cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Rogers ignite technicolor router security scan

sierra1989
I plan to stick around

Rogers ignite technicolor router security scan , should i be concerned ?

 

IMG_1502.JPG

 

 

**Added Labels**

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

Accepted Solutions

Re: Rogers ignite technicolor router security scan

-G-
Resident Expert
Resident Expert

@sierra1989 wrote:

Yes it is Bitdefender home scanner ,  but question still ,should i be worried about it  when internet security results say the router/modem is vulnerable and can be exploited ?


Clearly this is not a good situation.  As for whether it can be exploited, that's another thing.  It also depends on how the scanner works and what it considers a vulnerability.

 

I don't know which specific Ignite gateway you have but here is a listing of the open source software components in the Technicolor XB7: https://www.technicolor.com/sites/default/files/2020-01/CGM4331COM%20v1.0%20OSS%20Publication.pdf

 

I'm not impressed with the software quality of ANY consumer router/gateway, and that includes the modem/gateways that Bell and Rogers provide.

 

If you look at the average Linksys router, they often run an ancient Linux kernel that is no longer supported, because that is what the firmware/drivers for 3rd-party hardware components (e.g. for Wi-Fi chipsets) is certified against, and they continue to use those components for the lifetime of the product.  They may backport security fixes but other existing vulnerabilities may or may not get patched.

 

I would be shocked if the same were not true with the Technicolor gateways.  It's possible that they patched known vulnerabilities by backporting fixes, and that may show a false positive on the Bitdefender scan.  The scanner may detect old software components but the corresponding vulnerabilities may have been mitigated.  However, if the scanner did an actual pen test and the listed vulnerability really is present, well, that's not good.

 

If you log into the gateway through the web admin UI and run devtools on the web browser, what you will see is also not pretty.

 

As for whether or not any of the listed vulnerabilites can be exploited, its possible, but the attack would probably need to originate from a device on your internal network.  I don't know how vulnerable the Technicolor gateway is to attack from the WAN side.

 

If security is paramount to you, it's probably best that you run the Ignite gateway in Bridge Mode and then install a  router/firewall that you trust to protect your internal network.

 

However, your biggest security threat is really from the devices on your internal network that connect to the Internet.

View solution in original post

4 REPLIES 4

Re: Rogers ignite technicolor router security scan

RogersMoin
Moderator
Moderator

Hello, @sierra1989.

 

Thanks for being a member of our Community; I appreciate your query.😃

 

It's good to see you are using the Advanced Security feature. You can learn all about how Advanced Security monitors, block and informs you of potential security in the FAQs listed on our Support Portal. 

 

Let us know if you have further questions.

 

Cheers,

RogersMoin

Re: Rogers ignite technicolor router security scan

-G-
Resident Expert
Resident Expert

@RogersMoin I believe that this is output from a Bitdefender scan that was performed on the internal interface of an Ignite gateway.

Re: Rogers ignite technicolor router security scan

sierra1989
I plan to stick around

Yes it is Bitdefender home scanner ,  but question still ,should i be worried about it  when internet security results say the router/modem is vulnerable and can be exploited ?

Re: Rogers ignite technicolor router security scan

-G-
Resident Expert
Resident Expert

@sierra1989 wrote:

Yes it is Bitdefender home scanner ,  but question still ,should i be worried about it  when internet security results say the router/modem is vulnerable and can be exploited ?


Clearly this is not a good situation.  As for whether it can be exploited, that's another thing.  It also depends on how the scanner works and what it considers a vulnerability.

 

I don't know which specific Ignite gateway you have but here is a listing of the open source software components in the Technicolor XB7: https://www.technicolor.com/sites/default/files/2020-01/CGM4331COM%20v1.0%20OSS%20Publication.pdf

 

I'm not impressed with the software quality of ANY consumer router/gateway, and that includes the modem/gateways that Bell and Rogers provide.

 

If you look at the average Linksys router, they often run an ancient Linux kernel that is no longer supported, because that is what the firmware/drivers for 3rd-party hardware components (e.g. for Wi-Fi chipsets) is certified against, and they continue to use those components for the lifetime of the product.  They may backport security fixes but other existing vulnerabilities may or may not get patched.

 

I would be shocked if the same were not true with the Technicolor gateways.  It's possible that they patched known vulnerabilities by backporting fixes, and that may show a false positive on the Bitdefender scan.  The scanner may detect old software components but the corresponding vulnerabilities may have been mitigated.  However, if the scanner did an actual pen test and the listed vulnerability really is present, well, that's not good.

 

If you log into the gateway through the web admin UI and run devtools on the web browser, what you will see is also not pretty.

 

As for whether or not any of the listed vulnerabilites can be exploited, its possible, but the attack would probably need to originate from a device on your internal network.  I don't know how vulnerable the Technicolor gateway is to attack from the WAN side.

 

If security is paramount to you, it's probably best that you run the Ignite gateway in Bridge Mode and then install a  router/firewall that you trust to protect your internal network.

 

However, your biggest security threat is really from the devices on your internal network that connect to the Internet.

Topic Stats
  • 4 replies
  • 2753 views
  • 0 Likes
  • 3 in conversation