skip to main content
10.1145/2557977.2558043acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicuimcConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

The security appliance to BIRD software router

Published:09 January 2014Publication History

ABSTRACT

The Internet consists of a large number of interconnected Autonomous Systems (ASes) which exchange their routes using Border Gateway Protocol (BGP). However, it was originally designed to operate in a trusted environment, and there are no internal mechanisms to protect the information it carries. We have implemented RTR-BIRD, which is an enhancement of BIRD software router to interact with RTRPKI which is another implementation of us to allow RTR-BIRD to support origin validation using Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI). In contrast to QuaggaSRx that is the only one RPKI-capable software router implementation at this time, our implementation enables users to access an empirical cache rather than a virtual cache which is implemented by National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and resides in a local. Subsequently, RTR-BIRD can be exploited for practical testing in software-based routing environment against QuaggaSRx. Our main contribution here is that we have developed the originator which not only makes a software router (BIRD) interact with RPKI but also shares a validated cache as well as Route Origin Authorizations (ROAs) of the cache with the other software routers. We also expect that RTR-BIRD is faster than QuaggaSRx as much as the difference in performance between the deployed and latest version of BIRD and that of Quagga. It's because an algorithm theoretically shows the same performance in a same situation, and each origin validation scheme of RTR-BIRD and QuaggaSRx, each of which is implemented based on the same standard defined by IETF, is equivalent to each other.

References

  1. A. Barbir. RFC 4593: Generic Threats to Routing Protocols. http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4593, October 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. R. Barrett. Routing snafu causes Internet Outage. Interactive Week Magazine. 1997.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. I. Beijnum. BGP: Building Reliable Networks with the Border Gateway Protocol. O' Reilly, Border Gateway Protocol, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. S. Bellovin. IETF Internet Draft: Security Requirements for BGP Path Validation. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-reqs-01, October 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. V. J. Bono. NANOG Email: 7007 Explanation and Apology. http://www.merit.edu/mail.archives/nanog/1997-04/msg00444.html, April 1997.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. R. Bush. RFC 6810: The Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) to Router Protocol. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc6810/, January 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. K. Butler, T. R. Farley, and P. McDaniel. A Survey of BGP Security Issues and Solutions. In In Proceedings of the IEEE, pages 100--122. IEEE, January 2010.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. M. Caesar and J. Rexford. BGP routing policies in ISP networks. IEEE Network, 19(6):5--11, November 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. CZ.NIC Labs. Bird internet routing daemon. http://bird.network.cz/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The National Strategy to Secure Cyberspace. http://www.us-cert.gov/sites/default/files/publications/cyberspace_strategy.pdf, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. O. Filip. BIRD Internet Routing Daemon. http://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog48/presentations/Monday/Filip_BIRD_final_N48.pdf, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. T. Griffin, F. Shepherd, and G. Wilfong. The stable paths problem and interdomain routing. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking (TON), 10(2):232--243, April 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. J. Hawkinson and T. Bates. RFC 1930: Guidelines for Creation, Selection, and Registration of an Autonomous System (AS). http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc1930/, March 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. X. Hu and Z. Mao. Accurate Real-time Identification of IP Prefix Hijacking. In In Proceedings of the 2007 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, pages 3--17. IEEE Computer Society, May 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. G. Huston. 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, November 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. G. Huston, M. Rossi, and G. Armitage. Securing BGP - A Literature Survey. IEEE Communications Surveys and Tutorials, 13(2):199--222, May 2010.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. INET research group at the Hamburg University of Applied Sciences and the CST research group at Freie University Berlin. RTRlib. http://rpki.realmv6.org/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. S. Kent, C. Lynn, and J. Mikkelson. Secure Border Gateway Protocol (S-BGP). IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 18(4):582--592, August 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. E. Kranakis, P. Oorschot, and T. Wan. On inter-domain routing security and pretty secure BGP (ps-BGP). ACM Transactions on Information and System Security (TISSEC), 10(3):1--41, July 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. M. Lepinski. RFC 6482: A Profile for Route Origin Authorizations (ROAs). http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6482, February 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. M. Lepinski. IETF Internet Draft: An Overview of BGPSEC. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-overview-03, July 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. C. Lynn. IETF Internet Draft: Secure BGP (S-BGP). http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-clynn-s-bgp-protocol-01, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. C. Lynn. RFC 3779: X.509 Extensions for IP Addresses and AS Identifiers. http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3779, June 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. R. Mahajan, D. Wetherall, and T. Anderson. Understanding BGP Misconfiguration. In In Proceedings of the 2002 SIGCOMM conference, pages 3--16. ACM Press, October 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. D. Meyer. Routeviews. http://www.routeviews.org/, January 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. D. Montgomery and S. Murphy. Toward Secure Routing Infrastructures. IEEE Security and Privacy, 4(5):84--87, September 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. S. Murphy. RFC 4272: BGP Security Vulnerabilities Analysis. http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc4272/, January 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. NIST. Bgp secure routing extension (bgp-srx). http://www-x.antd.nist.gov/bgpsrx/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. North American Network Operators Group (NANOG). http://www.nanog.org, 1994.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. T. Paseka. Cloudflare Blog: Why Google went offline today and a bit about how the Internet works. http://blog.cloudflare.com/why-google-went-offline-today-and-a-bit-about, November 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. B. Quotin, C. Pelsser, and O. Bonaventure. A performance evaluation of BGP-based traffic engineering. International Journal of Network Management, 15(3):177--191, May 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Y. Rekhter, T. Li, and S. Hares. RFC 4271: A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4). http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc4271/, January 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. RIPE NCC. Resource Certification. http://ripe.net/certification/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. RIPENCC. RPKI Validator. http://195.13.63.18:8080/trust-anchors/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. RIPE NCC. RIPE NCC News: YouTube Hijacking: A RIPE NCC RIS case study. http://www.ripe.net/internet-coordination/news/industry-developments/youtube-hijacking-a-ripe-ncc-ris-case-study, March 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Savannah Project team. Quagga Routing Suite. http://www.nongnu.org/quagga/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Secure Inter-Domain Routing (SIDR) Working Group. http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/sidr-charter.html, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. T. Underwood. Rensys Blog: Con-Ed Steals the 'Net occurred on Jan 22nd. http://www.renesys.com/2006/01/coned-steals-the-net/, January 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. D. Vieira. A Survey of BGP Session Maintenance Issues and Solutions. Network Protocols and Algorithms, 2(1):132, March 2010.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. Vyatta. Vyatta virtual router. http://www.vyatta.com/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. T. Wan and V. Oorschot. Analysis of BGP Prefix Origins during Google's May 2005 Outage. In Proceedings of the 20th International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium (IPDPS) on Security in Systems and Networks, April 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. F. Wang. On inferring and characterizing internet routing policies. IEEE Journal of Communications and Networks, 9(4): 350--355, December 2007.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  43. R. White. Securing BGP through secure origin BGP (soBGP). Internet Protocol Journal, 6:15--22, May 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Y. Xiang, Z. Wang, and J. Wu. Sign what you really care about - Secure BGP AS-paths efficiently. Elsevier Computer Networks, 57(10):2250--2265, July 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. XORPteam. Xorp. http://www.xorp.org/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. M. Yannuzzi, X. Masip-Bruin, and O. Bonaventure. Open Issues in Interdomain Routing: A Survey. IEEE Network, 19(6):49--56, November 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. M. Zhao, S. Smith, and D. Nicol. The Performance Impact of BGP Security. IEEE Netowrk, 19(6):42--48, November 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. P. Zhu, H. Cao, and L. T. Yang. AS Alliance based security enhancement for inter-domain routing protocol. Elsevier Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 55(1-2):241--255, January 2012.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. The security appliance to BIRD software router

        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
          ICUIMC '14: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Ubiquitous Information Management and Communication
          January 2014
          757 pages
          ISBN:9781450326445
          DOI:10.1145/2557977

          Copyright © 2014 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 January 2014

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          ICUIMC '14 Paper Acceptance Rate116of407submissions,29%Overall Acceptance Rate251of941submissions,27%

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader