skip to main content
10.1145/1774088.1774480acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessacConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

TokDoc: a self-healing web application firewall

Authors Info & Claims
Published:22 March 2010Publication History

ABSTRACT

The growing amount of web-based attacks poses a severe threat to the security of web applications. Signature-based detection techniques increasingly fail to cope with the variety and complexity of novel attack instances. As a remedy, we introduce a protocol-aware reverse HTTP proxy TokDoc (the token doctor), which intercepts requests and decides on a per-token basis whether a token requires automatic "healing". In particular, we propose an intelligent mangling technique, which, based on the decision of previously trained anomaly detectors, replaces suspicious parts in requests by benign data the system has seen in the past. Evaluation of our system in terms of accuracy is performed on two real-world data sets and a large variety of recent attacks. In comparison to state-of-the-art anomaly detectors, TokDoc is not only capable of detecting most attacks, but also significantly outperforms the other methods in terms of false positives. Runtime measurements show that our implementation can be deployed as an inline intrusion prevention system.

References

  1. K. G. Anagnostakis, S. Sidiroglou, P. Akritidis, K. Xinidis, E. Markatos, and A. D. Keromytis. Detecting targeted attacks using shadow honeypots. In Proc. of USENIX Security Symposium, pages 129--144, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. M. Cova, D. Balzarotti, V. Felmetsger, and G. Vigna. Swaddler: An Approach for the Anomaly-based Detection of State Violations in Web Applications. In Recent Adances in Intrusion Detection (RAID), pages 63--86, September 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. P. Düssel, C. Gehl, P. Laskov, and K. Rieck. Incorporation of application layer protocol syntax into anomaly detection. In Proc. of International Conference on Information Systems Security (ICISS), pages 188--202, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. J. M. Estévez-Tapiador, P. García-Teodoro, and J. E. Díaz-Verdejo. Measuring normality in http traffic for anomaly-based intrusion detection. Computer Networks, 45(2):175--193, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. S. Forrest, S. Hofmeyr, A. Somayaji, and T. Longstaff. A sense of self for unix processes. In Proc. of IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, pages 120--128, Oakland, CA, USA, 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. M. Handley, V. Paxson, and C. Kreibich. Network intrusion detection: Evasion, traffic normalization and end-to-end protocol semantics. In Proc. of USENIX Security Symposium, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. K. L. Ingham, A. Somayaji, J. Burge, and S. Forrest. Learning DFA representations of HTTP for protecting web applications. Computer Networks, 51(5):1239--1255, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. C. Kruegel and G. Vigna. Anomaly detection of web-based attacks. In Proc. of 10th ACM Conf. on Computer and Communications Security, pages 251--261, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. C. Kruegel, G. Vigna, and W. Robertson. A multi-model approach to the detection of web-based attacks. Computer Networks, 48(5), 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. T. Krueger, C. Gehl, K. Rieck, and P. Laskov. An architecture for inline anomaly detection. In Proc. of European Conference on Computer Network Defense (EC2ND), pages 11--18, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. M. E. Locasto, K. Wang, A. D. Keromytis, and S. J. Stolfo. Flips: Hybrid adaptive intrusion prevention. In Recent Adances in Intrusion Detection (RAID), pages 82--101, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Microsoft. Microsoft security intelligence report: January to June 2008. Microsoft Corporation, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. V. Paxson. Bro: A system for detecting network intruders in real-time. Computer Networks, 31(23--24):2435--2466, Dec. 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. R. Perdisci, D. Ariu, P. Fogla, G. Giacinto, and W. Lee. McPAD: A multiple classifier system for accurate payload-based anomaly detection. Computer Networks, In Press, Corrected Proof:--, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. K. Rieck and P. Laskov. Detecting unknown network attacks using language models. In Detection of Intrusions and Malware, and Vulnerability Assessment, Proc. of 3rd DIMVA Conference, LNCS, pages 74--90, July 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. K. Rieck and P. Laskov. Linear-time computation of similarity measures for sequential data. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 9(Jan):23--48, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. W. Robertson, G. Vigna, C. Kruegel, and R. A. Kemmerer. Using generalization and characterization techniques in the anomaly-based detection of web attacks. In Proc. of Network and Distributed System Security Symposium (NDSS), 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. M. Roesch. Snort: Lightweight intrusion detection for networks. In Proc. of USENIX Large Installation System Administration Conference LISA, pages 229--238, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. B. W. Silverman. Density Estimation for Statistics and Data Analysis. Chapman & Hall/CRC, 1986.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Y. Song, A. D. Keromytis, and S. J. Stolfo. Spectrogram: A mixture-of-markov-chains model for anomaly detection in web traffic. In Proc. of Network and Distributed System Security Symposium (NDSS), 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Symantec. Symantec global internet security report: Trends for July--December 07. Volume XIII, Symantec Corporation, Apr. 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. F. Valeur, G. Vigna, C. Kruegel, and E. Kirda. An anomaly-driven reverse proxy for web applications. In Proc. of the 2006 ACM symposium on Applied computing, pages 361--368, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. G. Vigna, F. Valeur, D. Balzarotti, W. Robertson, C. Kruegel, and E. Kirda. Reducing errors in the anomaly-based detection of web-based attacks through the combined analysis of web requests and SQL queries. J. Comput. Secur., 17(3):305--329, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. K. Wang, J. Parekh, and S. Stolfo. Anagram: A content anomaly detector resistant to mimicry attack. In Recent Adances in Intrusion Detection (RAID), pages 226--248, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. R. R. Wilcox. Introduction to Robust Estimation and Hypothesis Testing. Academic Press, 1997.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. TokDoc: a self-healing web application firewall

    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
      SAC '10: Proceedings of the 2010 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing
      March 2010
      2712 pages
      ISBN:9781605586397
      DOI:10.1145/1774088

      Copyright © 2010 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: 22 March 2010

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      SAC '10 Paper Acceptance Rate364of1,353submissions,27%Overall Acceptance Rate1,650of6,669submissions,25%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader