Slashdot Mirror


How Do You Handle Portscanning Attacks?

Kainaw asks: "I tried to submit this earlier, but I couldn't because I had no bandwidth available. The reason is simple: I use Comcast for cable Internet. My modem/router is portscanned constantly. Nothing makes it past the router, so everyone tells me that it isn't an issue. Well, it is when I can't access any webpages, get email, or even submit a simple article to Ask Slashdot because my entire bandwidth is eaten up by script kiddies with a new portscanner toy. This is a two-part question: First, can anything be done with a simple at-home modem/Linksys router/two computer setup to stop a portscanning attack? Second, is it possible for the Linksys router to become a 'bot' and actually be the originator of much of the traffic?"

4 of 140 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Sounds more like a DoS to me by dougmc · · Score: 5, Informative
    Mere portscanning doesn't intentionally clog all bandwidth.
    Mod that statement up!

    In my expereience, when somebody's saying that `X is using up all my bandwidth', where `X' is things like virii, `hackers', ARP requests or something else, what that really means is that somebody doesn't really understand what's going on.

    Most cable modems have a lot of downstream bandwith and not so much upstream bandwidth -- but even the upstream bandwidth is far far more than is used by a standard port scan where somebody hits all your ports to see if they're open.

    And even that's unusual -- usually people seem to scan entire networks to see if one port is open, so a single scanner would only send a few packets at your box. It would take several thousand people hitting your box _at once_ like this to make things as bad as you make it sound.

    Your box may actually be under attack (a DoS attack.) I get a lot of trouble like this when people want the nick I use on IRC -- they packet my box incessantly. I've got 5 Mb/s downstream on my cable modem, so as long as my packet filtering isn't responding to each packet, it takes a pretty signifigant attack to kick me off of IRC. But if my system does respond to every packet with packets of approximately the same size, an attack of about 0.3 Mb/s is enough to bring everything down to a crawl. It's all a matter of configuring my filters properly ...

    Ultimately, what you should do is log all the packets being sent at your IP address with a tool like tcpdump, then send those logs to the abuse department of the ISP where they're coming from. If it's a DDoS attack, the odds are that the IPs are spoofed, but if it's really a portscan it's probably not (becuase they need to see the returning packets to see which ports are open.)

    You could also contact Comcat and see if they could filter the traffic out, though I'd reserve that option for an attack that lasts days and doesn't give up, because if they're anything like RR, getting to somebody who can actually do that will be very difficult.

    Another way of dealing with an attack is to turn off your cable modem long enough for your DHCP lease to expire, and then come back and get a new IP address, one that's hopefully not being attacked.

  2. Unlikely by thalakan · · Score: 3, Informative
    It is very unlikely that scans are eating up all of your incoming bandwidth. I just checked, since I was curious:
    # tethereal -w scan.cap host <myserver> &
    # nmap -A -T5 -o scan.cap <myserver>
    # killall tethereal
    # tethereal -z io,stat,5 -r scan.cap > scan.sum
    # cat scan.sum

    IO Statistics
    Interval: 5.000 secs
    Column #0:
    | Column #0
    Time |frames| bytes
    000.000-005.000 1925 107376 <-- peak bandwidth
    005.000-010.000 315 17952
    010.000-015.000 492 28032
    015.000-020.000 669 38118
    020.000-025.000 655 37290
    025.000-030.000 186 12153
    030.000-035.000 72 9665
    035.000-040.000 61 4648

    ...
    # bc
    107376 * 8 <- convert to bits per second
    last/5 <- account for 5 second sampling
    171801
    4000000/last <- how many fit into 4 Mbps?
    23

    So the peak scan bandwidth of a really noisy nmap scan is about 100 kilobits per second, and you would have to have 23 simultaneous scans being performed in the absolute worse case scenario to max out your link. If your router's external interface was actually replying to these scans, you would notice problems at somewhere less than this, say, 20 simultaneous scans. The actual number of scans you could endure before noticing it is much, much higher than this, because I used -T5 to make nmap really noisy (not typical for k1ddi3s scanning), and I took the peak bandwidth instead of the average bandwidth for my calculations.

    But I'm a Comcast customer and I don't see anywhere near that level of scanning. I see a few port scans a day, plus the usual worm remnants. Sometimes someone will get a bug up their ass and scan me repeatedly, but that's still just a few scans in a row. This is much, much lower than the 4 Mbit capacity of the throttled rx queue on my cable modem.

    The other thing that makes scans an unlikely root cause of your connectivity problem is that Comcast's security department would certainly go after anyone who was scanning one of their customers that hard, and possibly install filters to keep from having to pay their transit suppliers for all that bandwidth.

    The most likely explanation is that the problem is a simple misconfiguration, such as a misconfigured DNS setting or a P2P app running on your machine. The P2P apps in particular will cause intermittent problems loading web pages, which sounds like what you're experiencing.

    --
    -- thalakan
  3. Re:Err.... by mabu · · Score: 3, Informative
    If I recall my reading of the so-called CanSpam act, only ISPs can bring suits against spammers.

    You're wrong. And this isn't about spam. It's about computer tampering, which has been a crime since before the Internet. People who break into other peoples' computers and compromise them are breaking laws. (Port scanning may or may not be criminal, but it's the precursor to criminal activity) I'm just pointing out that the most significant group doing this are obviously the spammers. Anyone who is paying attention can see that, and they are clearly breaking the law. If you break in and take over someone else's computer, that's a felony.

    Unfortunately, we probably won't see law enforcement do anything about it until a spammer accidently breaks into the computer that contains the formula for McDonald's special sauce.

    Every state has laws like this:
    Breaking into someone's computer may seem like fun, but the consequences are not: Under the Arizona Computer Crime Act of 2000, computer tampering is a felony. Offenders can face up to 12½ years in prison and fines of up to $150,000.


    Here's a list of computer crime laws by state

    Here's info on Federal computer crime laws

    Also see:

  4. Re:Sounds more like a DoS to me by Medievalist · · Score: 3, Informative
    Mere portscanning doesn't intentionally clog all bandwidth.
    True. Portscanning per se is harmless (some things that look like portscanning on cursory inspection are not).
    IANA network security expert, but I'd say put a more capable firewall behind the router (read: a Linux or BSD box) and make it the DMZ.
    No, bad advice; if a person would consider a port scan harmful (s)he is not qualified to run a secured general-purpose system (not even OpenBSD) as a firewall. Better to use a cable modem with an integrated firewall (making sure to keep it patched and not use default passwords) or a "dumb" cable modem with a dedicated firewall between it and the hub or switch (same caveats apply).
    At least you don't have some punk trying to find a weak username/password combo through SSH. (Silly script kiddie, you can't login to root through SSH on my box.)
    If he has port 22 live, and he's on broadband, then he certainly is experiencing the attack you are referring to. Everybody is.