Slashdot Mirror


Ask Slashdot: How To Deal With a Persistent and Incessant Port Scanner?

jetkins writes: What would you do if your firewall was being persistently targeted by port scans from a specific group of machines from one particular company? I run a Sophos UTM9 software firewall appliance on my home network. Works great, and the free Home Use license provides a bunch of really nice features normally only found on commercial-grade gear. One of those is the ability to detect, block, and report port scans, and under normal circumstances I only get the occasional alert when some script kiddie comes a-knocking at my door.

But in recent months I have been getting flooded with alerts of scans from one particular company. I initially reported it to my own ISP's (RoadRunner's) abuse desk, on the assumption that if they're scanning me then they're probably scanning a bunch of my neighbors as well, and any responsible ISP would probably want to block this BS, but all I ever got back was an automated acknowledgment and zero action. So I used DNS lookup and WHOIS to find their phone number, and spoke with someone there; it appears that they're a small outfit, and I was assured that they had a good idea where it was coming from and that they would make it stop. Indeed, it did stop a few days later but then it was back again, unabated, after another week or so. So last week I called them again, and was once again assured of a resolution. No dice, the scans continue to pour in.

I've already blocked their subnet at my firewall, but the UTM apparently does attack detection before filtering, so that didn't stop the alerts. And although I *could* disable port scan alerts, it's an all-or-nothing thing and I'm not prepared to turn them off completely. This afternoon I forwarded the twenty-something alerts that I've received so far today, to their abuse@ address with an appeal for a Christmas Miracle, but frankly I'm not holding out much hope that it will have any effect. So, Slashdotters, what should I do if this continues into the new year? Start automatically bouncing every report to their abuse address? Sic Anonymous on them? Start calling them every time? I'm open to suggestions.

19 of 265 comments (clear)

  1. The first time didn't help. by Z00L00K · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So this time report it to appropriate authorities and if they don't take your case make a public letter into their local newspaper asking them what they are up to.

    --
    If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    1. Re:The first time didn't help. by freeze128 · · Score: 4, Funny

      ...and then, post it to 4chan.

    2. Re:The first time didn't help. by mysidia · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So this time report it to appropriate authorities and if they don't take your case

      OR push the block on the IP range into the Firewall's routing table as a route to Null0, or to an access-list on the Firewall's upstream router

      Most providers summarily shove complaints about portscans and firewall alerts into the trash bin. The OP needs something material to base a legitimate abuse complaint on, such as logs showing an actual SSH brute force access attempt, that demonstrates the activity is a malicious attempted intrusion and not merely some reconnaissance effort, possible false alarm, or "background noise" such as W32/Blaster traffic from some host still running infected XP.

      The authorities DON'T CARE about portscans either, unless the OP has something much more material to investigate, or can prove a crime was committed with serious damage, they generally will not get involved... It doesn't hurt to report it to the civil authorities, but it's not going to do anything to alleviate OP's situation, either, which is an "overly chatty" firewall device.

      The real issue there is the Firewall and the lack of options to suppress spurious alerts, that should get taken up with the firewall vendor as a software issue.

  2. So name them already by ArchieBunker · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Lets hear who it is.

    --
    Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
  3. Turn it off by Xenna · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Problem with these commercial products is that they want to prove their usefulness be regularly raising alarms. And, they miss essential features like IP based whitelisting. Portscans and probes are to standard to be bothered about, just block and forget.

    Use a decent open source product like pfsense instead. I've had an appliance with pfsense for years and I forget it's even there.

    https://www.applianceshop.eu/s...

    (no commercial interest, just a satisfied customer)

    1. Re:Turn it off by Voyager529 · · Score: 4, Informative

      UTM 9 IS open source excep for the gui and FAR better and FAR more features than pfsense.
      Not even close to being in the same leuage.
      (no commercial interest, just a satisfied UTM 9 user (not customer))

      Amusingly, I dealt with this very scenario just this week, except in reverse.

