Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Denial of Service Attack at Internet Root Servers
AP ^ | 22 OCT 2002 | TED BRIDIS

Posted on 10/22/2002 4:54:09 PM PDT by j_tull

WASHINGTON (AP) - An unusually powerful electronic attack briefly crippled nine of the 13 computer servers that manage global Internet traffic this week, officials disclosed Tuesday. But most Internet users didn't notice because the attack only lasted one hour.

The FBI and White House were investigating. One official described the attack Monday as the most sophisticated and large-scale assault against these crucial computers in the history of the Internet. The origin of the attack was not known.

Seven of the 13 servers failed to respond to legitimate network traffic and two others failed intermittently during the attack, officials confirmed.

The FBI's National Infrastructure Protection Center was "aware of the denial of service attack and is addressing this matter," spokesman Steven Berry said.

Service was restored after experts enacted defensive measures and the attack suddenly stopped.

The 13 computers are spread geographically across the globe as precaution against physical disasters and operated by U.S. government agencies, universities, corporations and private organizations.

"As best we can tell, no user noticed and the attack was dealt with and life goes on," said Louis Touton, vice president for the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, the Internet's key governing body.

Brian O'Shaughnessy, a spokesman for VeriSign Inc., which operates two of the 13 computers in northern Virginia, said "these sorts of attacks will happen."

"We were prepared, we responded quickly," O'Shaughnessy said. "We proactively cooperated with our fellow root server operators and the appropriate authorities."

Computer experts who manage some of the affected computers, speaking on condition of anonymity, said they were cooperating with the White House through its Office of Homeland Security and the President's Critical Infrastructure Protection Board.

Richard Clarke, President Bush's top cyber-security adviser and head of the protection board, has warned for months that an attack against the Internet's 13 so-called root server computers could be dramatically disruptive.

These experts said the attack, which started about 4:45 p.m. EDT Monday, transmitted data to each targeted root server 30 to 40 times normal amounts. One said that just one additional failure would have disrupted e-mails and Web browsing across parts of the Internet.

Monday's attack wasn't more disruptive because many Internet providers and large corporations and organizations routinely store, or "cache," popular Web directory information for better performance.

"The Internet was designed to be able to take outages, but when you take the root servers out, you don't know how long you can work without them," said Alan Paller, director of research at the SANS Institute, a security organization based in Bethesda, Md.

Although the Internet theoretically can operate with only a single root server, its performance would slow if more than four root servers failed for any appreciable length of time.

In August 2000, four of the 13 root servers failed for a brief period because of a technical glitch.

A more serious problem involving root servers occurred in July 1997 after experts transferred a garbled directory list to seven root servers and failed to correct the problem for four hours. Traffic on much of the Internet ground to a halt.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Technical
KEYWORDS: cyberterrorism
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-67 next last
To: j_tull; swarthyguy
Office of Homeland Security and the President's Critical Infrastructure Protection Board.

Hmmm, I didn't see in this article where the attacks came from. But I can guess.

21 posted on 10/22/2002 5:16:38 PM PDT by aristeides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aristeides
Yes. Of course, it could be a couple of kids :>>
22 posted on 10/22/2002 5:16:59 PM PDT by swarthyguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: j_tull
Actually, your access to FR does not rely on the root servers. The root servers are the
primary (but no only) method of associating an IP address (FR is 209.157.64.200) with the term
"www.freerepublic.com." That association is also stored at a DNS (Domain name server) close
to you. FR was slow for other reasons, not because 9 of 13 "root DNS servers" were slow
updating the name-lookup inquiries that they were getting. There are thousands of name-lookup
servers, and it is very unlikely that your browsing ever touches one directly.
23 posted on 10/22/2002 5:17:13 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: austingirl
So that's what happened - and this user sure noticed.

I didn't see time of day given so it's still conjecture -- but I sure noticed something yesterday. (Memory says somewhat in the 7 - 9 AM PDT timeslot.)

24 posted on 10/22/2002 5:17:16 PM PDT by Eala
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: j_tull
Our GCI Internet connection to the outside world was down for 6 hours today. No explanation given so far.
25 posted on 10/22/2002 5:19:10 PM PDT by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: j_tull
I think the statement: The origin of the attack was not known., is BS.They don't want us to know.
26 posted on 10/22/2002 5:20:40 PM PDT by philetus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

27 posted on 10/22/2002 5:21:28 PM PDT by Dakmar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: austingirl
Count me as one who noticed as well---
28 posted on 10/22/2002 5:26:55 PM PDT by stands2reason
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone; Madame Dufarge
Can anybody figure a way to get it hooked up to electricty??
29 posted on 10/22/2002 5:30:52 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: hispanarepublicana
We've been having problems too. It was NOT our computer. Pages slow to open, or wouldn't open. Had a real hard time getting FR's Finest to open.
30 posted on 10/22/2002 5:37:07 PM PDT by GailA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt
Actually, your access to FR does not rely on the root servers. The root servers are the primary (but no only) method of associating an IP address (FR is 209.157.64.200) with the term "www.freerepublic.com." That association is also stored at a DNS (Domain name server) close to you. FR was slow for other reasons, not because 9 of 13 "root DNS servers" were slow updating the name-lookup inquiries that they were getting. There are thousands of name-lookup servers, and it is very unlikely that your browsing ever touches one directly.

Well, regardless of whether your own machine ever touches those root servers, they are actually quite necessary.

DNS works by going from general-to-specific. The root servers manage a DNS zone that is really just "." (yup... dot).

So if you look up www.freerepublic.com, what you don't see is that domain names actually have a . on the end... just isn't needed really, it's assumed. :)

To lookup it's IP address, a DNS server would first find the servers that handle . (the root servers). Those would tell you where to find the servers that handle .com., and those servers tell you where to find freerepublic.com. and then it tells you where the server is for the hostname www in the domain freerepublic.com.

Rocket science, hardly, but just goes to show that without the root servers, we'd be screwed.

Practically speaking, any DNS server along the way can "cache" the data... I mean, DNS servers don't change all that often, so most servers out there, including the ones your local ISP uses, will cache data for hours, days, even weeks or months. I always get frustrated when I have to make a DNS change and there are servers out there that ignore my time-to-live settings and keep spitting out their invalid cached addresses. Urgh.

31 posted on 10/22/2002 5:47:18 PM PDT by MPB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: j_tull
I was in Cozumel, Mexico when it happened. Slow is the norm there so I noticed nothing. Even the dogs are slow.


32 posted on 10/22/2002 5:58:51 PM PDT by unixfox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: philetus
They don't want us to know.

I concur, but I would REALLY like to know what the "defensive measures" are.

33 posted on 10/22/2002 6:07:35 PM PDT by j_tull
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: j_tull
For those of you wondering how the source of the attack can remain an unknown: There are several known attacks that permit the attacker to send packets with "spoofed" source IP addresses; an attacker could easily plug your IP address into the source IP field so that from the victim's perspective, the attack would appear to be coming from your machine. Some attacks cause innocent third parties' servers to send unsolicited SYN/ACK packets to the victim's host. This is done in such a way that the machines being used to send the SYN/ACK packets each send only a trickle of them, barely noticeable to an admin who isn't looking for them, but in concert with hundreds or thousands of other machines the effect is a flood of traffic at the victim's end.

Counterattacking the IP address contained in the incoming packets would almost certainly be a bad idea because there's a high probability that the source IP is false, thus you'd be attacking a server that may not even exist or at worst is totally innocent, or belongs to a server that is simply doing what it is designed to do (as in the case of the unsolicited SYN/ACK attack).

34 posted on 10/22/2002 6:09:23 PM PDT by dwollmann
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dwollmann
Spoofed IP addresses are one technique to protect yourself when hacking someone's system, but they are not foolproof. Even without the IP in the header, the packets can be tracked backwards. It is slow and laborious and requires cooperation from your ISP and your ISP's ISP's ISP... It's how Stoll and friends caught the Hannover Hacker back in the day.

Another popular technique, which is more difficult to trace back to the attacker is the two phase attack. Phase 1, the hacker takes over some dupe's system. Phase 2, the hacker issues a time-delayed command to the dupe's system to attack your system. Usually, the logs (if there are any) have been recycled by the time the attack goes off and it is very difficult to figure out who took over the machine and issued the command.
35 posted on 10/22/2002 6:35:19 PM PDT by ReadMyMind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: calenel
Yup. China. Or North Korea. Or Terrorists. Or bored Canadian adolescents.
36 posted on 10/22/2002 6:40:44 PM PDT by FreeTheHostages
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: j_tull
I would REALLY like to know what the "defensive measures" are.

Depends on the nature of the attack. Totally. But for the general spam attack, they can block/reject/delay data that's associated with a sudden huge increase in volume. There are people at these roots 24/7 that are monitoring for suspcious stuff. They deal with minor security issues almost daily.
37 posted on 10/22/2002 6:43:23 PM PDT by FreeTheHostages
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: dwollmann
Some attacks cause innocent third parties' servers to send unsolicited SYN/ACK packets to the victim's host. This is done in such a way that the machines being used to send the SYN/ACK packets each send only a trickle of them, barely noticeable to an admin who isn't looking for them, but in concert with hundreds or thousands of other machines the effect is a flood of traffic at the victim's end.

For others that may not be familiar with the technology: this is what is known as a DDOS attack, or Distrubuted Denial Of Service. It is typically launched with a collection of servers that have already been compromised and have been held in waiting until given instructions to start the attack.

I don't know the specifics of this attack, but DNS lookup (port 53) is a connectionless UDP protocol, rather than TCP. So, there would be no SYN/ACK. However, I believe there are some aspects of DNS that are TCP.

38 posted on 10/22/2002 6:58:14 PM PDT by justlurking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: j_tull
I had a mysterious non-response from hotmail yesterday. Nothing like it ever before.
39 posted on 10/22/2002 7:00:19 PM PDT by Arthur McGowan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: j_tull
I felt that... Wonder if it was a 'trial run'?
40 posted on 10/22/2002 7:03:13 PM PDT by RCW2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-67 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson