skip to main content
10.1145/2390317.2390321acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesinfoseccdConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Hands-on denial of service lab exercises using SlowLoris and RUDY

Published:12 October 2012Publication History

ABSTRACT

This paper presents an interactive exercise based on offensive denial of service techniques used by hackers. The goals of the exercise are to teach how a large class of denial of service (DoS) attacks work. Students will see that it is not necessary to use distributed DoS. Moreover, using virtualization, we created an exercise that was easy for faculty to use. We tested it on a class of computer science undergraduates, and while it was well-received by the students and easy for the faculty member, we learned some important lessons about designing hands-on exercises. In addition to teaching students about DoS attacks and how to defend against them, this exercise also requires students to look carefully at the HTTP protocol.

In the following laboratory exercise, students learn offensive techniques in a context that prompts them to think critically about what makes networks secure and how they can be made more secure. The exercise involves the use of two newer but well-known denial of service attacks: 'SlowLoris' and 'R-U-Dead-Yet?' (RUDY). The students perform these attacks through a Java-based graphical interface, to make the lab more accessible. While carrying out the attacks, the students answer questions designed to improve their analytical skills and to better their understanding of TCP, HTTP, and application-layer security considerations.

References

  1. Anpilova, N., Das, S., Goodhart, B., Marsh, S, 2011. The HTTP POST Distributed Denial of Service Exploit. INFS 612 Summer 2011 PGN#1Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Bowne, S., 2009. Slowloris - stopping Apache Web servers. DEFCON '09. http://samsclass.info/seminars/DEFCON09_Bowne_Slowloris.docGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Caltagirone, S., Ortman, P., Melton, S., Manz, D., King, K., Oman, P. 2006. Design and implementation of a multi-use attack-defend computer security lab. In Proceedings of the 39th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. HICSS USA. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Du, W. 2011. SEED Project. Syracuse University. http://www.cis.syr.edu/~wedu/seed/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Mink, M., and Freiling, F. C. 2006. Is attack better than defense? Teaching information security the right way. In Proceedings of the 3rd Annual Conference on Information Security Curriculum Development, InfoSecCD '06, pp 44--48, Kennesaw, Georgia. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Mirkovic, J., Wei, S., Hussain, A., Wilson, B., Thomas, R., Schwab, Fahmy, S., Chertov, R., and Reiher, P., 2007. DDoS benchmarks and experimenter's workbench for the DETER testbed. In Proceedings of the Tridentcom 2007, May. http://www.eecis.udel.edu/~sunshine/publications/tric.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Nance, K., Hay, B., Dodge, R., Wrubel, J., Burd, S., Seazzu, A. 2009. Replicating and sharing computer security laboratory environments, In Proceedings of the 42nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. HICSS. http://www.hicss.hawaii.edu/hicss_46/Virtualization.pdf Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Nestler, V., White, G., Conklin, W., Hirsch, M., Schou, C. 2011. Principles of Computer Security CompTIA Security+ and Beyond Lab Manual, Second Edition. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Tavani, H. 2010. Ethics and Technology: Controversies, Questions, and Strategies for Ethical Computing, Wiley. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Taylor, B., Azadegan, S., Kaza, S., O'Leary, M., Turner, C. 2012. Security Injections. Towson University.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Trabelsi, Z. 2011. Hands-on lab exercises implementation of DoS and MiM attacks using ARP cache poisoning. In Information Security Curriculum Development Conference, InfoSecCD '11, Kennesaw, Georgia. pp 74--83. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Walfish, M., Vutukuru, M., Balakrishnan, H., Karger, D., Shenker, S. 2010. DDoS defense by offense. In ACM TOCS: Volume 28: Issue 1; Article No. 3. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Zalewski, M; Ciobanu, A. I. 2007. Re: a cheesy Apache / IIS DoS vulnerability (and a question). Bugtraq. Retrieved July 6, 2012 http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/455833/30/0/threadedGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Hands-on denial of service lab exercises using SlowLoris and RUDY

    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 Other conferences
      InfoSecCD '12: Proceedings of the 2012 Information Security Curriculum Development Conference
      October 2012
      84 pages
      ISBN:9781450315388
      DOI:10.1145/2390317

      Copyright © 2012 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: 12 October 2012

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate18of23submissions,78%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader