Argos: an emulator for fingerprinting zero-day attacks for advertised honeypots with automatic signature generation

As modern operating systems and software become larger and more complex, they are more likely to contain bugs, which may allow attackers to gain illegitimate access. A fast and reliable mechanism to discern and generate vaccines for such attacks is vital for the successful protection of networks and systems. In this paper we present Argos, a containment environment for worms as well as human orchestrated attacks. Argos is built upon a fast x86 emulator which tracks network data throughout execution to identify their invalid use as jump targets, function addresses, instructions, etc. Furthermore, system call policies disallow the use of network data as arguments to certain calls. When an attack is detected, we perform 'intelligent' process- or kernel-aware logging of the corresponding emulator state for further offline processing. In addition, our own forensics shellcode is injected, replacing the malevolent shellcode, to gather information about the attacked process. By correlating the data logged by the emulator with the data collected from the network, we are able to generate accurate network intrusion detection signatures for the exploits that are immune to payload mutations. The entire process can be automated and has few if any false positives, thus rapid global scale deployment of the signatures is possible.

[1]  A. One,et al.  Smashing The Stack For Fun And Profit , 1996 .

[2]  Crispan Cowan,et al.  StackGuard: Automatic Adaptive Detection and Prevention of Buffer-Overflow Attacks , 1998, USENIX Security Symposium.

[3]  Martin Roesch,et al.  Snort - Lightweight Intrusion Detection for Networks , 1999 .

[4]  Michael Shuey,et al.  StackGhost: Hardware Facilitated Stack Protection , 2001, USENIX Security Symposium.

[5]  Crispin Cowan,et al.  FormatGuard: Automatic Protection From printf Format String Vulnerabilities , 2001, USENIX Security Symposium.

[6]  David A. Wagner,et al.  This copyright notice must be included in the reproduced paper. USENIX acknowledges all trademarks herein. Detecting Format String Vulnerabilities with Type Qualifiers , 2001 .

[7]  Derek Bruening,et al.  Secure Execution via Program Shepherding , 2002, USENIX Security Symposium.

[8]  Matthew M. Williamson,et al.  Throttling viruses: restricting propagation to defeat malicious mobile code , 2002, 18th Annual Computer Security Applications Conference, 2002. Proceedings..

[9]  Vern Paxson,et al.  How to Own the Internet in Your Spare Time , 2002, USENIX Security Symposium.

[10]  Samuel T. King,et al.  ReVirt: enabling intrusion analysis through virtual-machine logging and replay , 2002, OPSR.

[11]  Angelos D. Keromytis,et al.  Countering code-injection attacks with instruction-set randomization , 2003, CCS '03.

[12]  John Johansen,et al.  PointGuard™: Protecting Pointers from Buffer Overflow Vulnerabilities , 2003, USENIX Security Symposium.

[13]  Tal Garfinkel,et al.  A Virtual Machine Introspection Based Architecture for Intrusion Detection , 2003, NDSS.

[14]  David H. Ackley,et al.  Randomized instruction set emulation to disrupt binary code injection attacks , 2003, CCS '03.

[15]  Jesse C. Rabek,et al.  Detection of injected, dynamically generated, and obfuscated malicious code , 2003, WORM '03.

[16]  Michael Rodeh,et al.  CSSV: towards a realistic tool for statically detecting all buffer overflows in C , 2003, PLDI '03.

[17]  Daniel C. DuVarney,et al.  Address Obfuscation: An Efficient Approach to Combat a Broad Range of Memory Error Exploits , 2003, USENIX Security Symposium.

[18]  Guofei Gu,et al.  HoneyStat: Local Worm Detection Using Honeypots , 2004, RAID.

[19]  Niels Provos,et al.  A Virtual Honeypot Framework , 2004, USENIX Security Symposium.

[20]  David Zhang,et al.  Secure program execution via dynamic information flow tracking , 2004, ASPLOS XI.

[21]  B. Karp,et al.  Autograph: Toward Automated, Distributed Worm Signature Detection , 2004, USENIX Security Symposium.

[22]  George Varghese,et al.  Automated Worm Fingerprinting , 2004, OSDI.

[23]  Angelos D. Keromytis,et al.  Using Execution Transactions To Recover From Buffer Overflow Attacks , 2004 .

[24]  J. Crowcroft,et al.  Honeycomb: creating intrusion detection signatures using honeypots , 2004, Comput. Commun. Rev..

[25]  Frederic T. Chong,et al.  Minos: Control Data Attack Prevention Orthogonal to Memory Model , 2004, 37th International Symposium on Microarchitecture (MICRO-37'04).

[26]  Herbert Bos,et al.  FFPF: Fairly Fast Packet Filters , 2004, OSDI.

[27]  Herbert Bos,et al.  Towards Software-Based Signature Detection for Intrusion Prevention on the Network Card , 2005, RAID.

[28]  James Newsome,et al.  Dynamic Taint Analysis for Automatic Detection, Analysis, and SignatureGeneration of Exploits on Commodity Software , 2005, NDSS.

[29]  Frederic T. Chong,et al.  Experiences Using Minos as a Tool for Capturing and Analyzing Novel Worms for Unknown Vulnerabilities , 2005, DIMVA.

[30]  Fabrice Bellard,et al.  QEMU, a Fast and Portable Dynamic Translator , 2005, USENIX Annual Technical Conference, FREENIX Track.

[31]  Miguel Castro,et al.  Vigilante: end-to-end containment of internet worms , 2005, SOSP '05.

[32]  Randy H. Katz,et al.  Protocol-Independent Adaptive Replay of Application Dialog , 2006, NDSS.

[33]  Andrew Warfield,et al.  Practical taint-based protection using demand emulation , 2006, EuroSys.

[34]  Herbert Bos,et al.  SweetBait: Zero-hour worm detection and containment using low- and high-interaction honeypots , 2007, Comput. Networks.