Re: Cisco 3015 concentrator VPN bruteforce? And proxy with easy header rewrite?

[aditya mukadam <aditya.mukadam () gmail com>]

Richard,

Well, you are trying to bruteforce to find the admin username/password
.Below is some info about admin username/password configuration.

Admin username password can be authenticated
1) Locally
2) AAA TACACS+ administrator authentication servers

Other options:
1)Session Idle Timeout
2)Session Limit
3)Access List:Only those IP addresses listed will have access to
manage this VPN 3000 Concentrator

There is no option for account lock up for local authentication.
However if the admin authentication is done via AAA, TACACS+ it can be
configured for account lock up.

> Derek, thanks for the link, however the target do not have the web
> interface

Correction: If Target = concentrator then there is web interface for
admin access !

Let me know if any questions. Im still trying to figure out what
exactly are you trying to achieve.

Thanks,
Aditya Govind Mukadam

On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 9:24 PM, Richard Miles
<richard.k.miles () googlemail com> wrote:
> Hi aditya, Derek and David,
>
> Thanks for all your reply.
>
> Aditya, well, at the end, what I really need is a tool able to
> brute-force user/password at this uncommon Cisco vpn concentrator.
> Someone know a tool for that?
>
> I'm thinking in look for a linux client and do a ugly shell-script to
> connect and do a brute force, however it will be very slow. So if
> there is a reliable solution, it should be much better. Also, I'm not
> sure if this Cisco VPN by default lock accounts. Anyone have more
> experience?
>
> I did found a old message where someguys pointed a flaw where was
> possible to enumerate usernames from this cisco vpn, but it for sure
> was not encapsulated like mine. No results for me, and also, it had
> been patched in the last 3 years.
>
> Derek, thanks for the link, however the target do not have the web
> interface and also I'm not allowed to do any DoS attack.
>
> David, yes, I'm sure it's TCP.
>
> Thank you all.
>
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 6:57 AM, aditya mukadam
> <aditya.mukadam () gmail com> wrote:
> > Richard,
> >
> > Based on my personal experience with Cisco Concentrator, the result
> > you received is pretty much expected.
> >
> > Quick Question: What are you exactly trying to achieve ? Brute force
> > to get what/which info ?
> >
> > As you would know, Security Associations(SA) are created by the VPN
> > Gateway during  IPSec negotiation/connection. The Phase 1 SA is ISAKMP
> > while the Phase 2 SAs are IPSEC (bi-directional). The actual traffic
> > is encrypted with protocol ESP or encapsulated with AH ( not used
> > nowadays). Packet is encapsulated in TCP 10000 after the IPSec
> > connection successfully establishes.
> >
> > Insight to Cisco Concentrator. Its capable of:
> > 1) Site to site IPSec VPN
> > 2) Remote Access IPSec VPN Gateway
> > 3) WebVPN (SSL VPN)
> > Lemme know if you need more info.
> >
> > Hope this helps.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Aditya Govind Mukadam
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 3:00 AM, Richard Miles
> > <richard.k.miles () googlemail com> wrote:
> > > Hello
> > >
> > > I'm doing a pen-test in a Cisco 3015 concentrator - ipsec connections
> > > tunneled over TCP port 10000.
> > >
> > > By the way, ike-scan do not work with this vpn. Also the common tools
> > > to brute force like THC-pptp, THC-Hydra and Medusa do not work also.
> > >
> > > Nmap neither regoganize the port as opened (but it doesn't matter), it
> > > say filtered, but I can telnet and estabilish a connection to it.
> > >
> > > Do you have some experience with this device? Can you give me some
> > > hints? And point me to some tools for identify, enumerate and
> > > brute-force this Cisco implementation?
> > >
> > > A bit off-topic: Does anyone know a easy to install and configure web
> > > proxy for windows which enable headers rewrite? I need to setup a fast
> > > web proxy at my windows box to replace all headers (before they are
> > > sent to the webserver) of the "Cookie" field and a proprietary header.
> > >
> > > Thanks folks.