Eskimo North


          [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

          Ping "attack" ? (fwd)


          • To: outages-list@eskimo.com
          • Subject: Ping "attack" ? (fwd)
          • From: Robert Dinse <nanook@eskimo.com>
          • Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1998 01:01:48 -0700 (PDT)
          • cc: cert@cert.org
          • Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1998 01:01:54 -0700
          • Resent-From: outages-list@eskimo.com
          • Resent-Message-ID: <"z4Hg43.0._q7.nxoAr"@mx1>
          • Resent-Sender: outages-list-request@eskimo.com

          
               We have been having some problems today and yesterday with one of our
          links, this e-mail which I received tells the reason (though the person sending
          it didn't understand it).  Someone has made us the target of a "smurf" attack. 
          This is an ICMP flood attack where an intermediate network is sent ICMP echo
          request packets with the originating address forged to be that of the target
          and those are sent to the broadcast address of the intermediate network. 
          
               What this does is, if the intermediate network allows broadcast packets
          from the outside world, causes every host on the intermediate network to send
          ICMP echo reply packets to the target host that is the forged source address.
          This smurf attack was directed at, amoung other things, chat.eskimo.com.  And
          while ICMP is filtered here, and while Sprint queues it at lowest priority to
          prevent it from stopping other traffic from getting through, it still increases
          the load on the router CPU to the point where it starts flaking out, thus
          affecting service. 
          
               Because the source address is forged, it is very difficult to determine
          the true origin of the attack.  However, because of the particular choice of
          targets, I have a pretty good idea of who, or what group of people were
          responsible for this one.  The difficulty is proving it and getting law
          enforcement to do anything about it. 
          
          ---------- Forwarded message ----------
          Date: Wed, 08 Apr 1998 09:35:29 +0200
          From: Craig Faasen <craig.faasen@diasemi.de>
          To: hostmaster@CS.Berkeley.EDU, hostmaster@nada.kth.se,
              hostmaster@microsoft.com, hostmaster@u.washington.edu,
              hostmaster@daxnet.no, hostmaster@waterw.com, hostmaster@dhp.com,
              hostmaster@pangea.ca, hostmaster@eskimo.com, hostmaster@polyester.net,
              hostmaster@ba.best.com, hostmaster@prismapkg.com,
              hostmaster@datagrid.com, hostmaster@ionet.net, hostmaster@ais.net,
              hostmaster@magic.mb.ca, hostmaster@spyderwebb.com,
              hostmaster@mindspring.com, hostmaster@anet-chi.com,
              hostmaster@kwiknet.net, hostmaster@martnet.com, hostmaster@sprint.ca,
              hostmaster@dialup.954access.net
          Subject: Ping "attack" ?
          
          My apologies in advance for this broadcast; I realize that "hostmaster"
          may well not be the appropriate recipient for this message - however, I
          simply do not have time to contact all relevant whois servers in order
          to identify the respective admin contacts.
          
          In the early hours (from about mid-night until 05h00 MET) of this
          morning, all of the hosts listed below sent (sometimes repeatedly)
          'ping' packets to *every* host on our network.
          
          128.32.42.75    iwojima.CS.Berkeley.EDU
          130.237.227.21  dront.nada.kth.se
          131.107.3.28    tide18.microsoft.com
          140.142.12.67   becker1.u.washington.edu
          193.216.147.78  mp-147-78.daxnet.no
          199.171.193.1   water.waterw.com
          199.245.105.1   shell.dhp.com
          204.112.101.109 surf.pangea.ca
          204.122.16.78   chat.eskimo.com
          205.133.127.110 freaky.polyester.net
          206.184.139.133 shell2.ba.best.com
          206.190.26.210  ntserver.prismapkg.com
          206.245.228.32  noc.datagrid.com
          206.41.128.8    irc.ionet.net
          207.154.187.187 merlin.ais.net
          207.161.152.101 ra.magic.mb.ca
          207.212.130.247 ppp-247-23.spyderwebb.com
          207.69.200.132  irc.mindspring.com
          207.7.4.6       zeus.anet-chi.com
          207.86.141.6    access.kwiknet.net
          208.222.251.2   merv.martnet.com
          209.103.29.242  spc-isp-ott-uas-05-41.sprint.ca
          209.203.195.149 209-203-195-149.dialup.954access.net
          
          Although I am aware that icmp can be used in an attack, I do not
          currently regard this is a threat (mainly due to the "respectable"
          domain names involved). On the other hand, I also do not regard it as
          being particularly friendly - if I had a dial-up line to my ISP, the
          phones costs incurred in keeping the line up would be passed on to me.
          
          I am very curious to know why 23 independent hosts should suddenly get
          it into their minds to ping every host on my network. Does anybody have
          any ideas or explanations ?
          
          Best regards,
          
          -- craig
          
          Craig Faasen                            Email: craig.faasen@diasemi.com
          System and Network Administrator        Tel  : +49 (0)7021 9414-40
          Dialog Semiconductor GmbH               Fax  : +49 (0)7021 9414-10
          D-73230 Germany                         whois: CF4-RIPE
          
          

          • Prev by Date: Sprint Outages today (Tue Apr 7 '98)
          • Next by Date: sl-bb5-dc
          • Prev by thread: sl-bb5-dc
          • Next by thread: Sprint Outages today (Tue Apr 7 '98)
          • Index(es):
            • Date
            • Thread