i’d have said that’s less important than TLS or something on your ATM, a VLAN for ATMs that can only access specific services, and all ports not on a VLAN just disabled
really you just want to stop traffic from being sniffed (stolen credentials) and spoofed (“correct - dispense $10000”)… beyond that, you just have to assume nothing. the services that an ATM connects to should be robust enough that they do all the validation - the ATM is pretty dumb (kinda in the same way as your browser on your computer: it gets no decision making to access your bank; just is input and output)
MAC addresses are easy to spoof, and physical security is pretty difficult on something like an ATM that’s publicly accessible
halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
And serious company will have this as basic security. It’s a fundamental function even available on your consumer grade router at home. While it’s overkill for that use, it’s basic security for a company.
AreaKode@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
… Which financial company do you work for?
A major one.
TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Image
Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Remember when John Stewart only had SOME grey hair?
Hey, no judgement. 2020 had my hair looking like santa claus.
FauxLiving@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Same as anywhere else. Complacency, lax auditing, temporary fixes which are in place for years, non-technical people making technical decisions (choosing convenience over security, generally).
TheRagingGeek@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Any of the major banks consider breaches as cost of doing business at their scale compared to smaller banks. My bank prides itself on never having a breach, and it is insufferable to develop code for, but I guess it’s the price of security
pupbiru@aussie.zone 3 weeks ago
i’d argue that any serious company wouldn’t really bother with MAC identification… they’re so easy to spoof that it adds to operational overhead far more than the benefit it brings
more likely with these things you’d have a VLAN mapped to a physical port, and if that port were disconnected you’d instantly get a notification and send someone to check it out
halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Spoofing a MAC is easy but it still requires knowing both what an existing valid address is, and ensuring that it’s not already connected to the network. It’s only operational overhead when a new device is onboarded, after that the impact is minimal.
A policy that requires sending a tech is fine, but if you have hundreds or thousands of individual locations then you aren’t going to have a tech onsite at every one of them to quickly check and fix an issue, and you don’t really want to have to trust an end user to verify and/or make physical changes on site if you can avoid it.
lazynooblet@lazysoci.al 3 weeks ago
This is still trivial. A Pi with 2 NICs and a Linux bridge. Using the 2 ports, effectively put the Pi in between the device you want to spoof and the rest of the network. Now you can see the traffic, the MAC addresses etc.
Zorsith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 weeks ago
Don’t really need to send a tech immediately. More efficient to get a gas station clerk (or whoever works where the ATM may be located) to verify nobody is trying to fuck with it on-site and they didn’t lose power/internet at their location, before escalation.
jubilationtcornpone@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
And really shitty auditors apparently. A good one would have at least spot checked for unsecured ports.
Vinstaal0@feddit.nl 3 weeks ago
You would be surprised how many companies don’t even have something fundamental like a custom SSID and password, or a backup, etc.
halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Oh I wouldn’t be surprised at all, most businesses are pretty small. I would be surprised if a Bank was that irresponsible, although not very surprised.