march 2003 mayday - massachusetts institute of...

28
Mayday: Distributed DoS Filtering David Andersen MIT Laboratory for Computer Science March 2003

Upload: others

Post on 18-May-2020

2 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: March 2003 Mayday - Massachusetts Institute of Technologynms.lcs.mit.edu/talks/mayday-usits2003.pdf · Proactive Defense against DoS Many systems trace DoS attacks Some react to DoS

Mayday:Distributed DoS Filtering

David Andersen

MIT Laboratory for Computer Science

March 2003

http://nms.lcs.mit.edu/ron/

Page 2: March 2003 Mayday - Massachusetts Institute of Technologynms.lcs.mit.edu/talks/mayday-usits2003.pdf · Proactive Defense against DoS Many systems trace DoS attacks Some react to DoS

Proactive Defense against DoS

� Many systemstrace DoS attacks

� Somereact to DoS attacks

� A few prevent, but

✘ Require near-global deployment, or

✘ Don’t protect outside of your own network

✔ Mayday:

– incrementally deployable

– proactive defense

Page 3: March 2003 Mayday - Massachusetts Institute of Technologynms.lcs.mit.edu/talks/mayday-usits2003.pdf · Proactive Defense against DoS Many systems trace DoS attacks Some react to DoS

Flooding Attacks

� Overload servers (not “ping of death”)

� Probably have lots of attack machines...

� ... and can spoof IP addresses

� We’ll discuss more powerful attackers later

AttackersVictim Server

��

Page 4: March 2003 Mayday - Massachusetts Institute of Technologynms.lcs.mit.edu/talks/mayday-usits2003.pdf · Proactive Defense against DoS Many systems trace DoS attacks Some react to DoS

Overlay Nodes and Filtering Routers

Borrow an idea from SOS

(Secure Overlay Services, [Sigcomm 2002]):

Use overlay nodes and normal routers to

protect servers.

RoutersNodesOverlay

Page 5: March 2003 Mayday - Massachusetts Institute of Technologynms.lcs.mit.edu/talks/mayday-usits2003.pdf · Proactive Defense against DoS Many systems trace DoS attacks Some react to DoS

Overlay Nodes and Filtering Routers

Nodes X

Filter Ring

Server

Overlay

Clients

����

� Routers allow only “good” traffic in

� Overlay nodes are “good” traffic- verify that clients allowed to use service

➔ How?

Page 6: March 2003 Mayday - Massachusetts Institute of Technologynms.lcs.mit.edu/talks/mayday-usits2003.pdf · Proactive Defense against DoS Many systems trace DoS attacks Some react to DoS

Making it practical

� Effective filtering must be near “core”

� Set of allowed clients dynamic or large

� Core routers can’t do heavy-duty filtering

� Let’s use existing router capabilities

✘ IPsec to the filter routers is a no-go.

Page 7: March 2003 Mayday - Massachusetts Institute of Technologynms.lcs.mit.edu/talks/mayday-usits2003.pdf · Proactive Defense against DoS Many systems trace DoS attacks Some react to DoS

ArchitectureFilter Ring

Lightweight

Client Auth

NodesOverlay

Authenticator

Clients

Server

����

� Clients authenticate to overlay nodes

(Can be heavy, not our concern)

� Overlay nodes authenticate to filter ring

➔ Lightweight Authenticator

Page 8: March 2003 Mayday - Massachusetts Institute of Technologynms.lcs.mit.edu/talks/mayday-usits2003.pdf · Proactive Defense against DoS Many systems trace DoS attacks Some react to DoS

Lightweight Authenticators

� Source Address

✔ Well understood, good with no spoofing

✘ Limited # of correspondant nodes

✘ Updated by filter changes

Page 9: March 2003 Mayday - Massachusetts Institute of Technologynms.lcs.mit.edu/talks/mayday-usits2003.pdf · Proactive Defense against DoS Many systems trace DoS attacks Some react to DoS

Lightweight Authenticators

� Source Address

✔ Well understood, good with no spoofing

✘ Limited # of correspondant nodes

✘ Updated by filter changes

� Server Destination Port

✔ Larger key space (65,000)

– Many correspondant nodes

✘ Updated by filter changes

Page 10: March 2003 Mayday - Massachusetts Institute of Technologynms.lcs.mit.edu/talks/mayday-usits2003.pdf · Proactive Defense against DoS Many systems trace DoS attacks Some react to DoS

Lightweight Authenticators 2

� Server DestinationAddress

✘ Small key space

✘ Changes IP address

✔ Updated via fast routing protocols

Page 11: March 2003 Mayday - Massachusetts Institute of Technologynms.lcs.mit.edu/talks/mayday-usits2003.pdf · Proactive Defense against DoS Many systems trace DoS attacks Some react to DoS

Lightweight Authenticators 2

� Server DestinationAddress

✘ Small key space

✘ Changes IP address

✔ Updated via fast routing protocols

� Other header fields

✔ Adds to key space

✘ Not all routers support

Page 12: March 2003 Mayday - Massachusetts Institute of Technologynms.lcs.mit.edu/talks/mayday-usits2003.pdf · Proactive Defense against DoS Many systems trace DoS attacks Some react to DoS

Overlay Routing Improves Security

� Fewer nodes have direct access to server

Overlay

Authenticator

Filter Ring

Lightweight

RoutingNodes

Client Auth

Server

Clients

Overlay

����

Choice of routing depends on authenticators,

paranoia.

Page 13: March 2003 Mayday - Massachusetts Institute of Technologynms.lcs.mit.edu/talks/mayday-usits2003.pdf · Proactive Defense against DoS Many systems trace DoS attacks Some react to DoS

Overlay Routing: Proximity

Filter Ring

Server

Nodes

Client

Overlay

��

✔ Like Akamai, great performance

✘ All nodes possess authenticator

✘ Can’t rely on source address auth

Page 14: March 2003 Mayday - Massachusetts Institute of Technologynms.lcs.mit.edu/talks/mayday-usits2003.pdf · Proactive Defense against DoS Many systems trace DoS attacks Some react to DoS

Overlay Routing

� Proximity Routing

� Singly-Indirect Routing

– Ingress node passes to egress node

✔ Fewer nodes know authenticator

(except for source address)

Page 15: March 2003 Mayday - Massachusetts Institute of Technologynms.lcs.mit.edu/talks/mayday-usits2003.pdf · Proactive Defense against DoS Many systems trace DoS attacks Some react to DoS

Overlay Routing

� Proximity Routing

� Singly-Indirect Routing

� Doubly-Indirect Routing

– Only a few nodes know the egress node

✔ Keeps source auth secret

✘ Overhead grows...

Page 16: March 2003 Mayday - Massachusetts Institute of Technologynms.lcs.mit.edu/talks/mayday-usits2003.pdf · Proactive Defense against DoS Many systems trace DoS attacks Some react to DoS

Overlay Routing

� Proximity Routing

� Singly-Indirect Routing

� Doubly-Indirect Routing

� Random or Mix Routing

– Route through many overlay nodes

✔ Resistant to node compromises

✘ Overhead grows more...

Page 17: March 2003 Mayday - Massachusetts Institute of Technologynms.lcs.mit.edu/talks/mayday-usits2003.pdf · Proactive Defense against DoS Many systems trace DoS attacks Some react to DoS

Choose protection vs. OverheadWhat authenticator / routing combinations?

� Performance:Proximity non-source

– vulnerable to eavesdroppers

� Eavesdropping:Singly-indirect non-source

– Random eavesdroppers don’t know secret

– Equivalent security to SOS, fewer hops

Page 18: March 2003 Mayday - Massachusetts Institute of Technologynms.lcs.mit.edu/talks/mayday-usits2003.pdf · Proactive Defense against DoS Many systems trace DoS attacks Some react to DoS

Choose protection vs. OverheadWhat authenticator / routing combinations?

� Agility: Singly-indirect destination

– Routing updates can change filters

– Resists adaptive attacks (discussed next)

� Maximum Security:Mix routing

– Like Freenet

– Resists some overlay node compromises

Using more authenticators boosts the key space

Page 19: March 2003 Mayday - Massachusetts Institute of Technologynms.lcs.mit.edu/talks/mayday-usits2003.pdf · Proactive Defense against DoS Many systems trace DoS attacks Some react to DoS

Attacks and Defenses

Attackers

O1

OverlayNodes

ISPRouters

Filter

R1Server

Internal

Filter Ring

��

� Basic flooding resistance shown already

� Real networks have third parties,

traffic can be sniffed, etc.

Page 20: March 2003 Mayday - Massachusetts Institute of Technologynms.lcs.mit.edu/talks/mayday-usits2003.pdf · Proactive Defense against DoS Many systems trace DoS attacks Some react to DoS

Probing: BasicAttacker TargetR1Filter

To TargetSYN

SYN/ACK or RST if not �ltered

nothing/ICMP if port �ltered

✘ About 30 seconds to find destination port

✔ Secondary Key-

server only responds to good requests.

Page 21: March 2003 Mayday - Massachusetts Institute of Technologynms.lcs.mit.edu/talks/mayday-usits2003.pdf · Proactive Defense against DoS Many systems trace DoS attacks Some react to DoS

Probing: Secondary KeyAttacker Target

To TargetR1Filter

TTL expires at R1

SYN

TTL limited

ICMP Time Exceeded

nothing/ICMP if port �ltered

✘ UseFirewalkingagainst intermediate routers

✘ ... about five minutes to port scan.

✔ Fix intermediate routers (ick)

✔ Use source address authentication

Page 22: March 2003 Mayday - Massachusetts Institute of Technologynms.lcs.mit.edu/talks/mayday-usits2003.pdf · Proactive Defense against DoS Many systems trace DoS attacks Some react to DoS

Probing: Secondary Key + SourceAttacker TargetOverlay Filter

To Target, spoofed from Overlay

To Overlay

Get IP ID

Get IP ID

IPID=1

IPID=2SYN

Spoofed source

SYN/ACK

RST

Get IP ID

IPID=4

RST increments IPID✘ UseIdlescanvia overlay nodes

✔ Fix overlay nodes

Page 23: March 2003 Mayday - Massachusetts Institute of Technologynms.lcs.mit.edu/talks/mayday-usits2003.pdf · Proactive Defense against DoS Many systems trace DoS attacks Some react to DoS

Probing: Secondary Key + SourceAttacker TargetR1Filter

To Target, spoofed from Overlay

To R1

Get IP ID

Get IP ID

IPID=1

IPID=2

SYN to targetSpoofed source, TTL expire

Time Exceeded

To spoofed address

Get IP ID

IPID=4

TTL Expires at R1

R1 increments IPID

✘ Next-hop scanvia routers

� Fix everything...

Page 24: March 2003 Mayday - Massachusetts Institute of Technologynms.lcs.mit.edu/talks/mayday-usits2003.pdf · Proactive Defense against DoS Many systems trace DoS attacks Some react to DoS

Further Attacks

� Timing Attacks

determine egress node

� Adaptive Flooding

smarter flooding, detect slowdown

� Request floods, compromised nodes...

� Shameless plug: All discussed in paper

Page 25: March 2003 Mayday - Massachusetts Institute of Technologynms.lcs.mit.edu/talks/mayday-usits2003.pdf · Proactive Defense against DoS Many systems trace DoS attacks Some react to DoS

How big are attacks?(most data from Savage et al.)

� 30% of attacks� 1000 pps

� 5 %� 10,000 pps

Page 26: March 2003 Mayday - Massachusetts Institute of Technologynms.lcs.mit.edu/talks/mayday-usits2003.pdf · Proactive Defense against DoS Many systems trace DoS attacks Some react to DoS

Large keyspace + AgilityAt 1000 pps, how long can we resist attack?

✘ Port-scan dest port: 5 minutes

✘ Locate egress node: 50 seconds

✔ Find both: 4 days

� Agility: update when discovered

Page 27: March 2003 Mayday - Massachusetts Institute of Technologynms.lcs.mit.edu/talks/mayday-usits2003.pdf · Proactive Defense against DoS Many systems trace DoS attacks Some react to DoS

Is any of this practical?We think so!

✔ Akamai has a few thousand nodes

(And offers “mayday-lite”)

✔ New core routers can filter at line-speed

� Useful in a service-provider context

– Amortize costs, load spikes

– Not everyone attacked at once.

Page 28: March 2003 Mayday - Massachusetts Institute of Technologynms.lcs.mit.edu/talks/mayday-usits2003.pdf · Proactive Defense against DoS Many systems trace DoS attacks Some react to DoS

Conclusions

✔ Practical, proactive DoS resistance

✔ Flexible choices of overhead vs. protection

✔ Better understanding of attacks

(next-hop attack and adaptive flooding novel)

� Only the first line of defense!

Security starts at home.