Wisdom of putting a Raspberry Pi on a production network
backtracker
Member Posts: 91 ■■■□□□□□□□
in Off-Topic
Just as it says, would any of you do it? This implementation would use a VLAN to separate it out from the business related resources, so maybe not exactly how I presented the title, but I figured it sounded more dramatic. Is a VLAN segmentation on a Cisco Meraki infrastructure going to be sufficient to separate this type of device?
Open to any advice, flames or pointers you may have!
Open to any advice, flames or pointers you may have!
MSM-ISS (Information System Security)-'07 Colorado Tech.
MCSE | MCSA X3 | Security + | Network +
MCSE | MCSA X3 | Security + | Network +
Comments
-
yoba222 Member Posts: 1,237 ■■■■■■■■□□If I found a Raspberry pi on the network the first thing I'd try would be to login with the default user/pass As far as being wise or unwise, I mean people put much worse things on the production network, like Windows XP . . .A+, Network+, CCNA, LFCS,
Security+, eJPT, CySA+, PenTest+,
Cisco CyberOps, GCIH, VHL,
In progress: OSCP -
UnixGuy Mod Posts: 4,570 Moda fanboy tried to put a Raspberry PI and wanted to configure it as a honey net on the network....
I said No. -
paul78 Member Posts: 3,016 ■■■■■■■■■■I don't particularly have an issue with it. It's really just like anything else that you may place on a network. It depends what you are using it for - and if you have good security practices and like patching, monitoring, etc. it's usually fine.
-
Mooseboost Member Posts: 778 ■■■■□□□□□□It is no different than putting any other device on the network. I have worked in and consulted for environments that use them for various things (script runners/controllers/dispalys/etc) and the threat they introduce can be minimal if you harden them properly. The first question I would ask you is: Why a pi? Is it a cost-driven decision, fanboy attraction, or form factor? What alternatives are available? If you can make the justification for it and are wiling to take the time to do it right, then there isn't a problem with having them. Just throwing them on the network out of box can be a problem though.
-
UnixGuy Mod Posts: 4,570 Modyou guys hit the nail on the head...it's like any other machine.. .IF it's gonna be managed/patched/monitored...etc.
Most places have issues with managing and patching normal Windows machines...I didn't think they'd be successful manually managing Raspberry Pi.....
Also...why? I never got a good enough reason to be honest. -
EANx Member Posts: 1,077 ■■■■■■■■□□My org has firm standards regarding the specific hardware allowed on the network. I don't have a problem with a Pi (in theory) but am a fan of documentation and process to avoid surprises.
-
ecuison Member Posts: 131 ■■■■□□□□□□My colleague had to deal with this. I don't recall the result, but I was pushing for a separate vlan with whitelisted access to the port level/service level. Thats how I would treat it since it was requested outside of IT.
I'm not shocked that organizations want to use these micoboards for some weird implementation. When I worked for this GIS company years back, at the time, the developers wanted to buy the Xbox Kinect to develop GIS applications to integrate it's use. I really think the developers wanted to dance off playing Dance Central on the Xbox 360, but they got them.Accomplishments: B.S. - Business (Information Management) | CISSP | CCSP | TOGAF v9.2 Certified | Security + | Network + -
backtracker Member Posts: 91 ■■■□□□□□□□I appreciate the responses...interesting the consensus isn't completely against it.
The devices were gifted to the organization and will be used to display video/images to a TV. Costs are a huge factor so they utilize what they have to a large degree. The politics are strong here, stronger than logic or reason. Unfortunately there is no real plan to harden the device other than disabling its wireless interface and sandboxing it on a VLAN not able to reach internal company resources. What else would you guys suggest? I like the idea of creating a white list of IP's that can connect to it. No one on the team has any meaningful Linux skills, hence my major hesitation with it- worse it will largely be in the hands of users in an unsupervised environment with no direct on site IT presence. Patching and device management will not be happening, again something I did my best to impress upon organizational management. I'm doing my best to document the potential liabilities and plans to separate it from the network. The documentation has historically been weak at this org. and the thought of creating these types of "one offs" seemingly create a support nightmare along with potential new attack vectors on a network with an otherwise weak security posture.
