/
No Direction Home: The True cost of Routing Around Decoys No Direction Home: The True cost of Routing Around Decoys

No Direction Home: The True cost of Routing Around Decoys - PowerPoint Presentation

pamella-moone
pamella-moone . @pamella-moone
Follow
355 views
Uploaded On 2018-11-06

No Direction Home: The True cost of Routing Around Decoys - PPT Presentation

Presented by Pallavi Kasula Background Autonomous systems AS Border Gateway Protocol BGP Internet Censorship Decoy Routing Routing Around DecoysRAD Autonomous SystemAS Internet Comprises of interconnected Autonomous Systems ID: 718089

rad routing internet ases routing rad ases internet path decoy transit paths ass decoys bgp attack customer placement autonomous

Share:

Link:

Embed:

Download Presentation from below link

Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "No Direction Home: The True cost of Rout..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.


Presentation Transcript

Slide1

No Direction Home:The True cost of Routing Around Decoys

Presented by :

Pallavi KasulaSlide2

Background

Autonomous systems (AS)

Border Gateway Protocol (BGP)

Internet Censorship

Decoy Routing

Routing Around Decoys(RAD)Slide3

Autonomous System(AS)

Internet

Comprises of interconnected Autonomous Systems

Autonomous System:

Collection of Networks with Same routing policy

Usually under single ownership, trust and administrative controlSlide4

BGP -Border Gateway Protocol

Designed to exchange routing and reachability information between autonomous systems (AS) on the Internet.

BGP is the path-vector protocol

provides routing information for autonomous systems on the Internet via its AS-Path attribute

Shortest AS_Path, Multi_Exit_DiscSlide5

Internet Censorship

the control or suppression of what can be accessed, published, or viewed on the Internet.

The extent of Internet censorship varies on a country-to-country basis

Content suppression methods include

Internet Protocol(IP) address blocking

DNS Name filtering and redirection

Circumvention using Proxy Server has been in use which needs client to connect to a specific IP address.Slide6

Decoy Routing

Decoy Routing -A mechanism capable of circumventing common network filtering strategies.

A client connects to any unblocked host service and then decoy routing is used to connect to blocked destination.

Circumvention service is placed in the network.

A single device could proxy traffic instead of host.Slide7

Routing Around Decoys

Schuchard et al. proposed Routing Against Decoys attack against decoy routing.

Main Idea- ISPs in censorship region have multiple paths to reach destination

It can instruct ISPs under it’s influence to select paths that do not pass through ISPs known to contain Decoys.Slide8

Objective of this paper

Authors have worked on true costs incurred by following RAD attack.

Various parameters have been studied such as Loss of Connectivity, Latency, path length etc.Slide9

Internet Topology

Business Relationship between ASs can be mapped to following three types according to Gao model

Customer-to-Provider (c2p)

Peer-to-Peer (p2p)

Sibling-to-sibling (s2s)Slide10

Internet Topology GraphSlide11

Internet Topology

Customer Cone : AS and its customers

Edge AS : AS with customer cone size =1

Transit AS : AS whose customer size is greater than 1 and transits other As traffic

Path : A sequence of neighbor ASes that connect source AS to destination AS.Slide12

Valid and Invalid Paths

Valid or Valley-Free(VF) Path

Every transit AS in the path a customer who is its immediate neighbor

Invalid or Non-Valley-Free (NVF) PathSlide13

BGP RoutingSlide14

RBGP RoutingSlide15

Costs of Routing

Degraded Internet Reachability

Less-Preferred Path

Longer Paths

Higher path latencies

Non-Valley-Free routes

New Transit ASes

Massive change in Transit LoadSlide16

Placing decoy Routers

RAD paper simulated two specific placements of decoys

Top - Tier

Random

But this placement in RAD is biased as decoys were primarily placed in EDGE ASsSlide17

Placing decoy Routers

Authors used following Strategic decoy Placements:

Sorted Placement - Decoys are chosen from ASs that transit more traffic for the RAD adversary.

sorted-with-ring - Set of ASs not directly controlled by RAD adversary

sorted-no-ring - Additionally exclude ASs having business relationship

Strategic random placement - ASs are chosen from a set of ASes with a particular customer size.

random-c (Random -1 is similar to one used in RAD).

random-with-ring-C and random-no-ring-CSlide18

Simulation Setup and Data Sources

Used CBGP - a popular BGP simulator with python interface to interact and query between ASs.

Geo location: “GeoLite Country” dataset to map IP addresses to countries.

AS relations : CAIDA’s inferred AS relationship dataset

AS ranking: CAIDA’s AS rank dataset

Latency: iPlane’s “Inter-PoP links” dataset to estimate BGP and RBGP path latencies.

Network origin: iPlane’s “Origin AS mapping” dataset Slide19

Simulation Results

Comparing the Internet connectivity of state-level censors.

Loss of connectivity for different RAD adversaries assuming the sorted-no-ring decoy placement strategy.Slide20

Simulation Results

Simulation results for two different scenarios :

China-World : Decoy chosen from 44000 ASs exlcuding the 199 ASs located in China. China is the adversary.

China-US :China is the RAD adversary; decoy ASes are selected only from the 13,299 ASes lo- cated in the United States.Slide21

Percentage of unreachable ASsSlide22

Non-Valley-Free pathsSlide23

Costly Valley-Free Paths

Using less preferred paths : Results have shown that the percentage of VF paths became from 6% to 21% more expensive for different placement strategies.

Longer Paths : Average increase in path length varies from 1.12 to 1.40.

Higher Latencies : Even same length paths have higher latencies due to less popular transits.Slide24

Latency Calculation

For two neighbor ASes A and B, eLat is calculated as :

where Ai represents the ith point-of-presence (PoP) of the AS A and nA is the number of A’s PoPs

For a BGP/RBGP path composed of k ASes {T1 , ..., Tk }, we define eLat to be the sum of eLat for all neighbor ASes in the path:Slide25

Simulation Results

The average increase in estimated latency due to the RAD attack.Slide26

need infrastructural changes

Edge ASes acting as transit ASes

Increased load on existing transit ASesSlide27

Traffic Volume

To simulate changes in transit loads, it is assumed that traffic volume between two ASes AS1 and AS2 is proportional to the number of IP addresses they respectively possess:

where I P s(A) is the number of IP addresses owned by the AS A

Maximum transit load increase factor for Chinese transit ASes due to the RAD attack

Text

Maximum transit load increase factor for Chinese transit ASes due to the RAD attackSlide28

Conclusions

Proposed RAD attack is extremely costly with loss of connectivity to many internet connections and lower QoS.

Strategic placement of decoy routers significantly increases cost.

Depends on connectivity of country.

Regional deployment is effective in defeating the RAD attack.

Needs more fine grained and data driven approach.Slide29

Questions?