If your mgt port is on the internet you likely have bigger problems.
Cybersecurity
c/cybersecurity is a community centered on the cybersecurity and information security profession. You can come here to discuss news, post something interesting, or just chat with others.
THE RULES
Instance Rules
- Be respectful. Everyone should feel welcome here.
- No bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia.
- No Ads / Spamming.
- No pornography.
Community Rules
- Idk, keep it semi-professional?
- Nothing illegal. We're all ethical here.
- Rules will be added/redefined as necessary.
If you ask someone to hack your "friends" socials you're just going to get banned so don't do that.
Learn about hacking
Other security-related communities [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]
Notable mention to [email protected]
However, keeping the management console away from public access isn't a foolproof solution. Palo Alto warns that even if you've limited access to the console to a restricted set of internal IP addresses, unpatched systems remain vulnerable, although the risk was "greatly reduced."
Exposing management consoles to the internet is a known risk. Security vendors strongly advise against it unless absolutely necessary, though it remains a "challenge" for some, as one vendor politely told us. Some admins expose the consoles to the public internet as it eases remote management chores, and hope security through obscurity protects them
PAN declined to specify how many customers are affected, but historically, most users keep their management interfaces private. Still, even those with restricted access must patch to stay secure.
I am sort of assuming that stuff about "greatly reduced" means, if an attacker can get into one of the systems on your network, there's about a 90% chance that they can then access the management port on the router from the "friendlies" side of it, and with access to the router they can greatly increase their invasiveness if they are a motivated attacker.
PAN already had a vuln not long ago that affected the mgt port access. If it’s still exposed then you have bigger issues.
Oh... that might explain it too. They mentioned a few different vulnerabilities combining together in nasty ways. That would certainly qualify.