skip to main content
10.1145/3345837.3355952acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmswimConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Real-time Traffic Monitoring and SQL Injection Attack Detection for Edge Networks

Published:25 November 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

Injection attacks are at the top of Open Web Application Security Project's Top 10 Application Security Risks list almost every year. SQL Injection (SQLI) is one such attack that presents the adversaries an opportunity to access personally identifiable information and commit identity theft, putting breach victims at risk. An intrusion detection and prevention system is a system or software application that continuously monitors a network for possible malicious activity or policy violations. A signature-based Intrusion Detection System (IDS) relies on predefined signatures to detect an attack. The signatures used are usually released periodically by the company who owns the IDS software or by the admin. Writing these signatures manually or waiting on the releases of new rules can take up significant time, effort, and knowledge. In this paper, we develop a system that monitors traffic in real time, performs deep packet inspection on each incoming packet, and looks for possible SQLI patterns to form rules in Snort (IDS) database. Our method increases the baseline IDS performance by 4.7x, with only 23% of the resources required by the baseline, while performing in the order of a few milliseconds, suitable for real-time edge networks.

References

  1. Hesham Altwaijry and Khalid Shahbar. 2013. (WHASG) automatic SNORT signatures generation by using honeypot. Journal of Computers , Vol. 8, 12 (2013), 3280--3287.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Philippe Biondi. 2010. Scapy documentation (!).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Parminder Chhabra, Ajita John, and Huzur Saran. 2005. PISA: automatic extraction of traffic signatures. In International Conference on Research in Networking. Springer, 730--742.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Security Compass. 2016. A brief history of application security. https://blog.securitycompass.com/a-brief-history-of-application-security-21e5a29ac330.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Github. 2015. dumbpig. An automated way to check for dumb snort rules. https://github.com/leonward/dumbpig.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Michael Holloway. 2015. Stuxnet Worm Attack on Iranian Nuclear Facilities. http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2015/ph241/holloway1/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Cisco Inc. 2014. Snort: The World's Most Widely Deployed IPS Technology. https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/security/brief_c17--733286.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Cloudfare Inc. 2019. SQL Injection. https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/security/threats/sql-injection/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Intel Inc. 2017. Hyperscan and Snort* Integration. https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/hyperscan-and-snort-integration.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Eunsoo Kim, Kuyju Kim, Dongsoon Shin, Beomjin Jin, and Hyoungshick Kim. 2018. CyTIME: Cyber Threat Intelligence ManagEment framework for automatically generating security rules. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Future Internet Technologies. ACM, 7.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Hyang-Ah Kim and Brad Karp. 2004. Autograph: Toward Automated, Distributed Worm Signature Detection. In USENIX security symposium, Vol. 286. San Diego, CA.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Christian Kreibich and Jon Crowcroft. 2004. Honeycomb: creating intrusion detection signatures using honeypots. ACM SIGCOMM computer communication review , Vol. 34, 1 (2004), 51--56.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Norton. 2019. What is cyber security? https://us.norton.com/internetsecurity-iot-what-is-cyber-security.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. OWASP. 2017. Open Web Application Security Project: Top Ten Project. https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Category:OWASP_Top_Ten _Project.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Claus Pahl, Sven Helmer, Lorenzo Miori, Julian Sanin, and Brian Lee. 2016. A container-based edge cloud paas architecture based on raspberry pi clusters. In 2016 IEEE 4th International Conference on Future Internet of Things and Cloud Workshops (FiCloudW). IEEE, 117--124.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Rafeeq Ur Rehman. 2003. Intrusion detection systems with Snort: advanced IDS techniques using Snort, Apache, MySQL, PHP, and ACID .Prentice Hall Professional.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Brandon Rice. 2014. Automated snort signature generation. Masters Theses, James Madison University (2014).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Martin Roesch et almbox. 1999. Snort: Lightweight intrusion detection for networks. In Lisa, Vol. 99. 229--238.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Ehsan Saboori, Shafigh Parsazad, and Yasaman Sanatkhani. 2010. Automatic firewall rules generator for anomaly detection systems with Apriori algorithm. In 2010 3rd International Conference on Advanced Computer Theory and Engineering (ICACTE), Vol. 6. IEEE, V6--57.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Palen Schwab. 2015. The History of Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS) - Part 1. https://www.threatstack.com/blog/the-history-of-intrusion-detection-systems-ids-part-1.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. SentinelOne. 2019. The history of cyber-security: Everything you ever wanted to know. https://www.sentinelone.com/blog/history-of-cyber-security/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Géza Szabó , Zoltán Turányi, László Toka, Sándor Molnár, and Alysson Santos. 2011. Automatic protocol signature generation framework for deep packet inspection. In Proceedings of the 5th International ICST Conference on Performance Evaluation Methodologies and Tools. ICST (Institute for Computer Sciences, Social-Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering), 291--299.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Chuck Willis. 2010. OWASP Broken Web Applications Project. (2010).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Zhenwei Yu, Jeffrey JP Tsai, and Thomas Weigert. 2008. An adaptive automatically tuning intrusion detection system. ACM Transactions on Autonomous and Adaptive Systems (TAAS) , Vol. 3, 3 (2008), 10.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Jiong Zhang, Mohammad Zulkernine, and Anwar Haque. 2008. Random-forests-based network intrusion detection systems. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C (Applications and Reviews) , Vol. 38, 5 (2008), 649--659.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Real-time Traffic Monitoring and SQL Injection Attack Detection for Edge Networks

        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
          Q2SWinet'19: Proceedings of the 15th ACM International Symposium on QoS and Security for Wireless and Mobile Networks
          November 2019
          115 pages
          ISBN:9781450369060
          DOI:10.1145/3345837
          • General Chair:
          • Geyong Min,
          • Program Chair:
          • Ahmed Mostefaoui

          Copyright © 2019 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: 25 November 2019

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          Overall Acceptance Rate46of131submissions,35%

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader