NetGladiator: A Layer 7 Shaper in Sheep’s Clothing


When explaining our NetGladiator technology the other day, a customer was very intrigued with our Layer 7 engine. He likened it to a caged tiger under the hood, gobbling up and spitting out data packets with the speed and cunning of the world’s most powerful feline.

He was surprised to see this level of capability in equipment offered at our prices.  He was impressed with the speed attained for the price point of our solution (more on this later in the article)…

In order to create a rock-solid IPS (Intrusion Prevention System), capable of handling network speeds of up to 1 gigabit with standard Intel hardware, we had to devise a technology breakthrough in Layer 7 processing. Existing technologies were just too slow to keep up with network speed expectations.

In order to support higher speeds, most vendors use semi-custom chip sets and a technology called “ASIC“. This works well but is very expensive to manufacture.

How do typical Layer 7 engines work?

Our IPS story starts with our old Layer 7 engine. It was sitting idle on our NetEqualizer product. We had shelved it when we got away from from Layer 7 shaping in favor of Equalizing technology, which is a superior solution for traffic shaping.  However, when we decided to move ahead with our new IPS this year, we realized we needed a fast-class analysis engine, one that could look at all data packets in real time. Our existing Layer 7 shaper only analyzed headers because that was adequate for its previous mission (detecting P2P streams).  For our new IPS system, we needed a solution that could do a deep dive into the data packets.  The IPS mission requires that you look at all the data – every packet crossing into a customer network.

The first step was to revamp the older engine and configure it to look at every packet. The results were disappointing.  With the load of analyzing every packet, we could not get throughput any higher than about 20 megabits, far short of our goal of 1 gigabit.

What do we do differently with our updated Layer 7 engine?

Necessity is the mother of invention, and so we invented a better Layer 7 engine.

The key was to take advantage of multiple processors for analysis of data without delaying data packets. The way the old technology worked was that it would intercept a data packet on a data link, hold it, analyze it for P2P patterns, and then send it on.  With this method, as packets come faster and faster you end up not having enough CPU time to do the analysis and still send the packet on without adding latency.  Many customers find this out the hard way when they update their data speeds from older slower T1 technology.  Typical analysis engines on affordable routers and firewalls often just can’t keep up with line speeds.

What we did was take advantage of a utility in the Linux Kernel called “clone skb”.  This allows you to make a temporary copy of the data packet without the overhead of copying.  More importantly, it allows us to send the packet on without delay and do the analysis within a millisecond (not quite line speed, but fast enough to stop an intruder).

We then combined the cloning with a new technology in the Linux kernel called Kernel Threading.  This is different than the technology that large multi-threaded HTTP servers use because it happens at the kernel level, and we do not have to copy the packet up to some higher-level server for analysis. Copying a packet for analysis is a huge bottleneck and very time-consuming.

What were our Results?

With kernel threading, cloning, and a high-end Intel SMP processor, we can make use of 16 CPU’s doing packet analysis at the same time and we now have attained speeds close to our 1 gigabit target.

When we developed our bandwidth shaping technology in 2003/2004, we leveraged technology innovation to create a superior bandwidth control appliance (read our NetEqualizer Story).  With the NetGladiator IPS, we have once again leveraged technology innovation to enable us to provide an intrusion prevention system at a very compelling price (register to get our price list), hence our customer’s remark about great speed for the price.

What other benefits does our low cost, high-speed layer 7 engine allow for? Is it just for IPS?

The sky is the limit here.  Any type of pattern you want to look at in real-time can now be done at one tenth (1/10th) the cost of the ASIC class of shapers.  Although we are not a fan of unauthorized intrusion into private data of the public Internet (we support Net Neutrality), there are hundreds of other uses which can be configured with our engine.

Some that we might consider in the future include:

– Spam filtering
– Unwanted protocols in your business
– Content blocking
– Keyword spotting

If you are interested in testing and experimenting in any of these areas with our raw technology, feel free to contact us ips@netgladiator.net.

Case Study: A Simple Solution to Relieve Congestion on Your MPLS Network


Summary: In the last few months, we have set up several NetEqualizer systems on hub and spoke MPLS networks. Our solution is very cost effective because it differs from many TOS/Compression-based WAN optimization products that require multiple pieces of hardware.  Normally, for WAN optimization, a device is placed at the HUB and a partner device is placed at each remote location. With the NetEqualizer technology, we have been able to simply and elegantly solve contention issues with a single device at the central hub.

The problem:

A customer has a hub and spoke MPLS network where remote sites get their public Internet and corporate data by coming in on a spoke to a central site.  Although the network at the host site has plenty of bandwidth, the spokes have a fixed allocation over the MPLS and are experiencing contention issues (e.g. slow response times to corporate sales data, etc.).

The solution:

By placing a NetEqualizer at a central location, so that all the remote spokes come in through the NetEqualizer, we are able to sense when a remote spoke has reached its contention level. We then perform prioritization on all the competing applications and user streams coming in over the congested link.

Why it works:

QoS and priority is really quite simple: it is always the case where some large selfish application is dominating a shared link. The NetEqualizer is able to spot these selfish applications and scale them back using a technique called Equalizing. QoS and priority are just a matter of taking away bandwidth from somebody else. See our related article: QOS is a matter of sacrifice.

Okay, but how does it really work?

How does NetEqualizer solve the congested MPLS link issue?

The NetEqualizer solution, which is completely compatible with MPLS, works by taking advantage of the natural inclination of applications to back off when artificially restrained. We’ll get back to this key point in a moment.

NetEqualizer will adjust selfish application streams by adding latency, forcing them to back off and allow potentially starved data applications to establish communications – thus eliminating any disruption.

Once you have determined the peak capacity of an MPLS spoke (if you don’t know for sure it can be determined empirically through busy hour observation), you then tell the centralized NetEqualizer the throughput of the spoke through its defined subnet range or VLAN identification tag. This tells the NetEqualizer to kick into gear when that upper limit on the spoke is reached.

Once configured, the NetEqualizer constantly (every second) measures the total aggregate bandwidth throughput traversing every spoke on your network. If it senses the upper limit is being reached, NetEqualizer will then isolate the dominating flows and encourage them to back off.

Each connection between a user on your network and the Internet constitutes a traffic flow. Flows vary widely from short dynamic bursts, which occur, for example, when searching a small Web site, to large persistent flows, as when performing peer-to-peer file sharing or downloading a large file.

By keeping track of every flow going through each MPLS spoke, the NetEqualizer can make a determination of which ones are getting an unequal share of bandwidth and thus crowding out flows from weaker applications.

NetEqualizer determines detrimental flows from normal ones by taking the following questions into consideration:

  1. How persistent is the flow?
  2. How many active flows are there?
  3. How long has the flow been active?
  4. How much total congestion is currently on the link?
  5. How much bandwidth is the flow using relative to the link size?

Once the answers to these questions are known, NetEqualizer will adjust offending flows by adding latency, forcing them to back off and allow potentially starved applications to establish communications – thus eliminating any disruption. Selfish Applications with more aggressive bandwidth needs will be throttled back during peak contention. This is done automatically by the NetEqualizer, without requiring any additional programming by administrators.

The key to making this happen over an MPLS link relies on the fact that if you slow a down a selfish application it will back off. This can be done via the NetEqualizer without any changes to the topology of your MPLS network, since the throttling is done independent of the network.

