Slashdot Mirror
Black Ops of TCP/IP: Paketto Keiretsu 1.0 Release
Effugas writes "After pushing OpenSSH
to perform feats of secure tunneling far beyond what I ever expected it could
do, it became clear that some genuinely useful modes of network operation were
simply inaccessable without either replacing or manipulating core network protocols.
Since the basic infrastructure of the Internet isn't likely to change any time
soon, that left...creative manipulation and reconstruction of the Lingua Reseaux:
TCP/IP. Taking advantage of expectations,
pitting layers against eachother, finding new uses for old options and data fields -- instead of simply
unleashing the latest incarnation of some "Ping of Death", could such work
unveil hidden functionality within existing networks? As I discussed at
Black Hat 2002 and the inimitable
Defcon X, the answer is yes. And now,
proof of this is ready. BSD Licensed (in deference to the very source of TCP/IP),
The Paketto Keiretsu, Version 1.0,
is a collection of five interwoven
"proof of concepts" that explore, extract, and expose previously
untapped capacities embedded deep within networks and their stacks, at Layers 2 through 4.
The five --
scanrand,
minewt,
lc
(
linkcat
),
paratrace,
and the OpenQVIS
cross-disciplinary-a-go-go phentropy --
demonstrate Stateless TCP Scanning, Inverse SYN Cookies, Guerrila Multicast, Parasitic Tracerouting, Ethernet Trailer
Cryptography, and quite a bit more. (For details, stop by DoxPara Research
or check out the latest slides. The academic paper is coming "soon".)
In terms of actual usefulness, scanrand is no
nmap, but it's still interesting: During an authorized test inside a multinational corporation's class B,
scanrand detected 8300 web servers across 65,536 addresses. Time elapsed: approximately 4 seconds."
I roomed with the guy and can attest to the year or so he spent cobbling this stuff together. Go Dan!!
-david
David E. Weekly
Code / Think / Teach / Learn
h4x0r for
"During an authorized test inside a multinational corporation's class B, scanrand detected 8300 web servers across 65,536 addresses. Time elapsed: approximately 4 seconds."
That is crazy! Does anyone have information, for comparison, on what a scan like that would take using other tools?
What's up with the pseudo-Japanese name?
---
Open Source Shirts
"Black Ops of TCP/IP", Indeed.
"The lesson to be learned is not to take the comments on slashdot too literally." --Vinnie Falco, BearShare
I happen to be Japanese, so I just thought it was rather...odd. Maybe it's because I've never seen the word "keiretsu" used in a context other than the one you described.
---
Open Source Shirts
Cut and Paste. Linkcat lets you do that with packets :-)
--Dan
I don't quite follow what scanrand does that a normal SYN-based scanner does not except that it is broken into two parts so that potentially a different system could be used to receive the packets sent by the first system. Why would this be useful?
I guess he refers to embedding a code in each packet sent out to validate that only "real" packets are accepted by the receiver as "Inverse SYN Cookie". I don't understand why this is important, tho.
Because it allows much faster scanning than can be done with a traditional scanner. You need to understand SYN cookies:
http://cr.yp.to/syncookies.html
Instead of sending a SYN and waiting for the response, as a normal scanner has to do, scanrand sends thousands of SYN packets at once, without tracking them. It determines the port based on the ``inverse SYN cookie'' that the response contains.
They're just a little bit more than slightly different. Try them out, you might be surprised.
Oh, and that's Dan's normal speaking and writing style. I've heard him speak several times, and he wrote a couple of chapters for me for Hack Proofing Your Network, 2nd Edition. Really good stuff. Dan's writing has a lot of really good stuff in it, but you have to be paying attention.
A friend of mine wrote an LSR scanner and an LSR tunnel tool which you probably won't understand either. Go get them, play with them, and then think about what it means. Here's his short paper on LSR.
;-)
While I'm here, let me just bitch for a second. I "love" slashdot. I can sort of understand the people who complain when a non-geeky story gets posted, but I just can't understand someone who complains when a technical story gets posted. "News for Nerds" dude! You can't get a whole lot nerdier than this. Stop complaining and go read some FMs. If you can't handle it, go read Wired or something instead. I'm happy to have a story posted here that my 7 year old doesn't understand yet...it gives us something new to talk about.
IMHO,
Michael
How about fun with lots of errors. If you can manipulate ip enough to do this, what's to say that you can't redirect that in a giant smurfing of the internet. 65k packets in 4 seconds could easily clog a semi-full link, if it was sustained.
/. effect!
It's a layer 2
You think that I'm crazy, you should see this guy!
His "router" seems pointless, unless it's attached to someone else's LAN. Yes, you can write a single-port NAT router that allows multiple machines on the same LAN to have the same IP address. But then they can't talk to each other. (They can talk to the "router" and perhaps, via it, the outside world.) Apparently he did this to get around some restriction on his dorm LAN in college.