移动目标防御DDoS攻击:实证博弈论分析

Mason Wright, S. Venkatesan, Massimiliano Albanese, Michael P. Wellman
{"title":"移动目标防御DDoS攻击:实证博弈论分析","authors":"Mason Wright, S. Venkatesan, Massimiliano Albanese, Michael P. Wellman","doi":"10.1145/2995272.2995279","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Distributed denial-of-service attacks are an increasing problem facing web applications, for which many defense techniques have been proposed, including several moving-target strategies. These strategies typically work by relocating targeted services over time, increasing uncertainty for the attacker, while trying not to disrupt legitimate users or incur excessive costs. Prior work has not shown, however, whether and how a rational defender would choose a moving-target method against an adaptive attacker, and under what conditions. We formulate a denial-of-service scenario as a two-player game, and solve a restricted-strategy version of the game using the methods of empirical game-theoretic analysis. Using agent-based simulation, we evaluate the performance of strategies from prior literature under a variety of attacks and environmental conditions. We find evidence for the strategic stability of various proposed strategies, such as proactive server movement, delayed attack timing, and suspected insider blocking, along with guidelines for when each is likely to be most effective.","PeriodicalId":20539,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Workshop on Moving Target Defense","volume":"27 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"32","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Moving Target Defense against DDoS Attacks: An Empirical Game-Theoretic Analysis\",\"authors\":\"Mason Wright, S. Venkatesan, Massimiliano Albanese, Michael P. Wellman\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/2995272.2995279\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Distributed denial-of-service attacks are an increasing problem facing web applications, for which many defense techniques have been proposed, including several moving-target strategies. These strategies typically work by relocating targeted services over time, increasing uncertainty for the attacker, while trying not to disrupt legitimate users or incur excessive costs. Prior work has not shown, however, whether and how a rational defender would choose a moving-target method against an adaptive attacker, and under what conditions. We formulate a denial-of-service scenario as a two-player game, and solve a restricted-strategy version of the game using the methods of empirical game-theoretic analysis. Using agent-based simulation, we evaluate the performance of strategies from prior literature under a variety of attacks and environmental conditions. We find evidence for the strategic stability of various proposed strategies, such as proactive server movement, delayed attack timing, and suspected insider blocking, along with guidelines for when each is likely to be most effective.\",\"PeriodicalId\":20539,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Workshop on Moving Target Defense\",\"volume\":\"27 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-10-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"32\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Workshop on Moving Target Defense\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/2995272.2995279\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Workshop on Moving Target Defense","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/2995272.2995279","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 32

摘要

分布式拒绝服务攻击是web应用面临的一个日益严重的问题,针对分布式拒绝服务攻击,人们提出了许多防御技术,包括几种移动目标策略。这些策略通常通过随着时间的推移重新定位目标服务来工作,这增加了攻击者的不确定性,同时尽量不破坏合法用户或产生过高的成本。然而,先前的工作并没有表明,理性的防御者是否以及如何选择移动目标方法来对抗自适应攻击者,以及在什么条件下。我们将拒绝服务场景描述为一个二人博弈,并使用经验博弈论分析方法求解了该博弈的限制策略版本。使用基于智能体的仿真,我们评估了在各种攻击和环境条件下的先前文献中的策略的性能。我们发现了各种建议策略的战略稳定性的证据,例如主动服务器移动、延迟攻击时间和可疑的内部阻止,以及每种策略何时可能最有效的指导方针。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Moving Target Defense against DDoS Attacks: An Empirical Game-Theoretic Analysis
Distributed denial-of-service attacks are an increasing problem facing web applications, for which many defense techniques have been proposed, including several moving-target strategies. These strategies typically work by relocating targeted services over time, increasing uncertainty for the attacker, while trying not to disrupt legitimate users or incur excessive costs. Prior work has not shown, however, whether and how a rational defender would choose a moving-target method against an adaptive attacker, and under what conditions. We formulate a denial-of-service scenario as a two-player game, and solve a restricted-strategy version of the game using the methods of empirical game-theoretic analysis. Using agent-based simulation, we evaluate the performance of strategies from prior literature under a variety of attacks and environmental conditions. We find evidence for the strategic stability of various proposed strategies, such as proactive server movement, delayed attack timing, and suspected insider blocking, along with guidelines for when each is likely to be most effective.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信