skip to main content
10.1145/1282380.1282415acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescommConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article
Free Access

How dynamic are IP addresses?

Published:27 August 2007Publication History

ABSTRACT

This paper introduces a novel algorithm, UDmap, to identify dynamically assigned IP addresses and analyze their dynamics pattern. UDmap is fully automatic, and relies only on application-level server logs. We applied UDmap to a month-long Hotmail user-login trace and identified a significant number of dynamic IP addresses - more than 102 million. This suggests that the fraction of IP addresses that are dynamic is by no means negligible. Using this information in combination with a three-month Hotmail email server log, we were able to establish that 95.6% of mail servers setup on the dynamic IP addresses in our trace sent out solely spam emails. Moreover, these mail servers sent out a large amount of spam - amounting to 42.2% of all spam emails received by Hotmail. These results highlight the importance of being able to accurately identify dynamic IP addresses for spam filtering. We expect similar benefits to arise for phishing site identification and botnet detection. To our knowledge, this is the first successful attempt to automatically identify and understand IP address dynamics.

References

  1. Multi-DNSBL Lookup. http://www.completewhois.com/rbl_lookup.htm.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Braunson. Guide To Change Your IP Address (Part 2). http://totaldream.org/index.php?page=articles&view=article&id=101, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. M. Casado and M. J. Freedman. Peering through the Shroud: The Effect of Edge Opacity on IP-based Client Identification. In Proc. 4th USENIX/ACM Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI), 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. K. R. Castleman. Digital Image Processing. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Cisco Network Registrar User's Guide. http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/netmgtsw/ps1982/products_user_guide_list.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. R. Droms. Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol. RFC 2131: http://www.dhcp.org, 1997.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Dynablock Dynamic IP list. http://www.njabl.org, recently aquired by Spamhaus, http://www.spamhaus.org/pbl/index.lasso, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. J. Evers. Most Spam Still Coming From the U.S. http://news.com/Most+spam+still+coming+from+the+U.S./2100-1029_3-6030758.html, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. S. Foo, S. C. Hui, S. W. Yip, and Y. He. Approaches for Resolving Dynamic IP Addressing. Internet Research: Electronic Networking Applications and Policy, 7(3):208--216, 1997.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. M. Freedman, M. Vutukuru, N. Feamster, and H. Balakrishnan. Geographic Locality of IP Prefixes. In Proc. of the ACM Internet Measurement Conference (IMC), 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. J. Hovold. Naive Bayes Spam Filtering Using Word Position Attributes. In Conference on Email and Anti-Spam, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. IDC Netwurx. http://www.idcnet.com, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. J. Jung and E. Sit. An Empirical Study of Spam Traffic and the Use of DNS Black Lists. In Proc. of the ACM Internet Measurement Conference (IMC), 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. T. Kohno, A. Broido, and K. Claffy. Remote Physical Device Fingerprinting. In IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. B. Krishnamurthy and J. Wang. On Network-Aware Clustering of Web Clients. In Proc. of Sigcomm, 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. H. Lee and A. Y. Ng. Spam Deobfuscation Using a Hidden Markov Model. In Conference on Email and Anti-Spam, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. F. Li and M. H. Hsieh. An Empirical Study of Clustering Behavior of Spammers and Group-based Anti-Spam Strategies. In Conference on Email and Anti-Spam, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. D. Lowd and C. Meek. Good Word Attacks on Statistical Spam Filters. In Conference on Email and Anti-Spam, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. D. Majoras, T. B. Leary, P. J. Harbour, and J. Leibowitz. Effectiveness and Enforcement of the CAN-SPAM Act: A Report to Congress. http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/edcams/spam/reports.htm, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. V. N. Padmanabhan and L. Subramanian. An Investigation of Geographic Mapping Techniques for Internet Hosts. In Proc. of Sigcomm, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Postini Message Security and Management Update for October Reveals that Spam is Back with a Vengeance. http://postini.com/news events/pr/pr110606.php,2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. A. Ramachandran, D. Dagon, and N. Feamster. Can DNSBased Blacklists Keep Up with Bots? In Conference on Email and Anti-Spam, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. A. Ramachandran and N. Feamster. Understanding the Network-Level Behavior of Spammers. In Proc. of Sigcomm, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. A. Ramachandran, N. Feamster, and D. Dagon. Revealing Botnet Membership Using DNSBL Counter-Intelligence. In 2nd Steps to Reducing Unwanted Traffic on the Internet Workshop (SRUTI), 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Route Views Project. http://www.routeviews.org.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. V. Sekar, Y. Xie, M. K. Reiter, and H. Zhang. A Multi-Resolution Approach for Worm Detection and Containment. In DSN, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. M. Sullivan and L. Munoz. Suggested Generic DNS Naming Schemes for Large Networks and Unassigned Hosts. RFC draft: http://tools.ietf.org/wg/dnsop/draft-msullivan-dnsop-generic-naming-schemes-00.txt, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. The Apache Spam Assassin Project. http://spamassassin.apache.org.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Trend Micro Inc, Mail Abuse Prevention System. http://www.trendmicro.com/en/products/global/kelkea.htm.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Whois.net - Domain Research Tools. http://www.whois.net.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. M. Xie, H. Yin, and H. Wang. An Effective Defense Against Email Spam Laundering. In Proc. of the ACM Computer and Communications Security (CCS), 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Y. Xie, V. Sekar, D. Maltz, M. Reiter, and H. Zhang. Worm Origin Identification Using Random Moonwalks. In Proc. of the IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. How dynamic are IP addresses?

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      SIGCOMM '07: Proceedings of the 2007 conference on Applications, technologies, architectures, and protocols for computer communications
      August 2007
      432 pages
      ISBN:9781595937131
      DOI:10.1145/1282380
      • cover image ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review
        ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review  Volume 37, Issue 4
        October 2007
        420 pages
        ISSN:0146-4833
        DOI:10.1145/1282427
        Issue’s Table of Contents

      Copyright © 2007 ACM

      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]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 27 August 2007

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • Article

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate554of3,547submissions,16%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader