mailing list archives
Re: [PATCH] TCP Idle Scan in IPv6
From: Mathias Morbitzer <m.morbitzer () student ru nl>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 14:12:45 +0200 (CEST)
Here is the list of the operating systems I tested:
System | Assignment of Identification
Android 4.1 (Linux 3.0.15) | Per host, incremental (1)
FreeBSD 7.4 | Random
FreeBSD 9.1 | Random
iOS 6.1.2 | Random
Linux 2.6.32 | Per host, incremental (2)
Linux 3.2 | Per host, incremental (1)
Linux 3.8 | Per host, incremental
OpenBSD 4.6 | Random
OpenBSD 5.2 | Random
OS X 10.6.7 | Global, incremental (3)
OS X 10.8.3 | Random
Solaris 11 | Per host, incremental
Windows Server 2003 R2 Standard 64bit, SP2 | Global, incremental
Windows Server 2008 Standard 32bit, SP1 | Global, incremental
Windows Server 2008 R2 Standard 64bit, SP1 | Global, incremental by 2
Windows Server 2012 Standard 64bit | Global, incremental by 2
Windows XP Professional 32bit, SP3 | Global, incremental (4)
Windows Vista Business 64bit, SP1 | Global, incremental
Windows 7 Home Premium 32bit, SP1 | Global, incremental by 2
Windows 7 Ultimate 32bit, SP1 | Global, incremental by 2
Windows 8 Enterprise 32 bit | Global, incremental by 2
(1) Hosts calculates wrong TCP checksum for routes with PMTU < 1280
(2) PMTU < 1280 results in DoS
(3) Does not accept PMTU < 1280
(4) IPv6 disabled by default
So, to sum up: Every Windows operating system can be used as zombie, all others I tested can't.
The change to get_ipid_sequence needs some more thought. When you are
dealing with 16-bit IPv4 ID values, and you start treating them as
32-bit, you will have calculation errors at the 16-bit boundary.
two consecutive IP ID values are 0xfffe and 0x0001.
(u16) 0x0001 - (u16) 0xfffe == 3
(u32) 0x0001 - (u32) 0xfffe == 4294901763
Do you have ideas as to how to account for this? Perhaps you need to
sequence calculation to be aware of whether it is handling 16-bit or
Thank you for pointing that out, I did not think about that.
As far as I understand, this concerns only these three lines:
235: ipid_diffs[i - 1] = ipids[i] - ipids[i - 1];
237: ipid_diffs[i - 1] = (u16) (ipids[i] - ipids[i - 1] + 65536);
261: ipid_diffs[i] -= 256;
Those are the only ones were calculations are done with the ipid_diffs values.
If so, I would just put a "if (o.af() == AF_INET4) ..." before those lines, and try to handle the values correctly
depending on if they are 16 or 32 bits, like this:
237 in IPv4: ipid_diffs[i - 1] = (u16) (ipids[i] - ipids[i - 1] + 65536);
237 in IPv6: ipid_diffs[i - 1] = (u32) (ipids[i] - ipids[i - 1] + 4294967296);
261 in IPv4: ipid_diffs[i] = (u16) ipid_diffs[i] - 256;
261 in IPv6: ipid_diffs[i] -= 256;
263 in IPv4: ipid_diffs[i] = (u16) ipid_diffs - 1;
263 in IPv6: ipid_diffs[i]--;
Let me know what you think about that approach.
I saw you added a new IPID_SEQ_INCR_BY_2, which is probably the right
way to do it. However, not only idle scan uses the IPID_SEQ
classifications; OS detection uses them as well. Specifically, we need
to decide what to do with IPID_SEQ_INCR_BY_2 in make_aval_ipid_seq.
is the code that controls what gets printed for the SEQ.TI, SEQ.CI,
SEQ.II IPv4 OS detection tests:
We have two options: one is to add a new value for "increment by 2",
instance to make TI=2 possible; and the other is to find out what
having "increment by 2" behavior are currently being classified as,
make hosts that increment by 2 map to this value, for instance TI=I or
What did get_ipid_sequence return for hosts that increment by 2,
your patch causing them to be IPID_SEQ_INCR_BY_2?
Before my patch, get_ipid_sequence returned "Incremental" instead of "Incremental by 2". (Which caused the scan to fail
because it was expecting lower increments)
So, hosts which increment by 2 are currently classified as "incremental".
It should not be much of an issue to apply the second solution and map the hosts to this value, but in my opinion it
would be nicer to add a value for "increment by 2".
This might also allow a better OS detection, as we have (in IPv6) for example Windows 7 that increments by 2, and
Windows Vista that increments by 1.
Also, there are operating systems like windows 7 which increment by 1 in IPv4, and by 2 in IPv6, which should allows
allow to limit the pool of possible OS for OS detection.
And not to forget, in previous research I stumbled across network printers which assigned the IPID incremental by 9.
They should probably also get their own value at a certain point instead of mapping all the "increment by x" to the
same, simple "incremental".
That is my opinion, but I do not have much expertise with the OS detection, so I will leave this decision up to
Sent through the dev mailing list
Archived at http://seclists.org/nmap-dev/