Home page logo
/

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: Ettiquette and rules regarding Hijacked ASN's or IP space?
From: "Christopher L. Morrow" <chris () UU NET>
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 20:06:56 +0000 (GMT)


On Mon, 9 Jun 2003, John Brown wrote:

Fear leads to Hate, which leads to Evil, the way of the darkside ;)

RIR's are not and should not be in the business of dictating what
goes into the routing table, or what label is used on what goes
into the routing table.

Certainly not, but if the information we (isp's/Network operators) need to
verify that our 'customer' has the right to route a block isn't correct or
is easily subverted they have some responsibility there I'd think, right?


I think part of the issue here is that to many providers don't filter
what they receive from their BGP speaking peer.

Hrm, I've heard this alot, and seen some other providers that clearly
don't filter... but even more insidious are the ones that DO filter and
rely on the information provided by an RIR to validate the 'ownership' of
the blocks they build their filters for.


Its not that hard to build tools to drop known IANA reserved space
packets, or even AS ranges.


that's not the issue here (or it wasn't the thrust of the original
question atleast)

If we get into RIR's processing witch hunts, we run the strong and real
risk of dropping real live users right off the net.  Then that causes
the risk for greater legal cost and exposure to happen.


Sure, this is true... so, how much is enough? and should the 'rules' still
be applied equally, despite the fact that the nuns at Mother Jessica's
Monestary who use Asn 8143 for upstream will get booted off the network
because 8143 was hijacked?

At the end of the day, RIR's make sure the bit strings are unique, and
that reasonable costs for do that job are covered in registration fees.

Its up to each provider to verify their BGP config and the data received
from those peers.


Sure, you are announcing 196.1.1.0/24 and only that, fine, but are you
allowed to announce that prefix? Are you "Centre for Monitoring Indian
Economy" ?? Or is this your direct customer and you are just the sat-link
provider for him?

If this was easy everyone would or could do it.


On Mon, Jun 09, 2003 at 05:12:26AM +0000, Christopher L. Morrow wrote:


So, with all this lifting the curtains on hijacked ASN's and ipblocks
recently I have a few general question...

1) Should the rules be uniformly applied?
2) Should these rules be applied even when something 'bad' might happen?
3) How much involvment should ARIN have in enforcing these rules?

Now, by 'rules' I mean:

If you steal something you have to give it back, regardless of who you
are.

So, for an example, if I steal ASN 8143 (already stolen so its mute) and
I'm 'a good guy', all I want to do is run a network no spam/abuse eminates
from it, should I be subject to the 'witch hunt' that my fellow ASN
stealer who does abuse/spam deals with? The same is asked for hijacked ip
space. If I steal/hijack a large netblock, not from an active org so there
is no 'damage' done, and I don't spam/abuse from it should I be compelled
to return it also? Compelled in the same way that my brother stealer who
spams/abuses is?

I am not advocating one or the other, and to me the rules should apply to
both groups (all theives treated equally)... I'm just curious as to the
general thought on this subject.

Additionally, how should ARIN go about verifying proper 'ownership' (that
I am still me after all these years of 'inactivity'), how much is enough
research on these issues? I know that at the ISP there is a measure of
trust placed on the customer, and upstream/downstream, when it comes to
ASN's and ip announcements. ARIN is in the same position as near as I can
tell. They have to trust that the community both is trustworthy (to an
extent) and conscientious. If there are bad actors out there that go to
enough trouble they can make ASN's or ip blocks appear to be registered to
themselves. There may be breadcrumbs of evidence if you look hard enough,
perhaps there won't be. How hard should ARIN be looking at these issues
and at specific instances? Should they apply their rules without
prejudice?

Sorry for the latenight not-completely-operational question :) but it
seems as though there is some abmiguity in the current
process/procedure/rules and I'd like to atleast start some discussion on
the topic.

Thanks.

--Chris
(chris () uu net)
#######################################################
## UUNET Technologies, Inc.                          ##
## Manager                                           ##
## Customer Router Security Engineering Team         ##
## (W)703-886-3823 (C)703-338-7319                   ##
#######################################################



  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]