Questions and Answers

How do you know congestion is caused by a heavy stream?

We have years of experience optimizing networks with this technology. It is safe to say that on any congested network, roughly five percent of users are responsible for 80 percent of Internet traffic. This seems to be a law of Internet usage.2

Can certain applications be given priority?

NetEqualizer can give priority by IP address, for video streams, and in its default mode it naturally gives priority to VoIP, thus addressing a common need for commercial operators.

———————————————————————————————————————————————–

2Randy Barrett, “Putting the Squeeze on Internet Hogs: How Operators Deal with Their Greediest Users.” Multichannel News. 7 Mar. 2007. Retrieved 1 Aug. 2007 http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6439454.html

Four Reasons Why Companies Remain Vulnerable to Cyber Attacks


Over the past year, since the release of our IPS product, we have spent many hours talking to resellers and businesses regarding Internet security. Below are our observations about security investment, and more importantly, non-investment.

1) By far the number one reason why companies are vulnerable is procrastination.

Seeing is believing, and many companies have never been hacked or compromised.

Some clarification here, most attacks do not end in something being destroyed or any obvious trail of data being lifted. This does not mean they do not happen; it’s just that there was no immediate ramification in many cases hence, business as usual.

Companies are run by people, and most people are reactive, and furthermore somewhat single threaded, thus they can only address a few problems at a time. Without a compelling obvious problem, security gets pushed down the list. The exception to the procrastination rule would be verticals such as financial institutions, where security audits are mandatory (more on audits in a bit). Most companies, although aware of  risk factors, are reluctant to spend on a problem that has never happened. In their defense, a company that reacts to all the security FUD, might find itself hamstrung and out of business. Sometimes, to be profitable, you have to live with a little risk.

2) Existing security tools are ignored.

Many security suites are just too broad to be relevant. Information overload can lead to a false sense of coverage.

The best analogy I can give is the Tornado warning system used by the National Weather Service. Their warning system, although well-intended, has been so diffuse in specificity that after a while people ignore the warnings. The same holds true with security tools. In order to impress and out-do one another, security tools have become bloated with quantity, not quality. This overload of data can lead to an overwhelming glut of frivolous information. It would be like a stock analyst predicting every possible outcome and expecting you to invest on that advice. Without a specific, targeted piece of information, your security solution can be a distraction.

3) Security audits are mandated formalities.

In some instances, a security audit is treated as a bureaucratic mandate. When security audits are mandated as a standard, the process of the audit can become the objective. The soldiers carrying out the process will view the completed checklist as the desired result and thus may not actually counter existing threats. It’s not that the audit does not have value, but the audit itself becomes a minimum objective. And most likely the audit is a broad cookie-cutter approach which mostly serves to protect the company or individuals from blame.

4) It may just not be worth the investment.

The cost of getting hacked may be less than the ongoing fees and consumption of time required to maintain a security solution. On a mini-scale, I followed this advice on my home laptop running Windows. It was easier to re-load my system every 6 months when I got a virus rather than mess with all the security virus protection being thrown at me, slowing my system down. The same holds true on a corporate scale. Although nobody would ever come out and admit this publicly, or make it deliberately easy, but it might be more cost-effective to recover from a security breach than to proactively invest in preventing it. What if your customer records get stolen, so what? Consumers are hearing about the largest banks and government security agencies getting hacked every day. If you are a mid-sized business it might be more cost-effective to invest in some damage control after the fact rather than jeopardize cash flow today.

So what is the future for security products? Well, they are not going to go away. They just need to be smarter, more cost-effective, and turn-key, and then perhaps companies will find the benefit-to-risk more acceptable.

<Article Reference:  Security Data overload article >

Web Security Breaches and Accountability


By Zack Sanders – Security Expert – APconnections

If this recent story about a breach of medical information in Utah is any indication of how organizations will now handle security breaches, technology managers everywhere should be shaking in their boots. After a breach that exposed personal information of 780,000 people, the Utah state technology director was relieved of his position by the governor, and several others are under investigation.

Details of the actual attack are scarce, but it appears as though a medicaid server (possibly hosted in the cloud) was vulnerable to a security misconfiguration at the password authentication level. This could mean a few different things – including SQL injection issues, exposed configuration files, or that content was accessible without actually logging in. Regardless of how it really occurred, it certainly could have been prevented with proper proactive assessments.

The larger issue at hand that the article touches on is accountability in data security. Personally, I think you are going to have a hard time finding organizations that will guarantee their solutions are totally secure. It’s just not realistic. You can never be 100% protected against an attack, and because software solutions often rely on other technologies and people, the amount of ways in are many and proving exactly how someone got in and who is to blame will be difficult considering that vulnerabilities are often leveraged against each other. For example, say you have a server that has a third party web application, a back-end database, and blog software installed. The web application itself is secure, but the blog software is not. It is breached by an attacker, and the database for the web application is stolen. User data in the database was not encrypted, and wide-spread fraud occurs. Who is to blame? The blog maker? The web application developer? The system administrator?

In truth, the answer is everyone – to varying degrees. The system administrator should not have these two software packages running on the same system. The blog developers should have built a better solution. The web application programmer should have encrypted data at rest. Blame can even shift further up the chain. The IT director should have budgeted more money for security. The board members should have demanded proactive actions be taken.

So, it is likely the firings in the Utah Medicaid breach were mostly political in that someone has to fall on the sword, but in truth, the blame should fall on many individuals and companies.

One thing is clear, if you are a technology director or manager, you don’t want this to happen to you – but there are actions you can take. The most important thing is to BE PROACTIVE about security. How many breaches do you have to read about every day before you take charge in your own environment. If you’ve never been hacked, ask someone who has. It is a very painful process and costs reputation, money, and time. Start taking steps today to better your chances against attack. Some options to consider:

– Have quarterly security assessments conducted.

– If major changes to the application or server are made, have those changes reviewed for security.

– Discuss your security controls with an expert.

– Audit your existing infrastructure and start making changes now. Even though this will take time and resources, it does not compare to the time and resources required if a breach occurs.

Apconnections Backs up Security Device Support with an unusual offer, “We’ll hack your network”


What gets people excited about purchasing an intrusion detection system? Not much. Certainly, fear can be used to sell security devices. But most, mid sized companies are spread thin with their IT staff, they are focused on running their business operations. To spend money to prevent something that has never happened to them would be seen as somewhat foolish. There are a large number of potential threats to a business, security being just one of them.

One expert pointed out recently:

“Sophisticated fraudsters are becoming the norm with data breaches, carder forums, and do it yourself (DIY) crime kits being marketed via the Internet.” Excerpt from fraudwar blog spot.

Thus, getting data stolen happens so often that it can be considered a survivable event, it is the new normal. Your customers are not going to run for the hills, as they have been conditioned to roll with this threat. But there still is a steep cost for such an event. So our staff put our heads together and asked the question… there must be an easy, quantifiable, minimum investment way to objectively evaluate data risk without a giant cluster of data security devices in place, spewing gobs of meaningless drivel.

One of our internal, white knight, hackers pointed out, that in his storied past, he had been able to break into almost any business at will (good thing he is a white knight and does not steal or damage anything). While talking to some of our channel resellers we have also learned that most companies, although aware of outside intrusion, are reluctant to throw money and resources at a potential problem that they can’t easily quantify.

