Physical Access

5 automated security scanners

Wireless Access Exploitation

Purpose: The Wireless Access Exploitation Scanner is designed to identify potential vulnerabilities and weaknesses in physical access control systems by analyzing company security documentation, public policy pages, trust center information, and compliance certifications for relevant indicators of key fob cloning, wireless doorbell attacks, and garage door exploits.

What It Detects:

Key Fob Cloning Indicators: Detection of phrases indicating key fob cloning vulnerabilities or incidents such as “key fob duplication”, “cloned key fobs”, and “unauthorized key fob usage”.
Wireless Doorbell Attacks: Identification of mentions related to wireless doorbell security issues or attacks including “wireless doorbell vulnerability”, “doorbell hacking”, and “compromised doorbell systems”.
Garage Door Exploits: Recognition of language suggesting garage door system vulnerabilities or breaches such as “garage door security flaw”, “unauthorized garage access”, and “breached garage door controls”.
Access Control Policy Gaps: Detection of gaps in access control policies that could lead to exploitation including “access control weaknesses”, “inadequate physical security measures”, and “vulnerabilities in access systems”.
Compliance and Security Documentation: Identification of compliance certifications or lack thereof that may indicate risk such as “ISO 27001 certification”, “SOC 2 compliance”, and “penetration test results”.

Inputs Required:

domain (string): Primary domain to analyze (e.g., acme.com).
company_name (string): Company name for statement searching (e.g., “Acme Corporation”).

Business Impact: This scanner is crucial as it helps in identifying potential security risks associated with key fobs, doorbells, and garage doors that could be exploited by unauthorized individuals, leading to significant financial losses and compromised data security.

Risk Levels:

Critical: Conditions where the scanner identifies clear vulnerabilities or breaches directly mentioned in company documentation.
High: Conditions where there are gaps in access control policies or mentions of potential issues that require immediate attention.
Medium: Conditions where compliance certifications are lacking, indicating a need for improvement in security practices.
Low: Informal findings related to general lack of specific indicators but no concrete evidence of exploitation.
Info: General information about the company’s stance on security without specific actionable items.

Example Findings:

The scanner might flag “Acme Corporation” for critical issues if it mentions direct key fob cloning incidents or unencrypted doorbell systems in its documentation.
For high risk, the scanner could alert about incomplete access control policies that allow unauthorized individuals to gain physical access.
Medium risk findings would include companies without ISO 27001 certification, indicating a need for stronger security measures.

E-ink Signage Tampering

Purpose: The E-ink Signage Tampering Scanner is designed to identify and alert about potential issues with e-ink signage systems that could lead to display manipulation, information falsification, and wayfinding attacks. This tool helps in detecting vulnerabilities in physical access control mechanisms that might be exploited for misleading or manipulating visitors’ experience.

What It Detects:

Display Manipulation Indicators: The scanner identifies signs of tampering in displayed information, discrepancies between expected and actual signage content, unauthorized changes to critical wayfinding information, and inconsistencies across multiple e-ink displays within the same facility.
Information Falsification Patterns: This includes detecting false or misleading information on e-ink signs, outdated or irrelevant content that could confuse visitors, and inconsistencies in signage language and formatting when compared against official records and documentation.
Wayfinding Attacks: The scanner detects potential wayfinding attacks indicated by misleading directions to sensitive areas and unauthorized modifications to wayfinding signs. It also ensures proper maintenance and monitoring of all e-ink displays.
Physical Access Control Vulnerabilities: This involves testing weaknesses in physical access control systems related to e-ink signage, lack of tamper-evident seals, inadequate monitoring or maintenance protocols for e-ink displays, and insecure mounting and protection from unauthorized access.
Compliance and Policy Adherence: The scanner checks adherence to company security policies regarding physical signage, compliance with relevant industry standards and regulations, and ensures that all changes to e-ink signage are documented and approved.

Inputs Required:

domain (string): Primary domain to analyze (e.g., acme.com) - This is the main website where the scanner will look for signs of tampering or misleading information.
company_name (string): Company name for statement searching (e.g., “Acme Corporation”) - Used in searches for company security documentation related to physical access control, wayfinding, and other relevant areas.

Business Impact: This scanner is crucial as it helps in maintaining the integrity of e-ink signage systems that are integral parts of many facilities’ physical access controls. Misleading or manipulated information can lead to significant confusion, potential safety risks, and operational disruptions for visitors and staff alike.

Risk Levels:

Critical: Conditions where tampering with e-ink displays is detected, leading to potentially misleading wayfinding information that could affect emergency response times or general facility navigation.
High: Weaknesses in physical access control systems related to e-ink signage, where unauthorized modifications might occur without detection, posing a risk of sensitive area access by unauthorized individuals.
Medium: Inconsistencies in displayed content such as outdated or incorrect information that could lead to visitor confusion but does not directly impact safety or operations significantly.
Low: Minor issues related to compliance and policy adherence like minor discrepancies in signage language or formatting, which do not pose significant risks unless they escalate over time without correction.
Info: Routine checks for regular audits, maintenance schedules, and other administrative practices that ensure ongoing compliance with security policies and standards.

Example Findings:

“Detected tampering on e-ink displays at the main entrance, potentially altering wayfinding information to mislead visitors.”
“Inadequate physical access control documented for e-ink screens in sensitive areas; no tamper-evident seals are present.”

Contactless Payment Attacks

Purpose: The Contactless Payment Attacks Scanner is designed to identify vulnerabilities related to physical access controls in the context of NFC skimming, POS terminal tampering, and contactless limit bypass. By analyzing company security documentation, public policy pages, trust center information, and compliance certifications, this scanner aims to detect gaps in protection against these types of attacks.

What It Detects:

NFC Skimming Vulnerabilities: The scanner identifies mentions of NFC technology without adequate security measures, detects gaps in protection against NFC skimmers, and flags inadequate encryption or authentication protocols for contactless payments.
POS Terminal Tampering: It looks for indications of weak physical security around POS terminals, checks for lack of tamper-evident seals or monitoring systems, and identifies insufficient access controls to POS devices.
Contactless Limit Bypass: The scanner detects mentions of transaction limits without corresponding safeguards, flags inadequate monitoring and alerting mechanisms for contactless transactions, and identifies gaps in risk assessment related to contactless payment limits.
Security Policy Indicators: It searches for security policy documents that lack specific protections against NFC attacks, verifies the presence of incident response plans addressing physical access controls, and checks for data protection policies that cover contactless payments.
Compliance Certifications: The scanner identifies missing compliance certifications such as SOC 2 or ISO 27001 related to payment security, detects gaps in vulnerability scanning and assessment processes, and verifies penetration testing coverage for POS systems and contactless payment infrastructure.

Inputs Required:

domain (string): Primary domain to analyze (e.g., acme.com) - This is the main website address that will be analyzed for security measures related to NFC skimming, POS terminal tampering, and contactless limit bypass.
company_name (string): Company name for statement searching (e.g., “Acme Corporation”) - This helps in identifying relevant documents and policies within the company’s online presence that pertain to payment security measures.

Business Impact: Identifying vulnerabilities related to physical access controls for contactless payments is crucial as it directly impacts customer trust, financial transactions, and compliance with regulatory standards. Poorly secured systems can lead to unauthorized data access, financial loss, and potential legal repercussions.

Risk Levels:

Critical: Conditions that would be considered critical include explicit mentions of inadequate security measures for NFC skimming or POS terminal tampering directly in public documents without any mitigation efforts mentioned. High transaction limits with no accompanying safeguards is another critical risk.
High: Conditions that could lead to a high severity finding involve weak physical security indicators, lack of compliance certifications specifically related to payment security, and significant gaps in documented policies regarding contactless payments.
Medium: Medium risk conditions include mentions of outdated or insufficient encryption methods for NFC transactions, absence of tamper-evident seals without any alternative security measures mentioned, and notable deficiencies in the company’s incident response plan concerning physical access controls.
Low: Low severity risks pertain to minor gaps in data protection policies that do not significantly impact overall payment security but still warrant attention for continuous improvement.
Info: Informational findings are those that provide general insights into the company’s stance on digital and physical security without posing an immediate threat, such as mentions of ongoing or planned penetration testing schedules.

Example Findings:

The presence of a public statement acknowledging the use of NFC technology but lacking any mention of specific security measures to prevent skimming could indicate a critical risk due to lack of protection against this prevalent attack method.
A company’s website does not list any compliance certifications related to SOC 2 or ISO 27001, which would be considered a high-risk finding as it significantly impacts trust and regulatory compliance in the financial sector.

Smart Lock Vulnerabilities

Purpose: The Smart Lock Vulnerabilities Scanner is designed to identify potential vulnerabilities in smart lock systems by analyzing company documentation related to BLE/NFC exploitation, protocol weaknesses, and authentication bypass issues. This tool aims to provide insights into the security posture of smart locks and help organizations mitigate risks associated with these devices.

What It Detects:

BLE/NFC Exploitation Indicators: The scanner looks for mentions of Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) or Near Field Communication (NFC) vulnerabilities, unauthorized access via BLE or NFC interfaces, and known attack vectors related to these technologies.
Protocol Weaknesses: It detects indications of weak or outdated communication protocols, insecure encryption methods, and the use of deprecated or unpatched protocols in smart lock systems.
Authentication Bypass Vulnerabilities: The scanner searches for descriptions of mechanisms that can be bypassed, including default passwords, weak PINs, easily guessable credentials, and vulnerabilities in multi-factor authentication (MFA) systems.

Inputs Required:

domain (string): Primary domain to analyze, such as “acme.com”, which helps the scanner target specific websites for analysis.
company_name (string): The name of the company, like “Acme Corporation”, used for searching relevant security documentation and policies.

Business Impact: This tool is crucial for assessing the cybersecurity posture of smart lock providers, ensuring that they adhere to best practices in authentication, encryption, and overall system security. Identifying vulnerabilities early can prevent potential breaches and protect consumer data and systems from exploitation.

Risk Levels:

Critical: The scanner identifies critical issues such as default passwords or lack of multi-factor authentication that could lead to immediate unauthorized access without requiring advanced hacking techniques.
High: High severity findings include weak encryption methods, outdated protocols, and significant gaps in security policies that might be easily exploited by determined attackers.
Medium: Medium risk findings involve less severe vulnerabilities such as default configurations or lack of protocol updates but still pose a threat if not addressed promptly.
Low: Low risk findings are informational and may include minor compliance issues without immediate impact on system security, though they should still be addressed to maintain best practices.
Info: These are purely informative and do not directly affect the security posture but can serve as indicators for further investigation or policy updates.

Example Findings:

The smart lock documentation mentions an insecure encryption method used in its communication protocol, which could be exploited by attackers to gain unauthorized access.
A company website does not list any compliance certifications relevant to the security of their smart locks, indicating a potential gap in transparency and regulatory adherence.

QR Code Supply Chain Attacks

Purpose: The QR Code Supply Chain Attacks Scanner is designed to safeguard organizations by detecting potential vulnerabilities in their physical labels and digital QR codes. It analyzes company documentation, public policy pages, trust center information, and compliance certifications to identify unauthorized modifications, malicious content, misuse of contact tracing data, and other security risks associated with the supply chain.

What It Detects:

Modified Physical Labels: Identifies discrepancies in QR codes that do not match expected patterns or checksums, indicating potential tampering.
Malicious QR Code Redirection: Detects QR codes leading to malicious websites or phishing sites by analyzing URL integrity and reputation.
Contact Tracing Abuse: Uncovers unauthorized access or sharing of contact tracing data for purposes other than public health, safeguarding sensitive information.
Security Policy Indicators: Searches for keywords related to security policies, incident response, data protection, and access control within company documentation.
Compliance Maturity Indicators: Looks for mentions of compliance certifications such as SOC 2, ISO 27001, penetration testing, and vulnerability assessments that ensure the organization’s adherence to industry standards.

Inputs Required:

domain (string): Primary domain to analyze, providing a comprehensive view of the company’s online presence for security documentation and policies.
company_name (string): Used to search within company documentation and websites for relevant keywords and phrases indicative of security practices and compliance certifications.

Business Impact: This scanner is crucial for maintaining the integrity of physical assets and digital communications, preventing unauthorized access to sensitive information, and ensuring regulatory compliance that safeguards both the organization’s reputation and its stakeholders.

Risk Levels:

Critical: Identifies significant risks such as undetected tampering with QR codes or misuse of contact tracing data on a critical infrastructure system.
High: Detects potential threats to sensitive information, unauthorized access points, and breaches in security policies that could lead to severe consequences if exploited.
Medium: Indicates vulnerabilities in the physical assets represented by QR code labels and possible risks associated with compromised digital links that may not immediately impact operations but are critical for ongoing monitoring.
Low: Flags minor issues such as outdated or unclear security documentation, which while not posing immediate threats, should be addressed to maintain a robust security posture.
Info: Provides informational findings about compliance certifications and general security practices that do not directly affect operational risk but contribute to the overall maturity of the organization’s security framework.

If specific conditions for each risk level are not detailed in the README, they have been inferred based on the purpose and impact of the scanner.

Example Findings: The scanner might flag a QR code with an altered pattern indicating it has been tampered with or a policy page missing crucial security language that could lead to unauthorized access.