|
Dailydave
mailing list archives
Re: DNS Speculation
From: Bryan Burns <bburns () juniper net>
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 09:20:08 -0700
Hi Marc,
I wrote a python version of the attack as well, and ran into the same
problem with scapy.send() being far too slow. However, scapy.sendpfast()
uses tcpreplay to send the packets which if anything is too fast. I had to
specify a limiting pps value to keep from sending all the spoofed responses
before the target server had a chance to send its own request..
The only caveat with sendpfast() vs send() is that it sends at layer2, so
you'll need to prefix an Ethernet() header to your IP packets..
help(scapy.sendpfast)
Help on function sendpfast in module scapy:
sendpfast(x, pps=None, mbps=None, realtime=None, loop=0, iface=None)
Send packets at layer 2 using tcpreplay for performance
pps: packets per second
mpbs: MBits per second
realtime: use packet's timestamp, bending time with realtime value
loop: number of times to process the packet list
iface: output interface
-Bryan
On 7/24/08 6:34 PM, "marc_bevand () rapid7 com" <marc_bevand () rapid7 com> wrote:
It is cool to see a ruby implementation of the Kaminsky attack that is
apparently fast enough... Yesterday I was working on a python
implementation
using scapy but the scapy.send() call was taking 1+ ms to execute because
of
lack of optimization: the way it is implemented, each send() fetches
interface
information via ioctl() calls, etc.
_______________________________________________
Dailydave mailing list
Dailydave () lists immunitysec com
http://lists.immunitysec.com/mailman/listinfo/dailydave
By Date
By Thread
Current thread:
Re: DNS Speculation Julien TINNES (Jul 22)
Re: DNS Speculation natron (Jul 22)
|