Thus arose an idea for our new offer. For a small refundable retainer fee, we will attempt to break into a customers data systems from the outside. If we can’t get in, then we’ll return the retainer fee. Obviously, if we get in, we can then propose a solution with indisputable evidence of the vulnerability, and if we don’t get in, then the customer can have some level of assurance that their existing infrastructure thwarted a determined break in.

Case Study: A Successful BotNet-Based Attack


By Zack Sanders – Security Expert – APconnections

In early 2012, I took on a client who was a referral from someone I had worked with when I first got out of school. When the CTO of the company initially called me, they were actually in the process of being attacked at that very moment. I got to work right away using my background as both a web application hacker and as a forensic analyst to try and solve the key questions that we briefly touched on in a blog post just last week. Questions such as:

– What was the nature of the attack?

– What kind of data was it after?

– What processes and files on the machine were malicious and/or which legitimate files were now infected?

– How could we maintain business continuity while at the same time ensuring that the threat was truly gone?

– What sort of security controls should we put in place to make sure an attack doesn’t happen again?

– What should the public and internal responses be?

Background

For the sake of this case study, we’ll call the company HappyFeet Movies – an organization that specializes in online dance tutorials. HappyFeet has three basic websites, all of which help sell and promote their movies. Most of the company’s business occurs in the United States and Europe, with few other international transactions. All of the websites reside on one physical server that is maintained by a hosting company. They are a small to medium-sized business with about 50 employees locally.

Initial Questions

I always start these investigations with two questions:

1) What evidence do you see of an attack? Defacement? Increased traffic? Interesting log entries?

2) What actions have you taken thus far to stop the attack?

Here was HappyFeet’s response to these questions:

1) We are seeing content changes and defacement on the home page and other pages. We are also seeing strange entries in the Apache logs.

2) We have been working with our hosting company to restore to previous backups. However, after each backup, within hours, we are getting hacked again. This has been going on for the last couple of months. The hosting company has removed some malicious files, but we aren’t sure which ones.

Looking For Clues

The first thing I like to do in cases like this is poke around the web server to see what is really going on under the hood. Hosting companies often have management portals or FTP interfaces where you can interact with the web server, but having root access and a shell is extremely important to me. With this privileged account, I can go and look at all the relevant files for evidence that aligns with the observed behavior. Keep in mind, at this point I have not done anything as far as removing the web server from the production environment or shutting it down. I am looking for valuable information that really can only be discovered while the attack is in progress. The fact that the hosting company has restored to backup and removed files irks me, but there is still plenty of evidence available for me to analyze.

Here were some of my findings during this initial assessment – all of them based around one of the three sites:

1) The web root for one of the three sites has a TON of files in it – many of which have strange names and recent modification dates. Files such as:

db_config-1.php

index_t.php

c99.php

2) Many of the directories (even the secure ones) are world writable, with permissions:

drwxrwxrwx

3) There are SQL dumps/backups in the web root that are zipped so when visited by a web browser the user is prompted for a download – yikes!

4) The site uses a content management system (CMS) that was last updated in 2006 and the database setup interface is still enabled and visible at the web root.

5) Directory listings are enabled, allowing a user to see the contents of the directories – making discovery of file names above trivial task.

6) The Apache logs show incessant SQL injection attempts, which when ran, expose usernames and passwords in plain text.

7) The Apache logs also show many entries accessing a strange file called c99.php. It appeared to be some sort of interface that took shell commands as arguments, as is evident in the logs:

66.249.72.41 – – “GET /c99.php?act=ps_aux&d=%2Fvar%2Faccount%2F&pid=24143&sig=9 HTTP/1.1″ 200 286

Nature of the Attack

There were two basic findings that stood out to me most:

1) The c99.php file.

2) The successful SQL injection log entries.

c99.php

I decided to do some research and quickly found out that this is a popular PHP shell file. It was somehow uploaded to the web server and the rest of the mayhem was conducted through this shell script in the browser. But how did it get there?

The oldest log data on the server was December 19, 2011. At the very top of this log file were commands accessing c99.php, so I couldn’t really be sure how it got on there, but I had a couple guesses:

1) The most likely scenario I thought was that the attacker was able to leverage the file upload feature of the dated CMS – either by accessing it without an account, or by brute forcing an administrative account with a weak password.

2) There was no hardware firewall protecting connections to the server, and there were many legacy FTP and SSH accounts festering that hadn’t been properly removed when they were no longer needed. One of these accounts could have been brute forced – more likely an FTP account with limited access; otherwise a shell script wouldn’t really be necessary to interact with the server.

The log entries associated with c99.php were extremely interesting. There would be 50 or so GET requests, which would run commands like:

cd, ps aux, ls -al

Then there would be a POST request, which would either put a new file in the current directory or modify an existing one.

This went on for tens of thousands of lines. The very manual and linear nature of the entries seemed to me very much like an automated process of some type.

SQL Injection

The SQL injection lines of the logs were also very exploratory in nature. There was a long period of information gathering and testing against a few different PHP pages to see how they responded to database code. Once the attacker realized that the site was vulnerable, the onslaught began and eventually they were able to discover the information schema and table names of pertinent databases. From there, it was just a matter of running through the tables one at a time pulling rows of data.

What Was The Attack After?

The motives were pretty clear at this point. The attacker was a) attempting to control the server to use in other attacks or send SPAM, and b) gather whatever sensitive information they could from databases or configuration files before moving on. Exploited user names and passwords could later be used in identity theft, for example. Both of the above motives are very standard for botnet-based attacks. It should be noted that the attacker was not specifically after HappyFeet – in fact they probably knew nothing about them – they just used automated probing to look for red flags and when they returned positive results,  assimilated the server into their network.

Let the Cleanup Begin

Now that the scope of the attack was more fully understood, it was time to start cleaning up the server. When I am conducting this phase of the project, I NEVER delete anything, no matter how obviously malicious or how benign. Instead, I quarantine it outside of the web root, where I will later archive and remove it for backup storage.

Find all the shell files

The first thing I did was attempt to locate all of the shell files that might have been uploaded by c99.php. Because my primary theory was that the shell file was uploaded through a file upload feature in the web site, I checked those directories first. Right away I saw a file that didn’t match the naming convention of the other files. First of all, the directory was called “pdfs” and this file had an extension of PHP. It was also called broxn.php, whereas the regular files had longer names with camel-case that made sense to HappyFeet. I visited this file in the web browser and saw a GUI-like shell interface. I checked the logs for usage of this file, but there were none. Perhaps this file was just an intermediary to get c99.php to the web root. I used a basic find command to pull a list of all PHP files from the web root forward. Obviously this was a huge list, but it was pretty easy to run through quickly because of the naming differences in the files. I only had to investigate ten or so files manually.

I found three other shell files in addition to broxn.php. I looked for evidence of these in the logs, found none, and quarantined them.

What files were uploaded or which ones changed?

Because of the insane amount of GET requests served by c99.php, I thought it was safe to assume that every file on the server was compromised. It wasn’t worth going through the logs manually on this point. The attacker had access to the server long enough that this assumption is the only safe one. The less frequent occurrences of POST requests were much more more manageable. I did a grep through the Apache logs for POST requests submitted by c99.php and came up with a list of about 200 files. My thought was that these files were all either new or modified and could potentially be malicious. I began the somewhat pain-staking process of manually reviewing these files. Some had been overwritten back to their original state by the hosting company’s backup, but some were still malicious and in place. I noted these files, quarantined them, and retested website functionality.

