skip to main content
10.1145/1298306.1298314acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesimcConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

Understanding passive and active service discovery

Published:24 October 2007Publication History

ABSTRACT

Increasingly, network operators do not directly operate computers on their network, yet are responsible for assessing network vulnerabilities to ensure compliance with policies about information disclosure, and tracking services that affect provisioning. Thus, with decentralized network management, service discovery becomes an important part of maintaining and protecting computer networks.

We explore two approaches to service discovery: active probing and passive monitoring. Active probing finds all services currently on the network, except services temporarily unavailable or hidden by firewalls; however, it is often too invasive, especially if used across administrative boundaries. Passive monitoring can find transient services, but misses services that are idle. We compare the accuracy of passive and active approaches to service discovery and show that they are complimentary, highlighting the need for multiple active scans coupled with long-duration passive monitoring. We find passive monitoring is well suited for quickly finding popular services, finding servers responsible for 99% of incoming connections within minutes. Active scanning is better suited to rapidly finding all servers, which is important for vulnerability detection - one scan finds 98% of services in two hours, missing only a handful. External scans are an unexpected ally to passive monitoring, speeding service discovery by the equivalent of 9-15 days of additional observation. Finally, we show how the use of static or dynamic addresses changes the effectiveness of service discovery, both due to address reuse and VPN effects.

References

  1. Nessus vulnerability scanner. http://www.nessus.org.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Nmap ("Network Mapper"). http://insecure.org/nmap/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Snort. http://www.snort.org/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. M. Bawa, H. Deshpande, and H. Garcia-Molina. Transience of peers and streaming media. In Proceedings of the I, pages 107--112, Princeton, NJ, USA, October 2002.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. D. Box, D. Ehnebuske, G. Kakivaya, A. Layman, N. Mendelsohn, H. F. Nielsen, S. Thatte, and D. Winer. Simple object access protocol (soap) 1.1. Technical Report NOTE-SOAP-20000508, W3C, May 2000.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. B. Dayioglu and A. Özgit. Use of passive network mapping to enhance signature quality of misuse network intrusion detection systems. 2001.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Nick Duffield and Matthias Grossglauser. Trajectory sampling for direct traffic observation. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM Conference, pages 179--191, Stockholm, Sweeden, August 2000. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Krishna P. Gummadi, Richard J. Dunn, Stefan Saroiu, Steven D. Gribble, Henry M. Levy, and John Zahorjan. Measurement, modelling, and analysis of a peer-to-peer file-sharing workload. In Proceedings of the 19th Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, pages 314--329, Bolton Landing, NY, USA, October 2003. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. A. Hussain, G. Bartlett, Y. Pryadkin, J. Heidemann, C. Papadopoulos, and J. Bannister. Experiences with a continuous network tracing infrastructure. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM Workshop on Mining network data Mine Net, pages 185--190, Philadelphia, PA, USA, August 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. M. Krzywinski. Port knocking: Network authentication across closed ports. SysAdmin Magazine, 12(6):12--17, June 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Kun-Chan Lan and John Heidemann. Rapid model parameteration from traffic measurement. ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulations, 12(3):201--229, July 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. A. De Montigny-Leboeuf and F. Massicotte. Passive network discovery for real time situation awareness. In Proceedings of the The RTO Information Systems Technology Panel (IST) Symposium on Adaptive Defence in Unclassified Networks, pages 288--300, November 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. V. Paxson. Bro: a system for detecting network intruders in real-time. Computer Networks (Amsterdam, Netherlands: 1999), 31(23-24):2435--2463, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. J. Rosenberg, H. Schulzrinne, A. Johnston, G. Camarillo, J. Peterson, M. Handley R. Sparks, and E. Schooler. SIP: Session initiation protocol. RFC 3261, Internet Request For Comments, June 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. D. Schweitzer. Two sides of vulnerability scanning. http://www.computerworld.com/, February 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. F. Donelson Smith, Felix Hernandez, Kevin Jeffay, and David Ott. What TCP/IP protocol headers can tell us about the web. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGMETRICS, pages 245--256, Cambridge, MA, USA, June 2001. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Sun Microsystems. RPC: remote procedure call protocol specification version 2. RFC 1057, Internet Request For Comments, June 1988. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. The PREDICT Program. Predict: Protected repository for the defense of infrastructure against cyber-threats. http://www.predict.org, January 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. S. Webster, R. Lippmann, and M. Zissman. Experience using active and passive mapping for network situational awareness. In Proceedings of the 5th IEEE International Symposium on Network Computing and Applications, pages 19--26, July 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Understanding passive and active service discovery

    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 Conferences
      IMC '07: Proceedings of the 7th ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement
      October 2007
      390 pages
      ISBN:9781595939081
      DOI:10.1145/1298306

      Copyright © 2007 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: 24 October 2007

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • Article

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate277of1,083submissions,26%

      Upcoming Conference

      IMC '24
      ACM Internet Measurement Conference
      November 4 - 6, 2024
      Madrid , AA , Spain

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader