| 
          
         | 
        
          
            <<  
             ^ 
              >>
          
          
            
              
                Date: 2000-02-16
                 
                 
                Schneier über DDoS-Attacken
                
                 
-.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- 
                 
                
      Wie immer maßvoll im Urteil, aber dabei kräftig in der  
Aussage und mit viel Wissen rund um die Techno-Historie  
ausgestatet, ist Bruce Schneiers monatliche Analyse, die  
diesmal klar/erweise den Distributed Denial of Services  
Attacken auf yahoo und andere gilt. 
 
 
-.-. --.-  -.-. --.-  -.-. --.-  -.-. --.-  -.-. --.-  -.-. --.-   
relayed vom Autor B.S. der hier zu Hause ist: 
http://www.counterpane.com
                   
-.-. --.-  -.-. --.-  -.-. --.-  -.-. --.-  -.-. --.-  -.-. --.-   
Suddenly, distributed denial-of-service (DDS) attacks are big  
news.  The first automatic tools for these attacks were  
released last year, and CERT sent out an advisory in  
November.  But the spate of high-profile attacks in mid- 
February has put them on the front pages of newspapers  
everywhere. 
 
Not much is new.  Denial-of-service attacks have been going  
on for years.  The recent attacks are the same, only this time  
there is no single source of the attack.  We've seen these for  
years, too.  The attacker first breaks into hundreds or  
thousands of random insecure computers (called "zombies")  
on the Internet and installs an attack program.  Then he  
coordinates them all to attack the target at the same time.   
The target is attacked from many places at once; his  
traditional defenses just don't work, and he falls over dead. 
 
It's very much like the pizza delivery attack: Alice doesn't like  
Bob, so she calls a hundred pizza delivery parlors and, from  
each one, has a pizza delivered to Bob's house at 11:00 PM.  
 At 11, Bob's front porch is filled with 100 pizza deliverers, all  
demanding their money.  It looks to Bob like the pizza Mafia  
is out to get him, but the pizza parlors are victims too.  The  
real attacker is nowhere to be seen. 
 
This sounds like a complicated attack on the Internet, and it  
is.  But unfortunately, it only takes one talented programmer  
with a poor sense of ethics to automate and distribute the  
attacks.  Once a DDS tool is publicly available, an attacker  
doesn't need skill; he can use a simple point-and-click  
interface to infect the intermediate sites, as well as to  
coordinate and launch the attack.  This is what's new: easy- 
to-use DDS tools like Trin00 and Tribal Flood Network. 
 
These attacks are incredibly difficult, if not impossible, to  
defend against.  In a traditional denial-of-service attack, the  
victim computer might be able to figure out where the attack  
is coming from and shut down those connections.  But in a  
distributed attack, there is no single source.  The computer  
should shut down all connections except for the ones it  
knows to be trusted, but that doesn't work for a public  
Internet site. 
 
Other defenses also have problems.  I've seen proposals that  
force the client to perform an expensive calculation to make a  
connection.  (RSA pre-announced such a "solution.") This  
works against standard denial-of-service attacks, but not  
against a distributed one.  Large-scale filtering at the ISPs  
can help, but that requires a lot of effort and will reduce  
network bandwidth noticeably. 
 
At least one report has suggested that a lack of  
authentication on the Internet is to blame.  This makes no  
sense.  The packets did harm just by the attempt to deliver  
them; whether or not they were authenticatable is completely  
irrelevant.  Mandatory authentication would do nothing to  
prevent these attacks, or to track down the attackers. 
 
There have been two academic conferences on DDS attacks  
in recent weeks, and the general consensus is that there is  
no way to defend against these attacks.  Sometimes the  
particular bugs exploited in the DDS attacks can be patched,  
but there are many that cannot.  The Internet was not  
designed to withstand DDS attacks. 
 
Tracing the attacker is also incredibly difficult.  Going back to  
the pizza delivery example, the only thing the victim could do  
is to ask the pizza parlors to help him catch the attacker.  If  
all the parlors coordinated their phone logs, maybe they  
could figure out who ordered all the pizzas in the first place.   
Something similar is possible on the Internet, but it is  
unlikely that the intermediate sites kept good logs.   
Additionally, it is easy to disguise your location on the  
Internet.  And if the attacker is in some Eastern European  
country with minimal computer crime laws, a bribable police,  
and no extradition treaties, there's nothing you can do  
anyway. 
 
So far, these attacks are strictly denial-of-service.  They do  
not affect the data on the Web sites.  These attacks cannot  
steal credit card numbers or proprietary information.  They  
cannot transfer money out of your bank account to trade  
stocks in your name.  Attackers cannot gain financially from  
these attacks.  Still, they are very serious.  And it is certainly  
possible that an attacker can use denial of service as a tool  
for a more complicated attack that IS designed to steal  
something. 
 
This is not to say that denial-of-service attacks are not real,  
or not important.  For most big corporations, the biggest risk  
of a security breach is loss of income or loss of reputation,  
either of which is achieved by a conspicuous denial-of-service  
attack.  And for companies with more mission- or life-critical  
data online, a DOS attack can literally put a person's life at  
risk. 
 
The real problem is that there are hundreds of thousands,  
possibly millions, of innocent naive computer users who are  
vulnerable to attack.  They're using DSL or cable modems,  
they're always on the Internet with static IP addresses, and  
they can be taken over and used as launching pads for these  
(and other) attacks.  The media is focusing on the mega e- 
corporations that are under attack, but the real story is the  
individual systems. 
 
Similarly, the real solutions are of the "civic hygiene" variety.   
Just as malaria was defeated in Washington, DC, by draining  
all the swamps, the only real way to prevent these attacks is  
to protect those millions of individual computers on the  
Internet.  Unfortunately, we are building swampland at an  
incredible rate, and securing everything is impracticable.   
Even if personal firewalls had a 95% market penetration, and  
even if they were all installed and operated perfectly, there  
would still be enough insecure computers on the Internet to  
use for these attacks. 
 
I believe that any long-term solution will involve redesigning  
the entire Internet.  Back in the 1960s, some people figured  
out that you could whistle, click, belch, or whatever into a  
telephone and make the system do things.  This was the era  
of phone phreaking: black boxes, blue boxes, Captain  
Crunch whistles.  The phone company did their best to  
defend against these attacks, but the basic problem was that  
the phone system was built with "in-band signaling": the  
control signal and the data signal traveled along the same  
wires.  In the 1980s, the phone company completely  
redesigned the phone system.  For example SS7, or  
Signaling System 7, was out-of-band.  The voice path and  
data path were separated.  Now it doesn't matter how hard  
you whistle into the phone system: the switch isn't listening.   
The attacks simply don't work.  (Red boxes still work,  
against payphones, by mimicking the in-band tones that  
count the coins deposited in the phones.) 
 
In the long term, out-of-band signaling is the only way to deal  
with many of the vulnerabilities of the Internet, DDS attacks  
among them.  Unfortunately, there are no plans to redesign  
the Internet in this way, and any such undertaking might be  
just too complicated to even consider. 
 
Discussion of DDS attacks:  
<http://staff.washington.edu/dittrich/talks/cert/> 
 
CERT Advisory: <http://www.cert.org/incident_notes/IN-99-
                   
07.html> 
 
Tool to check if Tribal Flood Network or Trin00 is installed on  
your computer: <http://www.nfr.net/updates/> 
 
Tutorial on DOS attacks:  
<http://www.hackernews.com/bufferoverflow/00/dosattack/dos
                   
attack.html> 
 
Trin00 Analysis:  
<http://staff.washington.edu/dittrich/misc/trinoo.analysis> 
 
Tribal Flood Network Analysis:  
<http://staff.washington.edu/dittrich/misc/tfn.analysis> 
 
Stacheldraht Analysis:  
<http://staff.washington.edu/dittrich/misc/stacheldraht.analysi
                   
s> 
 
Declan McCullagh's essay on the topic:  
<http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,34294,00.html> 
 
 
 
-.-  -.-. --.-   
Heraus zum Linux Demo Day am 17. Februar in Linz [AT] 
http://www.quintessenz.at
                   
-.-. --.- -.-. --.-  -.-. --.-  -.-. --.-  -.-. --.-  -.-. 
Wer schon einmal aufgestanden ist, 
soll sich jetzt widersetzen. 
http://o5.or.at
                   
-.-. --.- -.-. --.-  -.-. --.-  -.-. --.-  -.-. --.-  -.-. --.-
    
                 
- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- 
                
edited by Harkank 
published on: 2000-02-16 
comments to office@quintessenz.at
                   
                  
                    subscribe Newsletter
                  
                   
                
- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- 
                
                  <<  
                   ^ 
                    >> 
                
                
               | 
             
           
         | 
         | 
        
          
         |