Full Disclosure mailing list archives

Previous By Date Next
Previous By Thread Next

Re: [Tool] - inundator - an intrusion detection false positives generator.

From: Nelson Brito <nbrito () sekure org>
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 01:15:50 -0300
Last message to you, kid.

NNG was released in September 2008, and it doesn't mean it's not older than that.

And I see you've checked my background... Good! Are you gonna to hire me? Maybe I could teach you how to deal with real 
Perl, such as:
{(!($^O=~/^[M]*$32/i)&&($0=~s!^.*/!!))||($0=~s!.*\\!!)}$0;

Cheers.

Nelson Brito 
Security Researcher
http://fnstenv.blogspot.com/

Sent on an  iPhone wireless device. Please, forgive any potential misspellings!

On Jul 6, 2010, at 1:01 AM, "epixoip" <epixoip () hush com> wrote:


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 19:02:12 -0700 Nelson Brito <nbrito () sekure org>
wrote:


One more thing, just for the records and being polite: nobody
works on such "bad idea" anymore...


Somehow you've gone from "you stole my idea and you need to give me
credit, and here's the download link" to "well, it's a bad idea and
nobody does it anymore." Your tool (which you now claim isn't a
tool) was just released 20 months ago -- six to eight years after
tools like Snot and IDSwakeup were released, and far less effective
than those tools. So what you're essentially saying here is your
own work was irrelevant. Well, at least you admit it.


Why? Because doesn't make any sense you doing so many noise to

evade

an IPS.


Ah, I see. You're using reverse psychology. The tool doesn't make
any sense, so why not go ahead and throw a little credit your way,
right? Honestly, I couldn't care less what your "professional"
opinion is, and I still refuse to credit your work. I will,
however, continue to give full credit to tools like Snot and
snortspoof, regardless of their post-development discovery.


There much more effectiveness ways to do it without "scream
wolf", little boy.


Of course there are more effective techniques for IDS evasion, and
there's nothing stopping you from employing those techniques as
well, especially in tandem with Inundator. I guess that thought
never crossed your mind. If you decide to use that idea though, I
demand you give me full credit and prove a backlink to this post.



Best regards.

PS: Keep playing with "incubator"



I'm not entirely sure how calling it 'incubator' is an insult, but
I suppose I'll pretend to be insulted.



and let the real work for the pros.



And what sort of "real work" might you be doing? I'm curious to
know what sort of "pro work" one with "12 years of experience in
high-tek" does. Perhaps you're working on your "PATENT PENDING"
ENG++?

By the way, here's a shell script to replace NNG:

while [ 1 ]; do
   printf
"\x68\x2E\x64\x6C\x6C\x68\x65\x6C\x33\x32\x68\x6B\x65\x72\x6E\n" |
nc -v $1 1434
done

Again, if you're going to use that, you must give me full credit
and provide a backlink to this post. I'm super duper serious.



Nelson Brito
Security Researcher
http://fnstenv.blogspot.com/

Sent on an  iPhone wireless device. Please, forgive any potential
misspellings!

On Jul 5, 2010, at 7:56 PM, "epixoip" <epixoip () hush com> wrote:


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1




Oh, for fuck's sake...

<acerbity>

Wow, you've really called us out on this one. How embarrassing

for

us.

Please accept our sincerest apologies, Mr. Brito. We now

understand

how phrases like "inundator is a modern twist on an old concept"
and "Snot, fwsnort's snortspoof, and possibly others beat us to

the

punch" can be incredibly obtuse and largely indecipherable,
requiring *at least* a third grade education for full
comprehension. We accept full responsibility for failing to

write

this announcement with the lowest common denominator in mind,

and

promise to limit our vocabulary to only words found on
http://simple.wikipedia.org in future posts.

Also, thank you for taking the time to hi-jack our announcement

by

linking to your incredibly superior NNG tool. We failed to

include

it in our list of credits, and it brings us much shame. Please
excuse us while we prepare for Seppuku.

</acerbity>

To set the record straight right up front, we never stated this

was

an original idea. In fact, we clearly stated this was *NOT* an
original idea. And we *DID,* in fact, credit SNOT -- and

fwsnort's

snortspoof as well -- even though we discovered them after we

had

already begun working on Inundator. We didn't credit IDSwakeup,
because while IDSwakeup is kind of cool, it uses a static set
payloads to generate the false positives, and we use a dynamic

set.

We thought parsing Snort's rules files to dynamically build

attack

payloads was at least original, but when we learned otherwise,

we

credited the only other two apps we could find that did

something

similar: SNOT and snortspoof. So we're definitely going out of

our

way here to give credit where credit is due, even though we had

no

knowledge of these applications when we thought of the concept.
Again, all of this was clearly explained in plain English.

Now then, back to you.

At first I presumed you were just a self-important moron who
couldn't be bothered to actually read the full text of the
announcement before crafting your witty reply on your iPhone and
publicly embarrassing yourself on four separate mailing lists
concurrently. That is until I paid a visit to your outstanding
little blog, and realized that not only are you a self-important
queef, but you're also a little fucking crybaby who wants credit
and attention for every original thought you didn't have.

As we can clearly see from your blog, "ANY INFORMATION TAKEN

FROM

THIS BLOG MUST GIVE THE CREDITS TO THE AUTHOR AND ADD A BACKLINK

TO

THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE." This must mean you observed some parallel
between NNG and Inundator, and thus feel we should be giving you
some sort of credit and a backlink (although I suppose the

backlink

has already been covered by you douching all over this thread.)
Let's see what sort of parallels could possibly exist between

NNG

and Inundator:

From http://packetstormsecurity.org/filedesc/nng-4.13r-
public.rar.html:

"Description: NNG is a tool that creates crafted packets to

cause

MS02-039 false-positives against IPS/IDS. NNG does not have the
same approach used by Snot and Stick, where the main goal is

DoSing

the IPS. Instead, NNG tries to make IPS/IDS "numbed" enough to

have

the leakage of real attack.

"Author: Nelson Brito"

First of all, I don't think SNOT's main goal was to DoS the IPS,

as

you so cleverly state. Second, I have no fucking clue what "NNG
tries to make IPS/IDS 'numbed' enough to have the leakage of

real

attack" is even supposed to mean. I see some English words

there,

but that sentence means fuck-all.

So from what I can gather, your little tool is capable of send a
single packet mimicking MS02-039. Bra-fucking-vo, how

innovative.

So it isn't multi-threaded, no attempt is made to send the

attack

anonymously, you're using a single static payload, and you
essentially have little to no user configuration at all. What's

the

point? I actually have no idea what the actual goal of NNG is,
other than to serve as a POC for why pattern matching is full of
fail. But then again, that's something we've known for over a
decade (although I see you still give presentations on the topic

as

if it were both new and original), so again -- what is the point

of

NNG? Even snortspoof, though dated and pretty much useless by
today's standards, is vastly more impressive than NNG, as it at
least makes an attempt to anonymize attacks and dynamically

parses

an array of signatures to generate an attack instead of hard-

coding

ONE payload. Who are you giving credit to for NNG, by the way?

Oh

that's right -- yourself, even though there is literally nothing
original about NNG. By the way, I like how you have a file named
"Authors" in the NNG source tarball, where you list yourself and
your contact information twice.

Your pathetic piece of shit doesn't even come close to what
Inundator does, so why the fuck would we give NNG credit? Were

you

so disillusioned by your own self-importance that you honestly

saw

a parallel between NNG and Inundator? Or perhaps you were just
trying to drive traffic to your little piece of shit by linking
everyone to it after trying to make yourself look superior? No,

I

honestly think your cunt start aching at the thought of us
crediting SNOT and snortspoof, but not NNG. Reality is a bitch,

huh.


Here's my advice to you, Mr. Brito: slap some vagisil on your
aching pussy and shut the fuck up. Nobody has heard of you, and
nobody has heard of NNG. Get over yourself.


Oh, and Inundator is still available at
http://inundator.sourceforge.net/


Stay classy,
/epixoip.


On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 09:51:48 -0700 Nelson Brito

<nbrito () sekure org>

wrote:

That is not new and you should give the credits, not just for

NNG

(http://packetstormsecurity.org/filedesc/nng-4.13r-
public.rar.html), but you are missing STICK, SNOT and and
IDSWAKEUP as well.

Nelson Brito
Security Researcher
http://fnstenv.blogspot.com/

Sent on an  iPhone wireless device. Please, forgive any

potential

misspellings!

On Jul 1, 2010, at 10:25 PM, "epixoip" <epixoip () hush com>

wrote:



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1



homepage: http://inundator.bindshell.nl/
deb repo: deb http://inundator.sourceforge.net/repo/ all/
gpg key : http://inundator.sourceforge.net/inundator.asc

Announcing the release of inundator v0.5!

inundator is a modern twist on an old concept -- it's an
IDS/IPS/WAF evasion tool, used to anonymously flood intrusion
detection systems with false positives in order to obfuscate a

real

attack. inundator leverages the vagueness and poor quality of
Snort's rules files to generate completely harmless packets /

HTTP

requests that contain just enough keywords to trigger a false
positive. We thought this was an original idea, but it looks

like

Snot, fwsnort's snortspoof, and possibly others beat us to the
punch. However, these tools were developed around the turn of

the

century, are quite dated and well-forgotten, and overall quite
inferior to inundator.

inundator is full featured, multi-threaded, queue-based,

supports

multiple targets, and requires the use of a SOCKS proxy for
anonymization. Via Tor, inundator is capable of generating

around

1000 false positives per minute. Via a high-bandwidth SOCKS

proxy,

you might be able to generate ten times that amount.

The general idea is one would launch inundator prior to

starting

an

attack, allow it to run during the attack, and continue to run

it a

while longer after you've accomplished the attack. The goal,

of

course, is to generate an overwhelming number of false

positives

so

that your real attack is essentially buried within the other
alerts, minimizing the chance of your attack being detected.

It

could also be used to ruin an IDS analyst's day, or keep an
organization's infosec department busy for a while. I suppose

it

could also be used to test the effectiveness of an IDS, but

no,

not

really.

inundator is implemented in Perl (version >= 5.10 is

recommended

due to ithreads bugs in previous versions), and has been

tested

on

Debian Lenny, Debian Squeeze, Ubuntu Jaunty, BackTrack4, and

Mac

OS

X against Snort v2.8.5.2. It is presumed to work on all POSIX
operating systems. Hell, it might even work on Windows.

/epixoip.




-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Charset: UTF8
Note: This signature can be verified at

https://www.hushtools.com/verify

Version: Hush 3.0



wpwEAQMCAAYFAkwyYxEACgkQacHgESW3wZrghAQAoaUr7ZCmRKhpVs86cvXCHphwB/V
9



XCmQFCodPp6puHkCe0KqonLXBLCrW92qjVObOxW8TYlb56JKrZs0EV/jGLKUSrlcfgh
7



0/UMwH/vAL0C+PowgHuWFZSGSpLsKk5vUC+9YrKz0/oRkCVj4Ypks6Rd+VAUetzuNIe
T

W60Z6o0=
=uHzo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Charset: UTF8
Note: This signature can be verified at https://www.hushtools.com/verify
Version: Hush 3.0

wpwEAQMCAAYFAkwyqqYACgkQacHgESW3wZq22gP7Bisp36Tfco5+nvNFHBKYyxd7EW8a
4wQxbya29L3BxP7fF+V/hqlNQbdEPOeW6EnpPh71laO9PSl7jsPJsGdyLRE51JAcRoxp
UXr+d6VPf5lbQ6E7KHLPvtd33+HPA8nBgfY+uD/uqt3qda2o8xihefx2rnKGPqI1jKE8
r6Hha9g=
=nPAL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Previous By Date Next
Previous By Thread Next

Current thread: