network security and information assurance€¦ · information assurance products robert neal smith...

Post on 08-Aug-2020

3 Views

Category:

Documents

0 Downloads

Preview:

Click to see full reader

TRANSCRIPT

Network Security and Network Security and Information Assurance:Information Assurance: a broad brusha broad brush

A Discussion of Firewalls, Intrusion Detection Systems, Encryption, and the Common Criteria for evaluating Information Assurance Products

Robert Neal Smith Ph.D.r.n.smith@ieee.org

r.n.smith@ieee.org 2IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 27, 2003

Order of PresentationOrder of Presentation

! Introduction! Firewalls! Intrusion Detection Systems! Encryption ! Common Criteria! Questions

r.n.smith@ieee.org 3IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

IntroductionIntroduction

! Firewalls block or allow selected traffic based on various parameters (typically IP address, TCP or UDP port number)

! Intrusion Detection Systems involve scanning traffic on a network or within a host to determine if an intruder is present.

! Encryption systems involve the distribution of keys used by the encryption algorithm for the encryption/decryption of message and data. (algorithms, keys, key management)

! Common Criteria is the standardization of testing methods for proving information technology systems have security.

r.n.smith@ieee.org 4IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

What makes an application secure?What makes an application secure?

r.n.smith@ieee.org 5IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

SecuritySecurity

! Privacy / Confidentiality (supported by encryption and firewalls)

! Integrity (supported by signatures)! Authentication! Non-Repudiation (supported by signatures)

! Denial of Service (supported by firewalls)

r.n.smith@ieee.org 6IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Before we begin: R U Familiar Before we begin: R U Familiar with..with..! Sapphire (aka) SQL Slammer

– What could have been done?• Patches to the application• Firewall policy to block

– UDP Selected Addresses on Port 1428• Intrusion detection of UDP traffic on port 1428 and a

Search for the signature• Encryption and signatures of user communications• Better requirements and testing of application to

prevent security holes.•• Know who is connecting to your networkKnow who is connecting to your network

r.n.smith@ieee.org 7IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

FIREWALLFIREWALL

r.n.smith@ieee.org 8IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

FirewallFirewall

! Firewalls (or internet interface proxies) may be used to provide a secure interface to the Internet.– Firewall blocks or allows traffic– Proxy to filter application traffic and provides

address translation• Main proxies is the web interface proxies

– Providing filtering on normal TCP port 80

r.n.smith@ieee.org 9IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Firewall TechniquesFirewall Techniques

! Policy Based– (based on your security policy)

! Address Filter– Allow or disallow

r.n.smith@ieee.org 10IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Firewall FunctionsFirewall Functions

! Block selected traffic– Security policy

• Address, • Port,• Protocol, • Service,• Direction, and • User.

r.n.smith@ieee.org 11IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Fully BlockedRegion Partially Blocked

Partially Enabled

Fully Enabled

Region

Firewall Model BackgroundFirewall Model Background

r.n.smith@ieee.org 12IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Popular ProductsPopular Products

! PIX by Cisco (Ver 6.0)

! Firewall-1 by Checkpoint (http://www.checkpoint.com)

! NetWall by Evidian Inc (www.evidian.com)

r.n.smith@ieee.org 13IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Home Use FirewallHome Use Firewall

! Norton! McAfee

r.n.smith@ieee.org 14IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

ENCRYPTIONENCRYPTION

r.n.smith@ieee.org 15IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Encryption Encryption (ref: Applied Cryptography by Bruce Schneier)(ref: Applied Cryptography by Bruce Schneier)

! Algorithm– Symmetric (key distribution is difficult) (DES, BLOWFISH, RC3, etc)– Asymmetric ( 2 parts: private and public parts) (RSA, DSA)– Digital Signatures (one-way hash function)– Certificates

! The Key– 56 bits, – Elliptical

! Key Management– Firefly– PKI (Public Key Infrastructure) (key must be 7 times longer for equivalent 56

bit RSA encryption) evolving into a very Complex Hierarch– X.509 Certificates (trust someone)

r.n.smith@ieee.org 16IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Application of EncryptionApplication of Encryption

! Link Layer Encryption– Voice and – Data(1970’s ARPA)– KG-15, KG-30….– TACLANE (ATM)

! Application– Kerberos– Secure Sockets Layer– Secure Telnet

r.n.smith@ieee.org 17IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

PC Disk and Application SecurityPC Disk and Application Security

! Secret Agent– SecretAgent® is the premier file encryption and

digital signature utility, supporting cross-platform interoperability over a wide range of Windows- and UNIX-based systems. ($50)

– Information Security Corp (ISC) www.infoseccorp.com

! SpyProof– automatically encrypts all data blocks written to it

and then transparently decrypts them for any application

– Information Security Corp (ISC) www.infoseccorp.com

r.n.smith@ieee.org 18IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Secure Sockets LayerSecure Sockets Layer

! Public Key! Private Key! Session (secret key)

! Only as secure as– the Length and privacy of the KEY.– <Fill in the line>

r.n.smith@ieee.org 19IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Intrusion Detection SystemsIntrusion Detection Systems

r.n.smith@ieee.org 20IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

IDS CategoriesIDS Categories

! Network based! Host based

r.n.smith@ieee.org 21IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

IDS TechniquesIDS Techniques

! Artificial Immune System [7]! Control-Loop Measurement [8]! Data Mining [9]! Statistical [24]! Signature-Based (Rule-Based [25]).

r.n.smith@ieee.org 22IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Problem Lists / DatabasesProblem Lists / Databases

! bugtraq (since 1993)– http://www.securityfocus.com/– http://online.securityfocus.com/archive/1– A description of bug / events

! Common Vulnerability Exposure (CVE) (since 1999)– http://www.cve.mitre.org/compatible/enterprise.html– http://www.cve.mitre.org/cve/– A Dictionary Not a database

! WhiteHat– In Jail

r.n.smith@ieee.org 23IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Slammer SignatureSlammer Signature

! http://www.snort.org/snort-db/sid.html?sid=2003

! Signature/Rule– alert udp $EXTERNAL_NET any -> $HOME_NET 1434 (msg:"MS-SQL

Worm propagation attempt"; content:"|04|"; depth:1; content:"|81 F1 03 01 04 9B 81 F1 01|"; content:"sock"; content:"send"; reference:bugtraq,5310; classtype:misc-attack; reference:bugtraq,5311; reference:url,vil.nai.com/vil/content/v_99992.htm; sid:2003; rev:2;)

– Literal meaning: Any udp from External IP to an home IP at port 1434• If youb see hex 81 F1 03 01 04 9B 81 F1 01 and “sock” and “send”

r.n.smith@ieee.org 24IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

CVE Candidate (CAN)CVE Candidate (CAN)

! CAN-2000-1209– The "sa" account is installed with a default null

password on (1) Microsoft SQL Server 2000, (2) SQL Server 7.0, and (3) Data Engine (MSDE) 1.0, including third party packages that use these products such as (4) Tumbleweed Secure Mail (MMS) (5) Compaq Insight Manager, and (6) Visio 2000, are installed with a default "sa" account with a null password, which allows remote attackers to gain privileges, including worms such as Voyager Alpha Force and Spida.

r.n.smith@ieee.org 25IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

CVE CandidateCVE Candidate

! CAN-2002-0649– Multiple buffer overflows in SQL Server

2000 Resolution Service allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service or execute arbitrary code via UDP packets to port 1434 in which (1) a 0x04 byte causes the SQL Monitor thread to generate a long registry key name, or (2) a 0x08 byte with a long string causes heap corruption.

r.n.smith@ieee.org 26IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

BugTraq BugTraq (Sample)(Sample)

! SQL Sapphire Worm Analysis

! Release Date: 1/25/03

! Severity: High

! Systems Affected: Microsoft SQL Server 2000 pre SP 2

! Description: Late Friday, January 24, 2003 we became aware of a new SQL worm spreading quickly across various networks around the world.

! The worm is spreading using a buffer overflow to exploit a flaw in Microsoft SQL Server 2000. The SQL 2000 server flaw was discovered in July, 2002 by Next Generation Security Software Ltd. The buffer overflow exists because of the way SQL improperly handles data sent to its Microsoft SQL Monitor port

r.n.smith@ieee.org 27IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Monitor / Search TechniquesMonitor / Search Techniques

! User behavior! Network traffic

– Pattern match

r.n.smith@ieee.org 28IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Popular ProductsPopular Products

! Real Secure (Ver 6.0) (www.iss.net)– <$5k

– Related Products• Black ICE ($49.00)

! NFR Security (Ver 5.0) (www.nfr.com)– <$5k

! SNORT (Ver 1.9.0) (http://www.snort.org)– free software

! Tripwire (http://www.tripwire.com)

! Cisco Secure IDS ()

r.n.smith@ieee.org 29IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Home Use IDSsHome Use IDSs

! Black Ice ! Norton! Snort ! may not be compatible with other products

r.n.smith@ieee.org 30IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Common CriteriaCommon Criteria

r.n.smith@ieee.org 31IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Common Criteria Common Criteria http://www.commoncriteria.org/http://www.commoncriteria.org/

! Managed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the National Security Agency (NSA) (heading towards commercialization)

! Commercialized/Privatized/Nationalized

! Common Criteria is IT security evaluation

r.n.smith@ieee.org 32IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Creation of CCCreation of CC

! National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)

! National Security Agency (NSA) – National Information Assurance Partnership

(NIAP) • NIAP Common Criteria Evaluation and Validation

Scheme for IT Security

r.n.smith@ieee.org 33IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Common CriteriaCommon Criteria

! Standards! Training! Tools! Common Criteria

– Part 1, Introduction and general model– Part 2, Security functional requirements– Part 3, Security assurance requirements

! Common Evaluation Methodology– CEM Version 1.0 Part2,

r.n.smith@ieee.org 34IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Very Brief Overview of CCVery Brief Overview of CC

! Common Terms– TOE - Target of Evaluation– Evaluation Assurance Level (EAL) – Protection Profile (PP) requirements of the TOE;

implementation-independent set of security requirements

– Security Target (ST) TOE implementation-dependentrequirement are contained in a construct termed = Security Target (ST).

r.n.smith@ieee.org 35IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

CC DocumentsCC Documents

! Part 1: Introduction and General Model! Part 2: Security functional components ! Part 3: EALs and Security assurance

components

r.n.smith@ieee.org 36IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

How to Use CC DocumentsHow to Use CC DocumentsConsumers Evaluators Evaluators

Part 1: Introduction and General Model

For background information and reference purposes

For background information and reference for the development of requirements and formulating security specifications for TOEs

For background information and reference purposes. Guidance structure for PPs and STs

Part 2: Security Functional Requirements

For guidance and reference when formulating statements of requirements for security functions

For reference when interpreting statements of requirements and formulating functional specifications of TOEs

Mandatory statement of evaluation criteria when determining whether TOE effectively meets claimed security functions

Part 3: Security Assurance Requirements

For guidance when determining required levels of assurance

For reference when interpreting statements of assurance requirements and determining assurance approaches of TOEs

Mandatory statement of evaluation criteria when determining the assurance of TOEs and when evaluating PPs and STs

r.n.smith@ieee.org 37IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Common CriteriaCommon Criteria

! The CC, or more precisely the Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation, version 2.1 [CC99-P1, CC99-P2, and CC99-P3],

! The CC provides extensive flexibility in selecting components to satisfy security objectives.

r.n.smith@ieee.org 38IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

CC Requirements ConstructionCC Requirements Construction

! Classes– most general grouping of security equirements.

! Families– a grouping of sets of security requirements that

share security objectives! Components

– a specific set of security requirements! Package

– intermediate combination of components

r.n.smith@ieee.org 39IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Evaluation Assurance Levels (Evaluation Assurance Levels (EALsEALs))

! an increasing scale that balances the level of assurance obtained with the cost and feasibility of acquiring that degree of assurance.

! EAL 1 through 7– Typical Windows 2000 is rated EAL 4+

r.n.smith@ieee.org 40IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

More on Common CriteriaMore on Common Criteria

– The Common Criteria (CC) provides a grammar for describing Information Technology (IT) system security.

• The CC is a language you can use to describe IT product and system security requirements or specifications.

– The Common Criteria (CC) Toolbox provides an automated process for identifying Information Technology (IT) security requirements

– Use the Users Guide, Touring the CC Toolbox, and Reference Manual together.

r.n.smith@ieee.org 41IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

CC CC ToolBoxToolBox

! The CC Toolbox helps you to write a PP! Download from National Information

Assurance Partnership (NIAP) website (http://niap.nist.gov/tools/cctool.html).

! NIAP provides a database of security engineering information. – CC Profiling Knowledge Base.

r.n.smith@ieee.org 42IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Products Tested by NISTProducts Tested by NISTDefend the

Network andInfrasturcture

Defend the Enclave Boundary

Defend the Computing

Environment

Supporting the Infrastructure(PKI, Detect,

Mgmt)

Switches & Routers Firewalls Operating

Systems Network Mgmt

Routers VPNs Biometrics Certificate Management

WLANS Remote Access Secure Messaging Key Recovery

Mobile Code Tokens Smart CardsMultiple Domain

Solutions Single-Level Web

ServersPKI/KMI

Guards Sensitive Data Protection IDS

Trusted DBMSMisc.

PC Access Control

Mobile Code

Peripheral Switch

Misc.

r.n.smith@ieee.org 43IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Product InformationProduct Information

! Product Name ! Manufacturer! Conformance Claim! Validation Date! CC Scheme

r.n.smith@ieee.org 44IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

The CC Toolbox The CC Toolbox helps you do the following:helps you do the following:

! Describe the assumptions, policies, and threats that make up the TOE security environment.

! Capture security objectives to counter threats and satisfy policies and assumptions for the TOE and its environment.

! Identify relevant CC components to satisfy an objective and incorporate them into your PP or ST.

! Apply CC operations (i.e., assignment, iteration, refinement, and selection) to tailor CC components into requirements.

! Select an Evaluation Assurance Level (EAL).! Manage mappings that relate the TOE security

environment to the security objectives and relate security objectives to requirements.

! Build rationale arguments required by the CC.

! Manage details of identification, component dependencies.

r.n.smith@ieee.org 45IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

CC ReportsCC Reports

! Protection Profile (PP) Report, helps specify your IT security requirements (PP requirements called security objectives) using CC terminology

! Security Target (ST) Report, which helps vendors indicate the security objectives that a particular product meets, also using CC terminology

r.n.smith@ieee.org 46IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

CC Tool Steps for PPCC Tool Steps for PP

! Protection Profile (PP) steps supported by CC Tool include: – Identifying TOE Security Environment (Environment

Interview[R]). – Specifying TOE Security Environment (Context[R]). – Selecting Evaluation Assurance Level (EAL[R]). – Identifying Applicable CC Components (Component

Interview[R]). – Allocating CC Components (Allocation[R]). – Clarifying CC Components (Elaboration[R]). – Completing Draft Report (Report[R]).

r.n.smith@ieee.org 47IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

CC ComponentCC Component

!A CC component is the smallest selectable set of security requirements

r.n.smith@ieee.org 48IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

CC Tool Steps for STCC Tool Steps for ST

! ST Steps are as follows: – Identifying Applicable CC Components (Component

Interview[R]). – Selecting Evaluation Assurance Level (EAL[R]). – Identifying TOE Security Environment (Environment

Interview[R]). – Specifying TOE Security Environment (Context[R]). – Allocating CC Components (Allocation[R]). – Clarifying CC Components (Elaboration[R]). – Completing Draft Report (Report[R]).

r.n.smith@ieee.org 49IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Tool Knowledge BaseTool Knowledge Base (Grows)(Grows)

! The Knowledge Base contains sample policy, threat, and assumption statements that you can use to describe the TOE security environment.

r.n.smith@ieee.org 50IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

The CC ToolThe CC Tool

! Requires Java 1.3

r.n.smith@ieee.org 51IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

QuestionsQuestions

r.n.smith@ieee.org 52IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Security TrainingSecurity Training

