Another long-time lurker checking in to thank the SNB crew for the info needed to make my RT-AC87U behave again.
I really wish Asus documented asd better. While I get the idea that there's a degree of security through obscurity, the fact that it doesn't show up in any official (or even semi-official) literature is problematic. Fittingly, the best source on asd is
SNBForums, and the fact that the answer is there is practically happenstance.
If asd was properly documented, then it would have saved us all a lot of grief in trying to determine what was wrong, and how to fix it. As well as avoiding any speculation that this was malware. Though the irony that the interim fix is turning off the router's security daemon is not lost on me...
That sounds a lot like a first line person who heard something from someone who heard something from someone who made something up based on partial information they heard... ;-) Can't find any "fcc problem accused by different competitor" (as opposed to 'the same' competitor?) about Asus within the past 7 years. Weird that they would push out some undefined, unannounced security update, at the same time to everyone. This would also be the first I'm hearing of them pushing anything that is not part of a firmware update. Wasn't aware they have a mechanism to do that.
Agreed. That is a case of where someone on the support staff knew just enough to get themselves in trouble - or at least make wild claims.
Based on all of the evidence thus far, everything points to Asus's release of a definitions/signature file (chknvram20230516) for use by asd across all of their routers released in the last several years. Something about chknvram20230516 is malformed/corrupt, and as asd is incapable of properly handling the malformed file, it goes nuttier than an Almond Joy bar. Eventually, it consumes all of a router's available RAM, which is what finally makes the router unusable.
I'm a bit flummoxed by the fact that it has taken Asus so long to fix the issue. Based on asd.log and the
[chknvram_action] Invalid string error, in retrospect this should have been obvious for their higher tier support staff an engineers. Especially as Asus wouldn't even be the first vendor to distribute a bad definitions update for their security software - Microsoft has done it
a couple of times.
Perhaps the most interesting thing is the fact that using 388 beta firmwares offers a layer of mitigation against the issue. The root cause of the problem isn't the firmware itself (which is why downgrading doesn't help), but it seems that the version of asd included with 388 is capable of more gracefully handling malformed definitions? I do worry that it serves to obfuscate the root cause though; updating a router's firmware isn't truly fixing the problem. That'll come once Asus stops distributing the bad chknvram file.