Transcript Document
Intrusion Detection on Manets Kulesh Shanmugasundaram [email protected] SYN SYN Overview of Manets Overview of IDS Problems of Current Techniques Research Challenges Proposed Solutions Conclusion FIN Manets How Ad-Hoc is Ad-Hoc? No, really? Mechanics of Manets Auto-configuration (zeroconf, ipng) Routing (manet) Table driven vs. on-demand algorithms Performance depend on topology, density, size, mobility etc. So, it is hard to agree upon a standard Applications Nodes should be able to configure themselves when they join a “community” (e.g. choosing names, locating services) Mechanics of configuration should be transparent to applications We really don’t know Security (manet) Security of operations (e.g. integrity of routing mechanisms etc.) Physical security of nodes (e.g. lost devices, tampering etc.) Who is the weakest link? (network is as secure as the weakest link) Vulnerabilities of Manets Vulnerabilities accentuated by manet context Access Control Vulnerabilities specific to manets Trust Lack of physical boundary/packet boundary Shared, open broadcast medium E.g. IP masquerading, passive eavesdropping, DoS Lack of trust in the underlying infrastructure Collaborative participation of networks is mandatory for routing and auto-configuration E.g. Refusal of Service (RoS), Emission of false information, Sleep-deprivation torture, DoS on MAC, DAD Homework List at least 5 properties of manets that accentuate security vulnerabilities? Explain how they impact security, with examples. Intrusion Detection Systems Attempts to detect intrusions on autonomous systems e.g: computer networks Based on Deployment Host Based (HIDS) (e.g. ZoneAlarm) Network Based (NIDS) (e.g. NFR) Uses hosts’ audit logs & visible traffic for intrusion detection Uses substantial network traffic for intrusion detection Based on Techniques Anomaly Detection (e.g. use of normal profile) Misuse Detection (e.g. use of attack signatures) Specification Based (e.g. monitor invariants for violations) Policy Based (e.g. monitor policy violations) Requirements of an IDS on Manets 1. Not introduce a new weakness 2. Need little system resources 3. An IDS should not only detect but also should response to the detected intrusions, preferably without human intervention (e.g. modify firewall to avoid attacking hosts etc.) Be reliable 5. In general nodes on manets have stringent requirements on resources (e.g. may not be able to run complex detection algorithms) Have proper response for detections 4. Anomaly detection system itself should not make the node weaker than it already is (e.g. listening in promiscuous mode) Fewer false positives, as there is no extensive crisis control infrastructure to handle alarms Interoperable with other IDS Be able to collaborate with other nodes for detection or response (e.g. use standards ) Problems of Current Techniques Lack of traffic convergence points Lack of available data at hosts ID algorithms have to work with “partial and localized information” in and around the radio range of hosts Lack of communication among nodes Prohibits the use of NIDS, Firewalls, Policies etc. Disconnected operations Location dependent computing Lack of standards Lack of protocol standards |signatures|=|protocols|*|vulnerabilities|*|topologies| Lack of understanding of applications Research Challenges [1] What is a good system architecture for building intrusion detection and response systems for manets? What are appropriate audit data sources? How do we detect anomalies based on partial, localized data– if they are the only reliable data sources? What is a good model of activities in a manet that can separate anomaly when under attacks from the normalcy? Can we improve routing, zero-conf protocols to support intrusion detection systems? Proposed Solution Anomaly Detection In General Data Features 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. A Learning Algorithm Pick a learning algorithm Pick some features Train the algorithm Test the algorithm Tune the algorithm, features Go to 3 Results Anomaly Detection on Manets Arguments for Anomaly Detection on Manets One too many signatures to maintain for a misuse detection systems Keeping the signatures up to date is a bigger problem Lack of centralized management and monitoring points makes policy based systems difficult and also policies among communities may be incompatible Specification based systems may work but no one tried it, AFAIK Arguments Against Anomaly Detection on Manets There may not be a clear separation between