Re: [MEXT] Energy consumption attacks
"QIU Ying" <qiuying@i2r.a-star.edu.sg> Tue, 22 March 2011 03:03 UTC
Return-Path: <qiuying@i2r.a-star.edu.sg>
X-Original-To: mext@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mext@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix)
with ESMTP id 5609928C1D3 for <mext@core3.amsl.com>;
Mon, 21 Mar 2011 20:03:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com
[127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id O+1gqVMfffOR for
<mext@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Mar 2011 20:03:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gw3.scei.a-star.edu.sg (gw3.scei.a-star.edu.sg
[192.122.140.12]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38A6528C1DA for
<mext@ietf.org>; Mon, 21 Mar 2011 20:03:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailfe01.teak.local.net ([10.217.253.173]) by
gw3.scei.a-star.edu.sg (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p2M35Egg003642;
Tue, 22 Mar 2011 11:05:14 +0800
Received: from Win7PC ([10.217.141.158]) by mailfe01.teak.local.net with
Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 22 Mar 2011 11:04:30 +0800
From: "QIU Ying" <qiuying@i2r.a-star.edu.sg>
To: "'Pars Mutaf'" <pars.mutaf@gmail.com>, <mext@ietf.org>
References: <AANLkTikW+MfR_R4A+g2+o=BZDnsAoOmfLHNgiOm4Z_-n@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikGc4JDgzBivYQNGfPTzf8r75L_od2etQMq3Rm5@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikGc4JDgzBivYQNGfPTzf8r75L_od2etQMq3Rm5@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 11:05:21 +0800
Message-ID: <008c01cbe83d$fb4763c0$f1d62b40$@a-star.edu.sg>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_008D_01CBE881.096AA3C0"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: Acvnt/jWhsrWdCKVSeOOLDluOTTX6wAhJpXw
Content-Language: en-sg
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Mar 2011 03:04:30.0657 (UTC)
FILETIME=[DCE0F310:01CBE83D]
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.2.15, 1.0.148,
0.0.0000 definitions=2011-03-22_01:2011-03-16, 2011-03-22,
1970-01-01 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0
ipscore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 adultscore=0
classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx engine=5.0.0-1012030000
definitions=main-1103210204
Subject: Re: [MEXT] Energy consumption attacks
X-BeenThere: mext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mobile IPv6 EXTensions WG <mext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext>,
<mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mext>
List-Post: <mailto:mext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext>,
<mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 03:03:50 -0000
This topic is interesting. But I am afraid that there is an efficient way to prevent this kind of DOS attacks because the mobile node must wake up from sleep to receive and process these required messages before simply drop them. Could you please provide more details? Regards Qiu Ying From: mext-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mext-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Pars Mutaf Sent: Monday, March 21, 2011 7:07 PM To: mext@ietf.org Subject: Re: [MEXT] Energy consumption attacks Some details that may not be obvious: The victim consumes energy for: - Receiving the messages (continuously waking up from sleep mode) - Processing them and preparing reply packets (L2 and L3) - Sending replies (L2 ACKs and upper layer replies e.g. SIP or TCP replies) Sending replies especially consumes more energy. It was shown that in 802.11 sending 1 bit over the air consumes as much as executing 1,000 CPU instructions. Regards, Pars On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 11:43 AM, Pars Mutaf <pars.mutaf@gmail.com> wrote: Hello, I was wondering if solutions to energy consumption attacks on battery powered mobile hosts would be of interest to IETF Mobile IPv6 community. The attack consists of sending frequent request packets e.g. SIP INVITE or TCP SYN to a victim's home address. For example, experiments showed that the battery of a mobile phone with 802.11 access can be remotely consumed in 3 hours (full battery). Attacks on phones using an outdoor technology would result in more energy consumption because of the longer distance to the base station. The victim becomes unusable. Regards, Pars Institute for Infocomm Research disclaimer: "This email is confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete it and notify us immediately. Please do not copy or use it for any purpose, or disclose its contents to any other person. Thank you."
- [MEXT] Energy consumption attacks Pars Mutaf
- Re: [MEXT] Energy consumption attacks Pars Mutaf
- Re: [MEXT] Energy consumption attacks QIU Ying
- Re: [MEXT] Energy consumption attacks Julien Laganier
- Re: [MEXT] Energy consumption attacks Pars Mutaf
- Re: [MEXT] Energy consumption attacks Pars Mutaf
- Re: [MEXT] Energy consumption attacks Pars Mutaf