OSEC

Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email hr@neohapsis.com
 
From: Todd Ransom (transomextremelogic.com)
Date: Fri Aug 10 2001 - 09:27:50 CDT

  • Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

    I finally tracked the ACK scans all the way down. It turns out to be a RTT
    calculation performed by a network device made by RadWare. Once I started
    capturing all traffic from these machines I could see a pattern:

    them -> me 37852 udp
    them -> me icmp echo req
    them -> me tcp ack * this is what snort picked up
    them -> me tcp syn * radware waits for syn/ack then RSTs the
    connection

    I found this explanation at SANS:

    http://www.sans.org/y2k/031401.htm

    hopefully this will keep someone else from spending several days tracking
    this down like I did.

    TR

    =========================
    "Information is not knowledge."
    --Caleb Carr

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Todd Ransom" <transomextremelogic.com>
    To: <incidentssecurityfocus.com>
    Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 10:35 AM
    Subject: ACK scan

    > I got several nmap tcp ping events from one of my snort sensors the other
    > day. As I started digging into it the traffic starts to look more and
    more
    > strange. I wanted to bounce it off the list and see if anyone else had
    seen
    > anything similar or could (in)validate my thoughts on this. Here goes.
    >
    > I got 20 of these (abbreviated ACID output) from 5 different addresses:
    > ======
    > [2001-08-02 11:43:58]IDS28/scan_probe-nmap_tcp_ping
    > IPv4: attacker.com -> fw.my.org
    > hlen=5 TOS=0 dlen=40 ID=59958 flags=0 offset=0 TTL=55 chksum=45800
    > TCP: port=80 -> dport: 51723 flags=***A**** seq=193
    > ack=0 off=5 res=0 win=1024 urp=0 chksum=64006
    > Payload: none
    > ======
    > I concluded that these are not normal traffic because:
    > 1.. The ack bit is set but the ack number is 0, which makes no sense.
    > 2.. the sequence number of all the packets is less than 1000. For a 32
    > bit field this is just too coincidental.
    > 3.. The windows size of 1024 also looks suspicious to me.
    > So they look like crafted packets. I pull out nmap 2.54 Beta 6 and run an
    > ACK scan. The sequence numbers and ACK are reasonable numbers. So either
    > this is an old version of nmap or it's not nmap or it's generated using
    some
    > other option from nmap.
    >
    > According to the nmap man page ACK scans can be used for a few different
    > things.
    > 1.. Determine if a host exists. I don't think this is the purpose
    because
    > so many of them are going to the same machine. He only needs one or maybe
    2
    > packets to determine this.
    > 2.. Determine whether or not a host is behind a stateful firewall. A
    > stateful firewall will drop the packet, a non-stateful will pass it b/c of
    > the presence of the ACK bit and you should get a RST from the remote host.
    > Some things that are funny:
    >
    > 1.. The TTLs are all between 53 - 56 for all packets. I would expect
    them
    > to differ more than that, being from different subnets. From this I
    > conclude all the source addresses except 1 are spoofed.
    > 2.. I did a traceroute to try and find out which of the networks would
    > come up with a TTL close to 53. Every single source address is around
    10-15
    > hops away from me and they are all behind firewalls that rewrite the TTL
    > just before the destination. HUNH?!? This throws a kink in everything
    else
    > I've concluded. Either someone REALLY did their homework before scanning
    me
    > or there's something here I'm not seeing.
    > 3.. Mixed in with the rest was this one packet:
    > ======
    > [2001-08-02 16:04:29]IDS28/scan_probe-nmap_tcp_ping
    > IPv4: attacker.com -> fw.my.org
    > hlen=5 TOS=0 dlen=40 ID=7842 flags=0 offset=0 TTL=52 chksum=41042
    > TCP: port=80 -> dport: 53 flags=***A**** seq=55
    > ack=0 off=5 res=0 win=1024 urp=0 chksum=58172
    > Payload: none
    > ======
    >
    > Aha! A scan to port 53. There is one packet to 51723 from this address
    and
    > one to 53 from this address. Now I REALLY think the rest are spoofed and
    > this one address is my attacker.
    >
    > TR
    >
    >
    > --------------------------------------------------------------------------

    --
    > This list is provided by the SecurityFocus ARIS analyzer service.
    > For more information on this free incident handling, management
    > and tracking system please see: http://aris.securityfocus.com
    >
    >
    

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- This list is provided by the SecurityFocus ARIS analyzer service. For more information on this free incident handling, management and tracking system please see: http://aris.securityfocus.com