27 May
2005
27 May
'05
4:49 p.m.
Hello
This Mail [1] arrived just over the Full-Disclosure mailinglist
[2], but should probably also be of interest to some people here.
[1]
http://lists.grok.org.uk/pipermail/full-disclosure/2005-May/034342.html
[2] https://lists.grok.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/full-disclosure
bye
Fabian
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [Full-disclosure] DNS Smurf revisited
Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 10:28:37 -0400
From: Ian Gulliver <ian-fulldisclosure(a)penguinhosting.net>
To: full-disclosure(a)lists.grok.org.uk
DNS smurf is old news:
http://www.s0ftpj.org/docs/spj-002-000.txt
http://www.ciac.org/ciac/bulletins/j-063.shtml
However, as ISPs continue to operate networks that let spoofed
packets out this issue deserves a little publicity again.
10:17:07.641061 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 46429, offset 0, flags
[DF], length: 49) XXXXXXXXXXXXX.44295 >
c.gtld-servers.net.domain: [udp sum ok] 18297 ANY? org. (21)
10:17:07.673800 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 43, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF],
length: 468) c.gtld-servers.net.domain > XXXXXXXXXXXXX.44295:
18297- 0/13/13 (440)
% echo "2 k 468 49 / p" | dc
9.55
That's a 9.5X amplification of outgoing traffic; you can probably
break 10X with a little more work on the query and nameserver
choices.
SOLUTIONS
---------
ISPs: Drop outgoing packets that don't originate from within your
network. You should already be doing this, as it stops a variety
of other attacks.
NS operators: Ratelimit?
Attached is a modernized proof of concept.
--
Ian Gulliver
Penguin Hosting
"Failure is not an option; it comes bundled with your Microsoft
products."
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
27 May
27 May
9:31 p.m.
Fabian Wenk writes:
This Mail [1] arrived just over the Full-Disclosure
mailinglist [2],
but should probably also be of interest to some people here.
[1]
http://lists.grok.org.uk/pipermail/full-disclosure/2005-May/034342.html
[2] https://lists.grok.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/full-disclosure
Yes, at least it should remind our community that ingress filtering is
important. When I tried the "spoofer" test software from
http://momo.lcs.mit.edu/spoofer/#software , I was shocked to see that
I can spoof packets from my home broadband connection (and probably
the 299'999 other broadband customers of that Swiss ISP can do so as
well :-). Hopefully other Swiss ISPs do this better.
I hate to say something in defense of NATs, but at least the problem
is somewhat mitigated by the fact that many surfers (especially those
with broadband connections) use NATs. They make address spoofing from
compromised PCs ineffective.
As for enterprise connections, I'm not sure. I assume most small
enterprises use NATs as well. Large enterprises use firewalls, but if
something behind the firewall does get infected, I'm not sure those
firewalls would protect the outside world against spoofed packets (or
any other kind of junk) from those machines.
--
Simon.
PS. SWITCH has ingress filters on all customer access interfaces, so
compromised systems inside universities cannot used spoofed source
addresses from outside the respective site's address space.
30 May
30 May
9:55 a.m.
On Fri, May 27, 2005 at 09:31:32PM +0200, Simon Leinen wrote:
I can spoof packets from my home broadband connection
(and probably
the 299'999 other broadband customers of that Swiss ISP can do so as
well :-). Hopefully other Swiss ISPs do this better.
sunrise freesurf used to allow this also, didn't try for some time.
(it even let source address be in the private address space)
12:53 p.m.
On Mon, May 30, 2005 at 09:55:39AM +0200, Marc SCHAEFER wrote:
On Fri, May 27, 2005 at 09:31:32PM +0200, Simon Leinen
wrote:
amazing to still see this in 2005!
is there valuable argument from these ISP or is it
ignorance / badly designed networks??
on the leaf interfaces of the ISP routing topology:
(cisco)
ip verify unicast reverse-path
(linux)
echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/ethN/rp_filter
there is still this good paper from cisco, it's a bit
dated but probably mean no real valuable features was added
in IOS since 2001:
http://www.cisco.com/public/cons/isp/documents/IOSEssentialsPDF.zip
bye.
--
Philippe Strauss
av. de Beaulieu 25
1004 Lausanne
I can spoof packets from my home broadband
connection (and probably
the 299'999 other broadband customers of that Swiss ISP can do so as
well :-). Hopefully other Swiss ISPs do this better.
sunrise freesurf used to allow this also, didn't try for some time.
(it even let source address be in the private address space) 
5:59 p.m.
is there valuable argument from these ISP or is it
ignorance / badly designed networks??
Once someone told me they couldn't do it because it would add too much
delay to the packet and that their hardware would would have to throttle
the throughput if they wanted to do that on gigabit links.
But then someone has to explain me how other people manage to do full
NIDS inspection on gigabit links.
Jean-Pierre
--
HILOTEC Engineering + Consulting GmbH
Energietechnik und Datensysteme
Tel: +41 34 402 74 00 - http://www.hilotec.com/
6:18 p.m.
On Mon, May 30, 2005 at 05:59:35PM +0200, Jean-Pierre Schwickerath wrote:
performances problems on an operation which is basically a routing lookup
4 bytes aside the usual place? funky.
is there valuable argument from these ISP or is
it
ignorance / badly designed networks??
Once someone told me they couldn't do it because it would add too much
delay to the packet and that their hardware would would have to throttle
the throughput if they wanted to do that on gigabit links. But then someone has to explain me how other people
manage to do full
NIDS inspection on gigabit links.
absolutely.
--
Philippe Strauss
av. de Beaulieu 25
1004 Lausanne
http://philou.ch/
31 May
31 May
10:49 a.m.
Hello!
Am 30.05.05 schrieb Philippe Strauss:
Each filter takes some CPU cycles. And CPU-Power is still really
expensive on a Cisco device.
A word stolen from the IBM world: "You will never have
performance problems. You may habe financial problems, but you
will never have performance problems."
Nice paper!
Beat
--
\|/ Beat Rubischon <beat(a)0x1b.ch>
( 0^0 ) http://www.0x1b.ch/~beat/
oOO--(_)--OOo--------------------------------------------------
# wigwam.lugs.ch, Linux 2.4.31-pre2, up 16 days, 17:59, load: 0.22
sunrise
freesurf used to allow this also, didn't try for some time.
(it even let source address be in the private address space)
amazing to still see
this in 2005!
11:12 a.m.
On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 10:49:00AM +0200, Beat Rubischon wrote:
Hello!
Am 30.05.05 schrieb Philippe Strauss:
Each filter takes some CPU cycles. And CPU-Power is still really
expensive on a Cisco device.
A word stolen from the IBM world: "You will never have
performance problems. You may habe financial problems, but you
will never have performance problems."
a simple search on google, I find a paper
about a routing table lookup algorithm, on standard CPU,
able to do 30Millions lookup per second (on a 500MHz cpu).
with current CPU frequency, it would rather be 120Millions/s
on such "commodity pc" the bottleneck is the bus architecture, though.
2Gbit/s of traffic translate to roughly 400000 packets per second
that leaves a lot of spare cpu time.
--
Philippe Strauss
av. de Beaulieu 25
1004 Lausanne
http://philou.ch/
sunrise
freesurf used to allow this also, didn't try for some time.
(it even let source address be in the private address space)
amazing to still see
this in 2005!
6767
days inactive
6771
days old
7 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
Beat Rubischon -
Fabian Wenk -
Jean-Pierre Schwickerath -
Philippe Strauss -
schaefer＠alphanet.ch -
Simon Leinen