MSM-ISS (Information System Security)-'07 Colorado Tech.
MCSE | MCSA X3 | Security + | Network + -
paul78 Member Posts: 3,016 ■■■■■■■■■■I appreciate the responses...interesting the consensus isn't completely against it.
The devices were gifted to the organization and will be used to display video/images to a TV. Costs are a huge factor so they utilize what they have to a large degree. The politics are strong here, stronger than logic or reason. Unfortunately there is no real plan to harden the device other than disabling its wireless interface and sandboxing it on a VLAN not able to reach internal company resources. What else would you guys suggest? I like the idea of creating a white list of IP's that can connect to it. No one on the team has any meaningful Linux skills, hence my major hesitation with it- worse it will largely be in the hands of users in an unsupervised environment with no direct on site IT presence. Patching and device management will not be happening, again something I did my best to impress upon organizational management. I'm doing my best to document the potential liabilities and plans to separate it from the network. The documentation has historically been weak at this org. and the thought of creating these types of "one offs" seemingly create a support nightmare along with potential new attack vectors on a network with an otherwise weak security posture.Your use case isn't particularly unique. Most companies that I encounter have something that does this. I'm just kinda surprised that a Raspberry Pi device is more cost effective than a Chromecast or FireTV Stick.A separate vlan makes sense!Hey - at least you are consider the security impact. I've seen worst for this use case.
-
Tekn0logy Member Posts: 113 ■■■■□□□□□□UnixGuy said:Also...why? I never got a good enough reason to be honest.
-
DZA_ Member Posts: 467 ■■■■■■■□□□My old organizations had probably a dozen Raspberry Pi's if not more for the sole purpose of using them as machines running dashboard software that would be displayed against the TVs around the office. Physically they were secured in server rack. As much of the folks here proposed, as long as the machines are properly hardened security policies, physically secured then it's all game to use them in the company. Mind you that you get the proper approvals before anything else.
-
backtracker Member Posts: 91 ■■■□□□□□□□I appreciate all the input! I'm glad to hear there are others that use the devices in similar ways. In regards to the Chromecast suggestion- several of the sites do in fact use those, this is the first to use something outside of that.
I see the positives and negatives of it, and did my best to present this information to the key decision makers. In the end, they decided to give in to the powerful "C" level execs that want them at their sites. I guess we will find out first hand over time if these present long term security implications.
Still going to check into some of the further suggestions like building a white list and checking into physical security. Thanks again for the advice!
MSM-ISS (Information System Security)-'07 Colorado Tech.
MCSE | MCSA X3 | Security + | Network + -
UnixGuy Mod Posts: 4,570 ModTekn0logy said:UnixGuy said:Also...why? I never got a good enough reason to be honest.Sure, but why use Pi for a honeypot, why not normal servers??Why would they use Bro IDS when they have an actual vendor supported IPS/IDS ?
-
JDMurray Admin Posts: 13,099 AdminA Pi is a valid IP host, is easily identifiable by its MAC address (Raspberry Pi Foundation OUI = B827EB), and can be managed just like any other IP host. Just make sure that your asset and configuration management systems support Pi hardware and whatever host OS(es) it is running.
-
Mooseboost Member Posts: 778 ■■■■□□□□□□For their use case, you are doing what I would typically recommend. Create a media VLAN that is segmented from the internal network and put those devices on it. I would recommend changing default credentials unless you want locals messing around with them.
-
backtracker Member Posts: 91 ■■■□□□□□□□Mooseboost said:For their use case, you are doing what I would typically recommend. Create a media VLAN that is segmented from the internal network and put those devices on it. I would recommend changing default credentials unless you want locals messing around with them.
That is exactly the VLAN schema we are using essentially, no routing to internal resources at all. Good advice on the local credentials, I'll have to see if we can work this into the hardening suggestions- they are actually not the defaults, but not currently managed by IT either. Appreciate the continued responses, great food for thought....
MSM-ISS (Information System Security)-'07 Colorado Tech.
MCSE | MCSA X3 | Security + | Network +