distributed denial of service attacks and coutntermeasures
play

Distributed Denial of Service Attacks and Coutntermeasures - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  1. �������฀฀���฀฀�������� ��������������฀�������� � � �������฀���฀��������฀��������฀������ ����������฀��฀��������฀�������฀���฀����������� ������������฀�����฀�����������฀����������฀����฀฀�� Distributed Denial of Service Attacks and Coutntermeasures CSE598K/CSE545 - Advanced Network Security Prof. McDaniel - Spring 2008 CSE598K/CSE545 - Advanced Network Security - McDaniel Page 1

  2. DDoS • Denial of Service attack - intentionally preventing access to some valued resource. • Distributed DoS - attack launched from multiple sources, e.g., compromised computers • Attacks ‣ overload - sending more traffic than the system can handle causing backlogs, thrashing, e.g., congestion ‣ confusion - forcing the system into a state that is does not know how to progress, e.g., process death • Concept: indirect DOS via reflection CSE598K/CSE545 - Advanced Network Security - McDaniel Page 2

  3. Open vs. Closed Systems • Open systems provide functionality to all who would access the service as needed ‣ Often harder to secure against DoS • Closed systems restrict access based ‣ Generally predicate access on authentication ‣ Often more complex (leading to more DoS?) • Key DoS concepts/realities ‣ E2E : intel at edges, making hard to protect upstream ‣ Byzantine failures : if a system can act in any manner, then it can arbitrarily consume resources (threat model?) CSE598K/CSE545 - Advanced Network Security - McDaniel Page 3

  4. Root causes and targets • Causes (Mirkovic) • Targets (examples) ‣ Interdependencies ‣ Applications (Gnutella) between services ‣ Hosts (CSE webserver) ‣ Limited resources ‣ Resources (home dirs.) ‣ Intelligence distributed ‣ Networks (IBM) (and not near ‣ Infrastructure (routing) resources) ‣ No accountability Systems and Internet Infrastructure Security Laboratory (SIIS) Page 4

  5. The attack • Launching an attack Recruit ‣ Identify some hosts (find) ‣ Infect them ‣ Use them • Issues: Infect ‣ How do I find them? ‣ How do I communicate with them? ‣ What is the effect? Use CSE598K/CSE545 - Advanced Network Security - McDaniel Page 5

  6. Scanning • 1$ question: What is the best strategy for finding vulnerable hosts on the Internet? ‣ Random scanning ‣ Hitlist scanning ‣ Signpost scanning ‣ Permutation scanning ‣ Local subnet scanning • Concept: horizontal vs. vertical scanning • Concept: “low and slow” scanning CSE598K/CSE545 - Advanced Network Security - McDaniel Page 6

  7. Infection • 0.01$ question: what is the best strategy for distributing the malware ‣ Central source ‣ Back-chaining ‣ Autonomous (in-band) ‣ External (peer-to-peer) • Open question: is it possible to detect what is malware simply by looking at the payload of a packet? CSE598K/CSE545 - Advanced Network Security - McDaniel Page 7

  8. Modeling Infection • Assume f ( t, n, s ) =? ‣ n hosts in network. ‣ Pr(host is vulnerable) = k ‣ s hosts are initially seeded ‣ Uniform distribution of vulnerable host ‣ Random scanning ‣ One host can test/infect one other host in a single “round” • Give psuedo-code for a recursive function for the infection of the network at round t ‣ Think of the simplest model possible. CSE598K/CSE545 - Advanced Network Security - McDaniel Page 8

  9. An approx. model function f( t, n, s, k ) { if ( t == 0 ) return( s ); hosts = f(t-1, n, s, k); return( hosts + (hosts*k) ); } Q: what happens as t approaches inf ? Q: what about collisions? (how do you model them?) CSE598K/CSE545 - Advanced Network Security - McDaniel Page 9

  10. Simulated Infection Simple Infection Model (s=1, n=1*10^7, k=0.001) 1e+06 Infected hosts 900000 800000 700000 600000 500000 400000 300000 200000 100000 0 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 Time (in rounds) Q: why does it take so long to reach the POC? CSE598K/CSE545 - Advanced Network Security - McDaniel Page 10

  11. The attacks (redux) • Semantic/confusion - exploiting a characteristic of the environment to force into bad state • Overload - brute force traffic toward some service ‣ Overload rates: constant, pulse, variable ‣ Q: what are the consequences of each of these patterns • Enabling factor : IP address spoofing ‣ Source address spoofing is common, mostly random ‣ Plausible address spoofing is less common ‣ Fixed address is used in reflection more often ‣ Note: this makes use of backscatter effective CSE598K/CSE545 - Advanced Network Security - McDaniel Page 11

  12. Network Backscatter • A network telescope is a virtual device that listens to the traffic on “dark” (unused) address space. • Observation: during DDoS attacks, most tools fake their source IP address randomly-the victim responds to the random IP, e.g., SYN ACK, ICMP port unreach. • Consequence: if you monitor the dark space you can ‣ Detect attacks by looking at source addresses of responses ‣ Approximate intensity by looking and inter-arrival time • In principle, you can monitor the DDoS activity on the Internet without tapping any particular network CSE598K/CSE545 - Advanced Network Security - McDaniel Page 12

  13. Analysis • Attack of m packets, observing n IP addresses • Probability of receiving at least one packet: 1 − (1 − n 2 32 ) m • Expected number of responses seen for attack: E ( X ) = nm 2 32 • Intensity of attack (in packets per second): R ≥ R ′ 2 32 n • where R’ is average measured inter-arrival time CSE598K/CSE545 - Advanced Network Security - McDaniel Page 13

  14. [Moore et. al] 2004 • /8 (2 24 IP addresses monitored) Victims CSE598K/CSE545 - Advanced Network Security - McDaniel Page 14

  15. How long/intense? Intensity Duration CSE598K/CSE545 - Advanced Network Security - McDaniel Page 15

  16. Backscatter Limitations • Addresses really randomly selected? • What is the effect of ingress/egress filtering? • Reflector attacks not caught • Do all attack packets really cause response? • Q: what do you really learn (that the victim could not have told you)? CSE598K/CSE545 - Advanced Network Security - McDaniel Page 16

  17. DDoS Solutions (prevention) • Hardening : at the host, making them less vulnerable ‣ Yeah, right. • Protocols or service countermeasures : design for security ‣ Computational asymmetries (puzzles), credentialed functionality, • Filtering : dropping traffic as DoS is detected ‣ Source identification ‣ Rate limiting ‣ Reconfiguration CSE598K/CSE545 - Advanced Network Security - McDaniel Page 17

  18. IP Traceback • Idea: probabilistically (1/20,000) mark packets as they are flowing toward source. ‣ Mark with router’s IP address ‣ Edges traversed ‣ Reconstruct the attack path ‣ Filter as needed • Issues: ‣ Not much space to collect data, thus probabilistically need to mark paths ‣ Work has focused on how to build good reconstruction algorithms that allow accurate reconstruction of attack paths CSE598K/CSE545 - Advanced Network Security - McDaniel Page 18

  19. Algorithm 1: total marking • Marking : append each router IP address to packet • Reconstruction : any attacker packet has the path on it • Comments : IP HDR ‣ Single packet convergence A ‣ Problem: not enough space to mark B C D User Data CSE598K/CSE545 - Advanced Network Security - McDaniel Page 19

  20. Algorithm 2: Node Sampling • Marking : with probability p (often p>0.5), write router IP address into packet (or overwrite) • Reconstruction : arrange all routers by frequency count in received packets ‣ over enough packets, converges to attack path because reporting at victim inversely proportional to distance p (1 − p ) d − 1 • Comments : ‣ Problem: Not robust against multiple attackers ‣ Problem: slow convergence CSE598K/CSE545 - Advanced Network Security - McDaniel Page 20

  21. Algorithm 3: Edge Sampling • Marking : If packet is marked with a distance of 0 ‣ Mark packet with router IP address as ‣ If not with probability p write router IP address into packet ‣ Increment distance by one • Reconstruction : recover path by reconstructing by hop paths, possibly slowly • Comments : ‣ Problem: finding enough space is sometimes hard • XORing IP addresses provide some relief ‣ Convergence dominated by probability that hop received CSE598K/CSE545 - Advanced Network Security - McDaniel Page 21

  22. IP Pushback • Idea: identify attack traffic at victim and push route filters upstream toward the potential source ‣ Review the “drop tables” for discernible aggregations of most frequently dropped kinds of traffic. ‣ Aggregates are pushed upstream ‣ One approach: aggregating by dest • Compute aggregated downstream sigs ‣ IPs dropped, by longest matching route • [Ioannidis, Bellovin 02] • Pushback computed filters toward source CSE598K/CSE545 - Advanced Network Security - McDaniel Page 22

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend