Re: OBESEUS - A new type of DDOS protector

2010-03-17 Thread Guillaume FORTAINE
 Infrastructure). 
http://www.cpni.gov.uk/Products/technicalnotes/Feb-09-security-assessment-TCP.aspx




Best Regards,

Guillaume FORTAINE


On 03/15/2010 06:04 PM, Deepak Jain wrote:

At first blush, I would say it's an interesting idea but won't actually resolve 
anything of the scariest DDOS attacks we've seen. (Unless I've missed something 
obvious about your doodle).

The advantage/disadvantage of 100,000+ host drone armies is that they don't actually 
*have* to flood you, per se. 10 pps (or less) each and you are going to crush almost 
everything without raising any alarms based on statistically significant patterns 
especially based on IPs. Fully/properly formed HTTP port 80 requests to / 
won't set of any alarms since each host is opening 1 or 2 connections and sending 
keepalives after that. If you forcibly close the connection, it can wait 5 seconds or 15 
minutes before it reopens, it doesn't really care. Anything that hits you faster than 
that is certainly obnoxious, but MUCH easier to address simply because they are being 
boring.

You *can* punt those requests that are all identical to 
caches/proxies/IDS/Arbor/what have you and give higher priority to requests 
that show some differences from them... but you are still mostly at the mercy 
of serving them unless you *can* learn something about the 
originator/flow/pattern -- which might get you into a state problem.

Where this might work is if you are a large network that only serves one sort 
of customer and you'd rather block rogue behavior than serve it (at the risk of 
upsetting your 1% type customers). This would work for that. Probably good at 
stomping torrents and other things as well.

Best,

Deepak

   

-Original Message-
From: Guillaume FORTAINE [mailto:gforta...@live.com]
Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 2:57 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: OBESEUS - A new type of DDOS protector

Dear Mister Wyble,

Thank you for your reply.


On 03/15/2010 07:00 AM, Charles N Wyble wrote:
 

The paper is pretty high level, and the software doesn't appear to be
available for download.
   


http://www.loud-fat-bloke.co.uk/obeseus.html

http://www.loud-fat-bloke.co.uk/tools/obeseusvB.tar.gz



 

So it's kinda theoretical.


   


We have it running parallel with a commercial product and it detects
the following
attacks
▪ SYN floods
▪ RST floods
▪ ICMP floods
▪ General UDP floods
▪ General TCP floods




Best Regards,

Guillaume FORTAINE

 
   




Re: OBESEUS - A new type of DDOS protector

2010-03-16 Thread gordon b slater
On Tue, 2010-03-16 at 04:47 +0100, Guillaume FORTAINE wrote:

 c) Its code is Open Source.
 
 http://www.loud-fat-bloke.co.uk/tools/obeseusvB.tar.gz
 
 
 My conclusion is that I give far more credit to Obeseus than to Arbor 
 Networks.
 

Hmm, the hey! it's open source! factor doesn't hold much sway in the
network world, no-one will be amazed at that. Many observers are
surprised at the amount of free software employed by ISPs and the like,
but it's certainly no news to insiders. 

Cisco, Arbor and others all have products based on Linux kernels and
BSDs, as only two examples. Sure, the products aren't open sourced,
but in a world where moving packets is the main business - what works,
goes.

(I'm a Beastie/Puffy/Tux proponent myself, so I'm not trying to
criticise your approach, just a comment on addressing the list. 
Most of us here are either one of the following here:

1/ Open-Source users/converts
2/ FOSS users/converts (not the same thing as #1)
3/ Originals (eg: Vixie et.al.)
4/ BSD-style-license industrial users (some very big names involved,
quietly,  in this category)
5/ Quagga/Bird/OpenBGPd users
6/ MS-Windows-only people who happily SSH into various items of hardware
running various operating systems all day long without worrying about
it.
7/ a combination of all of the above and more

At the end of the day, I say it again - what works, goes

Especially, where is Roland Dobbins ?

hey, careful, if you're looking for a fight we'll let Randy out of his
box, and you don't want to get that ;)


It's mainly (ie: intended to be...lol) an operational list, not a
theoretical discussion list. It's always good to have a different point
of view here, just don't bait the dogs so hard  =8^}


Gord
--
rockin ze NOC  ( mit MOC in a shell )





Re: OBESEUS - A new type of DDOS protector

2010-03-16 Thread William Pitcock
On Tue, 2010-03-16 at 07:53 +, gordon b slater wrote:
 Hmm, the hey! it's open source! factor doesn't hold much sway in the
 network world, no-one will be amazed at that. Many observers are
 surprised at the amount of free software employed by ISPs and the
 like, but it's certainly no news to insiders. 

Not to mention that it is only open source for private non-commercial
use only, and is crippled.

Also, Obeseus doesn't seem to be any better then stuff I have made
myself for my own usage and clients' usage.  All it does it look at a
pcap dump and analyze it.

Obeseus is actually worse: it does not work in realtime, the data
structures it uses are not suited to realtime detection, and in a DDoS,
I think this could take several minutes to trigger appropriate events
like IP nullroutes and ACLs etcetera.

The best way to detect DDoS is to run a 30 second rolling average.  If
you're suddenly doing a gigabit inbound within 30 seconds of UDP
traffic, you're probably being DDoSed ;).

William




Re: OBESEUS - A new type of DDOS protector

2010-03-16 Thread Jorge Amodio
Is this a joke of some kind ?

J



Re: OBESEUS - A new type of DDOS protector

2010-03-16 Thread Guillaume FORTAINE

Dear Mister Dobbins,

Thank you for your reply.


Flow telemetry has demonstrated its extraordinary utility to network operators 
worldwide over the last decade, and continued advances such as Cisco's Flexible 
NetFlow and the IETF IPFIX/PSAMP effort signify that this is the broad 
consensus of the operational community.
   


What about Argus ? [1]

http://qosient.com/argus/



Layer-7 attacks against various types of services/apps can achieve significant 
amplification effects and disproportionate impact, are increasing in frequency 
and impact, and therefore must be addressed by any operationally viable 
solution in this space.
   


https://www.dpacket.org/


I believe that an effective and operationally useful open-source solution for 
basic DDoS detection/classification/traceback/mitigation can be implemented 
using existing widely-used and -understood tools/techniques as described here:

http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2010-January/016747.html
   


Me and my partners are working on a Flow Based Security Awareness 
Framework for High-Speed Networks.


http://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://www.vabo.cz/spi/2009/presentations/03/02-celeda_rehak_CAMNEP_no_video.pdf

For a demo :

http://demo.cognitivesecurity.cz/



I look forward to your answer,

Best Regards,

Guillaume FORTAINE

[1] 
https://tools.netsa.cert.org/wiki/download/attachments/10027010/Bullard_IntroductionToArgus.pdf?version=1modificationDate=1263221338000


Re: OBESEUS - A new type of DDOS protector

2010-03-16 Thread Dobbins, Roland

On Mar 17, 2010, at 2:56 AM, Guillaume FORTAINE wrote:

 What about Argus ? [1]

Argus is OK, but I believe that it mainly relies upon packet capture - it does 
now support NetFlow v5, and v9 support as well as support for Juniper flow 
telemetry and others is supposed to be coming.

I've personally not played with Argus and NetFlow; nfdump/nfsen is a useful 
open-source NetFlow collection/analysis system.

 https://www.dpacket.org/

This is Web forum focused on discussions regarding DPI, which is orthogonal to 
IDMS.

 Me and my partners are working on a Flow Based Security Awareness 
 Framework for High-Speed Networks.
 
 http://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://www.vabo.cz/spi/2009/presentations/03/02-celeda_rehak_CAMNEP_no_video.pdf
 
 For a demo :
 
 http://demo.cognitivesecurity.cz/

It's always good to see folks motivated to work on solutions they believe will 
benefit the community at large.

---
Roland Dobbins rdobb...@arbor.net // http://www.arbornetworks.com

Injustice is relatively easy to bear; what stings is justice.

-- H.L. Mencken






Re: OBESEUS - A new type of DDOS protector

2010-03-16 Thread Guillaume FORTAINE

Dear Mister Dobbins,

Thank you for your reply.


Argus is OK, but I believe that it mainly relies upon packet capture - it does 
now support NetFlow v5, and v9 support as well as support for Juniper flow 
telemetry and others is supposed to be coming.
   


Argus is a superset of Netflow [1]. It's a *better* Netflow :

http://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://www.cert.org/flocon/2009/presentations/Bullard_ControlPlane.pdf


I've personally not played with Argus and NetFlow; nfdump/nfsen is a useful 
open-source NetFlow collection/analysis system.

   


There is also Psyche from Pontetec that is a better nfsen :

http://psyche.pontetec.com/



Me and my partners are working on a Flow Based Security Awareness
Framework for High-Speed Networks.

http://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://www.vabo.cz/spi/2009/presentations/03/02-celeda_rehak_CAMNEP_no_video.pdf

For a demo :

http://demo.cognitivesecurity.cz/
 

It's always good to see folks motivated to work on solutions they believe will 
benefit the community at large.

   


Thank you. The question is : Who are the people interested in our work ?

Best Regards,

Guillaume FORTAINE

[1] http://www.qosient.com/argus/argusnetflow.htm


Re: OBESEUS - A new type of DDOS protector

2010-03-15 Thread Charles N Wyble
Guillaume FORTAINE wrote:
 Misters,

 No comments ?

 http://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://www.loud-fat-bloke.co.uk/obeseus2.pdf


 http://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://www.parliament.uk/documents/upload/F012Interoute121109.pdf


 http://barometer.interoute.com/barom_main.php

The paper is pretty high level, and the software doesn't appear to be
available for download. So it's kinda theoretical.




Re: OBESEUS - A new type of DDOS protector

2010-03-15 Thread Guillaume FORTAINE

Dear Mister Wyble,

Thank you for your reply.


On 03/15/2010 07:00 AM, Charles N Wyble wrote:

The paper is pretty high level, and the software doesn't appear to be
available for download.



http://www.loud-fat-bloke.co.uk/obeseus.html

http://www.loud-fat-bloke.co.uk/tools/obeseusvB.tar.gz




So it's kinda theoretical.

   



We have it running parallel with a commercial product and it detects 
the following

attacks
▪ SYN floods
▪ RST floods
▪ ICMP floods
▪ General UDP floods
▪ General TCP floods




Best Regards,

Guillaume FORTAINE




RE: OBESEUS - A new type of DDOS protector

2010-03-15 Thread Deepak Jain

At first blush, I would say it's an interesting idea but won't actually resolve 
anything of the scariest DDOS attacks we've seen. (Unless I've missed something 
obvious about your doodle).

The advantage/disadvantage of 100,000+ host drone armies is that they don't 
actually *have* to flood you, per se. 10 pps (or less) each and you are going 
to crush almost everything without raising any alarms based on statistically 
significant patterns especially based on IPs. Fully/properly formed HTTP port 
80 requests to / won't set of any alarms since each host is opening 1 or 2 
connections and sending keepalives after that. If you forcibly close the 
connection, it can wait 5 seconds or 15 minutes before it reopens, it doesn't 
really care. Anything that hits you faster than that is certainly obnoxious, 
but MUCH easier to address simply because they are being boring.

You *can* punt those requests that are all identical to 
caches/proxies/IDS/Arbor/what have you and give higher priority to requests 
that show some differences from them... but you are still mostly at the mercy 
of serving them unless you *can* learn something about the 
originator/flow/pattern -- which might get you into a state problem. 

Where this might work is if you are a large network that only serves one sort 
of customer and you'd rather block rogue behavior than serve it (at the risk of 
upsetting your 1% type customers). This would work for that. Probably good at 
stomping torrents and other things as well.

Best,

Deepak

 -Original Message-
 From: Guillaume FORTAINE [mailto:gforta...@live.com]
 Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 2:57 AM
 To: nanog@nanog.org
 Subject: Re: OBESEUS - A new type of DDOS protector
 
 Dear Mister Wyble,
 
 Thank you for your reply.
 
 
 On 03/15/2010 07:00 AM, Charles N Wyble wrote:
  The paper is pretty high level, and the software doesn't appear to be
  available for download.
 
 
 http://www.loud-fat-bloke.co.uk/obeseus.html
 
 http://www.loud-fat-bloke.co.uk/tools/obeseusvB.tar.gz
 
 
 
  So it's kinda theoretical.
 
 
 
 
 We have it running parallel with a commercial product and it detects
 the following
 attacks
 ▪ SYN floods
 ▪ RST floods
 ▪ ICMP floods
 ▪ General UDP floods
 ▪ General TCP floods
 
 
 
 
 Best Regards,
 
 Guillaume FORTAINE
 



Re: OBESEUS - A new type of DDOS protector

2010-03-15 Thread Guillaume FORTAINE

Dear Mister Jain,

Thank you for your reply.

You are speaking about EDoS (Economic Denial of Sustainability). Please 
see the following article :


http://www.rationalsurvivability.com/blog/?s=EDos

Consider a new take on an old problem based on ecommerce: Click-fraud. I 
frame this new embodiment as something called EDoS — economic denial of 
sustainability. Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks are blunt 
force trauma. The goal, regardless of motive, is to overwhelm 
infrastructure and remove from service a networked target by employing a 
distributed number of attackers. An example of DDoS is where a 
traditional botnet is activated to swarm/overwhelm an Internet connected 
website using an asynchronous attack which makes the site unavailable 
due to an exhaustion of resources (compute, network, or storage.)


EDoS attacks, however, are death by a thousand cuts. EDoS can also 
utilize distributed attack sources as well as single entities, but works 
by making legitimate web requests at volumes that may appear to be 
“normal” but are done so to drive compute, network, and storage utility 
billings in a cloud model abnormally high.


An example of EDoS as a variant of click fraud is where a botnet is 
activated to visit a website whose income results from ecommerce 
purchases. The requests are all legitimate but purchases are never made. 
The vendor has to pay the cloud provider for increased elastic use of 
resources but revenue is never recognized to offset them.


We have anti-DDoS capabilities today with tools that are quite mature. 
DDoS is generally easy to spot given huge increases in traffic. EDoS 
attacks are not necessarily easy to detect, because the instrumentation 
and business logic is not present in most applications or stacks of 
applications and infrastructure to provide the correlation between 
“requests” and “ successful transactions.” In the example above, 
increased requests may look like normal activity. Many customers do not 
invest in this sort of integration and Cloud providers generally will 
not have visibility into applications that they do not own.




Best Regards,

Guillaume FORTAINE


On 03/15/2010 06:04 PM, Deepak Jain wrote:

At first blush, I would say it's an interesting idea but won't actually resolve 
anything of the scariest DDOS attacks we've seen. (Unless I've missed something 
obvious about your doodle).

The advantage/disadvantage of 100,000+ host drone armies is that they don't actually 
*have* to flood you, per se. 10 pps (or less) each and you are going to crush almost 
everything without raising any alarms based on statistically significant patterns 
especially based on IPs. Fully/properly formed HTTP port 80 requests to / 
won't set of any alarms since each host is opening 1 or 2 connections and sending 
keepalives after that. If you forcibly close the connection, it can wait 5 seconds or 15 
minutes before it reopens, it doesn't really care. Anything that hits you faster than 
that is certainly obnoxious, but MUCH easier to address simply because they are being 
boring.

You *can* punt those requests that are all identical to 
caches/proxies/IDS/Arbor/what have you and give higher priority to requests 
that show some differences from them... but you are still mostly at the mercy 
of serving them unless you *can* learn something about the 
originator/flow/pattern -- which might get you into a state problem.

Where this might work is if you are a large network that only serves one sort 
of customer and you'd rather block rogue behavior than serve it (at the risk of 
upsetting your 1% type customers). This would work for that. Probably good at 
stomping torrents and other things as well.

Best,

Deepak

   

-Original Message-
From: Guillaume FORTAINE [mailto:gforta...@live.com]
Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 2:57 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: OBESEUS - A new type of DDOS protector

Dear Mister Wyble,

Thank you for your reply.


On 03/15/2010 07:00 AM, Charles N Wyble wrote:
 

The paper is pretty high level, and the software doesn't appear to be
available for download.
   


http://www.loud-fat-bloke.co.uk/obeseus.html

http://www.loud-fat-bloke.co.uk/tools/obeseusvB.tar.gz



 

So it's kinda theoretical.


   


We have it running parallel with a commercial product and it detects
the following
attacks
▪ SYN floods
▪ RST floods
▪ ICMP floods
▪ General UDP floods
▪ General TCP floods




Best Regards,

Guillaume FORTAINE

 
   





Re: OBESEUS - A new type of DDOS protector

2010-03-15 Thread Christopher Morrow
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 9:44 PM, Guillaume FORTAINE gforta...@live.com wrote:
 Dear Mister Jain,

 Thank you for your reply.

 You are speaking about EDoS (Economic Denial of Sustainability). Please see
 the following article :

 http://www.rationalsurvivability.com/blog/?s=EDos

 Consider a new take on an old problem based on ecommerce: Click-fraud. I

actually deepak was just saying that if you diffuse the botnet enough
you don't have to send more traffic from individual nodes than would
be normally expected. In total they swamp the end service
(potentially). There wasn't any discussion of clickfraud in his note.



Re: OBESEUS - A new type of DDOS protector

2010-03-15 Thread Guillaume FORTAINE

Dear Mister Morrow,

Thank you for your reply.

To quote :

The advantage/disadvantage of 100,000+ host drone armies is that they 
don't actually *have* to flood you, per se. 10 pps (or less) each and 
you are going to crush almost everything without raising any alarms 
based on statistically significant patterns especially based on IPs. 
Fully/properly formed HTTP port 80 requests to / won't set of any 
alarms since each host is opening 1 or 2 connections and sending 
keepalives after that. If you forcibly close the connection, it can wait 
5 seconds or 15 minutes before it reopens, it doesn't really care. 
Anything that hits you faster than that is certainly obnoxious, but MUCH 
easier to address simply because they are being boring. 




From my point of view, it seems similar to the EDoS concept :

http://www.rationalsurvivability.com/blog/?s=EDos

EDoS attacks, however, are death by a thousand cuts. EDoS can also 
utilize distributed attack sources as well as single entities, but works 
by making legitimate web requests at volumes that may appear to be 
“normal” but are done so to drive compute, network, and storage utility 
billings in a cloud model abnormally high.



Best Regards,

Guillaume FORTAINE


On 03/16/2010 02:47 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:

On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 9:44 PM, Guillaume FORTAINEgforta...@live.com  wrote:
   

Dear Mister Jain,

Thank you for your reply.

You are speaking about EDoS (Economic Denial of Sustainability). Please see
the following article :

http://www.rationalsurvivability.com/blog/?s=EDos

Consider a new take on an old problem based on ecommerce: Click-fraud. I
 

actually deepak was just saying that if you diffuse the botnet enough
you don't have to send more traffic from individual nodes than would
be normally expected. In total they swamp the end service
(potentially). There wasn't any discussion of clickfraud in his note.

   





Re: OBESEUS - A new type of DDOS protector

2010-03-15 Thread Suresh Ramasubramanian
That's right M.Fortaine .. and your model does not, as yet, appear to
address what you term as EDoS and what the general security community
calls DDoS

On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 7:29 AM, Guillaume FORTAINE gforta...@live.com wrote:
 From my point of view, it seems similar to the EDoS concept :

 http://www.rationalsurvivability.com/blog/?s=EDos

 EDoS attacks, however, are death by a thousand cuts. EDoS can also utilize
 distributed attack sources as well as single entities, but works by making
 legitimate web requests at volumes that may appear to be “normal” but are
 done so to drive compute, network, and storage utility billings in a cloud
 model abnormally high.



-- 
Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.li...@gmail.com)



Re: OBESEUS - A new type of DDOS protector

2010-03-15 Thread Christopher Morrow
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 10:02 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian
ops.li...@gmail.com wrote:
 That's right M.Fortaine .. and your model does not, as yet, appear to
 address what you term as EDoS and what the general security community
 calls DDoS

eh.. I guess I'm splitting hairs. the goal of 100k bots sending 1
query per second to a service that you know can only sustain 50k
queries/second is.. not to economically Dos someone, it's to
obliterate their service infrastructure.

Sure, you could ALSO target something hosted (for instance) at
Amazon-AWS and increase costs by making lots and lots and lots of
queries, but that wasn't the point of what Deepak wrote, nor what i
corrected.

-chris

 On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 7:29 AM, Guillaume FORTAINE gforta...@live.com 
 wrote:
 From my point of view, it seems similar to the EDoS concept :

 http://www.rationalsurvivability.com/blog/?s=EDos

 EDoS attacks, however, are death by a thousand cuts. EDoS can also utilize
 distributed attack sources as well as single entities, but works by making
 legitimate web requests at volumes that may appear to be “normal” but are
 done so to drive compute, network, and storage utility billings in a cloud
 model abnormally high.



 --
 Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.li...@gmail.com)




Re: OBESEUS - A new type of DDOS protector

2010-03-15 Thread Suresh Ramasubramanian
I got your point.  What I was saying is that what he calls EDoS (and
I'm sure he'll say obliterating infrastructure is the ultimate form of
an economic dos) is just what goes on ...

You may or may not be able to overload the AWS infrastructure by too
many queries but you sure as hell will blow the application out if
that ddos isnt filtered .. edos again.

On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 7:35 AM, Christopher Morrow
morrowc.li...@gmail.com wrote:


 eh.. I guess I'm splitting hairs. the goal of 100k bots sending 1
 query per second to a service that you know can only sustain 50k
 queries/second is.. not to economically Dos someone, it's to
 obliterate their service infrastructure.

 Sure, you could ALSO target something hosted (for instance) at
 Amazon-AWS and increase costs by making lots and lots and lots of
 queries, but that wasn't the point of what Deepak wrote, nor what i
 corrected.



-- 
Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.li...@gmail.com)



Re: OBESEUS - A new type of DDOS protector

2010-03-15 Thread Guillaume FORTAINE

Misters,

Thank you for your reply.

1) First of all, I am absolutely not related to the Obeseus project. 
From my point of view,  the interesting things were that :


a) This project was unknown.

http://www.google.com/search?q=obeseus+ddosbtnG=Searchhl=enesrch=FT1sa=2


b) This project comes from an ISP.

http://www.loud-fat-bloke.co.uk/links.html


c) Its code is Open Source.

http://www.loud-fat-bloke.co.uk/tools/obeseusvB.tar.gz


My conclusion is that I give far more credit to Obeseus than to Arbor 
Networks. By the way, I am surprised that this post didn't generate more 
interest given the uninteresting babble that I have been forced to read 
in the past on the NANOG mailing-list from the so-called experts.



2) EDoS is a DDoS 2.0

DDoS is about malicious traffic.

EDoS is malicious traffic engineered to look like legitimate one.

However, the goal is the same : to obliterate the service 
infrastructure, to quote Mister Morrow.




3) I do my homeworks something that doesn't seem to be the case for a 
lot of people on this mailing-list.


a) I would want to highlight the post of Tom Sands, Chief Network 
Engineer, Rackspace Hosting entitled DDoS mitigation recommendations [1].


-It seems evidence that he tried the Arbor solution so the three 
Arbor++ mails don't make sense.


-About the fourth one :

Sorry but RTFM

http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2010-January/thread.html#16675

Best regards

Hey kid, Tom Sands subscribed nearly a decade ago on the NANOG 
mailing-list. When you went out of school, he was already dealing with 
DoS concerns :


http://www.mcabee.org/lists/nanog/Jan-02/msg00177.html



b) I am really asking myself how much credit I could give to a spam 
expert, Suresh Ramasubramanian, about a DDoS related post [2].



c) Mister Morrow, even if you are a Network Security engineer at Google 
[3] (morr...@google.com) :


-You didn't provide any useful feedback on Obeseus.

-You totally missed the point on my other mails.

This is definitely disappointing.


Is this mailing-list a joke ?

Especially, where is Roland Dobbins ?


Best Regards,

Guillaume FORTAINE

[1] http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2010-January/016675.html
[2] http://www.hserus.net/
[3] http://www.linkedin.com/in/morrowc



On 03/16/2010 03:11 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:

I got your point.  What I was saying is that what he calls EDoS (and
I'm sure he'll say obliterating infrastructure is the ultimate form of
an economic dos) is just what goes on ...

You may or may not be able to overload the AWS infrastructure by too
many queries but you sure as hell will blow the application out if
that ddos isnt filtered .. edos again.

On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 7:35 AM, Christopher Morrow
morrowc.li...@gmail.com  wrote:
   


eh.. I guess I'm splitting hairs. the goal of 100k bots sending 1
query per second to a service that you know can only sustain 50k
queries/second is.. not to economically Dos someone, it's to
obliterate their service infrastructure.

Sure, you could ALSO target something hosted (for instance) at
Amazon-AWS and increase costs by making lots and lots and lots of
queries, but that wasn't the point of what Deepak wrote, nor what i
corrected.
 



   




Re: OBESEUS - A new type of DDOS protector

2010-03-15 Thread Nathan Ward
If only there were other security experts on this list with a proven ability to 
make this thread even more absurd.

On 16/03/2010, at 4:47 PM, Guillaume FORTAINE wrote:

 Misters,
 
 Thank you for your reply.
 
 1) First of all, I am absolutely not related to the Obeseus project. From my 
 point of view,  the interesting things were that :
 
 a) This project was unknown.
 
 http://www.google.com/search?q=obeseus+ddosbtnG=Searchhl=enesrch=FT1sa=2
 
 
 b) This project comes from an ISP.
 
 http://www.loud-fat-bloke.co.uk/links.html
 
 
 c) Its code is Open Source.
 
 http://www.loud-fat-bloke.co.uk/tools/obeseusvB.tar.gz
 
 
 My conclusion is that I give far more credit to Obeseus than to Arbor 
 Networks. By the way, I am surprised that this post didn't generate more 
 interest given the uninteresting babble that I have been forced to read in 
 the past on the NANOG mailing-list from the so-called experts.
 
 
 2) EDoS is a DDoS 2.0
 
 DDoS is about malicious traffic.
 
 EDoS is malicious traffic engineered to look like legitimate one.
 
 However, the goal is the same : to obliterate the service infrastructure, 
 to quote Mister Morrow.
 
 
 
 3) I do my homeworks something that doesn't seem to be the case for a lot of 
 people on this mailing-list.
 
 a) I would want to highlight the post of Tom Sands, Chief Network Engineer, 
 Rackspace Hosting entitled DDoS mitigation recommendations [1].
 
 -It seems evidence that he tried the Arbor solution so the three Arbor++ 
 mails don't make sense.
 
 -About the fourth one :
 
 Sorry but RTFM
 
 http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2010-January/thread.html#16675
 
 Best regards
 
 Hey kid, Tom Sands subscribed nearly a decade ago on the NANOG mailing-list. 
 When you went out of school, he was already dealing with DoS concerns :
 
 http://www.mcabee.org/lists/nanog/Jan-02/msg00177.html
 
 
 
 b) I am really asking myself how much credit I could give to a spam expert, 
 Suresh Ramasubramanian, about a DDoS related post [2].
 
 
 c) Mister Morrow, even if you are a Network Security engineer at Google [3] 
 (morr...@google.com) :
 
 -You didn't provide any useful feedback on Obeseus.
 
 -You totally missed the point on my other mails.
 
 This is definitely disappointing.
 
 
 Is this mailing-list a joke ?
 
 Especially, where is Roland Dobbins ?
 
 
 Best Regards,
 
 Guillaume FORTAINE
 
 [1] http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2010-January/016675.html
 [2] http://www.hserus.net/
 [3] http://www.linkedin.com/in/morrowc
 
 
 
 On 03/16/2010 03:11 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
 I got your point.  What I was saying is that what he calls EDoS (and
 I'm sure he'll say obliterating infrastructure is the ultimate form of
 an economic dos) is just what goes on ...
 
