Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

How to prevent abuse by using amplification/reflection DoS attack? #60

Open
paulmenzel opened this issue Dec 8, 2023 · 2 comments
Open
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation

Comments

@paulmenzel
Copy link

The DFN-CERT sent the warning below for our STUN server:

Ereignistyp:  Configuration/Amplifier
Zeitstempel:  2023-12-03 02:27:47+00:00
Anzahl:       4
Beschreibung: Auf dem System scheint ein Dienst betrieben zu werden, der
             potentiell für reflektierte DoS-Angriffe genutzt werden
             kann. Das heißt dieser Dienst antwortet auf Anfragen mit
             gefälschter Absenderadresse und schickt dabei Antworten die
             ein vielfaches der Größe der Anfrage haben.

Zuletzt gesehen            IP-Protokoll  Port  Dienst
---------------------------------------------------------
2023-12-01 02:27:33+00:00  UDP            3478  STUN
2023-12-01 02:27:33+00:00  UDP            3478  STUN
2023-12-02 07:55:22+00:00  UDP            3478  STUN
2023-12-03 02:27:47+00:00  UDP            3478  STUN

As I am ignorant about these things, could a security section be added to the README, what risks are to be weighed?

@licaon-kter
Copy link
Contributor

Change the default ports for starters.

XMPP clients will get the info via XEP-0215.

@weiss
Copy link
Member

weiss commented Dec 8, 2023

The DFN-CERT sent the warning below for our STUN server

We got the same email 😄

Unfortunately, there's no proper fix, as:

  1. per the spec, servers reply to unauthenticated requests, and
  2. it's not possible to reduce the amplification factor to 1 without breaking compatibility (at least the factor isn't anywhere as bad as with some other protocols, e.g. DNS).

As for workarounds, the only general recommendation is the one @licaon-kter mentioned, i.e. using a non-standard port. I guess the DFN-CERT might still discover you, but chances are the script kiddies won't. I was pondering with adding this hint to the documentation indeed.

@sando38 sando38 added the documentation Improvements or additions to documentation label Dec 12, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants