In Depth

Searching for Internet Perpetrators

Trying to trace Internet attacks backward to find the perp is an interesting exercisebut potentially fruitless.

By Simson Garfinkel

July 01, 2006CSO

Indeed, a sophisticated attacker can fake practically any kind of information thats used for traceback.

Somebody is targeting one of your employees. First they sent a chatty message to Jack in accounting, posing as a coworker, asking Jack to e-mail confidential documents to a Hotmail account. Jack didn’t bite. Next they tried sending a message with a “zero-day” exploit for Microsoft Outlook. That attack failed because you run Notes in the office and Joe has a Macintosh at home. But the attacker isn’t giving up, and you’d like to know who it is. “Traceback” is your goal: That’s the term for using various tools and techniques to follow Internet connections or content back to their point of origin.

A naive analysis of the Internet protocol might lead you to believe that traceback should be easy. After all, every packet that’s sent over the Internet contains the IP address of both its destination and its source. So when packets containing nasty attacks or hostile content show up at Jack’s computer, you should be able to determine the guilty party just by capturing a few packets and then looking at the source address in their packet headers.

Alas, traceback runs into an increasing number of snags, depending on how thoroughly the attacker has covered his tracks.

Return to Sender

First, you can’t trust the source address in the packet header. Most operating systems allow programs to fill in any address that they want. Denial-of-service (DoS) attacks are commonly based on the “ping” capability of the Internet common messaging protocol (ICMP) or on the user datagram protocol (UDP), because the Windows and Unix operating systems make it possible for any program to forge the return address. And since ICMP is frequently used for debugging network problems and UDP is used for streaming media like music and video, most organizations don’t want to block these packets.

Forgery is less of an issue with attacks that use the transmission control protocol (TCP). TCP is a bidirectional protocol that’s used for transmitting Internet traffic like webpages and e-mail. Because the protocol requires that both sides be able to communicate, an attacker who forges his source address with TCP usually won’t be very successful, because he won’t know what to send back to the victim computer to allow the connection to progress. But as it turns out, even though it’s very difficult for an attacker to forge an IP address with TCP, it’s still possible for him to hide his location rather effectively.

RESOURCE CENTER
Loading...
VIRTUAL CONFERENCE
Data Center Directions Virtual Conference

Data Center VCAttend this free, 100% online event exploring tools and techniques for making your data center deliver for today and tomorrow.

» Learn more and register here

WEBCAST
The Surest Path to Effective and Efficient Compliance

VeriSignIn this webcast, we explore why and how — with best practices, practical tips and solutions that work — to ease your compliance challenge.

» View the webcast

Featured Sponsors
Sponsored Links

Think your data is safe? Think again. It's time to Outthink the Threat. Get eBook now

Ponemon Study: How Much Does a Data Breach "Cost"?

Data Protection: Challenges for the Traveling User

Envision Identity-Based Access Control for the Datacenter

IT Service Management: Metrics That Matter

Configuration Audit and Control for Virtualized Environments

The PCI Data Security Standard

Configuration Audit and Control for Virtualized Environments

E-LOAN Maintains Reputation as a Privacy Leader with Symantec

Data Loss Prevention: Keeping Sensitive Data Out of the Wrong Hands

Prudential Financial Protects its Brand with Symantec

Envision Identity-Based Access Control for the Datacenter

Using Likewise to Comply with PCI Data Security Standard

Solving Online Credit Fraud Using Device Reputation

Take our CSO role survey and receive a copy of the results

IDC Defines an Identity and Access Management Submarket

IDC Defines an Identity and Access Management Submarket for Managing Privileged User Accounts and Meeting GRC Requirements

Everything Today's CISO Needs to Know About Using SSO to Succeed in the Web 2.0 Era

Learn how the new Quad-Core AMD Opteron™ processor improves performance

Revolutionizing Endpoint Security with a Single Agent

Prepare for (ISC)2® Certification With Villanova - Online

Key strategies for C-level executives and security staff

Configuration Assessment: Choosing the Right Solution

ITCi White Paper: Challenges and Opportunities of PCI

Effective Security with a Continuous Approach to ISO 27001 Compliance

Rolling the dice with your security? Take the Self-Assessment Test now

7 Requirements of Data Loss Prevention

Information Security: Data Drains and How to Prevent Loss

How Are Open Source Development Communities Embracing Security Best Practices?

Digital Identity Protection and Data Security Get Personal

The Case for Business Software Assurance ~ Securing Your Applications

Forrester Total Economic Impact (TEI) report: Save Millions in Fraud Losses.

Diebold: Frost & Sullivan Global Physical Security Systems Integrator of the Year

Welcome to the age of Service-Oriented Security (SOS)

Enabling Compliance with Converged Mainframe Security and Storage