skip to main content
10.1145/2535813.2535816acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesnspwConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Detecting hidden enemy lines in IP address space

Published:09 September 2013Publication History

ABSTRACT

If an outbound flow is observed at the boundary of a protected network, destined to an IP address within a few addresses of a known malicious IP address, should it be considered a suspicious flow? Conventional blacklisting is not going to cut it in this situation, and the established fact that malicious IP addresses tend to be highly clustered in certain portions of IP address space, should indeed raise suspicions. We present a new approach for perimeter defense that addresses this concern. At the heart of our approach, we attempt to infer internal, hidden boundaries in IP address space, that lie within publicly known boundaries of registered IP netblocks. Our hypothesis is that given a known bad IP address, other IP address in the same internal contiguous block are likely to share similar security properties, and may therefore be vulnerable to being similarly hacked and used by attackers in the future. In this paper, we describe how we infer hidden internal boundaries in IPv4 netblocks, and what effect this has on being able to predict malicious IP addresses.

References

  1. S. Coull, F. Monrose, and M. Bailey. On Measuring the Similarity of Network Hosts: Pitfalls, New Metrics, and Empirical Analyses. In Proceedings of the 18th Annual Network and Distributed Systems Security Symposium, February, 201Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. A. K. Jain, "Data Clustering: 50 Years Beyond K-Means" , Pattern Recognition Letters, Vol. 31, No. 8, pp. 651--666, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. A. K. Jain, M.N. Murthy and P.J. Flynn, Data Clustering: A Review, ACM Computing Reviews, Nov 1999.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Shyam Boriah, Varun Chandola, Vipin Kumar, "imilarity measures for categorical data: A comparative evaluation", In Proceedings of the eighth SIAM International Conference on Data MiningGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. SF Chen, J Goodman (1996). "An empirical study of smoothing techniques for language modeling". Proceedings of the 34th annual meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Meila, Marina, "Comparing Clusterings by the Variation of Information". Learning Theory and Kernel Machines, 2003, pp 173--187.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Meila, Marina, "Comparing clusterings -- an axiomatic view", Int. Conf. on Machine Learning, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Manos Antonakakis, Roberto Perdisci, David Dagon, Wenke Lee, and Nick Feamster. 2010. Building a dynamic reputation system for DNS. In Proceedings of the 19th USENIX conference on Security (USENIX Security'10). USENIX Association, Berkeley, CA, USA, 18--1 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Yuanchen He, Zhenyu Zhong, Sven Krasser, Yuchun Tang, "Mining DNS for Malicious Domain Registrations," Proc. of The 6th International Conference on Collaborative Computing (CollaborateCom 2010), Chicago, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. S. Sinha, M. Bailey, and F. Jahanian. Shades of grey: On the effectiveness of reputation-based blacklists. In 3rd International Conference on MALWARE, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. J. Zhang, P. Porra, and J. Ullrich. Highly predictive blacklisting. In Proceedings of the USENIX Security Symposium, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. D. Anderson, C. Fleizach, S. Savage, and G. Voelker. Spamscatter: Characterizing internet scam hosting infrastructure. In Proceedings of the USENIX Security Symposium, 2007 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. S. Hao, N. Syed, N. Feamster, A. Gray and S. Krasser. Detecting spammers with SNARE: Spatiotemporal network-level automatic reputation engine. In Proceedings of the USENIX Security Symposium, 2009 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Exploiting Network Structure for Proactive Spam Mitigation Shobha Venkataraman, Subhabrata Sen, Oliver Spatscheck, Patrick Haffner and Dawn Song In Usenix Security 2007, August 2007Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Tracking Dynamic Sources of Malicious Activity a Internet-Scale, NIPS 2009, Shobha Venkataraman, Avrim Blum, Dawn Song, Subhabrata Sen, Oliver SpatscheckGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Brett Stone-gross, Christopher Kruegel, Kevin Almeroth, Andreas Moser, Engin Kirda, FIRE: FInding Rogue nEtworks, ACSAC 2009 Proceedings of the 2009 Annual Computer Security Applications Conference. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. M. Collins, T. Shimeall, S. Faber, J. Janies, R. Weaver, and M. D. Shon. Using Uncleanliness to Predict Future Botnet Addresses. In ACM Internet Measurement Conference (IMC), 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Detecting hidden enemy lines in IP address space

        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 Other conferences
          NSPW '13: Proceedings of the 2013 New Security Paradigms Workshop
          December 2013
          132 pages
          ISBN:9781450325820
          DOI:10.1145/2535813

          Copyright © 2013 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: 9 September 2013

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          NSPW '13 Paper Acceptance Rate11of32submissions,34%Overall Acceptance Rate62of170submissions,36%

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader