Hi John,

We were trying to push a very similar spec to enhance the security group
API, we covered both DDoS case
and another use case for brute force prevention (We did a research to
identify common protocols login behaviour
in order to identify brute force attacks using iptables) and even some UI
work

You can view the specs and implementations here:
1) https://review.openstack.org/#/c/184243/
2) https://review.openstack.org/#/c/154535/
3) https://review.openstack.org/#/c/151247/
4) https://review.openstack.org/#/c/161207/

The spec didn't got approved as there is a strong opinion to keep the
security group API compatible with Amazon.
I think this and your request fits much more into the FWaaS and if this is
something you would like to work together on and push
i can help and align the above code to use FWaaS.

Feel free to contact me if you have any question

Thanks
Gal.



On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 6:58 PM, John Joyce (joycej) <[email protected]>
wrote:

>  Hello everyone:
>
>       I would like to test the waters on some new functionality we think
> is needed to protect OpenStack deployments from some overload situations
> due to an excessive user or DDOS scenario.   We wrote this up in the style
> of an RFE.   Please let us know your thoughts and we can proceed with a
> formal RFE with more detail if there are no concerns raised.
>
>
>
>
>
> *What is being requested*
>
> This request is to extend the QOS APIs to include the ability to provide
> connection rate limiting
>
> *Why is it being requested*
>
> There are many scenarios where a VM may be intentionally malicious or
> become harmful to the network due to its rate of initializing TCP
> connections.   The reverse direction of a VM being attacked with an
> excessive amount of TCP connection requests either intentionally or due to
> overload is also problematic.
>
> *Implementation Choices
>
>    There might be a number of ways to implement this,  but one of the
> easiest would appear to be to extend the APIs being developed under:
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/187513/. An additional rule type
> “connections per-second” could be added.
>
> The dataplane implementation itself may be realized with netfilter and
> conntrack.
>
> *Alternatives
>
> It would be possible to extend the security groups in a similar fashion,
> but due to the addition of rate limiting, QoS seems a more nature fit.
>
> *Who needs it*
>
> Cloud operators have experienced this issue in real deployments in a
> number of cases.
>
>
>
> [image: http://www.cisco.com/web/europe/images/email/signature/logo05.jpg]
>
> *John Joyce*
> PRINCIPAL ENGINEER.ENGINEERING
> [email protected]
> Phone: *+1 978 936 0227 <%2B1%20978%20936%200227>*
>
> *Cisco Systems Limited*
> 1414 Massachusetts Ave.
> BOXBOROUGH
> MASSACHUSETTS
> 01719
> US
> Cisco.com <http://www.cisco.com>
>
>
>
> [image: Think before you print.]Think before you print.
>
> This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole
> use of the intended recipient. Any review, use, distribution or disclosure
> by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or
> authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender by
> reply email and delete all copies of this message.
>
> For corporate legal information go to:
> http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>


-- 
Best Regards ,

The G.
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Reply via email to