skip to main content
10.1145/1177080.1177087acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesimcConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

Finding diversity in remote code injection exploits

Published:25 October 2006Publication History

ABSTRACT

Remote code injection exploits inflict a significant societal cost, and an active underground economy has grown up around these continually evolving attacks. We present a methodology for inferring the phylogeny, or evolutionary tree, of such exploits. We have applied this methodology to traffic captured at several vantage points, and we demonstrate that our methodology is robust to the observed polymorphism. Our techniques revealed non-trivial code sharing among different exploit families, and the resulting phylogenies accurately captured the subtle variations among exploits within each family. Thus, we believe our methodology and results are a helpful step to better understanding the evolution of remote code injection exploits on the Internet.

References

  1. BBC News. Sasser Creator Avoids Jail Term. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4659329.stm, July 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. M. Costa, J. Crowcroft, M. Castro, A. Rowstron, L. Zhou, L. Zhang, and P. Barham. Vigilante: End-to-End Containment of Internet Worms. In Proceedings of the 20th ACM Symposium on Operating System Principles (SOSP), Brighton, UK, Oct. 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. J. R. Crandall. Minos: A Tool for Capturing and Analyzing Novel Worms for Unknown Vulnerabilities. In Proceedings of the ACM Workshop on Rapid Malcode (WORM), Fairfax, VA, Oct. 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. J. R. Crandall, Z. Su, S. F. Wu, and F. T. Chong. On Deriving Unknown Vulnerabilities from Zero-Day Polymorphic and Metamorphic Worm Exploits. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, Alexandria, VA, Nov. 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. T. Dullien and R. Rolles. Graph-Based Comparison of Executable Objects. In Symposium sur la Sécurité des Technologies de l'Information et des Communications (SSTIC), June 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. H. Flake. Structural Comparison of Executable Objects. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Detection of Intrusions and Malware & Vulnerability Assessment (DIMVA), July 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. D. Hochbaum. Approximation Algorithms for NP-Hard Problems. PWS Publishing Company, Boston, MA, 1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. G. Keizer. Sasser Worm Impacted Businesses Around the World. http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB20040507S0008, May 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. H.-A. Kim and B. Karp. Autograph: Toward Automated, Distributed Worm Signature Detection. In Proceedings of the USENIX Security Symposium, San Diego, CA, Aug. 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. C. Kreibich and J. Crowcroft. Honeycomb - Creating Intrusion Detection Signatures Using Honeypots. In Proceedings of the 2nd ACM Workshop on Hot Topics in Networks (HotNets-II), Cambridge, MA, Nov. 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. C. Kruegel, E. Kirda, D. Mutz, W. Robertson, and G. Vigna. Polymorphic Worm Detection Using Structural Information of Executables. In Proceedings of Symposium on Recent Advances in Intrusion Detection (RAID), Seattle, WA, Sept. 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. R. Lemos. MSBlast Epidemic Far Larger than Believed. http://news.com.com/2100-7349 3-5184439.html, Apr. 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. C.-K. Luk, R. Cohn, R. Muth, H. Patil, A. Klauser, G. Lowney, S. Wallace, V. J. Reddi, and K. Hazelwood. Pin: Building Customized Program Analysis Tools with Dynamic Instrumentation. In Programming Language Design and Implementation (PLDI), Chicago, IL, June 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Metasploit Project. The Metasploit Framework. http://www.metasploit.com/projects/Framework/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. D. Moore, V. Paxson, S. Savage, C. Shannon, S. Staniford, and N. Weaver. Inside the Slammer Worm. IEEE Security and Privacy, 1(4):33--39, July 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. D. Moore, C. Shannon, G. M. Voelker, and S. Savage. Network telescopes. Technical Report CS2004-0795, UCSD, July 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Nepenthes Development Team. ShellcodeHandler Generic LinkTrans. http://nepenthes.mwcollect.org/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. J. Newsome and D. Song. Dynamic Taint Analysis for Automatic Detection, Analysis, and Signature Generation of Exploits on Commodity Software. In Proceedings of the 12th Annual Network and Distributed System Security Symposium (NDSS '05), San Diego, CA, Feb. 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. A. Ng, M. Jordan, and Y. Weiss. On Spectral Clustering: Analysis and an Algorithm. In Proceedings of Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2001.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. R. Pang, V. Yegneswaran, P. Barford, V. Paxson, and L. Peterson. Characteristics of Internet Background Radiation. In Proceedings of the USENIX/ACM Internet Measurement Conference, Taormina, Sicily, Italy, Oct. 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. P. Royal, D. Dagon, and W. Lee. PolyUnpack: Automating the Hidden-Code Extraction of Packed Malware. http://www-static.cc.gatech.edu/ ranma1/polyunpack/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. S. Singh, C. Estan, G. Varghese, and S. Savage. Automated Worm Fingerprinting. In Proceedings of the 6th ACM/USENIX Symposium on Operating System Design and Implementation (OSDI), San Francisco, CA, Dec. 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. spoonm. Recent Shellcode Developments. In REcon, Montreal, QC, June 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. A. E. Stepan. Defeating Polymorphism: Beyond Emulation. In Proceedings of the Virus Bulletin International Conference, Dublin, Ireland, Oct. 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Symantec. Trojan.Netdepix. http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/trojan.netdepix.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Symantec. W32.Korgo.AB. http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/w32.korgo.ab.html, Apr. 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. P. Szor. The Art of Computer Virus Research and Defense. Addison Wesley, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Trend Micro. Virus Encyclopedia. http://www.trendmicro.com/vinfo/virusencyclo/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. H. Wang, C. Guo, D. Simon, and A. Zugenmaier. Shield: Vulnerability-Driven Network Filters for Preventing Known Vulnerability Exploits. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM Conference, Portland, Oregon, Sept. 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Finding diversity in remote code injection exploits

      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
        IMC '06: Proceedings of the 6th ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement
        October 2006
        356 pages
        ISBN:1595935614
        DOI:10.1145/1177080

        Copyright © 2006 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 October 2006

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • Article

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate277of1,083submissions,26%

        Upcoming Conference

        IMC '24
        ACM Internet Measurement Conference
        November 4 - 6, 2024
        Madrid , AA , Spain

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader