NAS vulnerabilities
(www.theregister.com)
from Cyber@feddit.uk to selfhosted@lemmy.world on 25 Jun 2024 07:20
https://feddit.uk/post/13799325
from Cyber@feddit.uk to selfhosted@lemmy.world on 25 Jun 2024 07:20
https://feddit.uk/post/13799325
Just stumbled across this (overly dramatic?) article and thought I’d just post it here…
It’s more to act as a reminder that if you’ve got a NAS that is serving content to the interwebs, then make sure it’s behind a proxy of some kind to prevent weaknesses (ie in the management Web UI) being exposed.
Obvz, this article is pointing to Zyxel, but it could be your DIY home-built NAS with Cockpit: CVE-2024-2947 - just an example, not bashing that project at all.
I’ve used Squid and HAProxy over the years (mostly on my pfSense box) - but I’d be interested to know if there’s other options that I’ve not heard of
threaded - newest
Depending on the login flow, I have a lot of stuff behind an oauth proxy. So that you have to have a working 2fa account to see the non 2fa system behind.
I must get around to looking into 2FA / MFA sooooon (next ~5 years)
Did you find it really straight forward to get setup?
I think the fear of getting started with these things is sometimes worth it (home system offline for days) but often it’s quite simple…?
It is very simple, I run it from docker and it can plug into all sorts of places, I have nginx config that I could share if it helps.
This is the tool oauth2-proxy.github.io/oauth2-proxy/
I had one of those NAS (NSA320). Even when they were new and suppoted they were using some ancient custom version of linux with ancient packages. It would be insane to expose them on the internet.
Yeah, I actually finally got rid of mine a year ago, but it never was allowed to access the Internet. Also didn’t support smbv3 when those huge issues came out so has to use custom package sources to get updates. Never buying something unless it can have open source firmware flashed any time for my NAS hardware. Using TrueNAS now on slightly old custom built PC I upgraded from.
As someone who isn’t a fan of e-waste, I really hate these little “appliance” type NASes. Companies abandon them while they’re still perfectly usable and meeting someone’s needs, and tell you oh sorry, I guess you should buy a new one and throw your current one away. (Which, annoyingly, the article also does.)
I agree, though I wouldn’t blame the article. If it is insecure, you shouldn’t be using it unless it is set up to allow you to run a real os on it.
I mean I’m not blaming anyone other than the manufacturers who make things and then arbitrarily decide to stop supporting them while they’re still perfectly usable, leaving basically no choice other than trashing and buying a new one.
Agreed.
If the hardware’s standard, then it’s possible for people (us) to keep these things out of the ground / incinerator for a few more years, but if it’s custom / proprietary stuff, then that’s just terrible.
Totally agree! Also, at work we have some Synology and their web UI is soooo slow that it’s almost unusable
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I’ve seen in this thread:
2 acronyms in this thread; the most compressed thread commented on today has 3 acronyms.
[Thread #831 for this sub, first seen 26th Jun 2024, 05:55] [FAQ] [Full list] [Contact] [Source code]