Re: [ntp:questions] Public ntp-server and reflection-attacks

2013-12-26 Thread Jure Sah
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 23. 12. 2013 18:14, Rob wrote: I would just like to understand this... For noquery I understand, but for nopeer? The manual page states: Deny packets that might mobilize an association unless authenticated. This includes broadcast,

Re: [ntp:questions] Public ntp-server and reflection-attacks

2013-12-26 Thread Rob
Jure Sah dustwo...@gmail.com wrote: On 23. 12. 2013 18:14, Rob wrote: I would just like to understand this... For noquery I understand, but for nopeer? The manual page states: Deny packets that might mobilize an association unless authenticated. This includes broadcast, symmetric-active

Re: [ntp:questions] Public ntp-server and reflection-attacks

2013-12-23 Thread Jure Sah
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello, On 21. 11. 2013 18:12, Michael Sinatra wrote: How can I disable this behavior of ntpd? There are several ways, but having a basic 'restrict' statement in your config like this will help mitigate this attack: restrict default noquery

Re: [ntp:questions] Public ntp-server and reflection-attacks

2013-12-23 Thread Rob
Jure Sah dustwo...@gmail.com wrote: Wouldn't noquery or nopeer also prevent your timeserver from being used by other timeservers? Or at least limit usability? Not really. It limits the possibilities of debugging from remote (e.g. to look what servers you are synced to), but it does not limit

Re: [ntp:questions] Public ntp-server and reflection-attacks

2013-12-23 Thread Jure Sah
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, On 23. 12. 2013 15:13, Rob wrote: Jure Sah dustwo...@gmail.com wrote: Wouldn't noquery or nopeer also prevent your timeserver from being used by other timeservers? Or at least limit usability? Not really. It limits the possibilities of

Re: [ntp:questions] Public ntp-server and reflection-attacks

2013-12-23 Thread Rob
Jure Sah dustwo...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, On 23. 12. 2013 15:13, Rob wrote: Jure Sah dustwo...@gmail.com wrote: Wouldn't noquery or nopeer also prevent your timeserver from being used by other timeservers? Or at least limit usability? Not really. It limits the possibilities of debugging

Re: [ntp:questions] Public ntp-server and reflection-attacks

2013-12-23 Thread Steve Kostecke
On 2013-12-23, Jure Sah dustwo...@gmail.com wrote: On 23. 12. 2013 15:13, Rob wrote: For noquery I understand, but for nopeer? The manual page states: Deny packets that might mobilize an association unless authenticated. This includes broadcast, symmetric-active and manycast server packets

Re: [ntp:questions] Public ntp-server and reflection-attacks

2013-11-21 Thread theservman
On Thursday, 21 November 2013 11:42:39 UTC-5, Rudolf E. Steiner wrote: Hi. We have strong reflection-attacks on our public timeserver (ntpd 4.2.6p5). The strange behavior is the server received one packet and sends 100 packets to the target. Incoming packet: -

[ntp:questions] Public ntp-server and reflection-attacks

2013-11-21 Thread Rudolf E. Steiner
Hi. We have strong reflection-attacks on our public timeserver (ntpd 4.2.6p5). The strange behavior is the server received one packet and sends 100 packets to the target. Incoming packet: - begin - Network Time Protocol (NTP Version 2, private) Flags: 0x17 0... = Response bit:

Re: [ntp:questions] Public ntp-server and reflection-attacks

2013-11-21 Thread Michael Sinatra
On 11/21/2013 08:42, Rudolf E. Steiner wrote: Hi. We have strong reflection-attacks on our public timeserver (ntpd 4.2.6p5). The strange behavior is the server received one packet and sends 100 packets to the target. Yes, this is becoming increasingly common, and everyone operating NTP

Re: [ntp:questions] Public ntp-server and reflection-attacks

2013-11-21 Thread theservman
Now that I've had some quality time with Wireshark, I can confirm that I'm seeing exactly what Rudolph was seeing. Since implementing Michael's suggesting, I'm still getting the packets, but not responding to them. That will do for now... Ian ___

Re: [ntp:questions] Public ntp-server and reflection-attacks

2013-11-21 Thread Rudolf E. Steiner
Michael Sinatra wrote: I believe the key command is 'noquery' which means that the server can't be queried for information (it does NOT affect the server's ability to respond to time requests). That's it. To simple. RTFM! :-( I have deleted noquery at the time of installation. I thought it

Re: [ntp:questions] Public ntp-server and reflection-attacks

2013-11-21 Thread Steve Kostecke
On 2013-11-21, Michael Sinatra mich...@rancid.berkeley.edu wrote: There are several ways, but having a basic 'restrict' statement in your config like this will help mitigate [reflection attacks]: restrict default noquery nomodify notrap nopeer restrict -6 default noquery nomodify notrap