Skip to main content

Cross-Layer Damage Assessment for Cyber Situational Awareness

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Advances in Information Security ((ADIS,volume 46))

Abstract

Damage assessment plays a very important role in securing enterprise networks and systems. Gaining good awareness about the effects and impact of cyber attack actions would enable security officers to make the right cyber defense decisions and take the right cyber defense actions. A good number of damage assessment techniques have been proposed in the literature, but they typically focus on a single abstraction level (of the software system in concern). As a result, existing damage assessment techniques and tools are still very limited in satisfying the needs of comprehensive damage assessment which should not result in any “blind spots”.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. http://www.squid-cache.org.

  2. http://www.milw0rm.com/exploits/347.

  3. http://www.loadtestingtool.com/.

  4. P. Ammann, S. Jajodia, and P. Liu. Recovery from malicious transactions. 14(5):1167–1185, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  5. P. Ammann, D. Wijesekera, and S. Kaushik. Scalable, graph-based network vulnerability analysis. In CCS ’02: Proceedings of the 9th ACM conference on Computer and communications security, pages 217–224, Washington, DC, USA, 2002. ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Kun Bai and Peng Liu. A data damage tracking quarantine and recovery (dtqr) scheme for mission-critical database systems. pages 720–731, 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  7. F Bellard. Qemu, a fast and portable dynamic translator. In USENIX Annual Technical Conference, pages 41–46, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Peter M. Chen and Brian D. Noble. When virtual is better than real hotos. In Hot Topics in Operating Systems, pages 133– 138, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Jim Chow, Tal Garfinkel, , and Peter M. Chen. Decoupling dynamic program analysis from execution in virtual environments. In USENIX Annual Technical Conference, pages 1–14, Boston, Massachusetts, USA, 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  10. F. Cuppens and A. Miege. Alert correlation in a cooperative intrusion detection framework. In In Proceedings of the 2002 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, pages 202–215. IEEE, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  11. George W. Dunlap, Samuel T. King, Sukru Cinar, Murtaza A. Basrai, and Peter M. Chen. Revirt: enabling intrusion analysis through virtual-machine logging and replay. In OSDI ’02: Proceedings of the 5th symposium on Operating systems design and implementation, pages 211–224, Boston, Massachusetts, USA, 2002. ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  12. A. Goel, K. Farhadi K. Po, Z. Li, and E de Lara. The taser intrusion recovery system. In SOSP ’05: Proceedings of the twentieth ACM symposium on Operating systems principles, pages 23–26, Brighton, United Kingdom, 2005. ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  13. R. P. Goldberg. Survey of virtual machine research. In IEEE Computer, pages 34–45, june 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  14. K. Ingols, R. Lippmann, and K. Piwowarski. Practical attack graph generation for network defense. In In 22nd Annual Computer Security Applications Conference (ACSAC), pages 121–130, Miami Beach, Florida, USA, 2006. IEEE.

    Google Scholar 

  15. S. Jajodia, S. Noel, and B. O’Berry. Topological analysis of network attack vulnerability. In Proceedings of the 2nd ACM symposium on Information, computer and communications security, pages 2–2, Singapore, 2007. ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Xuxian Jiang, Xinyuan Wang, and Dongyan Xu. Stealthy malware detection through vmm-based “out-of-the-box” semantic view reconstruction. In CCS ’07: Proceedings of the 14th ACM conference on Computer and communications security, pages 128–138, Alexandria, Virginia, USA, 2007. ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Samuel T. King and Peter M. Chen. Backtracking intrusions. pages 223–236, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Michael E. Locasto, Angelos Stavrou, Gabriela F. Cretu, and Angelos D. Keromytis. From stem to sead: Speculative execution for automated defense. In USENIX Annual Technical Conference, pages 219–232, 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  19. J. NEWSOME and D. SONG. Dynamic taint analysis for automatic detection and analysis and signature generation of exploits commodity software. In Proceedings of the 12th Symposium on Network and Distributed System Security (NDSS), pages 196–206, San Diego, CA, USA, feb 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Peng Ning, Yun Cui, and Douglas S. Reeves. Constructing attack scenarios through correlation of intrusion alerts. In CCS ’02: Proceedings of the 9th ACM conference on Computer and communications security, pages 245–254, Washington, DC, USA, 2002. ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  21. X. Ou, W. F. Boyer, and M. A. McQueen. A scalable approach to attack graph generation. In CCS ’06: Proceedings of the 13th ACM conference on Computer and communications security, pages 336–345. ACM, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  22. B. Panda and J. Giordano. Reconstructing the database after electronic attacks. In The 12th IFIP 11.3 Working Conference on Database Security, pages 143–156, Greece, Italy, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Bryan D. Payne, Martim Carbone, Monirul Sharif, and Wenke Lee. Lares: an architecture for secure active monitoring using virtualization. In Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, pages 233–247, 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Feng Qin, Joseph Tucek, Jagadeesan Sundaresan, and Yuanyuan Zhou. Rx: treating bugs as allergies—a safe method to survive software failures. pages 235–248, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Martin Rinard, Cristian Cadar, Daniel Dumitran, Daniel M. Roy, Tudor Leu, and Jr. William S. Beebee. Enhancing server availability and security through failure-oblivious computing. In OSDI’04: Proceedings of the 6th conference on Symposium on Opearting Systems Design & Implementation, pages 21–21, San Francisco, CA, USA, 2004. USENIX Association.

    Google Scholar 

  26. O. Sheyner, J. Haines, R. Lippmann S. Jha, and J. M. Wing. Automated generation and analysis of attack graphs. In In Proceedings of the 2002 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, pages 273–284. IEEE, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Stelios Sidiroglou, Michael E. Locasto, Stephen W. Boyd, and Angelos D. Keromytis. Building a reactive immune system for software services. In ATEC ’05: Proceedings of the annual conference on USENIX Annual Technical Conference, pages 11–11, Anaheim, CA, USA, 2005. USENIX Association.

    Google Scholar 

  28. A. Smirnov and T. Chiueh. Dira: Automatic detection and identification and repair of control-hijacking attacks. In Proceedings of the 12th Symposium on Network and Distributed System Security (NDSS), San Diego, CA, USA, feb 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Sudarshan Srinivasan, Christopher Andrews, Srikanth Kandula, and Yuanyuan Zhou. Flashback: A light-weight extension for rollback and deterministic replay for software debugging. In Proceedings of the annual Usenix technical conference, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  30. L. P. Swiler, C. Phillips, D. Ellis, and S. Chakerian. Computer-attack graph generation tool. In In DARPA Information Survivability Conference and Exposition II (DISCEX ’01), volume 2, pages 307–321, June 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Heng Yin, Dawn Song, Manuel Egele, Christopher Kruegel, and Engin Kirda. Panorama: Capturing system-wide information flow for malware detection and analysis. In CCS ’07: Proceedings of the 14th ACM conference on Computer and communications security, pages 116–127, Alexandria, Virginia, USA, 2007. ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  32. M. Yu, P. Liu, and W. Zang. Self healing workflow systems under attacks. In Proc. 24th IEEE International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS’04), pages 418–425, Tokyo, Japan, 2004. IEEE.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by NSF CNS-0716479, AFOSR MURI: Autonomic Recovery of Enterprise-wide Systems after Attack or Failure with Forward Correction, AFRL award FA8750-08-C-0137, and ARO MURI: Computer-aided Human Centric Cyber Situation Awareness.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer-Verlag US

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Liu, P. et al. (2010). Cross-Layer Damage Assessment for Cyber Situational Awareness. In: Jajodia, S., Liu, P., Swarup, V., Wang, C. (eds) Cyber Situational Awareness. Advances in Information Security, vol 46. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-0140-8_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-0140-8_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4419-0139-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4419-0140-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics