Thank you for that advice - it is very well taken.

Obviously, my goal is to mitigate as much as possible - I have accepted
that I cannot stop all DDoS - my question is, do serious people ever
attempt to do the mitigation/load shedding with a host-based firewall (in
this case fbsd+ipfw) ?  Or would all serious people interested in
mitigating attacks use an appliance, like a netscreen ?

I will say this - 9/10 attacks that hurt me do not do anything interesting
- in fact they are even low bandwidth (2-3 megabits/s) but they have a
packet/second rate that just eats up all my firewall cpu and no traffic
goes through - and as soon as the attack goes away the firewall is fine.

So, I am looking at putting in more sophisticated traffic shaping
(limiting packets/s from each IP I have) and skipto rules to make the
ruleset more efficient ... but this is going to be a lot of work, and I
want to know if it is all just a waste because no matter how good I get at
a freebsd firewall, a netscreen 10 will always be better ?

thanks.

On Thu, 16 Jan 2003, Terry Lambert wrote:

> Josh Brooks wrote:
> > If I have a large network with high profile hosts (50+ shell servers, 50
> > or more different ircds running) am I wasting my time trying to hack and
> > tweak a FreeBSD host-based firewall running ipfw ?
> >
> > I am getting hammered by a different (D)DoS attack every single day - it's
> > always something new.  I am thinking of buying a netscreen, but on the
> > other hand I really like FreeBSD, I really like a host-based firewall, and
> > I hate to admit defeat.
>
>
> You cannot protect yourself against DDOS.
>
> In the limit, the attacker will fill up your communications
> pipes, so no matter what you do, in terms of load-shedding,
> you will still end up with the attack being effective.
>
> You've posted previously that you want to do some things,
> like characterizing packet options (e.g. MSS), and dropping
> certain packets with or without these options.
>
> This is merely a load-shedding strategy, and it is, in fact,
> one which will not be successful, if you make your choices
> in this regard public, since you will provide information to
> your attacker as to why his attack, previously effective, is
> not ineffective.  Th bad news is that, even if you do not
> make this information public, an attacker can infer your rules
> and "tighten up" the attack, to make it look more like legitimate
> traffic, to avoid your rules changes (e.g. adding the MSS option
> to SYN packets used in attacks, etc.).  In the worst case, the
> attacker will merely flood your pipes, if you are effective in
> stopping attack packets at your border firewall.
>
> The only really effective mechanisms for defending against DDOS
> attacks are:
>
> 1)    Have a bigger pipe than the aggregate of all your
>       attackers "robots" -- this has the negative effect
>       of your attacker, whi;le being unable to take you
>       off the air, they can still cost you money (e.g. the
>       "war dialer attack on 1-800 numbers of SPAM'mers and
>       televangelists, who get charged for call completion).
>
> 2)    DPOS - Distributed Provision Of Service.  A DDOS attack
>       can only work against a small number of targets.  As the
>       number of targets approaches the number of "robots", the
>       DDOS attack becomes ineffective.
>
> 3)    Identify the attackers, and have them arrested.  There
>       are all sorts of laws which are being violated by a DDOS
>       attack, but police agencies aren't very sophisticated,
>       mostly because of their hiring standards, and therefore
>       you have to do much of their work for them.
>
> 4)    Host something politically or militarily sensitive on
>       the same server farm.  The Men In Black will make your
>       attackers disappear (unlike police agencies, the
>       intelligence agencies *are* effective).
>
> > Or is it generally accepted that if you have that kind of targets on your
> > network that you just have to get an appliance - that is, even if the guy
> > that wrote ipfw and knows the fbsd kernel inside and out still wouldn't
> > even try to make that work ?
>
> The only thing a firewall can do for you is shed load, even if
> it's God's Own Firewall(tm).
>
> -- Terry
>


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message

Reply via email to