CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2019-6538

Missing Authentication for Critical Function

Published: Mar 25, 2019 | Modified: Oct 06, 2020
CVSS 3.x
6.5
MEDIUM
Source:
NVD
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
CVSS 2.x
3.3 LOW
AV:A/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
Ubuntu

The Conexus telemetry protocol utilized within Medtronic MyCareLink Monitor versions 24950 and 24952, CareLink Monitor version 2490C, CareLink 2090 Programmer, Amplia CRT-D, Claria CRT-D, Compia CRT-D, Concerto CRT-D, Concerto II CRT-D, Consulta CRT-D, Evera ICD, Maximo II CRT-D and ICD, Mirro ICD, Nayamed ND ICD, Primo ICD, Protecta ICD and CRT-D, Secura ICD, Virtuoso ICD, Virtuoso II ICD, Visia AF ICD, and Viva CRT-D does not implement authentication or authorization. An attacker with adjacent short-range access to an affected product, in situations where the product’s radio is turned on, can inject, replay, modify, and/or intercept data within the telemetry communication. This communication protocol provides the ability to read and write memory values to affected implanted cardiac devices; therefore, an attacker could exploit this communication protocol to change memory in the implanted cardiac device.

Weakness

The product does not perform any authentication for functionality that requires a provable user identity or consumes a significant amount of resources.

Affected Software

Name Vendor Start Version End Version
Mycarelink_monitor_firmware Medtronic 24950 (including) 24950 (including)
Mycarelink_monitor_firmware Medtronic 24952 (including) 24952 (including)

Extended Description

As data is migrated to the cloud, if access does not require authentication, it can be easier for attackers to access the data from anywhere on the Internet.

Potential Mitigations

  • Divide the software into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Identify which of these areas require a proven user identity, and use a centralized authentication capability.
  • Identify all potential communication channels, or other means of interaction with the software, to ensure that all channels are appropriately protected. Developers sometimes perform authentication at the primary channel, but open up a secondary channel that is assumed to be private. For example, a login mechanism may be listening on one network port, but after successful authentication, it may open up a second port where it waits for the connection, but avoids authentication because it assumes that only the authenticated party will connect to the port.
  • In general, if the software or protocol allows a single session or user state to persist across multiple connections or channels, authentication and appropriate credential management need to be used throughout.
  • Where possible, avoid implementing custom authentication routines and consider using authentication capabilities as provided by the surrounding framework, operating system, or environment. These may make it easier to provide a clear separation between authentication tasks and authorization tasks.
  • In environments such as the World Wide Web, the line between authentication and authorization is sometimes blurred. If custom authentication routines are required instead of those provided by the server, then these routines must be applied to every single page, since these pages could be requested directly.
  • Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
  • For example, consider using libraries with authentication capabilities such as OpenSSL or the ESAPI Authenticator [REF-45].

References