 You may or may not be able to overload the AWS infrastructure by too
 many queries but you sure as hell will blow the application out if
 that ddos isnt filtered .. edos again.
 
 On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 7:35 AM, Christopher Morrow
 morrowc.li...@gmail.com  wrote:
   
 
 eh.. I guess I'm splitting hairs. the goal of 100k bots sending 1
 query per second to a service that you know can only sustain 50k
 queries/second is.. not to economically Dos someone, it's to
 obliterate their service infrastructure.
 
 Sure, you could ALSO target something hosted (for instance) at
 Amazon-AWS and increase costs by making lots and lots and lots of
 queries, but that wasn't the point of what Deepak wrote, nor what i
 corrected.
 
 
 
   
 
 
 !DSPAM:22,4b9effc21388248155!
 
 




Re: OBESEUS - A new type of DDOS protector

2010-03-15 Thread Dobbins, Roland

On Mar 16, 2010, at 10:47 AM, Guillaume FORTAINE wrote:

 Especially, where is Roland Dobbins ?

At your service.

;

---
Roland Dobbins rdobb...@arbor.net // http://www.arbornetworks.com

Injustice is relatively easy to bear; what stings is justice.

-- H.L. Mencken






Re: OBESEUS - A new type of DDOS protector

2010-03-15 Thread Guillaume FORTAINE

Dear Mister Dobbins,

Thank you for your reply.

What do you think about Obeseus ?

I look forward to your answer,

Best Regards,

Guillaume FORTAINE



On 03/16/2010 05:16 AM, Dobbins, Roland wrote:

On Mar 16, 2010, at 10:47 AM, Guillaume FORTAINE wrote:

   

Especially, where is Roland Dobbins ?
 

At your service.

;

---
Roland Dobbinsrdobb...@arbor.net  //http://www.arbornetworks.com

 Injustice is relatively easy to bear; what stings is justice.

 -- H.L. Mencken






   





Re: OBESEUS - A new type of DDOS protector

2010-03-14 Thread Guillaume FORTAINE

Misters,

No comments ?

http://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://www.loud-fat-bloke.co.uk/obeseus2.pdf

http://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://www.parliament.uk/documents/upload/F012Interoute121109.pdf

http://barometer.interoute.com/barom_main.php


I look forward to your answer,

Best Regards,

Guillaume FORTAINE


On 03/13/2010 12:05 AM, Guillaume FORTAINE wrote:

Misters,

Let me introduce myself : Guillaume FORTAINE, Engineer in Computer
Science. I am currently working on High-Speed Network Security
Solutions.

DDoS is considered as The Mother of All Cyber Threats [1] therefore 
I have intensively studied this topic.


By the way, I have read with interest the NANOG mails [2] [3] [4] and 
the Linkedin groups [5] [6] on this subject.


Being an FPGA engineer, I approached this concern from an algorithmic 
point of view and that's why I would greatly appreciate to have your 
comments on this project, if possible, please :


OBESEUS - A new type of DDOS protector [7]

http://www.loud-fat-bloke.co.uk/obeseus2.pdf


For a better overview of the background of the project, please see the 
following document :


INQUIRY INTO EU POLICY ON PROTECTING EUROPE FROM LARGE SCALE 
CYBER-ATTACKS


http://www.parliament.uk/documents/upload/F012Interoute121109.pdf

I look forward to your answer,

Best Regards,

[1] 
http://events.linkedin.com/Webcast-DDoS-Mother-All-Cyber-Threats/pub/171074 


[2] http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2009-November/014963.html
[3] http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2010-January/016675.html
[4] http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2010-January/017604.html
[5] http://www.linkedin.com/groups?home=gid=2040519
[6] http://www.linkedin.com/groups?home=gid=2632190
[7] http://www.loud-fat-bloke.co.uk/obeseus.html


Guillaume FORTAINE
Tel : +33(0)631092519