News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:FTC sues D-Link over router and camera security flaws by cptskippy on Friday January 06, 2017 @02:14PM (#13339269)
You mapped all ports from the external IPs to the DVR?
Re:FTC sues D-Link over router and camera security flaws by nodja on Friday January 06, 2017 @02:30PM (#13339397)
The firewall has a 1 to 1 NAT feature. It maps an external ip to an internal one. I had no firewall policies set. Rookie mistake, I've blocked all outgoing access and only allow port 80 and the video port incoming.
Re:FTC sues D-Link over router and camera security flaws by mrpippy on Friday January 06, 2017 @05:00PM (#13340672)
I wouldn't even allow port 80 incoming from the internet. Even if the web interface appears to have authentication on it, there may be vulnerable CGIs. They left a telnet interface wide open--do you trust them to write a secure website?
Re:FTC sues D-Link over router and camera security flaws by tlrobinson on Friday January 06, 2017 @05:20PM (#13340832)
I'd suggest blocking all incoming traffic except a VPN. It's not that hard to set up a VPN.

Even better if the high-risk devices like cameras are on a separate VLAN from critical stuff.

Re:FTC sues D-Link over router and camera security flaws by zrm on Saturday January 07, 2017 @01:04AM (#13342614)
Blocking outgoing traffic is generally a mistake. It prevents the device from retrieving updates, assuming there are any. And if there are no updates then there had better also be no undiscovered or unpatched vulnerabilities, which isn't likely.
Re:FTC sues D-Link over router and camera security flaws by 300bps on Friday January 06, 2017 @02:25PM (#13339367)
I read it as he gave the DVRs external IP adresses without NATing them to internal addresses.