normalcy and anomaly (e.g. emission of false routing information) There may not be enough data for anomaly detection systems (e.g. disconnected operations, lack of communication in general) Processing, memory requirements for anomaly detection are relatively high and nodes may not be able to cope up with the requirements Hasn’t proven itself useful in fixed networks (IMHO) Proposed System Architecture local response global response local detection engine global detection engine local data collection secure communication system calls, communications activities etc. neighboring IDS agents Anomaly Detection on Manets The Goal Find most useful (features, algorithm) for anomaly detection on manets and using feedback alter routing algorithms to better support anomaly detection Results in best combination of (routing, features, model) The Process 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Choose a routing algorithm Choose some features Choose a modeling algorithm Train, test detection model and refine features Feedback to alter the routing algorithm Proposed Process PCR= Percentage of Changed Routes PCH= Percentage of Changes of sum of Hops of all routes Training process simulate diversity of normal situations and trace data is gathered A detection model trained on this data can work on any node Computing the normal profile Denote PCR the class Also, denote distance, direction, velocity, and PCH the features Use n classes to represent the PCR ranges Apply a classification algorithm to learn a classifier for PCR Repeat the process to learn a classifier for PCH Classification Algorithm Given a set of features describing a concept classification algorithms output classification rules (a.k.a classifier) For example, when using PCR, given the features output would be: if(distance < 0.5 && velocity < 3) PCR = 2 else if (velocity > 5 && PCH < 10) PCR = 6 Confidence = (|condition && conclusion|) (|condition|) Classification rule set of PCR, PCH together forms the normal profile of the manet Process of Anomaly Detection Training & Testing 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Feed the trace data to classification algorithm Compute confidence for all classification rules Compute PCR, PCH deviation scores PCRD, PCHD Assign classes {normal, abnormal} for (PCHD, PCRD) Use a classification/clustering algorithm on (PCHD, PCRD, Class) to compute a classifier Refine the models Deviation (PCRD, PCHD) is measured by the confidence value of violated classification rule Combination of classification algorithms (2,5) is used on hosts for anomaly detection Process of Anomaly Detection Distance Direction Velocity PCR PCH 0.01 S 0.1 20 15 10 S 20 80 50 0.02 N 0.1 0 0 … … … … … PCRD PCHD Class 0.0 0.0 Normal 0.1 0.0 0.2 Classification Algorithm Classification Rules Conclusion Confidence if(distance > 0.5 && velocity < 3) PCH = 2 0.0 Normal else if(velocity > 5 && direction = N ) PCR = 5 0.1 0.2 Normal else if (velocity > 5 && PCR = 20) PCH = 9 0.34 0.9 0.5 Abnormal else if (distance > 3.4 && velocity > 9) PCR = 4 0.87 0.3 0.1 Normal Detection Model Classification/ Clustering Algorithm Classification Rules if(PCHD < 0.5 && PCHD > 0.2) Conclusion Normal else if(PCHD > 0.5 && PCHD < 0.8 ) Abnormal else if (PCRD < 0.5 && PCRD > 0.0) Normal else if (PCRD > 0.8) Abnormal Multi-Layer Integrated IDS An obvious next step Conclusion Discussed a common process for anomaly detection on manets Discussed an architecture for the system Anyone interested in furthering this work: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Find realistic data set (DNE) Brainstorm for proper feature set Pick a learning algorithm (lots of tools) And the 3T’s (train, test, tune) Just don’t over fit or over tune References 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Intrusion Detection in Wireless Ad-Hoc Networks, Zhang, Yongguang, Lee, Wenke, MobiCom 2000 Security in Ad-Hoc Networks: A General Intrusion Detection Architecture Enhancing Trust Based Approaches, Albers, Patrick, Camp, Olivier et. al., International Workshop on Wireless Information Systems 2002 RFC2460, IETF Standards Document 1998 RFC2051, IETF Draft Document 2000 Zero Configuration Networking, Internet Draft 2002 Homework 1. 2. List at least 5 properties of manets that accentuate security vulnerabilities and explain how they impact security with examples. List a set of features and how they can be used for anomaly detection on manets based on following protocols: 1. 2. 3. DSDV DSR AODV Due 29th October? FIN Questions, Comments, Concerns…