Abstract
DoS attacks can vary in type, depending on many different criteria, as well as their countermeasures. Detailed taxonomy can help distinguish all possible types and be used for better understanding of the situation. This study reviews existing DoS attack and DoS attack countermeasure classifications and offers new classification schemes. The proposed DoS attack taxonomy has a new attack characteristic, which describes how bug exploitation can be used for DoS attack execution, as well as new possible values for resource depletion attack and the ways of agent army formation. We also clarify methods for DoS effect achievement and position them in the DoS taxonomy hierarchy. While for DoS attack countermeasure taxonomy we combine ideas from existing taxonomies and compose a three criteria hierarchy with average detailing level. All criteria and categories are described, and seven DoS attack and seven DoS attack countermeasure taxonomies are analysed to obtain their characteristics. Some research is also done to show their application capabilities.
[1] Asosheh A., Ramezani N., A Comprehensive Taxonomy of DDoS Attacks and Defense Mechanism Applying in a Smart Classification. WSEAS Transactions on Computers, 2008, 7, 281–290 Search in Google Scholar
[2] Back A., Hashcash — a denial of service counter-measure, 2002, 1–10, http://www.cypherspace.org/hashcash/hashcash.pdf Search in Google Scholar
[3] Champagne, D., Lee, R., Scope of DDoS countermeasures: taxonomy of proposed solutions and design goals for real-world deployment. In: 8th International Symposium on Systems and Information Security, 2006 Search in Google Scholar
[4] Fadlallah A., Serhrouchni A., Denial of service attack and schemes Analysis and Taxonomy, In: IEEE SETIT 2005, International Conference Sciences of Electronic, Technology of Information and Telecommunications (27–31 Mar. 2005, Tunisia), 2005 Search in Google Scholar
[5] Douligeris C., Mitrokotsa A., DDoS attacks and defense mechanisms: classification and state-of-the-art. COMPUT NETW, 2004, 44, 643–666 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.comnet.2003.10.00310.1016/j.comnet.2003.10.003Search in Google Scholar
[6] Juels A., Brainard J., Client puzzles: A cryptographic countermeasure against connection depletion attacks. In: Proceedings of the 1999 ISOC Network and Distributed System Security Symposium, 1999, 151–165 Search in Google Scholar
[7] Karig D., Lee R., Remote Denial of Service Attacks and Countermeasures, Princeton University Department of Electrical Engineering Technical Report CEL2001-002, 2001 Search in Google Scholar
[8] Kargl F., Maier J., Weber M., Protecting Web Servers from Distributed Denial of Service Attacks. In: www10, Tent International World Wide Web Conference (1–5 May 2001, Hong Kong), ACM, 514–524, 2001 10.1145/371920.372148Search in Google Scholar
[9] Mirkovic J., Reiher P., A taxonomy of DDoS attack and DDoS defense mechanisms, ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, 2004, 34, 39–53 http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/997150.99715610.1145/997150.997156Search in Google Scholar
[10] Mirkovic J., Dietrich S., Dittrich D., Reiher P., Internet Denial of Service: Attack and Defense Mechanisms, Prentice Hall, 2005 Search in Google Scholar
[11] Namestnikov Y., DDoS attacks in Q2 2011, SecureList, 2011, http://www.securelist.com/en/analysis/204792189/DDoS_attacks_in_Q2_2011?print_mode=1 Search in Google Scholar
[12] Specht M. S., Lee R., Distributed Denial of Service: Taxonomies of Attacks, Tools, and Countermeasures. In: 17th International Conference on Parallel and Distributed Computing Systems, 2004, 543–550 Search in Google Scholar
[13] Shadowserver Foundation, DDoS Historical, 2011, http://www.shadowserver.org/wiki/pmwiki.php/Stats/DDoSHistorical Search in Google Scholar
© 2011 Versita Warsaw
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.
