Attacks/Breaches
9/17/2013
11:54 PM
Lori MacVittie
Lori MacVittie
Commentary
50%
50%

Grand Theft Oh No: When Online Gamers Attack

A new report says the tactics players use to slow down the competition may be trained on your site. Here's how to protect yourself.

The volume of distributed denial-of-service attacks is holding steady, with vendors and researchers pointing to statistic after chilling statistic about how many, how often and how successfully such exploits occur. Most blame the ability of attackers to leverage vast networks of compromised PCs, often procured at volume-discount prices on the resource black market. But are zombie armies getting the blame for attacks originating from dark, seedy online gaming networks?

Maybe, says a recent white paper with the deceptively tame title "An Analysis of DrDoS and DDoS Attacks Involving the Multiplayer Video Gaming Community." In it, DDoS mitigation service provider Prolexic tells a tale of revenge, exploitation and extreme competition among gamers.

The report explains how vulnerable game servers become launch points for DDoS attacks against both third-party and in-game targets. It's become so common that the gaming community has its own term for the practice: "packeting." These attacks are most often reflection-based, using compromised servers to take down a target by spoofing requests to public services that return responses, flooding the target's network connection or overwhelming available resources. Gamers initiate attacks for a variety of reasons, including inducing enough lag to achieve a strategic advantage over rivals.

[ DDoS attacks can cost serious money and are nearly impossible to repel with standard defenses. Should you buy protection? ]

What's disconcerting, however, is the potential use of these often-vulnerable servers to carry out DDoS attacks against enterprise networks. Downtime and disruption caused by DDoS attacks is expensive, costing victims an average of $172,238, according to the Ponemon Institute, and you don't even get to blow up any virtual cities for your trouble.

Both IT organizations and game platform providers can take action to minimize the impact of such attacks, as well as prevent their servers from being used as an attack platform. Above all, remain vigilant and have monitoring and alerting systems and processes in place to rapidly detect and respond to an attack in progress. Specifically:

-- Close open resolvers: A significant number of DDoS attacks are carried out against DNS due to the public nature of the servers they provide. It's a rare organization that needs to act as an open resolver -- in most cases, these systems are misconfigured. Turning off open recursion is a good first step toward mitigating the effects of a DNS DDoS attack.

-- Mind your bandwidth: Reflective attacks work because the response, which is sent to the victim, is many orders of magnitude larger than the request itself. The sheer volume and size of responses can consume every bit of available bandwidth and cause network outages and service disruptions. Ensuring that you have spare network capacity -- both available bandwidth and packets-per-second processing power -- will buy you time to take action in the face of an attack. 


-- Consider rate limiting on perimeter network elements: Response-rate limiting as well as inbound packet filtering, particularly when network-layer anomalies indicative of an attack can be identified, will help reduce the impact of a DDoS attack on other services.

Gaming platform providers can -- and should -- do more to monitor and guard against abuse of their resources. Packet-filtering, rate limiting and, of course, addressing server vulnerabilities will go a long way toward eliminating the ability of gamers to exploit systems for their own gain.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Threaded  |  Newest First  |  Oldest First
Thomas Claburn
50%
50%
Thomas Claburn,
User Rank: Ninja
9/19/2013 | 12:28:24 AM
re: Grand Theft Oh No: When Online Gamers Attack
What evidence does the report provide that gaming community behavior spills over to affect businesses outside that sector?
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Cartoon
Latest Comment: nice post
Current Issue
Flash Poll
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2014-1750
Published: 2015-07-01
Open redirect vulnerability in nokia-mapsplaces.php in the Nokia Maps & Places plugin 1.6.6 for WordPress allows remote attackers to redirect users to arbitrary web sites and conduct phishing attacks via a URL in the href parameter to page/place.html. NOTE: this was originally reported as cross-sit...

CVE-2014-1836
Published: 2015-07-01
Absolute path traversal vulnerability in htdocs/libraries/image-editor/image-edit.php in ImpressCMS before 1.3.6 allows remote attackers to delete arbitrary files via a full pathname in the image_path parameter in a cancel action.

CVE-2015-0848
Published: 2015-07-01
Heap-based buffer overflow in libwmf 0.2.8.4 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (crash) or possibly execute arbitrary code via a crafted BMP image.

CVE-2015-1330
Published: 2015-07-01
unattended-upgrades before 0.86.1 does not properly authenticate packages when the (1) force-confold or (2) force-confnew dpkg options are enabled in the DPkg::Options::* apt configuration, which allows remote man-in-the-middle attackers to upload and execute arbitrary packages via unspecified vecto...

CVE-2015-1950
Published: 2015-07-01
IBM PowerVC Standard Edition 1.2.2.1 through 1.2.2.2 does not require authentication for access to the Python interpreter with nova credentials, which allows KVM guest OS users to discover certain PowerVC credentials and bypass intended access restrictions via unspecified Python code.

Dark Reading Radio
Archived Dark Reading Radio
Marc Spitler, co-author of the Verizon DBIR will share some of the lesser-known but most intriguing tidbits from the massive report