Vulnerabilities:

CVE-2023-52160 (wpa_supplicant) and CVE-2023-52161 (Intel’s iNet Wireless Daemon) allow attackers to:

  • Trick users into joining fake Wi-Fi networks: Attackers can create malicious clones of legitimate networks and steal user data.
  • Gain unauthorized access to secure Wi-Fi networks: Attackers can join password-protected networks without needing the password, putting devices and data at risk.

Affected devices:

  • CVE-2023-52160: Android devices using wpa_supplicant versions 2.10 and prior (requires specific configuration).
  • CVE-2023-52161: Linux devices using iNet Wireless Daemon versions 2.12 and lower (any network using a Linux access point).

Mitigation:

  • Update your Linux distribution and ChromeOS (version 118 or later).
  • Android fix not yet available, but manually configure CA certificate for any saved enterprise networks as a temporary workaround.

Exploitation:

  • Attacker needs SSID and physical proximity for CVE-2023-52160.
  • CVE-2023-52161 requires no special knowledge, affecting any vulnerable network.

Links:

    • Dran
      link
      English
      1710 months ago
      UAP-AC-Lite-LR-BZ.6.6.55# which wpa_supplicant 
      /usr/sbin/wpa_supplicant
      
      UAP-AC-Lite-LR-BZ.6.6.55# /usr/sbin/wpa_supplicant -v
      wpa_supplicant v2.10-devel
      Copyright (c) 2003-2019, Jouni Malinen  and contributors`
      
      

      Seems unifi devices are affected, no patch yet as far as I can tell.

      • Buelldozer
        link
        fedilink
        English
        710 months ago

        The patch is likely going to have to come from Intel since they’re the creators of IWD. I see that UniFi is running an older v2.10 module but it really doesn’t matter as the CVE states that even 2.14 (which I think is the latest?) is vulnerable as well.

        • Dran
          link
          English
          510 months ago

          it’s running wpa_supplicant, not iwd. It’s vulnerable to the similar exploit in CVE-2023-52160 but the patch will likely have to come from unifi, as wpa_supplicant hasn’t been updated in years as far as I know.

          • Buelldozer
            link
            fedilink
            English
            2
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            Help me clear my confusion on this.

            According to Mitre CVE-2023-52160 only applies to “Enterprise” Networks, that is WiFi Networks using WPA2 / WPA3 with Radius. This CVE is the one that relies on wpa_supplicant.

            Meanwhile CVE-2023-52161 works on “regular” networks, ones using WPA2 / WPA3 with PSK, and relies on a vulnerability in IWD.

            So unless I’m missing something (which is very possible) 5160 doesn’t apply to most people and SMBs because they are not using Radius. So unless YOU are using Radius on your UniFi gear this vulnerability doesn’t apply.

            The one that WOULD apply to most people is 5161 but your UniFi screenshot is showing wpa_supplicant and not IWD so according to mitre this one doesn’t apply to you either.

            What am I missing here?

            • Dran
              link
              English
              5
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              I just verified personally that it was present on unifi devices, since their docs weren’t clear. We are a mostly cisco/aruba shop where I work, but a lot of my colleagues at smaller businesses/universities use radius with unifi access points. I imagine they are vulnerable to this.

              You are correct though in assessing that homelab users and very small enterprise users are probably safe.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1110 months ago

        Hmm how would one know if their specific AP is affected? Lots of manufacturers won’t release updates.

        • @khannie
          link
          English
          10
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          TL;DR: If you’re using a linux based AP, check if you’re using iwd. If you are, you need to update immediately. Alternatively, if you’re using an OpenWRT based router you’re good.

          It’s not clear to me yet if this is specific to intel wireless devices (edit: the IWD wiki page says that it aims to be “a comprehensive Wi-Fi connectivity solution for Linux based devices” so it looks like it would cover any system using IWD, not just Intel AP’s).

          The article says “everyone using IWD as an access point” and “affects home WiFi networks”.

          So I went to the good ol’ Arch wiki and it gives some details on iwd:

          https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Iwd

          Long story short it looks like at a minimum you would need the iwd package installed on a linux based access point (think open source based routers and probably many ISP ones) and an easy way to test for that appears to be if the apps iwctl, iwd and / or iwmon are anywhere on the system (and / or if iwd is running).

          If you run

          ps -ef | grep iwd

          on a normal linux box or

          ps w | grep iwd

          on openwrt based routers it should give you a clear indication.

          The linux based router I’m using here has iw and iwlist but they’re for a separate package and no iwd daemon running.

          I am still digging on this and will be until I’m happy.

          update: iwd 2.13 is vulnerable and was released 2024/01/12 so unless you’re bang up to date, if you’re using iwd you’re exposed.

          update: even newer versions of OpenWRT don’t appear to use IWD.

            • @khannie
              link
              English
              310 months ago

              No worries. :) It was a bit rambling there for a while but I finally got to the bottom of it all.

              The article and / or CVE could have done a much better job of making it clear who wasn’t affected or at least how to check if you are.

        • @TunaLobster
          link
          English
          310 months ago

          If these CVEs didn’t expose a router that doesn’t get updates, many others already have. OpenWRT might be more secure than OEM firmware.