Malicious Information Gathering
Download
Report
Transcript Malicious Information Gathering
Malicious Information Gathering
Caezar
Introduction
By creating mobile agents that communicate
and make decisions, a vast number of
“secrets” can be learned without triggering
the target system’s alarms.
Presented by Caezar, a network security
research developer
History
Knowing your opponents strategy has always
been critical to success
Since the advent of radio transmission
opposing groups have monitored each other’s
strategic communications
Today, the medium has changed toward the
Internet but the espionage concepts are
identical
Topics of Discussion
Distributed Hacking
Agents
Information Representation
Goal Seeking
Mobility
Application
Distributed Hacking
Performs identically to common hacking
Appears to come from many Internet
addresses
Very difficult to stop, but fairly easy to detect
Recent examples include Trinoo and TFN
attacks on major web sites
Distributed Hacking
Each node is a module of the central
command
With increasing distance between nodes,
communication latency becomes extremely
difficult to manage
The central command decides which action
to take so the flexibility of the network
decreases as its size increases
Agents
An agent is a person or thing that acts on
your behalf so that the authority does not
need to be present
Normally, agents make the best available
decision without consulting the authority
Only in exceptional cases does an agent halt
to wait for orders or permission
Agents
A human food-delivery agent, for instance,
will not halt at a closed road, rather he will
choose another route and continue to perform
his tasks
These are often called “autonomous agents”
in artificial intelligence (AI) research, but I
will refer to them simply as “agents”
Agents
To be effective, computer agents need
sensors, actors and a management unit
For information gathering, the sensors are
packet filters and pattern matchers
The actors simply communicate interesting
data from the sensors back to the Authority
Agent, or an intermediary Director Agent
Agents
The management unit receives requests from
other Agents or Director Agents and
prioritizes them, possibly declining to
perform the service
Due to ideal small size requirements, we use
a simple rule set with a busy indicator to
decide when to accept or reject requests
Agents vs. Modules
Modules have a predefined purpose and use,
agents are multipurpose and have
interchangeable uses
Modules perform their tasks immediately,
agents may schedule the task for later
completion
Agents can choose to reject a request,
modules cannot make that choice
Information Representation
For the system of agents to communicate
effectively they must agree on a format of
representing their collected data
If the data collected is going to be used to
mount a network attack on a particular target,
the agents should be able to identify
weaknesses and catalog them with a
Librarian for future use by a Director
Information Representation
To catalog and retrieve learned information,
it must be consistently and uniquely named
XML or ASN.1 make good information
descriptions
Both can be used easily with SQL-based
exploit libraries by a Librarian Agent
Goal Seeking
Bruce Schneier of Counterpane Systems
recently elaborated on attack trees in Doctor
Dobb’s Journal, December 1999
The attack tree model is an excellent pattern
against which the data collected by the
Librarian can be compared
Each fully matching branch indicates an
available method for attack success
Goal Seeking
Creating an attack tree for every desirable
goal allows each goal to be broken into small
pieces and managed by a Director Agent
Redundant nodes can be applied to several
trees without wasted effort
With a good set of attack trees and agent
tools, a Director can find and exploit security
flaws without intervention
Goal Seeking
Given several goals, the management unit
can schedule the agent to fulfill many
requests without requiring further
communication with the network
Director Agents divide larger tasks into
smaller ones and distribute the work amongst
available agents
Goal Seeking
An example is port-scanning a Class C domain
The task can be divided between Directors who
then subdivide the job between their agents
Each agent will make a small number of requests
As a whole, this example agent network makes a
complete scan
Mobility
By adding an exploit sensor to every agent literally
thousands of machines can be found to infect
If a Librarian agent provides exploit code to the
agents, those found machines become hacked
machines
If the exploit code starts an agent running, then the
agent network grows of its own volition
Mobility
For the rest of this presentation, assume that
a particular target network is being attacked;
for instance “bigcompany.com”
We do not want to infect the whole Internet
to attack or monitor the target
By restricting the agent to infect only
machines “closer” to the target, we eliminate
the radical growth problem
Application
To bring all of this material together, we need the
following components:
A goal like “Collect all of the e-mail to or from
bigcompany.com”
A library of exploit code designed to inject a running
agent into currently popular systems
A Librarian Agent capable of searching the database and
returning code matched to a requested target
Application
Component list (continued):
E-mail capture code with source and destination
filters (e.g. dsniff by Dug Song)
A Director Agent to manage agent
communication, e.g. to Librarian Agent
A communication channel; direct TCP for
simplicity
Application
Identify a large list of initial nodes, perhaps by
scanning for known Trojans
Insert Librarian and Director Agents
Communicate the initial target list to the Director
As the Director spawns new agents they begin to
feed data back regarding more potential targets,
network layout, adjacency, etc.
Application
The agent network surrounds the target
Depending on the quality of the exploit
library it will be able to monitor portions of
the target’s network traffic
The ability to attack routers, ISP hosts and
other “hard” targets is critical to the success
of this sort of attack
What This Means
Distributed information gathering, especially
agent-based, can do much of the work of
network mapping software without triggering
your IDS
Corporate and government security models
must consider simple TCP services like
SMTP, POP3 and HTTP as totally insecure
unless explicitly audited
What This Means
Assume that mobile, autonomous agents are
already available to the intelligence
community
Assume that attackers do not need to probe
your network before attacking
They can listen long enough before attacking
to passively identify your systems and
servers
What This Means
With the introduction of automated
distributed attacks, it is reasonable to expect
that Artificial Intelligence and Superficial
Intelligence will pose new threats to online
security