makes EoL devices susceptible to attacks. For instance, a report showed that an EoL model with thousands of active devices was exploited to redirect web traffic for malicious purposes. In this paper, we conduct the first empirical study to shed light on the (in)security of EoL devices. To this end, our study performs two types of analysis, including the liveness analysis and the vulnerability analysis . The first one aims to detect the scale of EoL devices that are still alive in the wild. The second one is to evaluate the vulnerabilities existing in (active) EoL devices. We applied our approach to a large number of EoL models from three vendors (i.e., D-Link, Tp-Link, and Netgear) and detect the alive devices in a time period of more than two years . Our study reveals some worrisome facts that were unknown by the community. For instance, there exist a large number (more than 3 million) of active EoL devices. Some devices (more than 1 million) are still alive even after five years since EoL. Furthermore, more than half of the vulnerabilities (182 of 294) are discovered after the EoL date. Although vendors may release security patches after the EoL date, the process is ad hoc and incomplete, with only limited functionality. Furthermore, these patches can have side effects, such as providing valuable information to attackers. In summary, more than 2 million active EoL devices are vulnerable, and nearly half of them are threatened by high-risk vulnerabilities. Attackers can achieve a minimum of 8.67 Tbps DDoS attack by exploiting OS command injection vulnerabilities and compromising a large number of active EoL devices. We believe these facts pose a clear call for more attention to deal with the security issues of EoL devices.

On Manually Reverse Engineering Communication Protocols of Linux-Based IoT Systems

On Manually Reverse Engineering Communication Protocols of Linux Based IoT Systems

Automatic Protocol Reverse Engineering for Industrial Control Systems with Dynamic Taint Analysis

Towards Automatically Reverse Engineering Vehicle Diagnostic Protocols

An Empirical Study on the Insecurity of End-of-Life (eol) IoT Devices

IoT Security: An End-to-End View and Case Study

Toward Hybrid Static-Dynamic Detection of Vulnerabilities in IoT Firmware

MPInspector: A Systematic and Automatic Approach for Evaluating the Security of IoT Messaging Protocols

I Still See You: Why Existing IoT Traffic Reshaping Fails

Reverse Engineering and Security Evaluation of Commercial Tags for RFID-Based IoT Applications

Reverse Engineering Industrial Protocols Driven by Control Fields

Discovering Vulnerabilities in COTS IoT Devices Through Blackbox Fuzzing Web Management Interface

Identifying Privilege Separation Vulnerabilities in IoT Firmware with Symbolic Execution

A Brief Review of Classic IoT security Protocols

Unveiling Behavioral Transparency of Protocols Communicated by IoT Networked Assets (Full Version)

Who Let the Smart Toaster Hack the House? An Investigation into the Security Vulnerabilities of Consumer IoT Devices

argXtract: Deriving IoT Security Configurations via Automated Static Analysis of Stripped ARM Binaries

Discovering and Understanding the Security Hazards in the Interactions between IoT Devices, Mobile Apps, and Clouds on Smart Home Platforms

A Secure and Fine-Grained Scheme for Data Security in Industrial IoT Platforms for Smart City

PROFACTORY: Improving IoT Security via Formalized Protocol Customization

Faster and Better: Detecting Vulnerabilities in Linux-based IoT Firmware with Optimized Reaching Definition Analysis