The DNS amplification vulnerability, which was exploited to the fullest in the attacks on Spamhaus, return incoming requests to a DNS server with as much as 100 times as much data. When the attackers have faked the source address for those incoming requests, the responses can overwhelm the victims’ servers — and possibly spill over and clog the Net. What is the aftermath of the massive Distributed Denial of Service attacks recently on the anti-spam Spamhaus organization? As the largest such attack in history, the digital assault on Spamhaus slowed network performance in some regions of Europe and elsewhere, raised alarms about whether the Net could reach a breaking point, and has become a historic event that could mark a turning point. According to reports in The New York Times and elsewhere, a key figure in the attacks appears to be Sven Olaf Kamphuis, who is associated with CyberBunker, the Dutch hosting facility where the attacks originated. After the Europe-based Spamhaus put CyberBunker on its spam blacklist, because of what Spamhaus said were substantial streams of spam e-mails coming from that hosting facility, the DDoS attacks began. Kamphuis maintains a Facebook page, in which he champions hosting services such as CyberBunker for providing open Net access, and he rails against Spamhaus for acting like an arbitrary authority. Like ‘The Mafia’ CyberBunker has said it will allow customers to host anything except “child porn and anything related to terrorism.” Spamhaus is backed by a variety of e-mail services, and experts have testified in court that many e-mail services would be rendered useless by the flood of spam if not for the organization’s efforts. But this massive wave of DDoS attacks — in which Web servers are overwhelmed by a flood of bogus traffic — broke some boundaries, according to Garth Bruen, an adviser to the consumer-oriented Digital Citizens Alliance. Bruen told USA Today that the attacks from CyberBunker were like “the kind of things we saw the mafia do to take control of neighborhoods 50 years ago.” He added that what was particularly “troubling” is that CyberBunker is a commercial ISP “working with shadowy figures in undisclosed locations.” Open DNS Resolvers The attacks have highlighted some ongoing weaknesses in the Internet’s infrastructure . Key among these are open Domain Name System resolvers, which allow attackers to engage in so-called DNS amplification. One of the weaknesses of open resolvers is that they do not authenticate a sender’s address before replying. This vulnerability, which was exploited to the fullest in the attacks on Spamhaus, return incoming requests to a DNS server with as much as 100 times as much data . When the attackers have faked the source address for those incoming requests, the responses can overwhelm the victims’ servers — and possibly spill over and clog other parts of the Net. DNS servers are critical to the Internet as they translate alphanumeric-based Web addresses like “www.google.com” into the numeric IP addresses that computers can understand. The Spamhaus attacks reportedly utilized more than 30,000 unique DNS resolvers. There are efforts, such as the Open DNS Resolver Project, to convince DNS administrators to implement source address validation, among other actions, to eliminate open DNS resolvers as a Net-wide weakness. There are also calls for IT departments and individual PC owners to make a greater effort to scan their computers for signs of malware that could be hijacking their machines into becoming part of a botnet. Additionally, the Electronic Frontier Foundation and others have offered tips to small businesses on how to cope with DDoS attacks, if their sites become one of the direct or indirect targets. For DDoS protection click here . http://www.cio-today.com/story.xhtml?story_id=0020002HERPO&page=2
How you may have inadvertently participated in recent DDoS attacks
The botnets driving the recent distributed denial of service attacks are powered by millions of infected computers. Their coordinated flood of requests overwhelms the Internet’s DNS servers, slowing them down and even knocking the servers offline. The long-term solution for site operators and visitors alike may rely on reluctant ISPs working together. The risk that an Internet-connected computer is infected with malware will never be reducible to zero. It’s just the nature of software that errors happen. Where there are software-design errors, there are people who will exploit those errors to their advantage. The best PC users can hope for is to minimize the chances of an infection and to mitigate the damage a piece of malware can inflict — whether it intends to steal a user’s sensitive data or to commandeer the machine as part of a cyber attack on servers thousands of miles away. Last week, Internet users were caught in the crossfire of an online battle. On one side were spammers and other nefarious types who send malware via e-mail. On the other was the spam-fighting organization Spamhaus. As Don Reisinger reported last Wednesday, several European sites experienced significant slow-downs as a result of the attack, which may have also involved criminal gangs in Russia and Eastern Europe. In a post last Friday, Declan McCullagh explained that the technology to defeat such attacks has been known for more than a decade, although implementing the technology Internet-wide is difficult and, practically speaking, may be impossible. So where does that leave your average, everyday Internet user? Our ability to prevent our machines from being hijacked by malware will always be limited by our innate susceptibility. We’re simply too likely to be tricked into opening a file or Web page we shouldn’t. PC infection rates hold steady despite the prevalence of free antivirus software. Even the best security programs fail to spot some malware, as test results by A-V Comparatives indicate (PDF). For example, in tests conducted in August 2011, Microsoft Security Essentials was rated as Advanced (the second-highest scoring level) with a detection rate of 92.1 percent and “very few” false positives. Since we’ll never eliminate PC infections, the best defense against botnets is not at the source but rather at the point of entry to the ISP’s network. In July of last year the Internet Engineering Task Force released a draft of the Recommendations for the Remediation of Bots in ISP Networks that points out the challenges presented by bot detection and removal. Unfortunately, detecting and removing botnets isn’t much easier for ISPs. When ISPs scan their customers’ computers, the PC may perceive the scan as an attack and generate a security alert. Many people are concerned about the privacy implications of ISPs scanning the content of their customers’ machines. Then there’s the basic reluctance of ISPs to share data and work together in general. Much of the IETF’s suggested remediation comes down to educating users about the need to scan their PCs for infections and remove those they discover. While most virus infections make their presence known by slowing down the system and otherwise causing problems, the stealth nature of many bots means users may not be aware of them at all. If the bot is designed not to steal the user’s data but only to participate in a DDoS attack, users may feel no need to detect and delete the bot. One of the IETF report’s suggestions is that ISPs share “selective” data with third parties, including competitors, to facilitate traffic analysis. In March of last year the Communications Security, Reliability and Interoperability Council released its voluntary Anti-Bot Code of Conduct for ISPs (PDF). In addition to being voluntary, three of the four recommendations in the “ABCs for ISPs” rely on end users: Educate end-users of the threat posed by bots and of actions end-users can take to help prevent bot infections; Detect bot activities or obtain information, including from credible third parties, on bot infections among their end-user base; Notify end-users of suspected bot infections or help enable end-users to determine if they are potentially infected by bots; and Provide information and resources, directly or by reference to other sources, to end-users to assist them in remediating bot infections. A paper titled “Modeling Internet-Scale Policies for Cleaning up Malware” (PDF) written by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory’s Stephen Hofmeyr and others suggests that having large ISPs working together to analyze traffic at points of entry to their network is more effective than bot detection on end-user machines. But that doesn’t get us off the hook entirely. If every Windows PC were scanned for malware once a month, there would be far fewer bots available for the next DDoS attack. Since CNET readers tend to be more tech-savvy than average, I suggest a computer-adoption program: everyone scan two or three PCs they suspect aren’t regularly maintained by their owners (such as relatives) on a pro bono basis. Here are three steps you can take to minimize the possibility that a Windows PC will be drafted into a botnet army. Don’t use a Windows administrator account The vast majority of malware targets Windows systems. In large part it’s simply due to numbers: there are so many more installations of Windows than any other operating system that leveraging Windows maximizes a piece of malware’s effectiveness. Many people have no choice but to use Windows, most likely because their employer requires it. For many others, using an OS other than Windows is impractical. But very few people need to use a Windows administrator account on a daily basis. In the past two years I’ve used only a standard Windows account on my everyday PC, with one or two exceptions. In fact, I often forget the account lacks administrator privileges until a software installation or update requires that I enter an administrator password. Using a standard account doesn’t make your PC malware-proof, but doing so certainly adds a level of protection. Set your software to update automatically Not many years ago, experts advised PC users to wait a day or two before applying patches for Windows, media players, and other applications to ensure the patches didn’t cause more problems than they prevented. Now the risk posed by unpatched software is far greater than any potential glitches resulting from the update. In May 2011 I compared three free scanners that spot outdated, insecure software. My favorite of the three at the time was CNET’s own TechTracker for its simplicity, but now I rely on Secunia’s Personal Software Inspector, which tracks your past updates and provides an overall System Score. The default setting in Windows Update is to download and install updates automatically. Also selected by default are the options to receive recommended updates as well as those labeled important, and to update other Microsoft products automatically. Use a second anti-malware program to scan the system Since no security program detects every potential threat, it makes sense to have a second malware scanner installed for the occasional manual system scan. My two favorite manual virus-scanning programs are Malwarebytes Anti-Malware and Microsoft’s Malicious Software Removal Tool, both of which are free. I wasn’t particularly surprised when Malwarebytes found three instances of the PUP.FaceThemes virus in Registry keys of my everyday Windows 7 PC (shown below), but I didn’t expect the program to detect four different viruses in old Windows system folders on a test system with a default configuration of Windows 7 Pro (as shown on the screen at the top of this post). An unexpected benefit of the malware removal was a reduction in boot time for the Windows 7 machine from more than two minutes to just over one minute. Help for site operators who come under attack DDoS attacks are motivated primarily by financial gain, such as the incident last December that emptied a Bank of the West online account of $900,000, as Brian Krebs reported. The attacks may also be an attempt to exact revenge, which many analysts believe was implicated in last week’s DDoS onslaught against Spamhaus. The government of Iran was blamed for a recent series of DDoS attacks against U.S. banks, as the New York Times reported last January. Increasingly, botnets are being directed by political activists against their opposition, such as the wave of hacktivist attacks against banks reported by Tracy Kitten on the BankInfoSecurity.com site. While large sites such as Google and Microsoft have the resources to absorb DDoS attacks without a hiccup, independent site operators are much more vulnerable. The Electronic Frontier Foundation offers a guide for small site owners to help them cope with DDoS attacks and other threats. The Keep Your Site Alive program covers aspects to consider when choosing a Web host, backup alternatives, and site mirroring. The increasing impact of DDoS attacks is one of the topics of the 2013 Global Threat Intelligence Report released by security firm Solutionary. Downloading the report requires registration, but if you’re in a hurry, Bill Brenner offers a synopsis of the report on CSO’s Salted Hash blog. As Brenner reports, two trends identified by Solutionary are that malware is increasingly adept at avoiding detection, and Java is the favorite target of malware exploit kits, supplanting Adobe PDFs at the top of the list. The DNS server ‘vulnerability’ behind the DDoS attacks The innate openness of the Internet makes DDoS attacks possible. DNS software vendor JH Software explains how DNS’s recursion setting allows a flood of botnet requests to swamp a DNS server. CloudShield Technologies’ Patrick Lynch looks at the “open resolvers” problem from an enterprise and ISP perspective. Paul Vixie looks at the dangers of blocking DNS on the Internet Systems Consortium site. Vixie contrasts blocking with the Secure DNS proposal for proving a site’s authenticity or inauthenticity. Finally, if you’ve got two-and-a-half hours to kill, watch the interesting panel discussion held in New York City last December entitled Mitigating DDoS Attacks: Best Practices for an Evolving Threat Landscape. The panel was moderated by Public Interest Registry CEO Brian Cute and included executives from Verisign, Google, and Symantec. I was struck by one recurring theme among the panel participants: we need to educate end users, but it’s really not their fault, and also not entirely their problem. To me, it sounded more than a little bit like ISPs passing the buck. For DDoS protection click here . Source: http://howto.cnet.com/8301-11310_39-57577349-285/how-you-may-have-inadvertently-participated-in-recent-ddos-attacks/
Link:
How you may have inadvertently participated in recent DDoS attacks
Hackers attacking US banks are well-funded, expert says
The Cyber fighters of Izz Ad-Din Al Qassam hacker group – also known as Qassam Cyber Fighters – are at it again. For the third time in the last half year or so, they have mounted DDoS attacks agai…
See the article here:
Hackers attacking US banks are well-funded, expert says
DoS attacks expose enterprise infrastructure vulnerabilities
Lurking in the shadows for nearly a decade, DoS and DDoS attacks are making a resurgence. Several high-profile assaults on the world's leading financial firms and other industries have recently been e…
Read More:
DoS attacks expose enterprise infrastructure vulnerabilities
Airlock launches secure cloud hosting
Airlock launched its Secure Cloud Platform which offers enterprise-level security features like intrusion detection, hardware and web application firewalls, DDoS mitigation and malware scanning. Airlo…
Read More:
Airlock launches secure cloud hosting
Call centers under attack in targeted cyber-blackmail scheme
Crooks blasting public-safety phone lines with calls The US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has cautioned public-safety call centers against the rise of so-called telephony denial of service (TDoS) attacks, which it says have the potential to cripple local telephone exchanges.…
Read the article:
Call centers under attack in targeted cyber-blackmail scheme
iMessage DDoS attacks foreshadow a bigger threat
Over the last couple of days, a group of iOS developers has been targeted with a series of rapid-fire texts sent over Apple’s iMessage system. The messages, likely transmitted via the OS X Messages app using a simple AppleScript, rapidly fill up the Messages app on iOS or the Mac with text, forcing a user to constantly clear both notifications and messages. In some instances, the messages can be so large that they completely lock up the Messages app on iOS, constituting a ‘denial of service’ (DoS) attack of sorts, even though in this case they appear to be a prank. Obviously, if the messages are repeated an annoyingly large volume but don’t actually crash the app, they’re still limiting the use you’ll get out of the service. But if a string that’s complex enough to crash the app is sent through, that’s a more serious issue. The attacks hit at least a half-dozen iOS developer and hacker community members that we know of now, and appear to have originated with a Twitter account involved in selling UDIDs, provisioning profiles and more that facilitate in the installation of pirated App Store apps which are re-signed and distributed. The information about the source of the attacks was shared by one of the victims, iOS jailbreak tool and app developer iH8sn0w. “On Wednesday night my private iMessage handle got flooded with “Hi” and “We are anonymous” bulls**t,” iH8sn0w tells us. He immediately disabled that iMessage email and began tracking the sending email domain’s current ownership. iH8sn0w shared a proof-of-concept AppleScript with us that demonstrates just how easy it is to set up a recurring message that could saturate a person’s iMessage queue with items that would need to be cleared or read before any actions could be taken. Another iOS developer targeted, Grant Paul, shared some additional details about the attacks. “What’s happening is a simple flood: Apple doesn’t seem to limit how fast messages can be sent, so the attacker is able to send thousands of messages very quickly,” Paul says. The second part of that, he explains, is that if a user sends a ‘complex’ text message using unicode characters that force a browser to render ‘Zalgo’ text, or simply uses a message that is enormous in size, them the Messages app will eventually crash as it fails to display it properly. This will effectively ‘break’ the Messages app on iOS by forcing it to close and stop it from re-opening because it can’t render that text.” The ‘send a big message to crash the app’ method has been known for a while, as we were able to locate a month-old public posting that detailed an accidental triggering of this. The solutions involve playing around with sending a regular message, then locking the phone and activating the message notification until you’re able to time it right to delete the message thread that’s causing the problem. This is the way that Paul was able to finally delete the complex text that was causing him problems. Several of the developers we spoke to noted that multiple ‘throwaway’ emails were being used to send the spam, so while a simple ‘block’ option might work for a casual spammer, they wouldn’t work for a determined harasser. iH8sn0w notes that there is a possibility that Apple will notice these bursts of messages and block the repetitive spamming. This appears to be the only real solution as Apple does not currently allow you to block a specific iMessage sender. Once your iMessage ID is out there, you’re unable to stop people from using it. And since the latest version of iOS unifies your phone number and emails, there’s a strong possibility that if a person can ferret out your email, they can spam you with this annoying or disruptive technique. The only recourse right now is to disable that iMessage handle entirely. And if they get your phone number, it’s likely you’ll have to turn off iMessage entirely, because you can’t just change your phone number at the drop of a hat. Thankfully, this doesn’t seem to be a widespread practice, but it’s not that hard to figure out, and the only real solution will be the introduction of a block setting for Messages and better spam detection by Apple. We have informed Apple about the technique used in these cases but it has not responded with more information. We will update the article if it does so. Source: http://thenextweb.com/apple/2013/03/29/imessage-denial-of-service-prank-spams-users-rapidly-with-messages-crashes-ios-messages-app/
Continued here:
iMessage DDoS attacks foreshadow a bigger threat
Week in review: Massive DDoS attack targets Spamhaus, Amazon S3 buckets leaking, and cyber espionage deterrence
Here's an overview of some of last week's most interesting news, podcasts, videos and articles: What do users look for in a security solution? Users are aware of the dangers in the Internet and …
DDoS Attack Strikes American Express site
American Express confirms it was hit by a distributed-denial-of-service attack that disrupted online-account access for about two hours during the late afternoon on March 28. AmEx spokeswoman Amelia Woltering says the card brand is still investigating the attack. She did not confirm whether the strike was linked to Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Cyber Fighters, the hacktivist group that’s been targeting U.S. banking institutions since mid-September. But that group claims credit for this attack, as well as an unconfirmed attack against Bank of America, according to updates posted to a blog and on Twitter March 28. “The Bank of America and American Express have gotten out of reach today due to Izz ad-Din al-Qassam group’s attacks,” the blog posting says. “The Qassam group’s attacks to these banks have caused the banks to be unable to offer service to their customers and this [will] lead to their protests.” The attack began about 3 p.m. ET on March 28, Woltering says, and caused intermittent disruptions. She says there is no evidence to suggest that customer data or account information was exposed or compromised during the attack. “Our site experienced a distributed-denial-of-service (DDoS) attack for about two hours on Thursday afternoon,” AmEx says in a statement. “We experienced intermittent slowing on our website that would have disrupted customers’ ability to access their account information. We had a plan in place to defend against a potential attack and have taken steps to minimize ongoing customer impact.” Big Week for DDoS The attack comes just days after news of the Spamhaus DDoS attack , which caused a ripple effect that adversely affected online activity. That attack saw unprecedented traffic of 300 gigabytes per second, three to five times greater than the biggest attacks against U.S. banks, says Dan Holden, an online security expert for DDoS-mitigation provider Arbor Networks. Still, the European attack – a strike against The Spamhaus Project , a Geneva-based not-for-profit organization dedicated to fighting Internet spam operations – is not believed to be related to the attacks on U.S. banks. “The DNS reflection attacks [like the one used against Spamhaus] can consume a great deal of bandwidth, but they are different than what we’ve seen against the banks,” Holden says. “These guys would not be able to do the sophisticated, targeted attacks that are being launched against U.S. banks.” The attacks against U.S. banks, experts say, are much more complex and sophisticated, and their intensity has escalated in the last week. Earlier this week, TD Bank and Keybank confirmed their online banking sites had been hit by DDoS attacks, and industry experts say hacktivists’ attacks waged during this so-called third campaign are becoming increasingly sophisticated. Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Cyber Fighters, the hacktivist group taking credit for attacks against U.S. banking institutions, in an update posted to the online forum Pastebin on March 26, says it most recently targeted BB&T, PNC Financial Services Group, JPMorgan Chase & Co., Citibank, U.S. Bancorp, SunTrust Banks, Fifth Third Bancorp, Wells Fargo & Co., and others. Since Feb. 25, when the group launched its third phase of DDoS attacks , weekly updates have appeared on Pastebin on Mondays and Tuesdays about previous-week targets. The hacktivist group says its attacks are in protest of a YouTube movie trailer deemed offensive to Muslims. For DDoS protection click here . Source: http://www.bankinfosecurity.com/ddos-strikes-american-express-a-5645
Read this article:
DDoS Attack Strikes American Express site
Wisconsin man cuffed over Koch-blocking DDoS attack
Lawmen respond to Anonymous attack on right-wing moneymen A 37-year-old Wisconsin man has been charged over his alleged involvement in denial-of-service attacks against Koch Industries.…
View article:
Wisconsin man cuffed over Koch-blocking DDoS attack
