Sponsored Content
Special Forums Cybersecurity what is the better way to protect my server from DDos Attack Post 302213476 by lunc on Thursday 10th of July 2008 07:26:51 AM
Old 07-10-2008
Hi!

First of all you should determine from which kind of DDoS you suffer. The most common DDoS types (by OSI levels):

1) Network (bandwidth limits). The number of DDoS agents can send you enormous number of any packets. It's no matter whether your server reject them or not, the meaning of such attack is exhasting of you bandwidth. Usually, web-hosting providers, which specializes on anti DDoS services, provides network chanels with very high network badwidth.

2) Transport (for example SYN flood). There is a lot of solutions: Cisco routers with special DDoS prevention functionality, SYN cookies in your OS kernel etc. Also a reverse-proxies farm could help in this case.

3) Application (DDoS targeted on application service like HTTP server). In general case this kind of attack is the same as flush event, when your service has enormous number of _valid_ users as a result of, for example, excelent advertising or flash mob. However:

a) it is possibly to drop dynamicly the most flodive subnetworks by simple measuring of number of requests from the subnetwork (Cisco also has such solutions on routers). However, this solution will work badly if DDoS agents are internet propagated trojans, so a lot of internet networks will infected and involved into the attack. By this way such solution will block a lot of sub-network or won't blok anything (depending on sensitivity of DDoS sensors).

b) such system (desribed in previous point) could has some service semantics in its sensors. For example, it can make clustering of posible DDoS zombie sub-networks by number of heurisics like value of heavy requests, ratio of requests to received responses, requests signatures and so on. By corelating of these parameters such system can block DDoS requests more precisely. I don't know about market solutions of such systems. My company provides such solutions only by individual clients requests...

So DDoS prevention is quite complex problem which requires also complex measures.
lunc
 

7 More Discussions You Might Find Interesting

1. Cybersecurity

DDoS Simulation Tools

are there any popular DDoS simulation tools to test my own infrastructure? Anyone tried to setup all these in AWS EC2? (1 Reply)
Discussion started by: boriskong
1 Replies

2. Linux

Binary files damaged after attack on the server

Hello, a few days ago (June 19) a server that I manage has suffered an attack. Analyzing the log I discovered that there were several attempts to access a web scanner called w00tw00t.at.ISC.SANS.DFind I set the firewall to prevent further visits from this scanner. The problem is that the... (3 Replies)
Discussion started by: viessenetwork
3 Replies

3. Ubuntu

Problem in Postfix server/is my server got some attack

Hi Friends, This is logs of my mail log: mail for yahoo.com.tw is using up 4001 of 6992 active queue entries : 1 Time(s) mail for yahoo.com.tw is using up 4001 of 7018 active queue entries : 1 Time(s) mail for yahoo.com.tw is using up 4001 of 7072 active queue entries : 1 Time(s) ... (1 Reply)
Discussion started by: darakas
1 Replies

4. Cybersecurity

DDoS and brute force attack

How to protect DDoS and brute force attack. I want to secure my server and block attacker. (1 Reply)
Discussion started by: romanepo
1 Replies

5. Emergency UNIX and Linux Support

DDOS attack please help!

Dear community, my site was recently attacjed by DDOS technique and goes down in a few minutes. My site runs under Debian/Apache2/Mysql. I identified the IPs who attack me and block it through iptable firewall from debian. Something like: iptables -D INPUT -s xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx -j DROP This... (7 Replies)
Discussion started by: Lord Spectre
7 Replies

6. UNIX for Advanced & Expert Users

Anti ddos shell script, is it useful?

Hi guys, just need a opinion from you. I found anti ddos script from github Script What is your opinion about it? Is it usefull? Do you have some similar? I want to protect my servers on all levels, why not in the servers via script. I assume I must fix this script to be useful for me, but... (1 Reply)
Discussion started by: tomislav91
1 Replies

7. What is on Your Mind?

Revive Ad Server MySQL Injection Attack

No rest for the weary, a Revive Ad Server I am responsible for experienced a MySQL injection attack due to a vulnerability uncovered in the past few months. I was busy developing Vue.js code for the forums and thought to myself "I will get around to upgrading to Revive 4.2.0 (supposedly the... (0 Replies)
Discussion started by: Neo
0 Replies
BLACKHOLE(4)						   BSD Kernel Interfaces Manual 					      BLACKHOLE(4)

NAME
blackhole -- a sysctl(8) MIB for manipulating behaviour in respect of refused TCP or UDP connection attempts SYNOPSIS
sysctl net.inet.tcp.blackhole[=[0 | 1 | 2]] sysctl net.inet.udp.blackhole[=[0 | 1]] DESCRIPTION
The blackhole sysctl(8) MIB is used to control system behaviour when connection requests are received on TCP or UDP ports where there is no socket listening. Normal behaviour, when a TCP SYN segment is received on a port where there is no socket accepting connections, is for the system to return a RST segment, and drop the connection. The connecting system will see this as a ``Connection refused''. By setting the TCP blackhole MIB to a numeric value of one, the incoming SYN segment is merely dropped, and no RST is sent, making the system appear as a blackhole. By setting the MIB value to two, any segment arriving on a closed port is dropped without returning a RST. This provides some degree of protection against stealth port scans. In the UDP instance, enabling blackhole behaviour turns off the sending of an ICMP port unreachable message in response to a UDP datagram which arrives on a port where there is no socket listening. It must be noted that this behaviour will prevent remote systems from running traceroute(8) to a system. The blackhole behaviour is useful to slow down anyone who is port scanning a system, attempting to detect vulnerable services on a system. It could potentially also slow down someone who is attempting a denial of service attack. WARNING
The TCP and UDP blackhole features should not be regarded as a replacement for firewall solutions. Better security would consist of the blackhole sysctl(8) MIB used in conjunction with one of the available firewall packages. This mechanism is not a substitute for securing a system. It should be used together with other security mechanisms. SEE ALSO
ip(4), tcp(4), udp(4), ipf(8), ipfw(8), pfctl(8), sysctl(8) HISTORY
The TCP and UDP blackhole MIBs first appeared in FreeBSD 4.0. AUTHORS
Geoffrey M. Rehmet BSD
January 1, 2007 BSD
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:19 PM.
Unix & Linux Forums Content Copyright 1993-2022. All Rights Reserved.
Privacy Policy