Lenovo Discovers and Removes Backdoor In Networking Switches (bleepingcomputer.com) 42
An anonymous reader writes: Lenovo engineers have discovered a backdoor in the firmware of RackSwitch and BladeCenter networking switches. The company released firmware updates last week. The Chinese company said it found the backdoor after an internal security audit of firmware for products added to its portfolio following the acquisitions of other companies. Lenovo says the backdoor affects only RackSwitch and BladeCenter switches running ENOS (Enterprise Network Operating System).
The backdoor was added to ENOS in 2004 when ENOS was maintained by Nortel's Blade Server Switch Business Unit (BSSBU). Lenovo claims Nortel appears to have authorized the addition of the backdoor "at the request of a BSSBU OEM customer." In a security advisory regarding this issue, Lenovo refers to the backdoor under the name of "HP backdoor." The backdoor code appears to have remained in the firmware even after Nortel spun BSSBU off in 2006 as BLADE Network Technologies (BNT). The backdoor also remained in the code even after IBM acquired BNT in 2010. Lenovo bought IBM's BNT portfolio in 2014.
The backdoor was added to ENOS in 2004 when ENOS was maintained by Nortel's Blade Server Switch Business Unit (BSSBU). Lenovo claims Nortel appears to have authorized the addition of the backdoor "at the request of a BSSBU OEM customer." In a security advisory regarding this issue, Lenovo refers to the backdoor under the name of "HP backdoor." The backdoor code appears to have remained in the firmware even after Nortel spun BSSBU off in 2006 as BLADE Network Technologies (BNT). The backdoor also remained in the code even after IBM acquired BNT in 2010. Lenovo bought IBM's BNT portfolio in 2014.
Some FISA court has to stop the chinese (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
There is only one FISC and it doesn’t actually give out orders. If you’re gonna try to create a conspiracy at least gets your facts straight.
Re: (Score:1)
Yes, and those are written up and issued by the FBI not the FISC. The whole point of the NSL is not needing court approval. Want to try again?
Re: Some FISA court has to stop the chinese (Score:4, Insightful)
Neither the FISA court nor any court is involved in NSLs. That’s one of the major issues with them; the complete lack of any (even rubber-stamped) judicial oversight.
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah knowing how the law works must make one a stooge... NOT. On the other hand, I’ve spotted an ignorant twat.
Do you have an actual argument as to how I’m wrong?
Don't be so blatant! (Score:1)
Better to make it look like an accidental "vulnerability" like how intel does it.
Does HP own Nortel?t (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Does HP own Nortel?t (Score:5, Insightful)
Not an "enterprise" customer but a customer that embeds the switches in their own product or solution, hence the term OEM. Presumably HP requested the backdoor for some reason (ex. easier support, CIA request, etc) and Nortel complied.
I guess it's pretty funny to name the backdoor after the requester. Allegedly.
you sure this was not Harry's Powerswitch? (Score:2)
certainly if Harry's Powerswitch management software stops working in certain modes, we'll know who the mysterious OEM was....
Really? (Score:5, Insightful)
One customer asked for a backdoor and they added it to all their products, giving that customer access to all of their customers' systems? Who the hell would authorize that?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Why would a Canadian company have done something for the NSA that would have violated Canadian law? Do you people even think through your conspiracies?
Re: (Score:1)
Because national security. You don't want the terrorists to win do you? Think of the chrilden.
Re: Really? (Score:1)
^^^^ +1 funny!
Re: (Score:2)
Nortel was hurting for business, so... (Score:2)
the top brass authorized it. as The Red Book said, it's a feature, not a bug.
HP Backdoor.... (Score:1)
Yeah, right. In other news, Lenovo engineers executed by Chinese government for tampering with government code.
How deep does this go? (Score:5, Interesting)
So,... How was this vulnerability discovered? Could it have been "discovered" by its creator?
Re: (Score:3)
Re:How deep does this go? (Score:5, Interesting)
This might have been requested by HP, as another commenter suggested elsewhere, and then incompetence spread it to equipment beyond the requester's equipment. Or it could have been compromised code planted by the hackers, hiding it as HP requested code. Yet another option is that this was code intended for HP equipment, which the hackers then approved for non-HP equipment.
We also don't know if any of the hackers involved in the incident(s) from 2000-2012 are employed with Lenovo. It is logical to assume they would have valuable expertise and skills.
Part of the procedure... (Score:1)
Part of the procedure that they have for adding Chinese government backdoors, is to check if there are already any other backdoors there...
FYI (Score:4, Interesting)
FYI: Nortel used to be big with North American defence contractors
The fact that Lenovos did the audit in first place itself tells that Chinese were hoping to shop for more than just an average network gear supplier
Re: (Score:1)
They found the back door account (Score:2)
and fixed it by changing the password.
Why does this sound familiar? (Score:1)
Posted by samzenpus on Thursday July 11, 2013 @09:06PM:
For the second time in a month, Hewlett-Packard has been forced to admit it built secret backdoors into its enterprise storage products.