! SANS (SysAdmin, Audit, Network, Security) Institute

– http://www.sans.org– Since 1989– GIAC (Global Information Assurance Certification) in 1999

! Common Criteria– NAIP (using the tools)

! Certificates– Master Certificate in Computer Security WWW.ITI.EDU– System and Network Security

Certificate Program ) WWW.ITI.EDU! NIST

– http://csrc.nist.gov/ATE/te_full.html#build

r.n.smith@ieee.org 53IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

ReferencesReferences

! Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation (CC 2.1) is a revision that aligns it with International Standard ISO/IEC 15408:1999.

r.n.smith@ieee.org 54IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Web ReferencesWeb References

! https://www.trusecure.com! http://www.iss.net

r.n.smith@ieee.org 55IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Examples of Common CriteriaExamples of Common Criteria

! Smart Card! Windows 2000

r.n.smith@ieee.org 56IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Acronym/GlossaryAcronym/Glossary

! Common Criteria Testing Laboratory (CCTL)

! security target (ST)! Information Technology (IT)! target of evaluation (TOE)! Information Assurance (IA)

r.n.smith@ieee.org 57IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Web LinksWeb Links

! http://niap.nist.gov/cc-scheme! http://commoncriteria.org! http://niap.nist.gov/

r.n.smith@ieee.org 58IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

The Primary DocumentsThe Primary Documents

! http://commoncriteria.org/docs/PDF/CCPART1V21.PDF

! http://commoncriteria.org/docs/PDF/CCPART2V21.PDF

! http://commoncriteria.org/docs/PDF/CCPART3V21.PDF

r.n.smith@ieee.org 59IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Related PapersRelated Papers

! Smith, R. N. and S. Bhattacharya, 1997, ”Firewall Placement In A Large Network Topology,” IEEE FTDCS’97

! Smith, R. N. and S. Bhattacharya, 1998, “Fault and Leak Tolerance in Firewall Engineering,” IEEE HASE’98

! Smith, R. N. and S. Bhattacharya, 1998, “A Protocol and Simulation for Distributed Communicating Firewalls,” IEEE COMPSAC,99

! Smith, R. N. and S. Bhattacharya, 1999, “Operating Firewalls Outside the LAN Perimeter,” IEEE IPCCC’99.

r.n.smith@ieee.org 60IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Related PapersRelated Papers

! Smith, R. N. and S. Bhattacharya, 1999, “Distributed Firewall Protocol, With Simulation and Emulation Tool in Java,”Motorola Inc., SMS’99

! Smith, R. N., R. Feigen, and S. Bhattacharya, 2000, “Securing Communications in an Enterprise Network of LAN and or WAN by Utilizing an Enhanced Encrypting Network Interface Card and Associated Software,” Motorola Inc., Technical Developments, 2000

! Smith, R. N., and S. Bhattacharya, 2003, “Cascade of Distributed and Cooperating Firewalls in a Secure Data Network,” IEEE Transactions on Knowledge AND Data Engineering, VOL. 15, NO. 4, July/August 2003

r.n.smith@ieee.org 61IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Listed ReferencesListed References

[1] S. Staniford, J. Hoagland, J. McAlerney. “Practical Automated Detection of Stealthy Portscans.” In: CCS IDS Workshop Athens. November 1, 2000.

[2] deleted.[3] A. Sundaram. “An Introduction to Intrusion Detection.”

http://www.acm.org/crossroads/xrds2-4/intrus.html[4] H. Debar. “What is knowledge-based intrusion detection?” In: Intrusion

Detection FAQ. http://www.sans.org/newlook/resources/IDFAQ/knowledge_based.htm

[5] H. Debar. “What is behavior-based intrusion detection?” In: Intrusion Detection FAQ. http://www.sans.org/newlook/resources/IDFAQ/behavior_based.htm

[6] D. Lehmann. “What is ID?” In: Intrusion Detection FAQ. http://www.sans.org/newlook/resources/IDFAQ/what_is_ID.htm

r.n.smith@ieee.org 62IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

References ContinuedReferences Continued

[7] J. Kim. “An Artificial Immune System for Network Intrusion Detection.”http://www.cs.ucl.ac.uk/staff/J.Kim/GECCO_WS99.html

[8] M. Craymer, J. Cannady, J. Harrell. “New Methods of Intrusion Detection using Control-Loop Measurement.” In: Fourth Technology for Information Security Conference’96. May, 16, 1996.

