Re: (How) Does AntiSniff do what is claimed?

From: der Mouse (mouseat_private)
Date: Mon Jul 26 1999 - 06:47:55 PDT

  • Next message: Yozo Toda: "Re: Troff dangerous."

    > The L0pht people have my admiration for fully documenting (and
    > crediting) their approach, but I think they over-hype this tool by
    > saying that it will detect sniffing -- a green light from their
    > product does NOT mean you're not being sniffed.
    
    Very true.
    
    Last time I wanted to set up a sniffer, I ended up adding a BPFONLY
    interface flag to the kernel, which completely disables the interface
    for incoming packets except for BPF access (the raw-packet interface on
    the OS in question was BPF).  This would defeat all of AntiSniff's
    checks (with the possible exception of the response-time check, which
    would be possible if the machine had another interface that *could*
    receive packets).
    
    And all of the checks assume the machine has an IP address.  For its
    apparently-intended purpose (helping admins tell when their net has
    been remotely compromised), this is not a problem, since such an
    intrusion will be little use to an attacker without leaving IP up on
    the machine...but I *would* have preferred to see this explicitly
    stated in their doco.
    
    					der Mouse
    
    			       mouseat_private
    		     7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Apr 13 2001 - 14:53:35 PDT