8 Replies Latest reply: Apr 23, 2014 2:34 PM by acwon RSS

    Heartbleed signature?


      Anyone have a signature for the heartbleed OpenSSL bug?  I am hoping McAfee will come up with something for it.




      Can IDS/IPS detect or block this attack?

      Although the content of the heartbeat request is encrypted it has its own record type in the protocol. This should allow intrusion detection and prevention systems (IDS/IPS) to be trained to detect use of the heartbeat request. Due to encryption differentiating between legitimate use and attack can not be based on the content of the request, but the attack may be detected by comparing the size of the request against the size of the reply. This seems to imply that IDS/IPS can be programmed to detect the attack but not to block it unless heartbeat requests are blocked altogether.

        • 1. Re: Heartbleed signature?

          Fully support this request!


          I've raised an SR 4-5613282937 regarding this

          • 2. Re: Heartbleed signature?

            Looks like McAfee has released a UDS, good job guys.


            SSL: OpenSSL TLS DTLS Heartbeat Extension Packets Info Disclosure


            A Network Security Emergency User Defined Signature (UDS) has been created to detect this threat. The UDS is available for download via the Knowledge Base article KB55447.

            • 3. Re: Heartbleed signature?

              When Mcafee relases a UDS, we imported as a custom signature..


              But, what isn't clear, is do I ahve to go enable it in the policy, to block, before I push out the update to the sensors?


              Or, does this UDS "auto-block" the attack, just by its presence as a custom signature?

              • 4. Re: Heartbleed signature?

                There is now an announcement at the top of the main page here: https://community.mcafee.com/index.jspa

                • 5. Re: Heartbleed signature?

                  Depending on how you have your policies setup (which rule sets they are using), the signature may or may not be automatically added to your policy.  To ensure it is in your policy, just open the policy editor and check for the presense of the UDS signature.  (Policy | Intrusion Prevention | IPS Policies)


                  You can then open the signature and set it to block or packet capture or whatever.  Settings for what a signature does is policy specific, not signature specific.


                  In our case I enabled the packet capture option because we have SSL decrption, so I would be able to see what the attacker was able to get from heartbeat, if anything.


                  4-9-2014 3-54-57 PM.jpg

                  • 6. Re: Heartbleed signature?

                    Anyone has any evidence that the UDS for the Heartbleed provided by McAFee works ?.


                    It doesnt seem to show up in the Threat Analyzer.

                    • 7. Re: Heartbleed signature?

                      Whats can i see in the packet which trigger for "UD-SSL: OpenSSL TLS DTLS Heartbeat Extension Packets Information Disclosure" . The target servers are not vulnerable  but signature is matching for network traffic. When looking at the packet in wireshark it looks a normal SSL conenction.

                      what could be the difference between normal SSL conection Vs OpenSSL heartbeat extension.


                      is there any signature which can give  exploitation of the heartbeat than just information disclosure. Trying to minimize the false positive.


                      Thanks in Advance

                      • 8. Re: Heartbleed signature?



                        In MVM , Manage -> FASL Scripts, I reviewed the "OpenSSL TLS DTLS Heartbeat Extension Packets Information Disclosure" and in "View Script" I found some statement as follows:



                        FASL.vulnID     = 16505;

                        FASL.attackType = ATTACK_NONINTRUSIVE;

                        FASL.os         = OS_ANY;

                        FASL.protocol   = PROTOCOL_TCP;

                        FASL.filters = [ 443, 465, 990, 993, 994, 995, 563, 636, 992, 3713, 5061, 6514, 10161, 10162 ];


                        Does "FASL.filters" mean this check will only checkTCP ports in the group of "443, 465, 990, 993, 994, 995, 563, 636, 992, 3713, 5061, 6514, 10161, 10162"?   Or this check will cheking based on the IPs specified in  MVM, Settings -> Services -> TCP Scanning?