Handling the SQL injection vulnerabilities

The dated CMS used by this site was riddled with SQL injection vulnerabilities. So much so, that my primary recommendation for handling it was building a brand new site. That process, however, takes time, and we needed a temporary solution. I used the log data that I had to figure out which pages the botnet was primarily targeting with SQL attacks. I manually modified the PHP code to do basic sanitizing on all inputs in these pages. This immediately thwarted SQL attacks going forward, but the damage had already been done. The big question here was how to handle the fact that all usernames and passwords were compromised.

Improving Security

Now that I felt the server was sufficiently cleaned, it was time to beef up the security controls to prevent future attacks. Here are some of the primary tasks I did to accomplish this:

1) Added a hardware firewall for SSH and FTP connections.

I worked with the hosting company to put this appliance in front of the web server. Now, only specific IPs could connect to the web server via SSH and FTP.

2) Audited and recreated all accounts.

I changed the passwords of all administrative accounts on the server and in the CMS, and regenerated database passwords.

3) Put IP restrictions on the administrative console of the CMS.

Now, only certain IP addresses could access the administrative portal.

4) Removed all files related to install and database setup for the CMS.

These files were no long necessary and only presented a security vulnerability.

5) Removed all zip files from the web root forward and disabled directory listings.

These files were readily available for download and exposed all sorts of sensitive information. I also disabled directory listings, which is helpful in preventing successful information gathering.

6) Hashed customer passwords for all three sites.

Now, the passwords for user accounts were not stored in plain text in the database.

7) Added file integrity monitoring to the web server.

Whenever a file changes, I am notified via email. This greatly helps reduce the scope of an attack should it breach all of these controls.

8) Wrote a custom script that blocks IP addresses that put malicious content in the URL.

This helps prevent information gathering or further vulnerability probing. The actions this script takes operate like a miniature NetGladiator.

9) Installed anti-virus software on the web server.

10) Removed world-writable permissions from every directory and adjusted ownership accordingly.

No directory should ever be world writable – doing so is usually just a lazy way of avoiding proper ownership. The world writable aspect of this server allowed the attack to be way more broad than it had to be.

11) Developed an incident response plan.

I worked with the hosting company and HappyFeet to develop an internal incident response policy in case something happens in the future.

Public Response

Due to the fact that all usernames and passwords were compromised, I urged HappyFeet to communicate the breach to their customers. They did so, and later received feedback from users who had experienced identity theft. This can be a tough step to take from a business point of view, but transparency is always the best policy.

Ongoing Monitoring

It is not enough to implement the above controls, set it, and forget it. There must be ongoing tweaking and monitoring to ensure a strong security profile. For HappyFeet, I set up a yearly monitoring package that includes:

– Manual and automated log monitoring.

– Server vulnerability scans once a quarter, and web application scans once every six months.

– Manual user history review.

– Manual anti-virus scans and results review.

Web Application Firewalls

I experimented with two types of web application firewalls for HappyFeet. Both of which took me down the road of broken functionality and over-robustness. One had to be completely uninstalled, and the other is in monitoring mode because protection mode disallowed legitimate requests. It also is alerting to probing attempts about 5,000 times per day – most of which are not real attacks – and the alert volume is unmanageable. Its only value is in generating data for improving my custom script that is blocking IPs based on basic malicious attempts.

This is a great example of how NetGladiator can provide a lot of value to the right environment. They don’t need an intense, enterprise-level intrusion prevention system – they just need to block the basics and not break functionality in their web sites. The custom script, much like NetGladiator, suits their needs to a T and can also be configured to reflect previous attacks and vulnerabilities I found in their site that are too vast to manually patch.

Lessons Learned

Here are some key take-aways from the above project:

– Being PROACTIVE is so much better than being REACTIVE when it comes to web security. If you are not sure where you stack up, have an expert take a look.

– Always keep software and web servers up to date. New security vulnerabilities arrive on the scene daily, and it’s extremely likely that old software is vulnerable. Often, security holes are even published for an attacker to research. It’s just a matter of finding out which version you have and testing the security flaw.

– Layered security is king. The security controls mentioned above prove just how powerful layering can be. They are working together in harmony to protect an extremely vulnerable application effectively.

If you have any questions on NetGladiator, web security, or the above case study, feel free to contact us any time! We are here to help, and don’t want you to ever experience an attack similar to the one above.

Why is the Internet Access in My Hotel So Slow?


The last several times I have stayed in Ireland and London, my wireless Internet became so horrific in the evening hours that I ended up walking down the street to work at the local Internet cafe. I’ll admit that hotel Internet service is hit or miss – sometimes it is fine , and other times it is terrible. Why does this happen?

To start to understand why slow Internet service persists at many hotels you must understand the business model.

Most hotel chains are run by Real Estate and Management type companies, they do not know the intricacies of wireless networks any more than they can fix a broken U-Joint on the hotel airport van. Hence, they hire out their IT – both for implementation and design consulting. The marching orders to their IT consultant is usually to build a system that generates revenue for the hotel. How can we charge for this service? The big cash cow for the hotel industry used to be the phone system, and then with advent of cell phones that went away. Then it was On-Demand Movies (mostly porn) , and that is fading fast. Competing on great free Internet service between operators has not been a priority. However, even with concessions to this model of business, there is no reason why it cannot be solved.

There are a multitude of reasons that Internet service can gridlock in a hotel, sometimes it is wireless interference, but by far the most common reason is too many users trying to watch video during peak times (maybe a direct result of pay on demand movies). When this happens you get the rolling brown out. The service works for 30 seconds or so, duping  you into thinking you can send an e-mail or finish a transaction; but just you as you submit your request, you notice everything is stuck, with no progress messages in the lower corner of your browser. And then, you get an HTTP time out. Wait perhaps 30 seconds, and all of a sudden things clear up and seem normal only to repeat again .

The simple solution for this gridlock problem is to use a dynamic fairness device such as our NetEqualizer. Many operators take the first step in bandwidth control and use their routers to enforcing fixed rate limits per customer, however this will  only provide some temporary relief and will not work in many cases.

The next time you experience the rolling brown out, send the hotel a link to this blog article (if you can get the email out). The  hotels that we have implemented our solution at are doing cartwheels down the street and we’d be happy to share their stories with anybody who inquires.

What to Do If Your Organization Has Been Hacked


By Zack Sanders – Security Expert – APconnections

It’s a scary scenario that every business fears; a successful attack on your web site that results in stolen information or embarrassing defacement.

From huge corporations, to mom-and-pop online shops, data security is (or should be) a keystone consideration. As we’ve written about before, no one is immune to attack – not even local businesses with small online footprints. I, personally, have worked with many clients whom you would not think would be targeted by hackers, and they end up being the victims of reasonably intricate and damaging attacks that cost many thousands of dollars to mitigate.

Because no set of security controls or solutions can make you truly safe from exploitation, it is important to have a plan in place in case you do get hacked. Having a documented plan ready BEFORE an attack occurs allows you to be calm and rational with your response. Below are some basic steps you should consider in an incident response plan and/or follow in case a breach occurs.

1) Stay calm.

An attack, especially one in progress, naturally causes panic. While understandable, these feelings will only cause you to make mistakes in handling the breach. Stay calm and stick to your plan.