      I installed the Sophos UTM on a Vista-vintage Optiplex. It was fine and responsive, and yes, the UI was beautiful, with lots of enterprise-grade features. The problem I had was that Sophos seemed to have a default 'deny any any' sort of rule in place that allowed HTTP, DNS, and...basically nothing else. I couldn't RDP out via nonstandard ports, I couldn't access IMAP mail, I couldn't get new Usenet articles in Agent, and that damn 'yellow triangle of limited connectivity' was proudly shown on all the Windows boxen on my LAN. I spent about two hours trying to get it to let SOMETHING through, Googled around, and...apparently there's some sort of voodoo that everyone else 'just knows' to make Sophos be a bit less strict, but for me it was like debating with the great-grandson of HAL9000: "Open the port 3389 doors, HAL." "I'm sorry Joey, I can't do that." Between that and the fact that Sophos went to the Sonicwall school of port forwarding hell, I installed pfSense.

      pfSense allows traffic to flow the way one would expect a router to work; all the things that didn't work in Sophos worked just fine on pfSense. Port forwards can be as simple as a Linksys router (source port, destination port, IP address), or as complex as a Sonicwall. It's UI isn't nearly as pretty, but it's highly functional. The transparent proxy helps speed up HTTP traffic, which is helpful as I'm stuck with 2mbit/768k DSL for the immediate term.

      I'm sure this is all a PEBKAC situation, and I do understand that Sophos's "assume the worst" stance has its place, but especially for being labeled for home users, I would have at least expected some sort of option in the initial config wizard to have the option between 'paranoid mode' and 'actual router' mode.

  4. Port Scans are normal, stop whining! by marco.tedaldi · · Score: 4, Informative

    Disable the Port-Scanning warning. It is useless! It only drowns really important stuff! Port-Scanning is not an attack. Nothing breaks because of a harmless port scan and an alert does not provide you with ANY useful information. So get rid of this useless piece of software.

    Your ISP is doing nothing and rightly so. It would only suck up resources that can be used elsewhere where they make a real difference!
    Fighting port scans is like trying to fight people looking out of the car windows! Get over it, ignore it, it's completely normal!

    And don't suck up other peoples resources by whinging about it!

  5. Re:Not a surprise by wierd_w · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Indeed, I routinely get portscans en-mass from china.

    Sometimes 5x a day or more. Really aggressive scans that last for hours.

    Not a lot you can do about it. Scanning for open ports is a legitimate activity on networks you own, so naturally, a big internetwork like the internet is going to be drowning in automated portscans, and automated blocking of them would break many legitimate services, if they make too many queries too quickly. (say for instance, metacrawlers and pals.)

    Just accept that the internet is not a cozy nice place. Bad things lie in wait for the unwary. Use modern protection, and be sensible in how you use it.

    really, that's all you can do unless you have actual DDoS style attacks leveled at you. THEN you call the feds.

  6. Just set up a honeypot by Z80a · · Score: 4, Interesting

    And see what they do with it.

  7. Re:Not a surprise by BenFranske · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This. There was a time that ISPs and people on the Internet cared about port scans, that time is long gone (by at least 15 years). If you have a public IP you should assume it's being scanned all the time. Once you assume that these types of alerts have little additional meaning. If it really bothers you then you should implement some kind of pre-filter to block the IP range. I understand that your particular device doesn't allow that so put another router with proper access control list support in front of it if it bothers you so much. TLDR, unless you live in the past it's time to get over port scanning.

  8. Re:Simple. by gl4ss · · Score: 4, Insightful

    obvious answer is obvious, report a feature request to sophos.
    or buy a different firewall.
    or do attack detection after it.
    or just don't bother with doing anything with it(proper).

    really this is a problem with his firewall device/software in it. I have no idea why this passed through to slashdot since he already tried contacting the offender and his isp.

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  9. Re:Chances are... by Z00L00K · · Score: 4, Informative

    One solution to such actions is to instead of blocking send them to a tar-pit server. That may look like a valid server but with very slow responses.

    --
    If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
  10. Re:Simple. by mysidia · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The OP has been more than patient with them.... Assuming they are full TCP connects (non-spoofable); After complaining 3 times about ongoing abuse... I would definitely consider some internet routing table inspection, Identify their upstream providers, and start contacting the upstreams', after continued persistent scans of one IP. Don't stop politely contacting them to ask for help, until you get permanent resolution.

    9 times out of 10.... upstream providers will not turn off their customer, probably 10 times out of 10 for simple port scans, which are considered trivial. The industry does NOT consider a simple port scan equivalent to a DoS or hacking attempt, and Most providers will simply disqualify complaints about portscans.

    It's partly the OP's folly in having a security device generating excessive noise, especially about blocked IP addresses. I understand the OP may be constrained by product selection; However, Null-routing the offending range SHOULD be an option, and if not..... get a proper packet-filtering firewall to put in front of your UTM, or set an access-list entry on the router in front of it.

