Slashdot Log In
Linux-Based Phone System Phones Home
Posted by
kdawson
on Sun Dec 16, 2007 09:20 PM
from the hard-to-keep-secrets-when-they-can-read-the-code dept.
from the hard-to-keep-secrets-when-they-can-read-the-code dept.
An anonymous reader writes to let us know that users of Trixbox, a PBX based on Asterisk, recently discovered that the software has been phoning home with statistics about their installations. It's easy enough to disable, and not particularly steathy (beyond encrypting the data sent back), but customers in the forum are annoyed at not having been informed of the reporting. Trixbox is owned by Fonality, which makes customized PBXs (again based on Asterisk) for paying customers.
Related Stories
[+]
Linux: Fonality Acquires Trixbox 50 comments
An anonymous reader writes "MySQL's Brian Aker has a good commentary on the big news in acquisitions today that Fonality has acquired Trixbox, the Linux Telephony distribution." From the article: "So why is this big news? Trixbox is the distribution for telephony on Linux today. They have put together a vertical Linux distribution dedicated to telephony. It combines Asterisk with a web based interface backed by MySQL, integrated into the SugarCRM solution. As Redhat today is the LAMP of the IT Enterprise and Web Framework, (Linux, Apache, MySQL, Perl/PHP), Trixbox is the LAMP stack of the Telephony market, Linux , Asterisk, MySQL, Perl/PHP."
Firehose:Linux based phonesystem phones home by Anonymous Coward
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Trick Box (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Trick Box (Score:5, Informative)
AsteriskNOW isn't ready for prime-time yet, though it shows promise long-term.
If you don't want to compile Asterisk yourself and yet you still want to use FreePBX (and you really should!), I highly recommend you check out Nerd Vittles, http://www.nerdvittles.com/ [nerdvittles.com] instead -- everything that Trixbox CE could have been.
Parent
So? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:So? (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:So? (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:So? (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh and by the way reading Meliville and Shakespeare is called getting an education. It serves a purpose to learn about other times, other places, other language and about heritage. In contrast, reading a EULA is just a complete waste of time. If one does not understand the difference, then one's education has failed one miserably.
Re:Stats are useful (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
eh? (Score:4, Insightful)
What's the problem here?
Re:eh? (Score:5, Insightful)
First of all, your claim isn't true. Here's what it currently sends back the output of: Note that it sends the registration data on every request. Which means the other data isn't anonymous.
But, and this is much more alarming, it also can execute arbitrary commands. It connects to the remote server, asks it what to execute, and then executes it. That's VERY scary, no matter what is currently collected. Imagine a hacker getting access to the server customers connect to.
Parent
Security Vuln (Score:5, Informative)
Mod parent up (Score:5, Informative)
In what universe does this seem like a good idea?
Parent
Re:Mod parent up (Score:4, Informative)
What a terrible design! I worked for a couple of years on a FOSS product whose commercial version phoned home by design. It was a small server that allowed remote configuration changes via our NOC. The idea was to provide basic systems admin functionality for multiple geographically dispersed servers. Man-in-the-middle attacks - in either direction - were one of the primary concerns, second only to the privacy of the customer.
We vetted every byte, incoming or outgoing; we worried constantly about both sides of the the authentication process, addressed DNS poisoning and coped properly with pwned clients as well. We never ever passed anything but text between the server and the NOC. Even anti-virus signature updates were performed out-of-band with the 'phone-home' process.
Allowing execution of arbitrarily defined scripts is a disaster in the making. The trust model is entirely wrong, for one thing. I understand now why the manufacturer didn't want to talk about, because no sysadmin in his right mind[*] would accept that someone outside the organisation should ever have the right to run arbitrary code on their boxes without prior vetting.
*****
[*] Unfortunately, 'sysadmins in their right mind' is a far-too-small subset of all sysadmins....
Parent
This about says it all (Score:5, Informative)
From the forum:
I used to be the lead developer.. (Score:5, Informative)
The only other slightly information-divulging bit of information was the built-in IRC client did a 'uname -n' and specified what distro the client was running. It broadcast that in a 'notice' to the FreePBX channel. This was highlighted on the IRC page, with exactly what would be sent.
FreePBX has NEVER 'phoned home'. I would be amazingly upset if it was doing so now. Trixbox, on the other hand, may do that, but please do NOT link the FreePBX project with it.
--Rob
Re:I used to be the lead developer.. (Score:5, Informative)
So, when someone mistakenly says 'trixbox does...' they usually mean 'freepbx does...' as FreePBX is the GUI Trixbox uses to configure Asterisk.
--Rob
Parent
Make your own Linux-based PBX system (Score:5, Insightful)
--
Educational microcontroller kits for the digital generation. [nerdkits.com]
Um (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It is possible for a person to be unhappy about two different things. And I don't recall anyone saying anything about the phone companies, including whether they were more or less upset about this or that.
Re:Um (Score:4, Insightful)
Min.
Parent
Our bias (Score:3, Insightful)
So if an OSS project does the same why should be any less outraged? Its still a violation of any sort of professional ethics. It doesn't matter that the script is in clear text on the system, who here has the time to go through every script on a new installation of their favorite distribution?
We trust the package suppliers to disclose anything we need to know about. If that trust is breached we call them to task on it.
Well the trust has been breached in this case and the community needs to call the developer to task on it so that it's clear that this sort of behavior is unacceptable. I've read some comments that you're getting it for free. So it would be acceptable for Linus to start including arbitrary command execution backdoors into the kernel?
Remember the Trojan Horse didn't have a price tag attached either!
Min
Additional interesting articles about this issue (Score:3, Insightful)
The freePBX team has also commented [freepbx.org] on the issue. In short they want to make it clear that running arbitrary commands sent from the Fonality server is a trixbox/Fonality issue and has nothing to do with freePBX. FreePBX's "phone home" functionality is just a "check for updates" sort of thing. Of course if the modules are not digitally signed and verified, then a man in the middle attack is still possible and malicious versions of modules with a little "extra goodness" added could be sent to the pbx for automatic installation.