The Attack Back Mechanism: An Efficient Back-Hacking Technique
In recent years there has been substantial increase in both online conducted industrial espionage and hacking, resulting in heavy losses to various organizations across the globe. According to the U.S. officials’ estimations American companies in 2009 lost $50 billion alone due to cyber- espionage. The global losses due to internet hacking is estimated to be more than $1 trillion. Several techniques and methods are being used to protect data and network but all these techniques have been proved inefficient by the black hats. Then some organizations realized the need for counter attacking the attackers, but there approach doesn’t differentiate an innocent user from an attacker. These techniques mainly focus on tracing or counter attacking the suspected attacker on the basis of the IP address retrieved. But the actual attacker may spoof his IP address and therefore some other person may be affected by the counter attack. Moreover tracing an attacker on the basis of the spoofed IP is also a very difficult task. We have proposed a new technique for a counter attack which will efficiently differentiate between an attacker and a normal user. We mainly focus on entering the users system and verify his authenticity and ultimately making the task of tracing very simple.
KeywordsCryptography counter attack access control spyware program data compression cyber war
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Jayaswal, V., Yurcik, W., Doss, D.: Internet Hack Back: Counter Attacks as Self-Defense or Vigilantism? In: International Symposium on Technology and Society, pp. 380–386 (2002)Google Scholar
- 2.Juels, A., Kaliski Jr., B.S.: Proofs of retrievability for large files. In: Proceedings of the 14th ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 584–597 (2007)Google Scholar
- 3.Robinson Jr., C.: Make My Day Server Throws Gauntlet to Network Hackers. Signal Magazine (1998)Google Scholar
- 5.Merkle, R.C.: Protocols for Public Key Cryptosystems. In: Proceedings of IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (1980)Google Scholar
- 6.Provos, N.: A virtual honeypot framework. CITI Technical Report 03-1 (2003)Google Scholar
- 7.Sailer, R., Jaeger, T., Zhang, X., Doorn, L.V.: Attestation-based Policy Enforcement for Remote AccessGoogle Scholar
- 8.Ateniese, G., Burns, R., Curtmola, R., Herring, J., Khan, O., Kissner, L., Peterson, Z., Song, D.: Remote Data Checking Using Provable Data Possession. ACM Transactions on Information and System Security 14(1) (2011)Google Scholar
- 9.Castaneda, F., Sezer, F.C., Xu, J.: WORM vs. WORM: Preliminary Study of an Active Counter Attack MechanismGoogle Scholar
- 10.Staniford, S., Paxson, V., Weaver, N.: How to 0wn the internet in your spare time. In: Proceedings of the 11th USENIX Security Symposium (2002)Google Scholar
- 11.Bellovin, S.M.: Distributed Firewalls. Login (1999)Google Scholar
- 12.Ferraiolo, F., Kuhn, D.R.: Role based access control. In: 15th National Computer Security Conference (1992)Google Scholar
- 15.Curtmola, R., Khan, O., Burns, R., Ateniese, G.: MR-PDP: Multiple-Replica Provable Data Possession. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, pp. 411–420 (2008)Google Scholar