Re: unidentified DOS 'bad traffic'

From: Kerry Thompson (kerry@crypt.gen.nz)
Date: 03/14/03

  • Next message: David Gillett: "RE: unidentified DOS "bad traffic""
    Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 12:10:12 +1300 (NZDT)
    From: "Kerry Thompson" <kerry@crypt.gen.nz>
    To: <incidents@securityfocus.com>
    
    

    GTBot ( a DDOS agent ) uses IP protocol 255 to communicate, sometimes
    large and/or small packets, and sometimes fragmented. Its quite capable of
    flooding most gateways, and connects to an IRC channel as you describe.
    You'd best read Dave Dittrich's paper at :

    http://staff.washington.edu/dittrich/talks/core02/xdcc-analysis.txt

    and look for the symptoms that he describes on the Win2k box.

    Kerry

    DY said:
    > Hi all,
    >
    > I'm quite surprised at the lack of material I'm turning up in
    > researching this issue, so I'm resorting to this post. Please feel free
    > to point me somewhere.
    >
    > Twice in the past week I have experienced a severe DOS condition on my
    > network. A particular host has been completely flooding the network
    > with some sort of traffic that chokes the whole thing. Now, on the
    > first incident I was unable to obtain packet trace data (I'll spare the
    > details) and was forced to reconnect the particular segment's port. We
    > got by for a few days, and then wham, it happened again. This time I
    > isolated the segment with a Snort sensor and captured a large amount of
    > data (actually, I only sniffed for a few seconds before I'd already
    > swallowed about 10 MB of data, all of which was identical, so I
    > stopped). My Snort output on this trace was filled with nothing but
    > bizillions of these entries (payload did vary a little):
    >
    >
    > 03/13-07:53:50.650383 10.1.2.3 -> 64.12.165.57
    > PROTO255 TTL:128 TOS:0x0 ID:50456 IpLen:20 DgmLen:80
    > 45 10 00 3C B5 F5 40 00 40 06 E8 85 CD A2 E9 48 E..<..@.@......H
    > 40 0C A5 39 D3 A6 1A 0B BC C0 DE 3C 00 00 00 00 @..9.......<....
    > A0 02 7D 78 D3 8E 00 00 02 04 05 B4 04 02 08 0A ..}x............
    > 00 CD 7F 52 52 00 00 00 01 03 03 00 ...RR.......
    >
    > =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
    >
    >
    >
    > The source IP is from a private network that I run, which uses basic
    > NAT, so I can certainly route and identify the host, as this capture is
    > from the private side of the NAT router. Now, here's the Snort alert
    > entry (again, just thousands of this same entry):
    >
    >
    > [**] [1:1627:1] BAD TRAFFIC Unassigned/Reserved IP protocol [**]
    > [Classification: Detection of a non-standard protocol or event]
    > [Priority: 2]
    > 03/13-07:53:11.032136 10.1.2.3 -> 64.12.165.57
    > PROTO255 TTL:128 TOS:0x0 ID:23977 IpLen:20 DgmLen:80
    >
    >
    > Now, I've read up on the Snort signature that generates this alert (SID
    > 1627). It says that it's bad traffic (of course) using an unassigned
    > protocol, which of course the alert states. However, I'm not finding
    > anything (Google, Usenet, etc.) that leads me toward the proper analysis
    > of what this machine was doing. All I know is:
    >
    > 1) The machine runs Win2K pro.
    > 2) The user has no idea what's going on, of course, and has scanned his
    > machine with the latest AV updates, with no viri found.
    > 3) IP address 64.12.165.57, the destination for this complete flood of
    > "bad traffic," resolves (reverse) to irc-m.icq.aol.com.
    > 4) There was so much of this traffic that it shut my network down. My
    > main router (Cisco) reported no appreciable CPU consumption during the
    > attack. It just appears that the sheer volume of the [bad] packets
    > choked everybody out.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

    <Pre>Lose another weekend managing your IDS?
    Take back your personal time.
    15-day free trial of StillSecure Border Guard.</Pre>
    <A href="http://www.securityfocus.com/stillsecure"> http://www.securityfocus.com/stillsecure </A>


  • Next message: David Gillett: "RE: unidentified DOS "bad traffic""

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: unidentified DOS "bad traffic"
      ... I'd do some closer looking at the source machine. ... Do you have an idea of the volume of packets that were coming from this ... A particular host has been completely flooding the network with ... My Snort output on ...
      (Incidents)
    • Re: sniffer black box
      ... Snort can be configured to generate alerts based packets it sees, ... For real-time network analysis, ...
      (comp.security.firewalls)
    • Re: sniffer black box
      ... Snort can be configured to generate alerts based packets it sees, ... For real-time network analysis, ...
      (alt.computer.security)
    • Re: sniffer black box
      ... Snort can be configured to generate alerts based packets it sees, ... For real-time network analysis, ...
      (comp.os.linux.security)
    • HP t 5700 Thin client
      ... I receive packets on port 445 ... This is flooding my network. ... But having trouble installing it on those machines. ...
      (microsoft.public.security)