Distributed reflection denial of service attack: A critical review

As the world becomes increasingly connected and the number of users grows exponentially and “things” go online, the prospect of cyberspace becoming a significant target for cybercriminals is a reality. Any host or device that is exposed on the internet is a prime target for cyberattacks. A denial-of-service (DoS) attack is accountable for the majority of these cyberattacks. Although various solutions have been proposed by researchers to mitigate this issue, cybercriminals always adapt their attack approach to circumvent countermeasures. One of the modified DoS attacks is known as distributed reflection denial-of-service attack (DRDoS). This type of attack is considered to be a more severe variant of the DoS attack and can be conducted in transmission control protocol (TCP) and user datagram protocol (UDP). However, this attack is not effective in the TCP protocol due to the three-way handshake approach that prevents this type of attack from passing through the network layer to the upper layers in the network stack. On the other hand, UDP is a connectionless protocol, so most of these DRDoS attacks pass through UDP. This study aims to examine and identify the differences between TCP-based and UDP-based DRDoS attacks

The Road Ahead for Networking: A Survey on ICN-IP Coexistence Solutions

In recent years, the current Internet has experienced an unexpected paradigm shift in the usage model, which has pushed researchers towards the design of the Information-Centric Networking (ICN) paradigm as a possible replacement of the existing architecture. Even though both Academia and Industry have investigated the feasibility and effectiveness of ICN, achieving the complete replacement of the Internet Protocol (IP) is a challenging task. Some research groups have already addressed the coexistence by designing their own architectures, but none of those is the final solution to move towards the future Internet considering the unaltered state of the networking. To design such architecture, the research community needs now a comprehensive overview of the existing solutions that have so far addressed the coexistence. The purpose of this paper is to reach this goal by providing the first comprehensive survey and classification of the coexistence architectures according to their features (i.e., deployment approach, deployment scenarios, addressed coexistence requirements and architecture or technology used) and evaluation parameters (i.e., challenges emerging during the deployment and the runtime behaviour of an architecture). We believe that this paper will finally fill the gap required for moving towards the design of the final coexistence architecture.Comment: 23 pages, 16 figures, 3 table

Addressless: A New Internet Server Model to Prevent Network Scanning

Eliminating unnecessary exposure is a principle of server security. The huge IPv6 address space enhances security by making scanning infeasible, however, with recent advances of IPv6 scanning technologies, network scanning is again threatening server security. In this paper, we propose a new model named addressless server, which separates the server into an entrance module and a main service module, and assigns an IPv6 prefix instead of an IPv6 address to the main service module. The entrance module generates a legitimate IPv6 address under this prefix by encrypting the client address, so that the client can access the main server on a destination address that is different in each connection. In this way, the model provides isolation to the main server, prevents network scanning, and minimizes exposure. Moreover it provides a novel framework that supports flexible load balancing, high-availability, and other desirable features. The model is simple and does not require any modification to the client or the network. We implement a prototype and experiments show that our model can prevent the main server from being scanned at a slight performance cost

Migrating the Internet to IPv6: An Exploration of the When and Why

The paper documents and to some extent elucidates the progress of IPv6 across major Internet stakeholders since its introduction in the mid 90’s. IPv6 offered an early solution to a well-understood and well-documented problem IPv4 was expected to encounter. In spite of early standardization and awareness of the issue, the Internet’s march to IPv6 has been anything but smooth, even if recent data point to an improvement. The paper documents this progression for several key Internet stakeholders using available measurement data, and identifies changes in the IPv6 ecosystem that may be in part responsible for how it has unfolded. The paper also develops a stylized model of IPv6 adoption across those stakeholders, and validates its qualitative predictive ability by comparing it to measurement data

Assessing the Privacy Benefits of Domain Name Encryption

As Internet users have become more savvy about the potential for their Internet communication to be observed, the use of network traffic encryption technologies (e.g., HTTPS/TLS) is on the rise. However, even when encryption is enabled, users leak information about the domains they visit via DNS queries and via the Server Name Indication (SNI) extension of TLS. Two recent proposals to ameliorate this issue are DNS over HTTPS/TLS (DoH/DoT) and Encrypted SNI (ESNI). In this paper we aim to assess the privacy benefits of these proposals by considering the relationship between hostnames and IP addresses, the latter of which are still exposed. We perform DNS queries from nine vantage points around the globe to characterize this relationship. We quantify the privacy gain offered by ESNI for different hosting and CDN providers using two different metrics, the k-anonymity degree due to co-hosting and the dynamics of IP address changes. We find that 20% of the domains studied will not gain any privacy benefit since they have a one-to-one mapping between their hostname and IP address. On the other hand, 30% will gain a significant privacy benefit with a k value greater than 100, since these domains are co-hosted with more than 100 other domains. Domains whose visitors' privacy will meaningfully improve are far less popular, while for popular domains the benefit is not significant. Analyzing the dynamics of IP addresses of long-lived domains, we find that only 7.7% of them change their hosting IP addresses on a daily basis. We conclude by discussing potential approaches for website owners and hosting/CDN providers for maximizing the privacy benefits of ESNI.Comment: In Proceedings of the 15th ACM Asia Conference on Computer and Communications Security (ASIA CCS '20), October 5-9, 2020, Taipei, Taiwa

Survey of End-to-End Mobile Network Measurement Testbeds, Tools, and Services

Mobile (cellular) networks enable innovation, but can also stifle it and lead to user frustration when network performance falls below expectations. As mobile networks become the predominant method of Internet access, developer, research, network operator, and regulatory communities have taken an increased interest in measuring end-to-end mobile network performance to, among other goals, minimize negative impact on application responsiveness. In this survey we examine current approaches to end-to-end mobile network performance measurement, diagnosis, and application prototyping. We compare available tools and their shortcomings with respect to the needs of researchers, developers, regulators, and the public. We intend for this survey to provide a comprehensive view of currently active efforts and some auspicious directions for future work in mobile network measurement and mobile application performance evaluation.Comment: Submitted to IEEE Communications Surveys and Tutorials. arXiv does not format the URL references correctly. For a correctly formatted version of this paper go to http://www.cs.montana.edu/mwittie/publications/Goel14Survey.pd

Hosting Industry Centralization and Consolidation

There have been growing concerns about the concentration and centralization of Internet infrastructure. In this work, we scrutinize the hosting industry on the Internet by using active measurements, covering 19 Top-Level Domains (TLDs). We show how the market is heavily concentrated: 1/3 of the domains are hosted by only 5 hosting providers, all US-based companies. For the country-code TLDs (ccTLDs), however, hosting is primarily done by local, national hosting providers and not by the large American cloud and content providers. We show how shared languages (and borders) shape the hosting market -- German hosting companies have a notable presence in Austrian and Swiss markets, given they all share German as official language. While hosting concentration has been relatively high and stable over the past four years, we see that American hosting companies have been continuously increasing their presence in the market related to high traffic, popular domains within ccTLDs -- except for Russia, notably.Comment: to appear in IEEE/IFIP Network Operations and Management Symposium https://noms2022.ieee-noms.org