2) DO NOT unplug the system.

Unplugging the affected system, deleting malicious files, or restoring to a backup are all panic-driven responses to a security incident. When you take measures such as these, you potentially destroy key evidence in determining what, if anything, was taken, how it was taken, and when. Leave the system in place and call an expert as soon as possible.

3) Call an expert.

There are many companies that specialize in post-breach analysis, and it is important to contact these folks right away. They can help determine how the breach occurred, what was taken, and when. They can also help implement controls and improve security so that the same attack does not happen again. If you’ve been hacked, this is the most important step to take.

4) Keep a record.

For possible eventual legal action and to simply keep track of system changes, always keep a record of what has happened to the infected system – who has touched it, when, etc.

5) Determine the scope of the attack, stop the bleeding, and figure out what was taken.

The expert you phoned in will analyze the affected system and follow the steps above. Once the scope is understood, the system will be taken offline and the security hole that caused the problem will be discovered and closed. After that, the information that was compromised will be reviewed. This step will help determine how to proceed next.

6) Figure out who to tell.

Once you’ve determined what kind of information was compromised, it is very important to communicate that to the right people. If it was internal documents, you probably don’t need to make that public. If it was usernames and passwords, you must let your users know.

7) Have a security assessment performed and improve security controls.

Have your expert analyze the rest of your infrastructure and web applications for security holes that could be a problem in the future. After this occurs, the expert can recommend tools that will vastly improve your security layering.

Of course, many of these tasks can be performed proactively to greatly reduce the likelihood of ever needing this process. Contact an expert now and have them analyze your systems for security vulnerabilities.

Do We Really Need SSL?


By Art Reisman, CTO, www.netequalizer.com, www.netgladiator.net.

Art Reisman CTO www.netequalizer.com

I know that perception is reality, and sometimes it is best to accept it, but when it comes to security, FUD, I get riled up.

For example, last year I wrote about the un-needed investment surrounding the IPV4 demise, and, as predicted, the IPv6 push turned out to be mostly vendor hype motivated by a desire to increase equipment sales. Today, I am here to dispel the misplaced fear around the concept of having your data stolen in transit over the Internet. I am referring to the wire between your residence and the merchant site at the other end. This does  not encompass the security of data once it is stored on disk drive at its final location, just the transit portion.

To get warmed up, let me throw out some analogies.

Do you fear getting carjacked going 75 mph on the interstate?

Most likely not, but I bet you do lock your doors when stopped.

Do you worry about encrypting your cell phone conversations?

Not unless you are on security detail in the military.

As with my examples, somebody stealing your credit card while it is in transit, although possible, is highly impractical; there are just better ways to steal your data.

It’s not that I am against VPN’s and SSL, I do agree there is a risk in transport of data. The problem I have is that the relative risk is so much lower than some other glaring security holes that companies ignore because they are either unaware, or more into perception than protecting data. And yet, customers will hand them financial data as long as their web site portal provides SSL encryption.

To give you some more perspective on the relative risk, let’s examine the task of stealing customer information in transit over the Internet.

Suppose for a moment that I am a hacker. Perhaps I am in it for thrills or for illegal financial gain, either way, I am going to be pragmatic with my approach and maximize my chances of finding a gold nugget.

So how would I go about stealing a credit card number in transit?

Option 1: Let’s suppose I parked in the alley behind your house and had a device sophisticated enough to eaves drop your wireless router and display all the web sites you visited. So now what? I just wait there, and hope perhaps in a few days or weeks you’ll make an online purchase and I’ll grab your cc information, and then I’ll run off and make a few purchases.  This may sound possible, and it is, but the effort and exposure would not be practical.

Option 2: If I landed a job at an ISP, I could hook up a sniffer that eaves drops on every conversation between the ISP customers and the rest of the Internet. I suppose this is a bit more likely than option 1;  but there is just no precedent for it – and ISPs often have internal safeguards to monitor and protect against this. I’d still need very specialized equipment and time to work unnoticed to pull this off. I’d have to limit my thefts to the occasional hit and run so as not to attract suspicion. The chances of economic benefit are slim, and the chances of getting caught are high, and thus the risk to the customer is very low.

For the criminal intent on stealing data, trolling the internet with a bot looking for unsecured servers, or working for a financial company where the data resides, and stealing thousands of credit cards is far more likely. SSL does nothing to prevent the real threats, and that is why you hear about hacking intrusions in the headlines everyday. Many of these break-ins could be prevented, but it takes a layered approach, not just a feel good SSL layer that we could do without.

Common NetGladiator Questions Explained


Since our last security-related blog post, The Truth About Web Security (And How to Protect Your Data), we’ve received many inquiries related to NetGladiator and best-practice security in general. In the various email and phone conversations thus far, we’ve encountered some recurring questions that many of you might also find useful. The purpose of this post is to provide answers to those questions.

1) Could an attacker circumvent NetGladiator by slowly probing the targets as not to be detected by the time anomaly metrics?

The NetGladiator detects multiple types of anomalies. Some are time-frequency based, and some are pattern based.

For instance, a normal user won’t be hitting 500 pages/minute, and a normal user will never be putting SQL in the URL attempting an injection. If a malicious user was slowly running a probing robot, it would likely still be attempting patterns that the NetGladiator would detect, and the NetGladiator would immediately block that IP. There are directory brute force tools that won’t hit on any patterns, but they will hit on the time frequency settings. If the attacker were to slow it down to a normal user click-rate, it’s possible they could go undetected, but these brute force lists rely on trying millions of common page and directory names quickly. It would not be worth it to run through this list at that pace.

2) Could a hacker change their IP address often enough so that NetGladiator would not think the source of the attack was the same?

The amount of IP addresses you’d need to spoof would make this a tiresome effort for the attacker, and in an automated attack by a botnet, the probe is more likely to just move on to a new target. In a targeted attack, IP spoofing, while possible, would also likely be more of a hassle than it’s worth. But, even if it were worth it for the attacker, the NetGladiator alerts admins to intrusion attempts, so you can proactively deal with the threat. You can also block by IP Range/Country so that if you notice someone spoofing IP addresses from a specific IP range, you can drop all those connections for as long as you like.

Also with regard to IP addresses, the NetGladiator only bans them for a set amount of time. This is because bots probe from new IP addresses all the time. A real user might eventually end up with that IP and you wouldn’t want to block it forever. That being said, if there was a constantly malicious IP, you can permanently block it.

3) Why is there a maximum number of patterns you can input into NetGladiator?

One of NetGladiator’s key differentiating factors is its “robustlessness” and its custom configuration. This may sound like a detriment, but it actually will make you better off. Not only will you be able to exclusively detect threats pertinent to your web application, you also will not break functionality – regardless of poor programming or setup on the back end. Many intrusion prevention systems are so robust in their blocking of requests that there are too many false positives to deal with (usually based on programming “errors” or infrastructure abnormalities). This often ends with the IPS being disabled – which helps no one. NetGladiator has a maximum number of patterns for one main reason:

Speed and efficiency.

We don’t want to hamper your web connections by inspecting packets for too many regular expressions. We’d rather quickly check for key patterns that show malicious intent under the assumption that those patterns will be tried eventually by an attacker. This way, data can seamlessly pass through, and your users won’t incur performance problems.

4) What kind of environments benefit from NetGladiator?

NetGladiator was built to protect web applications from botnets and hackers – it won’t have much use for you at the network level or the user level (email, SPAM, anti-virus, etc.). There are other options for security controls that focus on these areas. Every few years, the Open Web Application Security Project (OWASP), releases their Top 10 – which is a list of the most common web application security vulnerabilities facing sites today. NetGladiator helps protect against issues of this type, so any web application that has even a small amount of interactivity or backend to it will benefit from NetGladiator’s features.

We want to hear from you!

Have some questions about NetGladiator or web security in general? Visit our website, leave a comment, or shoot us an email at ips@apconnections.net.

Update: Bandwidth Consumption and the IT Professionals that are Tasked to Preserve It


“What is the Great Bandwidth Arms Race? Simply put, it is the sole reason my colleague gets up and goes to work each day. It is perhaps the single most important aspect of his job—the one issue that is always on his mind, from the moment he pulls into the campus parking lot in the morning to the moment he pulls into his driveway at home at night. In an odd way, the Great Bandwidth Arms Race is the exact opposite of the “Prime Directive” from Star Trek: rather than a mandate of noninterference, it is one of complete and intentional interference. In short, my colleague’s job is to effectively manage bandwidth consumption at our university. He is a technological gladiator, and the Great Bandwidth Arms Race is his arena, his coliseum in which he regularly battles conspicuous bandwidth consumption.”

The excerpt above is from an article written by Paul Cesarini, a Professor at Bowling Green University back 2007. It would be interesting to get some comments and updates from Paul at some point, but for now, I’ll provide an update from the vendor perspective.

Since 2007, we have seen a big drop in P2P traffic that formerly dominated most networks. A report from bandwidth control vendor Sandvine tends to agree with our observations.

Sandvine Report
— The growth of Netflix, the decline of P2P traffic, and the end of the PC era are three notable aspects of a new report by network equipment company Sandvine. Netflix accounted for 27.6% of downstream U.S. Internet traffic in the third quarter, according to Sandvine’s “Global Internet Phenomena Report” for Fall 2011. YouTube accounted for 10 percent of downstream traffic and BitTorrent, the file-sharing protocol, accounted for 9 percent.”

We also agree with Sandvine’s current findings that video is driving bandwidth consumption; however, for the network professionals entrenched in the battle of bandwidth consumption, there is another factor at play which may indicate some hope on the horizon.

There has been a precipitous drop on raw bandwidth costs over the past 10 years. Commercial bandwidth rates have dropped from around $100 or more per megabit to as little as $10 per megabit. So the question now is: Will the availability of lower-cost bandwidth catch up to the demand curve? In other words, will the tools and human effort put into the fight against managing bandwidth become moot? And if so, what is the time frame?

I am going to go out halfway on limb and claim we are seeing bandwidth catch up with demand and hence the battle for the IT professional is going to subside over the coming years.

The reason for my statement is that once we get to a price point where most consumers can truly send and receive interactive video (note this is the not the same as ISPs using caching tricks), we will see some of the pressure spent on micro-managing bandwidth consumption with human labor ease up. Yes, there will be consumers that want HD video all the time, but with a few rules in your bandwidth control device you will be able allow certain levels of bandwidth consumption through, including low resolution video for Skype and YouTube, without crashing your network. Once we are at this point, the pressure for making trade-offs on specific kinds of consumption will ease off a bit.  What this implies is that the cost of human labor to balance bandwidth needs will be relegated to dumb devices and perhaps obsolete this one aspect of the job for an IT professional.

Ever Wonder Why Your Video (YouTube) Over the Internet is Slow Sometimes?


By: Art Reisman

Art Reisman CTO www.netequalizer.com

Art Reisman is the CTO of APconnections. He is Chief Architect on the NetGladiator and NetEqualizer product lines.

I live in a nice suburban neighborhood with both DSL and Cable service options for my Internet. My speed tests always show better than 10 megabits of download speed, and yet sometimes, a basic YouTube or iTunes download just drags on forever. Calling my provider to complain about broken promises of Internet speed is futile. Their call center people in India have the patience of saints; they will wear me down with politeness despite my rudeness and screaming. Although I do want to believe in some kind of Internet Santa Claus, I know first hand that streaming unfettered video for all is just not going to happen. Below I’ll break down some of the limitations for video over the Internet, and explain some of the seemingly strange anomalies for various video performance problems.

The factors dictating the quality of video over the Internet are:

1) How many customers are sharing the link between your provider and the rest of the Internet

Believe it or not, your provider pays a fee to connect up to the Internet. Perhaps not in the same exact way a consumer does, but the more traffic they connect up to the rest of the Internet the more it costs them. There are times when their connection to the Internet is saturated, at which point all of their customers will experience slower service of some kind.

2) The server(s) where the video is located

It is possible that the content hosted site has overloaded servers and their disk drives are just not fast enough to maintain decent quality. This is usually what your operator will claim regardless if it is their fault or not. :)

3) The link from the server to the Internet location of your provider

Somewhere between the content video server and your provider there could be a bottleneck.

4) The “last mile”  link between you and your provider (is it dedicated or shared?)

For most cable and DSL customers, you have a direct wire back to your provider. For wireless broadband, it is a completely different story. You are likely sharing the airwaves to your nearest tower with many customers.

So why is my video slow sometimes for YouTube but not for NetFlix?

The reason why I can watch some NetFlix movies, and a good number of popular YouTube videos without any issues on my home system is that my provider uses a trick called caching to host some content locally. By hosting the video content locally, the provider can insure that items 2 and 3 (above) are not an issue. Many urban cable operators also have a dedicated wire from their office to your residence which eliminates issues with item 4 (above).

Basically, caching is nothing new for a cable operator. Even before the Internet, cable operators had movies on demand that you could purchase. With movies on demand, cable operators maintained a server with local copies of popular movies in their main office, and when you called them they would actually throw a switch of some kind and send the movie down the coaxial cable from their office to your house. Caching today is a bit more sophisticated than that but follows the same principles. When you watch a NetFlix movie, or YouTube video that is hosted on your provider’s local server (cache),  the cable company can send the video directly down the wire to your house. In most setups, you don’t share your local last mile wire, and hence the movie plays without contention.

Caching is great, and through predictive management (guessing what is going to be used the most), your provider often has the content you want in a local copy and so it downloads quickly.  However, should you truly surf around to get random or obscure YouTube videos, your chances of a slower video will increase dramatically, as it is not likely to be stored in your provider’s cache.

Try This: The next time you watch a (not popular) YouTube video that is giving your problems, kill it, and try a popular trending video. More often than not, the popular trending video will run without interruption. If you repeat this experiment a few times and get the same results, you can be certain that your provider is caching some video to speed up your experience.

In case you need more proof that this is “top of mind” for Internet Providers, check out the January 1st 2012, CED Magazine article on the Top Broadband 50 for 2011 (read the whole article here).  #25 (enclosed below) is tied to improving video over the Internet.

#25: Feeding the video frenzy with CDNs

So everyone wants their video anywhere, anytime and on any device. One way of making sure that video is poised for rapid deployment is through content delivery networks. The prime example of a cable CDN is the Comcast Content Distribution Network (CCDN), which allows Comcast to use its national backbone to tie centralized storage libraries to regional and local cache servers.

Of course, not every cable operator can afford the grand-scale CDN build-out that Comcast is undertaking, but smaller MSOs can enjoy some of the same benefits through partnerships. – MR

The Truth About Web Security (And How to Protect Your Data)


By Zack Sanders – Security Expert at APconnections.

Security Theater

Internet security is an increasingly popular and fascinating subject that has pervaded our lives through multiple points of entry in recent years. Because of this infiltration, security expertise is no longer a niche discipline teetering on the fringe of computer science – it’s an integral part. Computer security concerns have ceased to be secondary thoughts and have made their way to the front lines of business decisions, political banter, and legislative reform. Hackers are common subjects in movies, books, and TV shows. It seems like every day we are reading about the latest security breach of a gigantic, international conglomerate. Customers who once were naive to how their data was used and stored are now outwardly concerned about their privacy and identity theft.

This explosion in awareness has, of course, yielded openings for the opportunistic. Companies now know there is a real business need for security, and there are thus hundreds of solutions available to you to improve your security footprint. But most of them are not telling you the truth about how to really secure your infrastructure. They just want to sell you their product – hyping its potential, touting its features, and telling you to install it and – *poof* – you no longer need to worry about security – something those in the industry call “Security Theater.” In many ways, these companies are actually making you less secure because of this sales point. Believing that you can plug in an “all-in-one device” and have it provide you with all of your security controls sounds good, but it’s unrealistic. When you stop being diligent on multiple levels, you start being vulnerable.

Real security is all about two things:

1) Being PROACTIVE.
2) Implementing LAYERED security controls.

Let’s briefly discuss each of these central tenants of best-practice security.

1) Being proactive is key for many reasons. When you are proactive with security, you are anticipating attacks before they start. This allows you to more calmly implement security controls, develop policies, and train staff before a breach occurs. You should be proactive about security for the same reasons you are proactive about your health. Eating well, exercising, and periodically seeing a doctor are all ways to improve your chances of remaining healthy. It doesn’t guarantee you won’t get sick, much in the same way security controls won’t guarantee you won’t get hacked, but it does greatly improve your odds. And if you are not proactive, just like with your personal health, if something does go wrong, it can often be too late to reverse the effects, as most of the damage has already been done.

2) Implementing a layered approach to security is paramount in reducing the odds of a successful attack. The goal is to take security controls that complement each other on different levels of your infrastructure and piece them together to form a solid line of defense. If one control is breached, another is there to back it up in a different, but equally effective way. It is actually possible to take products that are relatively ineffective on their own (say 75% effective), and layer them to lower the chances of a successful attack to less than 1%. If you implement just four 75%-effective tools, say, check out what your breach success rate becomes: (.25 * .25 * .25 *.25) = .0039 * 100 = 0.39%! That’s pretty impressive!

Here is an analogy

Think of your sensitive data as crown jewels that are stored in the center of a castle. If your only security control is a moat, it wouldn’t take much ingenuity for a thief to cross over the moat and subsequently steal your jewels. One thing we can do to improve security is better our moat. Let’s add some crocodiles – that will certainly help in thwarting would-be crossers. But, even though we’ve beefed up the security of the moat, it’s still passable. The problem is that we can never 100% secure the moat from thieves no matter what we do. We need to add in some complementary controls to back up the security of the moat in case the moat fails. So, we’ll place archers at the four corner towers and install a big door with multiple locks and guards at the front gate. We’ll move the jewels to the cellar and place them under lock and key with a designated guard. Knights will be trained to spot thieves, and there will be a checkpoint outside the castle for all incoming and outgoing guests. Now, instead ofhaving to just cross the moat, a thief would also have to get through the heavy door, through the locks, past the guards, past the archers, into the cellar, past another guard, and into the locked room. On exit, he’d have to get through all these again, including a manual search at the checkpoint. That seems tough to do compared to just crossing the moat.

Your web security infrastructure should work the same way. Multiple policies, devices, and configurations should all work in harmony to protect your sensitive data. When companies are trying to sell you an all-in-one security device, they are essentially trying to sell you a very robust moat. It’s not that their product won’t provide value, but it needs to be implemented as part of an overall security strategy, and it should not be solely relied upon.

How Real Attacks Occur

We have thought a lot lately about exactly how real attacks occur in the wild for organizations with interactive web applications. This is slightly simplistic, but it really seems to boil down to two key origins:

1) A hack results from an AUTOMATED scan or probe.

This is by far the most common type of attack, despite it not being as popular as the other. Many organizations don’t take this type of attack as seriously as they should. They think that just because they are a small, non-influential site with little customer data that they won’t be targeted. And they are probably right – a human attacker won’t be targeting them. But a robot has no discretion. The robot’s goal is to increase hosts in their botnet (for DOS attacks, sending SPAM, etc.), and to siphon off any available sensitive data from the server. The botnets are constantly scouring the Internet, rapidly attempting breaches with known, common patterns. They don’t get too sophisticated.

2) A hack results from a TARGETED attack.

The media has hyped this into the most popular type of attack, but it is much less common. Targeted attacks can begin from multiple motivations. Sometimes, a targeted attack will occur due to interesting results from an automated scan (as in #1, above). The other type of targeted attack is the most dangerous – an attacker, or group of attackers, specifically targeting your site for financial or political reasons. Despite what other products might profess, there is no one-stop solution for stopping this type of attack. A layered approach to security, as discussed above, is key.

Approaches to Dealing with Botnets/Malnets and other Automated Attacks

Botnets are large, distributed networks of private computers and servers that are infected with malicious software without the owner of the system being aware. The botnet computers can be used to scan targets for vulnerabilities or send out SPAM/malicious emails. Using systems registered to someone else provides a layer of anonymity to the attacker. He/she also has increased processing power and resources available at their disposal. Botnets rely heavily on attempting simple intrusions and speed. They often are brute forcing directory listings or credentials and once they’ve exhausted their lists, they move on.

There are a few things you can do to greatly lower the effectiveness of a botnet:

1) Think about if your website really needs to be open to the entire Internet. Are there countries/subnets that you will never receive business from? Why not just block these IP ranges right off the bat? It seems harsh at first, but if you think about it, there is a lot of added security value here for the small risk you turn away a legitimate customer.

2) Implement a tool that monitors the amount of requests received over a given time frame. A normal user won’t ever be requesting pages at the same rate as a botnet. If the request count reaches past a certain threshold, you can confidently block the offending IP.

3) Implement a tool that monitors logs for multiple 404 (Page Not Found) requests. Brute-force tools will generate plenty of 404 requests when they are hammering your servers. If you see multiple 404’s over a short period of time from the same IP, chances are good they are acting maliciously.

4) Look for common patterns in logs that suggest malicious intent. The information discovery process is very important for an attacker (or botnet). It is during this phase that they learn about possible vulnerabilities your sites might have. In order to find these holes, the attacker has to experiment with the site to see how it responds to malicious code. If you can isolate these probing attempts right off the bat, you stand a good chance at cutting off the information gathering process before they get results on potential attack vectors.

5) Implement a file integrity monitoring tool on your web server and have it actively alert to changes in files that are not supposed to change often. If an attacker finds an entry point, one of the first things they will try and do is upload a file to the server. Getting a file to the server is a huge accomplishment for an attacker. They can upload PHP or ASP files that act as shell interfaces to the server itself, and from there can wreak whatever havoc they’d like. With a file integrity monitoring tool, you can know if an file is added within minutes of upload and can deal with the threat before it is wide spread.

The NetGladiator

NetGladiator is a next-generation Intrusion Prevention System (IPS) made by APconnections that deals with some of the issues above and was built based on how attacks actually occur. It can be an effective layer in your security profile to help block unwanted web-based requests (either from a botnet or a targeting attacker) – you can think of it as a firewall for your web applications. In addition to handling web requests, it can detect time-based anomalies and block IP ranges by country and/or subnet.

NetGladiator has two primary goals:

1) Make your web infrastructure INVISIBLE and UNINTERESTING to probing botnets.
2) Provide value as a LAYERED appliance in case of a targeted attack.

NetGladiator also has some of the following aspects that set it apart from more expensive, overly robust IPS’s:

Customizable Configurations
Unlike other IPSs with insanely robust pattern sets, NetGladiator lets you pick and choose the patterns you’d like it to hit on. Other products inspect for every vulnerability known to man. While this sounds good, it isn’t very practical and often leads to broken functionality, false positives, and total reliance.

Support From a White Knight (a.k.a Professional Hacker)
As part of your support agreement when you purchase a NetGladiator, a real, white knight will help you set up and configure your machine to meet your needs. This includes identifying and patching any existing holes prior to your installation, deciding what issues you might face from a real attacker, and writing you a custom configuration for your box. That’s something that no one else provides – especially at this price point. And, if you want further security assessments performed, additional support hours can be purchased.

Plug and Play
If you’ve set up a NetEqualizer in the past, you’ll find NetGladiator’s installation process to be even easier. Just put it in front of your web servers, cable the box correctly, and turn it on. Traffic will be passing through it instantly. Now all that’s left is to configure your patterns. NetGladiator comes with default patterns in case no customization is necessary. NetGladiator also runs on its own system, and does not require any installs to your web server. This makes it platform independent and will create zero conflicts with your existing software and hardware.

But remember, protecting web applications is just one piece of the puzzle. In order to layer NetGladiator into your overall security strategy, you should complement its use with other controls. Some examples would be:

– Well-defined user and staff policies that deal with insider threats and social engineering

– Full or column-level database encryption

– Anti-virus

– File integrity monitoring

– Hardware firewalls

– A security assessment by an expert

etc…

Questions?

Need help instituting a layered security strategy? We have experience in all these levels of security controls and are happy to help with NetGladiator implementation or other security-related tasks. Just let us know how we can be of service!

Have some questions about NetGladiator or web security in general? Visit our website, leave a comment, or shoot us an email at ips@apconnections.net. In the next blog post, we’ll answer those questions and also discuss common ones we’ve received from customers so far.

Our Take on Network Instruments 5th Annual Network Global Study


Editors Note: Network Instruments released their “Fifth Annual State of the Network Global study” on March 13th, 2o12. You can read their full study here. Their results were based on responses by 163 network engineers, IT directors, and CIOs in North America, Asia, Europe, Africa, Australia, and South America. Responses were collected from October 22, 2011 to January 3, 2012.

What follows is our take (or my .02 cents) on the key findings around Bandwidth Management and Bandwidth Monitoring from the study.

Finding #1: Over the next two years, more than one-third of respondents expect bandwidth consumption to increase by more than 50%.

Part of me says “well, duh!” but that is only because we hear that from many of our customers. So I guess if you were an Executive, far removed from the day-to-day, this would be an important thing to have pointed out to you. Basically, this is your wake up call (if you are not already awake) to listen to your Network Admins who keep asking you to allocate funds to the network. Now is the time to make your case for more bandwidth to your CEO/President/head guru. Get together budget and resources to build out your network in anticipation of this growth – so that you are not caught off guard. Because if you don’t, someone else will do it for you.

Finding #2: 41% stated network and application delay issues took more than an hour to resolve.

You can and should certainly put monitoring on your network to be able to see and react to delays. However, another way to look at this, admittedly biased from my bandwidth shaping background, is get rid of the delays!

If you are still running an unshaped network, you are missing out on maximizing your existing resource. Think about how smoothly traffic flows on roads, because there are smoothing algorithms (traffic lights) and rules (speed limits) that dictate how traffic moves, hence “traffic shaping.” Now, imagine driving on roads without any shaping in place. What would you do when you got to a 4-way intersection? Whether you just hit the accelerator to speed through, or decided to stop and check out the other traffic probably depends on your risk-tolerance and aggression profile. And the result would be that you make it through OK (live) or get into an ugly crash (and possibly die).

Similarly, your network traffic, when unshaped, can live (getting through without delays) or die (getting stuck waiting in a queue) trying to get to its destination. Whether you look at deep packet inspection, rate limiting, equalizing, or a home-grown solution, you should definitely look into bandwidth shaping. Find a solution that makes sense to you, will solve your network delay issues, and gives you a good return-on-investment (ROI). That way, your Network Admins can spend less time trying to find out the source of the delay.

Finding #3: Video must be dealt with.

24% believe video traffic will consume more than half of all bandwidth in 12 months.
47% say implementing and measuring QoS for video is difficult.
49% have trouble allocating and monitoring bandwidth for video.

Again, no surprise if you have been anywhere near a network in the last 2 years. YouTube use has exploded and become the norm on both consumer and business networks. Add that to the use of video conferencing in the workplace to replace travel, and Netflix or Hulu to watch movies and TV, and you can see that video demand (and consumption) has risen sharply.

Unfortunately, there is no quick, easy fix to make sure that video runs smoothly on your network. However, a combination of solutions can help you to make video run better.

1) Get more bandwidth.

This is just a basic fact-of-life. If you are running a network of < 10Mbps, you are going to have trouble with video, unless you only have one (1) user on your network. You need to look at your contention ratio and size your network appropriately.

2) Cache static video content.

Caching is a good start, especially for static content such as YouTube videos. One caveat to this, do not expect caching to solve network congestion problems (read more about that here) – as users will quickly consume any bandwidth that caching has freed up. Caching will help when a video has gone viral, and everyone is accessing it repeatedly on your network.

3) Use bandwidth shaping to prioritize business-critical video streams (servers).

If you have a designated video-streaming server, you can define rules in your bandwidth shaper to prioritize this server. The risk of this strategy is that you could end up giving all your bandwidth to video; you can reduce the risk by rate capping the bandwidth portioned out to video.

As I said, this is just my take on the findings. What do you see? Do you have a different take? Let us know!

APconnections Releases FREE Version of Intrusion Detection and Prevention Device


APconnections quietly released a free version of their IPS device yesterday. Codenamed StopHack, you can install this full-featured IPS with a little elbow grease on your own hardware. This powerful technology is used to detect and block hacker intrusion attempts before they get into your network.

Although the price is free for this version, under the hood, the StopHack software can handle about 10,000 simultaneous streams (users) hitting your network and will check every query for malformed and invasive URL’s. These type of attacks are the most dangerous and are typically exploited by probing bots to knock holes in your servers. StopHack also has a nice log where you can see who has attempted to breach your network, and a white list to exempt users from being scrutinized at all.

It comes with 16 of the most common intrusion techniques blocked, (more can be purchased with a support contract), and uses behavior-based techniques to differentiate a friendly IP from a non-friendly IP.

Click here for the StopHack FAQ.

Click here to get the download and installation instructions.

NOTE: StopHack is free to use but support must be purchased if you need help for any reason, including installation.