Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

skip to main content
10.1145/2398776.2398779acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesimcConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Detecting prefix hijackings in the internet with argus

Published: 14 November 2012 Publication History

Abstract

Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) plays a critical role in the Internet inter-domain routing reliability. Invalid routes generated by mis-configurations or forged by malicious attacks may hijack the traffic and devastate the Internet routing system, but it is unlikely that a secure BGP can be deployed in the near future to completely prevent them. Although many hijacking detection systems have been developed, they more or less have weaknesses such as long detection delay, high false alarm rate and deployment difficulty, and no systematic detection results have been studied.
This paper proposes Argus, an agile system that can accurately detect prefix hijackings and deduce the underlying cause of route anomalies in a very fast way. Argus is based on correlating the control and data plane information closely and pervasively, and has been continuously monitoring the Internet for more than one year. During this period, around 40K routing anomalies were detected, from which 220 stable prefix hijackings were identified. Our analysis on these events shows that, hijackings that have only been theoretically studied before do exist in the Internet. Although the frequency of new hijackings is nearly stable, more specific prefixes are hijacked more frequently. Around 20% of the hijackings last less than ten minutes, and some can pollute 90% of the Internet in less than two minutes. These characteristics make \emph{Argus} especially useful in practice. We further analyze some representative cases in detail to help increase the understanding of prefix hijackings in the Internet.

Supplementary Material

PDF File (11.pdf)
Summary Review Documentation for "Detecting Prefix Hijackings in the Internet with Argus", Authors: X. Shi, Y. Xiang, Z. Wang, X. Yin, and J. Wu

References

[1]
Ant censuses of the internet address space. http://www.isi.edu/ant/traces/index.html.
[2]
Archipelago Measurement Infrastructure. http://www.caida.org/projects/ark/.
[3]
The BGPmon project. http://bgpmon.netsec.colostate.edu.
[4]
BGPmon.net. http://bgpmon.net/.
[5]
Charter of the IETF Secure Inter-Domain Routing Working Group. http://tools.ietf.org/wg/sidr/charters.
[6]
DNS records collected by Hurricane Electric. http://bgp.he.net/net/166.111.0.0/16#_dns.
[7]
Irr - internet routing registry. http://www.irr.net/.
[8]
Ripe myasn system. http://www.ris.ripe.net/myasn.html.
[9]
H. Ballani, P. Francis, and X. Zhang. A study of prefix hijacking and interception in the internet. In SIGCOMM, 2007.
[10]
S. M. Bellovin, R. Bush, and D. Ward. Security requirements for bgp path validation. http://tools. ietf.org/html/draft-ymbk-bgpsec-reqs-02, 2011.
[11]
M. Caesar, L. Subramanian, and R. H. Katz. Towards root cause analysis of internet routing dynamics. In Berkeley EECS Annual Research Symposium, 2004.
[12]
Y.-J. Chi, R. Oliveira, and L. Zhang. Cyclops: The AS-level connectivity observatory. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, pages 7--16, 2008.
[13]
N. Feamster, D. G. Andersen, H. Balakrishnan, and M. F. Kaashoek. Measuring the effects of internet path faults on reactive routing. In SIGMETRICS, 2003.
[14]
A. Feldmann, O. Maennel, Z. M. Mao, A. W. Berger, and B. M. Maggs. Locating internet routing instabilities. In SIGCOMM, 2004.
[15]
S. Goldberg, M. Schapira, P. Hummon, and J. Rexford. How secure are secure interdomain routing protocols? In SIGCOMM, 2010.
[16]
X. Hu and Z. M. Mao. Accurate real-time identification of ip prefix hijacking. In IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, pages 3--17, 2007.
[17]
G. Huston and G. Michaelson. RFC 6483: Validation of Route Origination Using the Resource Certificate Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) and Route Origin Authorizations (ROAs). http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6483, 2012.
[18]
J. Karlin, S. Forrest, and J. Rexford. Pretty good BGP: Improving BGP by cautiously adopting routes. In ICNP, pages 290--299, 2006.
[19]
E. Katz-Bassett. Announcement of university of washington routing study. http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2011-August/039337.html.
[20]
E. Katz-Bassett, H. V. Madhyastha, J. P. John, A. Krishnamurthy, D. Wetherall, and T. E. Anderson. Studying black holes in the internet with hubble. In NSDI, 2008.
[21]
S. Kent, C. Lynn, J. Mikkelson, and K. Seo. Secure border gateway protocol (S-BGP). IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 18:103--116, 2000. {22} M. Lad, D. Massey, D. Pei, Y. Wu, B. Zhang, and L. Zhang. PHAS: A prefix hijack alert system. In USENIX, 2006.
[22]
M. Lad, D. Massey, D. Pei, Y. Wu, B. Zhang, and L. Zhang. PHAS: A prefix hijack alert system. In USENIX, 2006.
[23]
H. Madhyastha, T. Isdal, M. Piatek, C. Dixon, T. Anderson, and A. Krishnamurthy. iPlane: An information plane for distributed services. In OSDI, pages 367--380, 2006.
[24]
R. Mahajan, D. Wetherall, and T. Anderson. Understanding bgp misconfiguration. In SIGCOMM, pages 3--16, 2002.
[25]
S. Murphy. Rfc 4272: Bgp security vulnerabilities analysis. http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4272, 2006.
[26]
R. Oliveira, B. Zhang, D. Pei, R. Izhak-Ratzin, and L. Zhang. Quantifying path exploration in the Internet. In Proc. of the 6th ACM SIGCOMM Internet Measurement Conference (IMC), Rio de Janeriro, Brazil, 2006.
[27]
Y. Rekhter, T. Li, and S. Hares. RFC 4271: Border gateway protocol 4. http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4271, 2006.
[28]
Renesys. China's 18-minute mystery. http://www.renesys.com/blog/2010/11/chinas-18-minute-mystery.shtml, 2010.
[29]
RIPE. Youtube hijacking: A ripe ncc ris case study. http://www.ripe.net/news/study-youtube-hijacking.html, 2008.
[30]
L. Subramanian, V. Roth, I. Stoica, S. Shenker, and R. H. Katz. Listen and whisper: Security mechanisms for BGP. In NSDI, pages 127--140, 2004.
[31]
F. Wang, Z. M. Mao, J. Wang, L. Gao, and R. Bush. A measurement study on the impact of routing events on end-to-end internet path performance. In SIGCOMM, 2006.
[32]
Y. Xiang, Z. Wang, X. Yin, and J. Wu. Argus: An accurate and agile system to detecting ip prefix hijacking. In Workshop on Trust and Security in the Future Internet, 2011.
[33]
B. Zhang, R. Liu, D. Massey, and L. Zhang. Collecting the internet as-level topology. SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev., 35(1):53--61, 2005.
[34]
Z. Zhang, Y. Zhang, Y. C. Hu, Z. M. Mao, and R. Bush. iSPY: Detecting ip prefix hijacking on my own. In SIGCOMM, pages 327--338, 2008.
[35]
X. Zhao, D. Pei, L. Wang, D. Massey, A. Mankin, S. F. Wu, and L. Zhang. An analysis of BGP multiple origin as (MOAS) conflicts. In 1st ACM SIGCOMM Workshop on Internet Measurement, 2001.
[36]
C. Zheng, L. Ji, D. Pei, J. Wang, and P. Francis. A light-weight distributed scheme for detecting ip prefix hijacks in real-time. In SIGCOMM, pages 324--334, 2007.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)The Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI): A Survey on Measurements and Future ProspectsIEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management10.1109/TNSM.2023.332745521:2(2353-2373)Online publication date: Apr-2024
  • (2024)Modeling the BGP Prefix Hijack via Pollution and Recovery ProcessesBig Data and Social Computing10.1007/978-981-97-5803-6_15(253-265)Online publication date: 1-Aug-2024
  • (2024)Detecting BGP Routing Anomalies Using Machine Learning: A ReviewForthcoming Networks and Sustainability in the AIoT Era10.1007/978-3-031-62871-9_13(145-164)Online publication date: 26-Jun-2024
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. Detecting prefix hijackings in the internet with argus

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Conferences
    IMC '12: Proceedings of the 2012 Internet Measurement Conference
    November 2012
    572 pages
    ISBN:9781450317054
    DOI:10.1145/2398776
    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Sponsors

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 14 November 2012

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. bgp
    2. hijacking detection
    3. prefix hijacking
    4. security

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article

    Conference

    IMC '12
    Sponsor:
    IMC '12: Internet Measurement Conference
    November 14 - 16, 2012
    Massachusetts, Boston, USA

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate 277 of 1,083 submissions, 26%

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)76
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)10
    Reflects downloads up to 12 Nov 2024

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2024)The Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI): A Survey on Measurements and Future ProspectsIEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management10.1109/TNSM.2023.332745521:2(2353-2373)Online publication date: Apr-2024
    • (2024)Modeling the BGP Prefix Hijack via Pollution and Recovery ProcessesBig Data and Social Computing10.1007/978-981-97-5803-6_15(253-265)Online publication date: 1-Aug-2024
    • (2024)Detecting BGP Routing Anomalies Using Machine Learning: A ReviewForthcoming Networks and Sustainability in the AIoT Era10.1007/978-3-031-62871-9_13(145-164)Online publication date: 26-Jun-2024
    • (2024)Realtime BGP Anomaly Detection Using Graph Centrality FeaturesAdvanced Information Networking and Applications10.1007/978-3-031-57870-0_20(222-233)Online publication date: 10-Apr-2024
    • (2023)On Large-Scale IP Service Disruptions Dependencies2023 19th International Conference on Network and Service Management (CNSM)10.23919/CNSM59352.2023.10327794(1-5)Online publication date: 30-Oct-2023
    • (2023)BiRNNs-SAT for Detecting BGP Traffic Anomalies in Communication NetworksProceedings of the 6th International Conference on Machine Learning and Machine Intelligence10.1145/3635638.3635659(143-150)Online publication date: 27-Oct-2023
    • (2023)Machine Learning-based BGP Traffic Prediction2023 IEEE 22nd International Conference on Trust, Security and Privacy in Computing and Communications (TrustCom)10.1109/TrustCom60117.2023.00262(1925-1934)Online publication date: 1-Nov-2023
    • (2023)Metis: Detecting Fake AS-PATHs Based on Link Prediction2023 IEEE Symposium on Computers and Communications (ISCC)10.1109/ISCC58397.2023.10218104(656-662)Online publication date: 9-Jul-2023
    • (2023)Be Careful of Your Neighbors: Injected Sub-Prefix Hijacking Invisible to Public MonitorsICC 2023 - IEEE International Conference on Communications10.1109/ICC45041.2023.10278923(3774-3780)Online publication date: 28-May-2023
    • (2023)On the Effectiveness of BGP Hijackers That Evade Public Route CollectorsIEEE Access10.1109/ACCESS.2023.326112811(31092-31124)Online publication date: 2023
    • Show More Cited By

    View Options

    Get Access

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Media

    Figures

    Other

    Tables

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media