Intelligent Worms: Searching for Preys



Similar documents
Optimal worm-scanning method using vulnerable-host distributions

MODELING AND DEFENDING AGAINST INTERNET WORM ATTACKS

Understanding the Behavior of Internet Worm through PArallel Worm Simulator (PAWS)

IPv4 Routing Worm - A Fast, Selective Attack

The Effect of Infection Time on Internet Worm Propagation

WORMS : attacks, defense and models. Presented by: Abhishek Sharma Vijay Erramilli

CSE331: Introduction to Networks and Security. Lecture 15 Fall 2006

Sapphire/Slammer Worm. Code Red v2. Sapphire/Slammer Worm. Sapphire/Slammer Worm. Sapphire/Slammer Worm. Why Was Slammer So Fast?

How To Attack A Server With A Ddos Attack On A Zombie Army Of Your Computer (For A Free Download)

SECURITY TERMS: Advisory Backdoor - Blended Threat Blind Worm Bootstrapped Worm Bot Coordinated Scanning

Volume 2, Issue 9, September 2014 International Journal of Advance Research in Computer Science and Management Studies

Review Study on Techniques for Network worm Signatures Automation

A Firewall Network System for Worm Defense in Enterprise Networks

INTRUSION DETECTION SYSTEMS. Edited by Pawel Skrobanek

The Spread of the Sapphire/Slammer Worm

Comparison of Firewall, Intrusion Prevention and Antivirus Technologies

Lecture 13 - Network Security

On the Development of an Internetwork-centric Defense for Scanning Worms

Security Information Management (SIM)

Malicious Software. Malicious Software. Overview. Backdoor or Trapdoor. Raj Jain. Washington University in St. Louis

Why Leaks Matter. Leak Detection and Mitigation as a Critical Element of Network Assurance. A publication of Lumeta Corporation

CISCO INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AT WORK CASE STUDY: CISCO IOS NETFLOW TECHNOLOGY

A Real-Time Network Traffic Based Worm Detection System for Enterprise Networks

A Critical Investigation of Botnet

: SENIOR DESIGN PROJECT: DDOS ATTACK, DETECTION AND DEFENSE SIMULATION

How to Detect and Prevent Cyber Attacks

A SURVEY OF INTERNET WORM DETECTION

Cryptography and Network Security Chapter 21. Malicious Software. Backdoor or Trapdoor. Logic Bomb 4/19/2010. Chapter 21 Malicious Software

A Study of Mass-mailing Worms

Outline. Outline. Outline

Symantec Cyber Threat Analysis Program Program Overview. Symantec Cyber Threat Analysis Program Team

DDOS WALL: AN INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDER PROTECTOR

OF-RHM: Transparent Moving Target Defense using Software Defined Networking

Application of Netflow logs in Analysis and Detection of DDoS Attacks

Network Security Monitoring and Behavior Analysis Pavel Čeleda, Petr Velan, Tomáš Jirsík

Intrusion Forecasting Framework for Early Warning System against Cyber Attack

CONFIGURING TCP/IP ADDRESSING AND SECURITY

Design and Experiments of small DDoS Defense System using Traffic Deflecting in Autonomous System

Networking Technology Online Course Outline

Source Code Analysis of Worms

Internetworking and Internet-1. Global Addresses

On Characterizing BGP Routing Table Growth Tian Bu, Lixin Gao, and Don Towsley University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003

Defending Against Cyber Attacks with SessionLevel Network Security

CSE331: Introduction to Networks and Security. Lecture 14 Fall 2006

NSC E

Building A Secure Microsoft Exchange Continuity Appliance

Security Engineering Part III Network Security. Intruders, Malware, Firewalls, and IDSs

NVisionIP: An Interactive Network Flow Visualization Tool for Security

Network layer: Overview. Network layer functions IP Routing and forwarding

IP Subnetting and Addressing

Internet Worm Classification and Detection using Data Mining Techniques

A Novel Packet Marketing Method in DDoS Attack Detection

Malware Defense Using Network Security Authentication

Banking Security using Honeypot

Index Terms Denial-of-Service Attack, Intrusion Prevention System, Internet Service Provider. Fig.1.Single IPS System

Classification of Different Computer Worms with Dynamic Detection Using Victim Number Based Algorithm

Evangelos Kranakis, School of Computer Science, Carleton University, Ottawa 1. Network Security. Canada France Meeting on Security, Dec 06-08

Network Monitoring Tool to Identify Malware Infected Computers

Flashback: Internet design goals. Security Part Two: Attacks and Countermeasures. Security Vulnerabilities. Why did they leave it out?

