NETGEAR is aware of a growing number of phone and online scams. To learn how to stay safe click here.
Forum Discussion
warpdag
Jan 25, 2020Apprentice
RBR850 Massive Security Fail - Many ports responding to requests
Just bought the thing, using the latest firmware V3.2.9.2_1.2.4. Did not Disable Port Scan and DoS Protection. WAN ports respond to unsollicited requests, instead of ignoring. They do respond clo...
FURRYe38
Jan 25, 2020Guru - Experienced User
Thanks for letting us know. I and others have already seen this and reported it to NG. No responce as of yet. Hopefully someone will check in to this.
warpdag
Jan 25, 2020Apprentice
Added a screenshot just in case. Firmware is obviously far from being ready for prime time.
- FURRYe38Jan 25, 2020Guru - Experienced User
Thanks.
- tantrumMay 17, 2020Apprentice
This still seems to be ongoing.
I even created a fake default dmz (ip address that is in my subnet but not assigned to any device on my lan) to act as a black hole; that actually stopped a lot of the ports from just showing closed but present into stealth, but I can't block all. Invariably a "common port scan" shows 1025-1030 inclusive responding as closed.
Horribly, if I don't do the dmz trick, ALL common ports except ping, http (80), and upnp (5000) show as closed with those 3 as stealthed.
I thought maybe this is my modem or something; but the Orbi router's logs show that it was the one accepting the request to forward it to a non-existent device, but only on the ports that are not showing stealthed in the scan (i.e. if it logs the forwarding of the port, it seems to also acknowledge back to the remote host that it exists as a host); e.g.:
[LAN access from remote] from 4.79.142.206 port 35873 to 192.168.1.252 port 1025 Sunday, May 17,2020 07:58:53 [LAN access from remote] from 4.79.142.206 port 35873 to 192.168.1.252 port 1026 Sunday, May 17,2020 07:58:53 [LAN access from remote] from 4.79.142.206 port 35873 to 192.168.1.252 port 1027 Sunday, May 17,2020 07:58:52 [LAN access from remote] from 4.79.142.206 port 35873 to 192.168.1.252 port 1028 Sunday, May 17,2020 07:58:52 [LAN access from remote] from 4.79.142.206 port 35873 to 192.168.1.252 port 1029 Sunday, May 17,2020 07:58:52 [LAN access from remote] from 4.79.142.206 port 35873 to 192.168.1.252 port 1030 Sunday, May 17,2020 07:58:52 [LAN access from remote] from 4.79.142.206 port 35873 to 192.168.1.252 port 1025 Sunday, May 17,2020 07:58:52 [LAN access from remote] from 4.79.142.206 port 35873 to 192.168.1.252 port 1026 Sunday, May 17,2020 07:58:52 [LAN access from remote] from 4.79.142.206 port 35873 to 192.168.1.252 port 1027 Sunday, May 17,2020 07:58:52 [LAN access from remote] from 4.79.142.206 port 35873 to 192.168.1.252 port 1028 Sunday, May 17,2020 07:58:52
There's no device on my network with .252 as the IP, and none showing in the attached devices list in the .2xx range at all. Without the faux dmz host many more ports seem to be exposed but without any logging.
I have:
- NOT turned off the port scan / DDoS prevention (i.e. the box to disable it is unchecked as default)
- left the disable wan pings option turned on (i.e. the box is checked as default)
- tried explicitly forwarding ranges of ports to a black hole, e.g. and including 1025-1030, to no avail; generally it just means other ports (including 5000!) start responding to the GRC Shields Up! common scan as being "closed" (but present) instead.
- warpdagMay 17, 2020ApprenticeYes, this thing forwards requests to the internal LAN without sanitizing them. Really basic security stuff, the proper behavior should be to check whether a session has been established by a LAN device on that port before accepting random packets from random IPs on random ports, but for some reason, the router tries to process them anyway (and of course it leads to a closed port response, which, I’m sorry, isn’t an acceptable behavior in 2020). Interestingly, the previous Orbi generation didn’t behave that way.
I tried to disclose the issue to netgear in a responsible way. They did not acknowledge. I eventually bought a separate router to shield the Orbi, and put it in AP mode. That fixed the firewall issues, but opened another can of worms, as Orbi has major DHCP and backhaul issues when running in AP mode.
So I moved on.