[9] W. Lee, S. Stolfo. “Data Mining Approaches for Intrusion Detection.” In: Proceedings of the 7th USENIX Security Symposium. 1998.

[10] M. Gerken. “Statistical-Based Intrusion Detection.”http://www.sei.cmu.edu/str/descriptions/sbid_body.html

r.n.smith@ieee.org 63IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

References ContinuedReferences Continued

[11] http://www.nfr.com/products/NID/[12] http://www.checkpoint.com/products/firewall-1/realsecure.html[13] http://www.portcullis-security.com/products/index.htm[14] http://www.snort.org[15] http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/cc/pd/sqsw/sqidsz/[16] S. Northcutt. Network Intrusion Detection: An Analyst’s Handbook. New

Riders, Indianapolis, 1999. p. 125.

r.n.smith@ieee.org 64IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

References ContinuedReferences Continued

[17] http://www.silicondefense.com/software/spice/index.htm[18] http://www.tcpdump.org[19] http://www.ethereal.com[20] http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html[21] R. Permeh, M. Maiffret. “.ida “Code Red” Worm.”

http://www.eeye.com/html/Research/Advisories/AL20010717.html.[22] R. Lyttle. http://www.sub-seven.com[23] D. Ruiu. “Snort FAQ Version 1.8.”

http://snort.sourcefire.com/docs/faq.html[24] M. Prabhaker. “Intrusion Detection.”

http://www.cs.wright.edu/~pmateti/Courses/499/IntrusionDetection/

r.n.smith@ieee.org 65IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

References (continued)References (continued)

[25] M. Gerken. “Rule-Based Intrusion Detection.”http://www.sei.cmu.edu/str/descriptions/rbid_body.html

[26] R. Lupton. Statistics In Theory And Practice. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1993. p. 50.

r.n.smith@ieee.org 66IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Distributed and Communicating Distributed and Communicating Gateway FirewallsGateway Firewalls (a system of(a system of))

!A system of distributed communicating gateway with firewalls incorporated in each distributed node (DCGFW)

r.n.smith@ieee.org 67IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Architecture TopologyArchitecture Topology

AttackerScout

=Untrusted node=Trusted node=Scout to monitor traffic

Attackee

k=3

k=2

k=1

k=4

r.n.smith@ieee.org 68IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

The LAN Node The LAN Node (the main node)(the main node)

! CGFW manager! CGFW aware gateway! Filter commands! Activation heuristics.

r.n.smith@ieee.org 69IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Naïve ActivationNaïve Activation

! Set 1 CGFW active– At the LAN or– At the attacker CGFW

r.n.smith@ieee.org 70IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Ring HeuristicRing Heuristic

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Attacker

p

o

n

m

g

j

i

k

h

l

f

e

d

c

b

a

Attackee

p

o

n

m

g

j

i

k

h

l

f

e

d

c

b

a

r.n.smith@ieee.org 71IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Path HeuristicPath Heuristic (Shortest Path)(Shortest Path)

! Smallest number of hops

! Smallest delay

r.n.smith@ieee.org 72IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Shortest PathShortest Path

Un-Trusted

CGFW Nodes

CGFW Scout Nodes

Shortest Path(s)

Attacker

- CGFW Nodes

k=1

k=2

k=3

k=4

Attackee(LAN firewall)

Not On Shortest Path

On Shortest Path

r.n.smith@ieee.org 73IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Scouting of other CGFW agentsScouting of other CGFW agents

! Scout benefits– Distributed denial of service

– Accounts for address spoofing.

r.n.smith@ieee.org 74IEEE Phoenix Section Computer Society Chapter Feb 28, 2003

Architecture TopologyArchitecture Topology

=Untrusted node=Trusted node

Attacker

Attackee

top related