27
Network-based and Attack- resilient Length Signature Generation for Zero-day Polymorphic Worms Zhichun Li 1 , Lanjia Wang 2 , Yan Chen 1 and Judy Fu 3 1 Lab for Internet and Security Technology (LIST), Northwe stern Univ. 2 Tsinghua University, China 3 Motorola Labs, USA

Network-based and Attack-resilient Length Signature Generation for Zero-day Polymorphic Worms

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Network-based and Attack-resilient Length Signature Generation for Zero-day Polymorphic Worms. Zhichun Li 1 , Lanjia Wang 2 , Yan Chen 1 and Judy Fu 3. 1 Lab for Internet and Security Technology (LIST), Northwestern Univ. 2 Tsinghua University, China 3 Motorola Labs, USA. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Page 1: Network-based and Attack-resilient Length Signature Generation for Zero-day Polymorphic Worms

Network-based and Attack-resilient Length Signature Generation for Zero-day Polymorphic Worms

Zhichun Li1, Lanjia Wang2, Yan Chen1 and Judy Fu3

1 Lab for Internet and Security Technology (LIST), Northwestern Univ.

2 Tsinghua University, China

3 Motorola Labs, USA

Page 2: Network-based and Attack-resilient Length Signature Generation for Zero-day Polymorphic Worms

The Spread of Sapphire/Slammer Worms

Page 3: Network-based and Attack-resilient Length Signature Generation for Zero-day Polymorphic Worms

Limitations of Content Based Signature

1010101

10111101

11111100

00010111

Our network

Traffic Filtering

Internet

Signature: 10.*01

XX

Polymorphic worm might not have exactly content based signature

Polymorphism!

Page 4: Network-based and Attack-resilient Length Signature Generation for Zero-day Polymorphic Worms

Vulnerability Signature

Work for polymorphic wormsWork for all the worms which target thesame vulnerability

Vulnerability signature traffic filtering

Internet

XX Our network

Vulnerability

XX

Page 5: Network-based and Attack-resilient Length Signature Generation for Zero-day Polymorphic Worms

Network Based Detection

• At the early stage of the worm, only limited worm samples.

• Host based sensors can only cover limited IP space, which might have scalability issues. Thus they might not be able to detect the worm in its early stage

Gateway routersInternet

Our network

Host baseddetection

Page 6: Network-based and Attack-resilient Length Signature Generation for Zero-day Polymorphic Worms

Design Space and Related Work

• Most host approaches depend on lots of host information, such as source/binary code of the vulnerable program, vulnerability condition, execution traces, etc.

[Polygraph-SSP05][Hamsa-SSP06][PADS-INFOCOM05]

[CFG-RAID05]

[Nemean-Security05]

[DOCODA-CCS05]

[TaintCheck-NDSS05]

LESG (this paper)

[Vulsig-SSP06]

[Vigilante-SOSP05]

[COVERS-CCS05]

[ShieldGen-SSP07]

Vulnerability Based

Exploit Based

Network Based Host Based

Page 7: Network-based and Attack-resilient Length Signature Generation for Zero-day Polymorphic Worms

Outline

• Motivation and Related Work

• Design of LESG

• Problem Statement

• Three Stage Algorithm

• Attack Resilience Analysis

• Evaluation

• Discussions and Conclusions

7

Page 8: Network-based and Attack-resilient Length Signature Generation for Zero-day Polymorphic Worms

Key Ideas

• At least 75% vulnerabilities are due to buffer overflow

• Some protocol fields might map to the vulnerable buffer to trigger the vulnerability

• The length of some protocol field have to longer than the buffer length

• Intrinsic to buffer overflow vulnerability and hard to evade

• However, there could be thousands of fields to select the optimal field set is hard

Page 9: Network-based and Attack-resilient Length Signature Generation for Zero-day Polymorphic Worms

Framework

• Sniff network traffic from network gateways

• Filter out known worms

• Existing flow classifiers– Separate traffic into a suspicious traffic pool

and a normal traffic pool– E.g. port scan detector, honeynets

• LESG Signature Generator

Page 10: Network-based and Attack-resilient Length Signature Generation for Zero-day Polymorphic Worms

LESG Signature Generator

Page 11: Network-based and Attack-resilient Length Signature Generation for Zero-day Polymorphic Worms

Outline

• Motivation and Related Work

• Design of LESG

• Problem Statement

• Three Stage Algorithm

• Attack Resilience Analysis

• Evaluation

• Discussions and Conclusions

11

Page 12: Network-based and Attack-resilient Length Signature Generation for Zero-day Polymorphic Worms

Field Hierarchies

DNS PDU

Page 13: Network-based and Attack-resilient Length Signature Generation for Zero-day Polymorphic Worms

Length-based Signature Definition

• Signature is signature length for field

• Matching: for flow – if , flow X is labeled as a worm flow

• Signature Set – worm flows: match at least one signature

• Ground truth signature is the vulnerable buffer length

23/4/20 13

jjjjj lEflfS ,),,(

jf

},...,,,...,,{ 21 Kk xxxxX

jf lxj

}...,,,{ 21 JSSSS

BBB LLfB ),,(

Page 14: Network-based and Attack-resilient Length Signature Generation for Zero-day Polymorphic Worms

Problem Formulation

LESG

Coverage bound

Coverage in the suspicious pool is bounded by 1-

Minimize the false positives in the normal pool

Suspicious pool

Normal pool

Signature

With noise NP-Hard!

Page 15: Network-based and Attack-resilient Length Signature Generation for Zero-day Polymorphic Worms

Outline

• Motivation and Related Work

• Design of LESG

• Problem Statement

• Three Stage Algorithm

• Attack Resilience Analysis

• Evaluation

• Discussions and Conclusions

15

Page 16: Network-based and Attack-resilient Length Signature Generation for Zero-day Polymorphic Worms

Stage I and II

16

Stage I: Field Filtering Stage II: Length Optimization

COV=1%FP=0.1% Trade off Score function

Score(COV,FP)

Page 17: Network-based and Attack-resilient Length Signature Generation for Zero-day Polymorphic Worms

Stage III

17

• Find the optimal set of fields as the signature approximately

• Separate the fields to two sets, FP=0 and FP>0– Opportunistic step (FP=0)– Attack Resilience step (FP>0)

• The similar greedy algorithm for each step– Every time find the field with maximum

residual coverage and the coverage is no less than a threshold.

Page 18: Network-based and Attack-resilient Length Signature Generation for Zero-day Polymorphic Worms

Attack Resilience Bounds

18

Accuracy

High

Low

Ground Truth Signature

Know the vulnerable fieldMultiple field Optimal

LESG Signature

b0b1

• With different assumptions on b0 and whether deliberated noise injection (DNI) exists, get bound b1– DNI: Theorem2 and 3– No DNI: Theorem4 and 5

• With 90% noise in the suspicious pool, we can get the FN<10% and FP<1.8%

• Resilient to most proposed attacks

Page 19: Network-based and Attack-resilient Length Signature Generation for Zero-day Polymorphic Worms

Outline

• Motivation and Related Work

• Design of LESG

• Problem Statement

• Three Stage Algorithm

• Attack Resilience Analysis

• Evaluation

• Discussions and Conclusions

19

Page 20: Network-based and Attack-resilient Length Signature Generation for Zero-day Polymorphic Worms

Methodology

20

• Protocol parsing with Bro and BINPAC

• Worm workload– Eight polymorphic worms created based on

real world vulnerabilities– DNS, SNMP, FTP, SMTP

• Normal traffic data– 27GB from a university gateway and

123GB email log.

• Experiment Settings

%5%,1'%,1COV%,1.0FP

COV*)1FPlog/1()FPCOV,(

00

Score

Page 21: Network-based and Attack-resilient Length Signature Generation for Zero-day Polymorphic Worms

Results

21

• Single/Multiple worms with noise– Noise ratio: 0~80%– False negative: 0~1% (mostly 0)– False positive: 0~0.01% (mostly 0)

• Speed and memory consumption– For DNS, parsing 58 secs, LESG 18 secs f

or (500,320K)

• Pool size requirement– 10 or 20 is enough

Page 22: Network-based and Attack-resilient Length Signature Generation for Zero-day Polymorphic Worms

Results – Attack Resilience

22

• The worm not only spread worms but also spread worse case faked noise to mislead the signature generation

• DNS Lion worm, noise ratio: 8%~92%, suspicious pool size 200

Page 23: Network-based and Attack-resilient Length Signature Generation for Zero-day Polymorphic Worms

Conclusions

• A novel network-based automated worm signature generation approach– Work for zero day polymorphic worms with

unknown vulnerabilities – Vulnerability based and Network based– Length-based signatures for buffer overflow

worms– Provable attack resilience– Fast and accurate through experiments

23/4/20 23

Page 24: Network-based and Attack-resilient Length Signature Generation for Zero-day Polymorphic Worms

Backup Slides

Page 25: Network-based and Attack-resilient Length Signature Generation for Zero-day Polymorphic Worms

Discussions of Practical Issues

• Speed of signature matching– Major over head: protocol parsing– Software (Bro with Binpac): 50~200Mbps– Optimized Binpac: 600Mbps– Hardware: 3Gbps

• Relationship between fields and buffers– Mostly direct mapping between fields– Analyzed 19 vulnerabilities, 1 exception

23/4/20 25

Page 26: Network-based and Attack-resilient Length Signature Generation for Zero-day Polymorphic Worms

LEngth-based Signature Generator (LESG)

Thwart zero-day polymorphic worms

Network-based

Vulnerability-based

75% of Vulnerabilitiesbased on buffer overflow

LESG

Target buffer overflow worms

Only use network level info

Noise tolerant

Can detect zero-day worm inreal-time

Efficient signature matching

Attack resilient

Page 27: Network-based and Attack-resilient Length Signature Generation for Zero-day Polymorphic Worms