FTC sues D-Link over router and camera security flaws

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.

[ Parent | on HN ]

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?

[ Parent | on HN ]

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.

[ Parent | on HN ]

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.

[ Parent | on HN ]