17 August 2000


A Denial of Service attack on Cryptome commenced at 19:27, 16 August 2000, from a Sprint Government Systems Division customer Data Wave (NET-SPRINT-C64637), 214 B State Street, Santa Barbara, CA 93101:

198.70.55.34 - - [16/Aug/2000:19:27:36 -0400] "GET / HTTP/1.0" 302 200 "-" "LEIA/2.90"

The attack ended this morning (last entry):

198.70.55.34 - - [17/Aug/2000:06:09:28 -0400] "GET / HTTP/1.0" 302 200 "-" "LEIA/2.90"

The attack repeated this command non-stop 6 times per second, for about 250,000 hits total. We noticed and attempted to block the machine's htaccess at 22:20 on 16 August but the htaccess block did not stop the attack.

The 198.70.55.34 address has made no previous requests.

The contact phone number for the "coordinator" of Data Wave, Universal Access (ua.com), is disconnected. An e-mail was sent to the coordinator, Henry Minsky (hqm@ua.com), who promptly called from Tokyo to say he is no longer coordinator and referred me to Brian Fox (bfox@ua.com or  bfox@ai.mit.edu), the current administrator of Universal Access. Mr. Minsky suspects the address may have been hi-jacked by the attacker. We immediately sent a request for help to Brian Fox at his two e-mail addresses but have not received a reply at 7:10, 17 August.

Information welcomed on the attacking address or the program "LEIA/2.90." Send to jya@pipeline.com


Thanks for these responses to request for help:

From: D

On your system, the command :

	route add 198.70.55.34 lo
	
	(or its equivalent on a non-unix system) will leave the machine at that
address waiting with an open connection waiting for something that your
system won't answer. Basically, it will make the operating system think
that address is one of your own and won't send a response. At the other 
end, the timeout for a response could be as long as minutes, so without
running the same program multiple times, the attacking system will just
wait (of course, someone can write software to do anything, but some
script kiddie or hack-wannabe might just have a script that automates
the repeated connection attempts. If that's the case, blocking it by 
sending an RST will only cause it to loop faster. The command mentioned
above essentiall tells the system to find that address through the systems
own loopback to itself.

	If you have the system set up for persistent connections, set
the persistent connection limit lower if possible. If tcp keep-alive
is requested, your server will hold open multiple connections from
this person.


From: DG

LEIA appears to be a web browser or spider.  Many sites that publish 
web server logs list this program in the compilation of browser 
versions. See for instance 

http://www.co.broward.fl.us/usage/brows233_b.htm

Damned if I can find any other info on it, though.


From: JH

I did some research on the dos attack that you were witnessed to 
and have found something interesting that is not just affecting 
you.  There has recently been an exploit, non-published, that I 
have seen posted by many linux users with telnet with SSH 
tunneling open.  

I have found some dated information on the subject:

"All systems running implementations of SSH using protocol 
version 1.x are vulnerable. This includes SSH software versions 
up to 1.2.23 and F-Secure SSH 1.3.4 To obtain the version of the 
SSH server that is running on a given host you can issue the 
following commands:

$ telnet <IP address> 22
Trying <IPaddress>...
Connected to <IPaddress>.
Escape character is '^]'.
SSH-1.5-1.2.23
\ / \--------- software version
|------------ protocol version

^]
telnet> close
Connection closed.
$ exit

Additional Information:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
These vulnerabilities were discovered by Ariel Futoransky
<futo@core-sdi.com> and Emiliano Kargieman <ek@core-sdi.com>
CORE SDI wishes to thank the SSH maintainers Tatu Ylonen <ylo@ssh.fi>
and Tero Kivinen <kivinen@ssh.fi> for their quick response to the
issues rised by this advisory."

http://archives.indenial.com/hypermail/bugtraq/1998/June1998/0068.html

The IP address you listed has 2 ports open.  Port 22, which is an 
altered telnet port(they are using SSH-1.5-1.2.26), and port 
25(email server 220 mailhost.ua.com ESMTP).  That SSH version is 
rootable.  The sysadmin should have taken the system offline as 
soon as he recieved your email.  Their email box is effectively 
comprimised and must be formated.  

I suspect that it is trojaned and being controlled by an outside 
party.  I did not portscan the upper spectrum of ports ala 65xxx 
and up.  I suspect the 3rd party is telneting and controlling the 
box via that range with a sub7/bo2k type setup.  The admin should 
take the email server down, format it, and restore only the email 
database from a backup.  He should disable telnet until a fix is 
found.

The fed has a blunt little tool that maybe of assistance to the 
sysop (probably not though):

http://www.fbi.gov/nipc/trinoo.htm

Here is a link to one forum pertinent to this root xploit:

http://search.prospero.com/n/mb/message.asp?webtag=maxlinuxmsg=2116.1

I hope this helps.  I have seen no recent errata on the subject as 
of yet.  Since quite a few people are being affected, I may have to 
look into doing it myself.  It looks interesting.  Take care.


From: JH (2)

It seems that the company http://www.metahtml.com/ email server has 
been rooted.  The reason why they aren't responding to your email is 
therefore obvious.  ua.com and metahtml.com are the same company 
parent/daughter- whatever.  Brian Fox is the programmer and is 
listed at:

http://www.metahtml.com/~bfox/

It seems like this server is redhat based, and correlates with what 
I have spoken to people about that have been exploited.  In any case,
it sucks that a hacker would target you at the business end of the 
xploit...

Which makes me think, that it wasn't a hacker.  True hacker's will 
not attack you because you give a voice to their cause, even if you 
don't intend to.  And so, this 0-day exploit, which has no 
documentation, which cannot be gotten canned, which has to be from 
someone in the know or which had to have been truly created/hacked 
by a fairly intuitive person.. is being used on you.  

I'd think that more than likely it was one of the groups that you 
have pissed off, that have the people and tools to do this.  And so 
that narrows it down further.  I won't speculate anymore, less I 
start to sound like Montana resident.  Take care.