RE: Identifying Kernel 2.4.x based Linux machines using UDP

From: Fletcher, Stephen J (stephen.fletcherat_private)
Date: Wed Mar 20 2002 - 15:57:04 PST

  • Next message: Jonathan A. Zdziarski: "[Mozilla Bug #131761] Buffer Overflow in Geck/Netscape 5.0/6.0?"

    I believe this was implemented with the ZeroCopy patch. Setting the sequence
    number was removed where not needed to speed things up, which was the main
    function of the ZeroCopy patch. The patch was included in the main tree
    somewhere around 2.4.8. 
    
    Regards
    Stephen
    
    
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Crist J. Clark [mailto:crist.clarkat_private]
    Sent: Wednesday, 20 March 2002 12:44 PM
    To: Ofir Arkin
    Cc: bugtraq
    Subject: Re: Identifying Kernel 2.4.x based Linux machines using UDP
    
    
    On Tue, Mar 19, 2002 at 11:12:36AM +0000, Ofir Arkin wrote:
    > Subject: Identifying Kernel 2.4.x based Linux machines using UDP
    > 
    > Author: Ofir Arkin (ofirat_private)
    > 
    > 
    > Linux Kernel 2.4.x has a bug with the UDP implementation which allows 
    > both active and passive fingerprinting of Linux machines based on the 
    > 2.4.x Kernel.
    
    This is a feature, not a bug. (IIRC, I am not a Linux developer and do
    not follow the Linux IP stack development.)
    
    > The following is a simple nslookup query initiated from my Kernel 2.4.10 
    > based Linux machine:
    > 
    > 03/16-11:49:41.531642 192.168.1.200:1024 -> x.x.x.x:53 UDP TTL:64 
    > TOS:0x0 ID:0 IpLen:20 DgmLen:63 DF
                 ^                    ^^
    Note that the "Do not Fragment" bit is set. The sole purpose of the IP
    ID field is to assist in the reassembly of fragmented datagrams. If
    the packet cannot be fragmented, the IP ID field is useless. The Linux
    IP stack designers have chosen to use a zero IP ID field when the
    DF bit is set.
    
    I am not a Linux IP developer, but I can think of several arguments to
    do this. If you are really concerned with IP ID randomness (and
    strangely enough, some people are), algorthims which produce "good"
    random numbers tend to be computationally expensive. Why waste the
    computations on the IP ID when it will never be used in DF packets?
    
    Right now, Linux kernels are one of the few to do this, so it is a way
    to fingerprint. But most everyone on this list knows fingerprinting is
    usually very easy anyway and is not vulnerability per sae. Also
    consider that other IP implementations may change to this behavior in
    the future as it does make some sense.
    -- 
    Crist J. Clark                     |     cjclarkat_private
                                       |     cjclarkat_private
    http://people.freebsd.org/~cjc/    |     cjcat_private
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Mar 20 2002 - 16:48:32 PST