Fuzzy Network Profiling for Intrusion Detection

Protecting the Infrastructure: Symantec Web Gateway

Second-generation (GenII) honeypots

IPv6 SECURITY. May The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region

Let the Pirates Patch? An Economic Analysis of Network Software Security Patch Restrictions

Provider-Based Deterministic Packet Marking against Distributed DoS Attacks

WHITE PAPER. Understanding IP Addressing: Everything You Ever Wanted To Know

Data Centers Protection from DoS attacks. Trends and solutions. Michael Soukonnik, Radware Ltd Riga. Baltic IT&T

Multifaceted Approach to Understanding the Botnet Phenomenon

DNS-based Detection of Scanning Worms in an Enterprise Network

Lecture 19 - Network Security

Analysis of Attacks towards Turkish National Academic Network

1 Introduction. Agenda Item: Work Item:

SECURITY FLAWS IN INTERNET VOTING SYSTEM

HoneyBOT User Guide A Windows based honeypot solution

Transcription:

Intelligent Worms: Searching for Preys By Zesheng Chen and Chuanyi Ji ABOUT THE AUTHORS. Zesheng Chen is currently a Ph.D. Candidate in the Communication Networks and Machine Learning Group at the School of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, advised by Professor Chuanyi Ji. Chen s research interests focus on network security, especially modeling the spread of malware on networks, the performance of distributed detection systems, the effectiveness of defense systems, and the performance evaluation of communication networks. Chuanyi Ji is an Associate Professor in the School of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology. Her research lies in both basic and applied areas of networking and machine learning, seeking to understand and investigate fundamental issues of network management and security, to develop engineering solutions for managing and controlling heterogeneous and large networks, to develop and apply algorithmic and analytical approaches in the area of machine learning, statistics and information theory. Internet worms have been a persistent security threat in recent years since the Morris worm arose in 1988. After the Code Red and Nimda worms were released into the Internet in 2001, the Slammer worm was unleashed with a 376-byte User Datagram Protocol (UDP) packet and infected at least 160,000 computers worldwide on January 25, 2003. Later, the Blaster and Witty worms flooded the Internet in 2003 and 2004, respectively. These active worms caused large parts of the Internet to be temporarily inaccessible, costing both public and private sectors millions of dollars. The frequency and virulence of active-worm outbreaks have been increasing dramatically in the last few years, presenting a significant threat to today's Internet. In this article, we review the prey-searching methods that worms use currently, and may potentially exploit in the future. While reviewing what has been used by worms is doable, predicting what worms may use seems to be prohibitive: There would be million ways for active worms to attack the Internet. We show how mathematics has been playing an important role in providing both a guidance and methodology in studying current and futuristic worm attacks. In particular, we outline how mathematical tools (e.g., epidemic model, statistics, machine learning, and game theory) can be applied in this area. Self-propagation is a key characteristic of an Internet worm. Using self-propagating malicious code, active worms can spread rapidly by infecting computer systems and by using infected hosts to disseminate the worms in an automated fashion. For example, when a worm is released into the Internet, it begins with a single host and scans randomly for other vulnerable machines (i.e., preys). When a prey is found, the worm sends out a probe to infect the target. After a new host is compromised, the worm transfers a copy of itself to this host. This new host then begins to run the worm and infect other targets. The Sapphire worm combined all these steps into one. That is, the Sapphire worm used a single UDP packet to probe, compromise, and spread the worm to targets.

Worms designers, attackers and defenders, developed different prey-searching algorithms such as random, localized, topological, and sequential scanning. Random scanning is used by such well-known worms as Code Red v2 and Slammer. A worm that employs random scanning selects target IP addresses at random. Therefore, every vulnerable machine is equally likely to be infected by a worm scan. Localized scanning is used by Code Red II and Nimda worms, which preferentially scan for hosts in the local address space. For example, an infected host can put more emphasis on searching for preys from local hosts, e.g., in the same sub-network (or subnet). An intuition for such a strategy is that vulnerable hosts are clustered, and localized scanning can rapidly compromise all local vulnerable hosts. Topological scanning is used by Morris and Secure SHell (SSH) worms. The worm relies on the topological information contained in the victim machine in order to locate new targets. The information may include routing tables, email addresses, a list of peers, and Uniform Resource Locations (URLs). Such a scanning method is analogous to the spread pattern of biological viruses. Sequential scanning, where IP addresses are scanned sequentially, is used by the Blaster worm. After the worm compromises a vulnerable host, it will check the host with an IP address near this vulnerable host. As the above worms have been used by attackers, intelligent worms have been considered by researchers. These worms are futuristic and studied for their virulence as what-if scenarios. For example, Nicholas Weaver presented the hitlist scanning idea to speed up the spread of worms at an initial stage. There potentially vulnerable machines are gathered into a hitlist beforehand, and targeted first when the worm is released. An extreme example of hitlist-scanning is provided by flash worms, where IP addresses of all vulnerable machines are known in advance and put into the list. Flash worms are considered to be the fastest as a worst-case scenario, since every worm scan can hit a vulnerable host. One other scanning method to speed up the spread of worms is to use the information provided by Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) routing tables to reduce the space that worms scan. This scanning method is called routable scanning. Zou et al. designed two types of routable-scanning worms (or called routing worms). One is based on class A (x.0.0.0/8) address-allocations, and thus called Class A routing worm. Such a worm can reduce the scanning space to 45.3% of the entire IPv4 address space. The other is based on BGP routing tables, and thus called BGP routing worm. This kind of worm can reduce the scanning space to only about 28.6% of the entire IPv4 address space. One other strategy that a worm can potentially employ is importance scanning, where a worm takes advantage of the knowledge of vulnerable-host distribution. Importance scanning is inspired by importance sampling in statistics. When worm scanning methods are considered, random scanning is equivalent to a Monte Carlo method, which samples randomly-chosen targets in IP address space. In contrast, importance scanning samples targets according to an underlying group distribution of vulnerable hosts. The division of groups can follow different criteria, such as Domain Name System (DNS) Top-Level Domains, countries, Autonomous Systems, IP prefixes in Classless Inter-Domain Routing (CIDR), first byte of IP addresses (/8 subnets), or first two bytes of IP addresses (/16