    However, if contacted, the abusing providers' upstream provider will likely forward the abuse reports to their customer.

    After you've done your homework in thoroughly documenting and verifiably reporting, and they have failed to resolve, then a few more iterations, and a seriously-harmed party would be getting their lawyers involved anyways. Probably NOT for a simple portscan however, the offending entities' upstreams might be concerned about it from a risk management perspective and pressure their customer to shape up.

  11. Re:No NAT??? by Bert64 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have many boxes directly on the internet, NAT would only add an extra layer of headaches... I only open the services i actually want to offer, so if i used port forwarding i would have exactly the same services listening but with added overhead.

    --
    http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  12. Put a filter box in front of full firewall by Morgaine · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The submitter has two problems, the first is an external site persistently doing something that he doesn't want, and the second is his firewall appliance that isn't doing what he wants.

    The first problem is not fixable. Even if you could make them go away, tomorrow someone else will take their place. Do you really want to spend your time in courtrooms and writing letters? In any case, port scanning is not actual service abuse nor hacking but merely service discovery and it's working as intended, so you'll have a hard time convincing anyone that you are suffering actual harm. It's just an annoyance.

    In contrast, your second problem *IS* fixable by you, at very little cost. Just put a low-end packet filter in front of your existing firewall, doing nothing but passively blocking all packets from the offending source. It should have no open ports of its own and should run nothing other than the firewall management software, something like pfsense or iptables. Any old PC hardware running off a thumb drive will suffice, or a new ARM board for lowest power consumption, or a repurposed router from eBay for lowest cost.

    Fix problems that you can solve. The others are not worth your time fretting about.

    --
    "The question of whether machines can think is no more interesting than [] whether submarines can swim" - Dijkstra
  13. Background noise by Bert64 · · Score: 4, Informative

    The internet is full of background noise, not a lot you can do about it..
    Chances are this isn't even a portscan at all, because what would be the point of scanning the same thing repeatedly? Chances are they've configured the target IP wrong, or the IP you now have used to be used by someone else etc.

    Having a router constantly notifying you about internet background noise is pointless and will only waste your time.

    --
    http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  14. Re:Simple. by WarJolt · · Score: 5, Informative

    If it's a choice between all or nothing, then I'd pick nothing.

    Port scan alerts are a bad idea for three reasons.
    1. These attacks are very common and excess noise of the alerts may distract you from real threats.
    2, Port scans that get caught by these filters are usually benign. NMAP is the first tool that every little kid who thinks they are a hacker plays with before they learn some common sense.
    3. Any sophisticated attack that actually stands a chance of working won't be detected by these simple mechanisms.

    Hopefully, your firewall will detect the real threats using more sophisticated methods. If I were you I wouldn't count on it catching everything. Those alerts might be giving you a false sense of security. The only thing that alert is satisfying is the author's curiosity. It's not really protecting him.

  15. A Honeypot? by MagickalMyst · · Score: 4, Informative

    If they are scanning for ports then give them something to play with. :)

    Setup a honeypot and gather intelligence about them. Find out who they are, where they are, and if possible, a motive as to why they are specifically targeting you.

    Once you have that information you can act accordingly - contact ISP, law enforcement, etc.

    --
    Political correctness is really just herd psychology pushed by insecure people who desperately seek social conformity.
  16. Re:Simple. by u-235-sentinel · · Score: 4, Interesting

    upstream providers don't care, they will just forward your email to their abuse contact and call it a day, if they do anything at all.

    That is fine. By forwarding, they will have proven they received the message, AND the network in question will be more apt to respond in many cases.

    At a later stage of the game when you get your lawyers involved their upstream providers will likely respond, for example, it's not worth their while to fight a lawsuit you can file against the upstream provider about their customer's activities.

    Years ago I took a new position at a company when I received a phone call from an ISP stating that my servers were port scanning someone who complained. They were going to turn off our network access. Surprised, I looked into it. I discovered they were right. Someone had allowed malware to get installed on several of our systems. After some cleanup work we were good but it left an impression on me. Besides asking a new employer more in depth questions about their security (or lack of it), that ISP's would be a good place to file a complaint when you are port scanned over and over again.

    Might be time to contact THEIR ISP and yours. Ask them to block or disconnect them. If anything, once THEY get a phone call about the complaint, it will wake them up a bit :D

    --
    Has Comcast disconnected your Internet account? Same here. You can read about it at http://comcastissue.blogspot.com