flooding an embedded device with isic and tcpreplay causing different results
- From: wlet <wlet@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 13:37:23 +0100
Hi everybody,
I'm trying to force a reload of an embedded SOHO router/NAT Gateway.
This is what I've done so far:
I flodded the device with isic and captured the packet flow. About 60s
later the device rebooted (obviosly because of a memory overload). I
stopped the packet capture, rebooted the SOHO and fired the pcap with
tcpdump again to the SOHO.
This behavior is reproducible - I did that scenario alt least 5 times.
So, now I wondering why the tcpreplay attack don't f*** up the SOHO.
I've 2 theories:
1. The tcpdump isn't complete because of "dropped by kernel" packets -
and these are the packets which are forcing the reload
2. tcpreplays performance is weaker than that of isic - this causes less
networkload and that is not enough to grill SOHOs mem.
these are the statistics of isic:
root@machine:/root# isic -s rand -d 192.168.1.1 -r 1337 -F 100 -I -V
..
..
284000 @ 5109.4 pkts/sec and 3321.4 k/s
^C
Caught signal 2
Used random seed 1337
Wrote 284003 packets in 69.00s @ 4116.05 pkts/s
and these are the captured packets from tcpdump:
root@machine:/root# tcpdump -i eth0 -n -s0 -w /root/crash.pcap
tcpdump: listening on eth0, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size
65535 bytes
^C
268004 packets captured
283995 packets received by filter
15991 packets dropped by kernel
there is the output of tcpreplay (replaying the captured *.pcap)
root@machine:/root# tcpreplay -i eth0 crash.pcap
sending out eth0
processing file: crash.pcap
Actual: 268004 packets (180061091 bytes) sent in 74.45 seconds
Rated: 2418422.2 bps, 18.45 Mbps/sec, 3599.59 pps
Statistics for network device: eth0
Attempted packets: 268004
Successful packets: 268004
Failed packets: 0
Retried packets (ENOBUFS): 0
Retried packets (EAGAIN): 0
As you can see at the statistic of tcpreplay and isic, that tcpreplay
sends out about 500pkt/s less than isic.
Do you have an idea why my SOHO do not break down while pounding it with
tcpreplay?
cu
wlet
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This list is sponsored by: InfoSec Institute
Tired of using other people's tools? Why not learn how to write your own exploits? InfoSec Institute's Advanced Ethical Hacking class teaches you how to write stack and heap buffer overflow exploits for Windows and Linux. Gain your Certified Expert Penetration Tester (CEPT) cert as well.
http://www.infosecinstitute.com/courses/advanced_ethical_hacking_training.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: flooding an embedded device with isic and tcpreplay causing different results
- From: Andres Riancho
- Re: flooding an embedded device with isic and tcpreplay causing different results
- Prev by Date: Botnets
- Next by Date: Web App Complexity Metrics / Scoping a Web App
- Previous by thread: Botnets
- Next by thread: Re: flooding an embedded device with isic and tcpreplay causing different results
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|