subnets). A key observation is that the vulnerable-host distributions in these groups are highly non-uniform, which can be exploited by importance-scanning strategy. For example, Figure 1 shows the web-server (port 80) distribution. To estimate the distribution of web servers, we exploited a random Uniform Resource Locator (URL) generator from UROULETTE (http://www.uroulette.com/) to collect 13,866 IP addresses of web servers on January 24, 2005. Figure 1 shows the group distribution in /8 subnets for web servers and reflects that web servers are highly-unevenly distributed in the Internet. Importance scanning concentrates on scanning groups that are more likely for worms to find vulnerable hosts. Hence, importance scanning can reduce the number of scans needed for attacking a large number of vulnerable hosts. Importantly, as there would be million ways for attackers to make use of a vulnerable host distribution, importance scanning provides a best-case scenario for worm attacks given such a distribution. Importance scanning thus supplies a bench mark to compare with any other scanning schemes that use a vulnerable-host distribution. 0.08 0.07 0.06 Group distribution 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 /8 subnets (class A prefixes) Figure 1: Uneven distribution of web servers. The above-mentioned advanced scanning mechanisms have been developed based on such a philosophy: The use of side information by an attacker can help a worm speed up the propagation. In the Internet, however, it may not be easy for attackers to collect information on vulnerable hosts a priori. For example, Windows SQL database servers do not advertise their addresses. It is therefore difficult for the Slammer worm to obtain a list of vulnerable hosts or an underlying vulnerable-host distribution before the worm is released. Nevertheless, future worms are likely to become more intelligent and potentially learn about a certain knowledge (e.g., on the vulnerable-host distribution) while propagating. A self-learning worm with a simple proportion estimator has been proposed by Chen et al. that learns a vulnerable-host distribution. Such a worm then uses the importance-scanning method to speed up worm propagation using the learned

distribution of vulnerable hosts. Advanced machine learning methods can be potentially applied for future intelligent worms. How can we model the spread of worms that employ different scanning methods? Traditional biological epidemic models have been customized to study the virulence of distinct scanning methods. For example, a homogenous epidemic model is quite suitable for modeling the propagation of random-scanning worms, and has been widely used. Furthermore, epidemic models are applied to study the performance of detection/defense systems and to estimate the speed of worm propagation. How can we defend against these smart worms? For an intelligent worm, its goal is to find the preys as quickly as possible. While for a defender of the Internet, he/she needs to detain this searching procedure. For example, a defender can potentially deploy the vulnerable hosts in the Internet in some fashion to discourage some advanced scanning methods. Therefore, there is a game between attackers and defenders. Game theory has been exploited to describe such interaction and to provide insights for countering intelligent worms. In summary, worm-scanning methods have been widely studied. Mathematical tools (e.g., machine learning, epidemic model, and game theory) have been applied to provide guidance and methodology. Weapon race between attackers and defenders has begun, forcing us to understand the future intelligent worms more. Reference [1] Z. Chen and C. Ji, A Self-Learning Worm Using Importance Scanning, in ACM CCS Workshop on Rapid Malcode (WORM'05), 2005. [2] Z. Chen and C. Ji, Importance-Scanning Worm Using Vulnerable-Host Distribution, in Proc. of IEEE Globecom 2005, St. Louis, MO, 2005, [3] Z. Chen, L. Gao, and K. Kwiat, Modeling the Spread of Active Worms, in Proc. of INFOCOM 2003, San Francisco, April, 2003. [4] S. Staniford, V. Paxson, and N. Weaver, How to 0wn the Internet in Your Spare Time, in Proc. of the 11th USENIX Security Symposium (Security '02), 2002. [5] N. Weaver, Warhol Worms, the Potential for Very Fast Internet Plagues, http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~nweaver/warhol.html. [6] J. Wu, S. Vangala, L. Gao, and K. Kwiat, An Effective Architecture and Algorithm for Detecting Worms with Various Scan Techniques, in Network and Distributed System Security Symposium, 2004.

[7] C. C. Zou, D. Towsley, W. Gong, and S. Cai, Routing Worm: A Fast, Selective Attack Worm based on IP Address Information, in 19th ACM/IEEE/SCS Workshop on Principles of Advanced and Distributed Simulation (PADS'05), June 1-3, Monterey, USA, 2005. [8] C. C. Zou, D. Towsley, and W. Gong. On the Performance of Internet Worm Scanning Strategies, to appear in Journal of Performance Evaluation.