nanog mailing list archives

Re: Is current DDoS detecting method effective?


From: Joe Shen <joe_hznm () yahoo com sg>
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 17:24:09 +0800 (CST)


Hi,



you aren't distinguishing between 'dos attack' and
'scan' or 'probe' or
'welcome to the Internet!' traffic. The Arbor
systems may see 'scan'
traffic (depending upon sample rates and traffic
loads) and they may
not... They aren't designed to see that, they are
designed to: (speaking
of peakflow SP, peakflow Traffic, peakflow DoS
only... peakflow X isn't
really a 'provider' solution as much as a
'enterprise' tool)

That's what I think current tool not enough, because
we can not think ongoing traffic is not malicious when
tools are building up 'normal' traffic model in ISP
networks.

But, in enterprise  network this could be achived
because traffic pattern for a enterprise could be
estimated, and load on special server could be
controled by threshhold (but, think about CNN website
on 911 ) 
  


1) to watch traffic and alarm against thresholds
2) track traffic trends over time
3) report traffic trends over time


So, it need to define what should be monitored ( port,
protocol, application data set ...) ? 


(possibly some other things out of scope of this
discussion... someone
from Arbor could/should clarify)

Some of your cflowd gathering should also see these
things, but they will
need data correlation, something Arbor already went
to the trouble of
doing for you... So, define: "attack" and then see
if your tool fits that
definition.
 

So, I think current tool is just for enterprise , or
for ISPs who want to provide anti-DoS services. 

regards

Joe

  
 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Log on to Messenger with your mobile phone!
http://sg.messenger.yahoo.com


Current thread: