Review of PPM, a Traceback Technique for Defending Against DDoS Attacks

Satwinder Singh; Abhinav Bhandari

doi:https://doi.org/10.14445/22315381/IJETT-V4I6P163

Research Article | Open Access | Download PDF

Volume 4 | Issue 6 | Year 2013 | Article Id. IJETT-V4I6P163 | DOI : https://doi.org/10.14445/22315381/IJETT-V4I6P163

Review of PPM, a Traceback Technique for Defending Against DDoS Attacks

Satwinder Singh , Abhinav Bhandari

Citation :

Satwinder Singh , Abhinav Bhandari, "Review of PPM, a Traceback Technique for Defending Against DDoS Attacks," International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT), vol. 4, no. 6, pp. 2550-2554, 2013. Crossref, https://doi.org/10.14445/22315381/IJETT-V4I6P163

Abstract

Distributed denial - of - service (DDoS) is a swiftly growing problem. Denials of Service (DoS) attacks add up to one of the major fear and among the hardest security problems in today’s Internet. DDoS attacks are more difficult to handle because their tr affic can be made highly similar to the legitimate traffic. With little or no advance notice, a DDoS attack can easily wear out the computing and communication resources of its victim within a short period of time. This paper presents classification of D DoS tools and IP Traceback technique to configure the actual source of attacker. The attack classification criteria were selected to highlight commonalities and important features of attack strategies. The goal of this paper is to place some order into the existing attack and defence mechanisms, so that a better thoughtful of DDoS attacks can be achieved and then more efficient and effective algorithms, techniques and procedures to fighting these attacks may be developed.

Keywords

DoS, DDoS,PPM, IP, Trace back .

References

1. CERT Coordination Center, Denial of Service attacks, Available from http://www.cert.org/tech_tips/denial_of_service.htl.
2. Computer Security Institute and Federal Bureau of Investigation, CSI/FBI Computer crime and security survey 20 01, CSI, March 2001, Available from http://www.gocsi. com.
3. D. Moore, G. Voelker, S. Savage, Inferring Internet Denial of Service activity, in: Proceedings of the USENIX Security
4. W. Stallings, “Cryptography and Network ”, 4 th ed, Pearson Education, 2006.
5. D . Dittrich, the DoS Project_s ‘‘trinoo’’ Distributed Denial of Service attack tool, University of Washington, October 21, 1999, Available from http://staff.washington.edu/ dittrich/misc/trinoo.analysis.txt.
6. D. Dittrich, the Tribe Flood Network Distribute d Denial of Service attack tool, University of Washington, O ctober 21, 1999, Available from http://staff.washington.edu/ dittrich/misc/trinoo.analysis.txt.
7. Phrack Magazine 7 (49), File 06 of 16 [Project LOKI], Available from http://www.phrack.com/search .phtml? View& article¼p49 - 6.
8. Phrack Magazine 7 (51) September 01, 1997, article 06 of 17 [LOKI2 (the implementation)], Available from http:// www.phrack.com/search.phtml?
9. J. Barlow, W. Thrower, TFN2K –– an analysis , 2000, Available from http://security. royans.net/info/posts/ bugtraq_ddos2.shtml.
10. D. Dittrich, The _Stacheldraht_ Distributed Denial of Service attack tool, University of Washing ton, December1999 , Available from http://staff.washington.edu/dittrich/misc/stacheldraht.analysi s.txt.
11. Christos Do uligeris, Aikaterini Mitrokotsa, “DDoS attacks and defense mechanisms: classification and state - of - the art, Received 9 October 2003; accepted 13 October 2003.
12. P. Zaroo, A survey of DDoS attacks and some DDoS defense mechanisms, Advanced Information Assur ance (CS 626).
13. S. Savage, D. Wetherall, A. Karlin, and T. Anderson, “Network support for IP traceback,” IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking , vol. 9, June 2001.
14. Burch, Hal; Bill Cheswick, “Tracing Anonymous Packets to their Approxima te Source”, LISA, pp. 319 – 327, 2000