Image
 
Latest Additions
 
EH-Net Login
Welcome Guest.






Lost Password?
No account yet? Register
Who's Online
We have 22 guests and 3 members online
EH-Net Donations

Enter Amount:
$

Google Ads
EH-Net News Feeds
Latest Additions
Book Recommendations





 
Advertisement

You are here: Home arrow Forum arrow Ethical Hacking Discussions and Related Certificationsarrow Network Pen Testingarrow DoS
Ethical Hacker Community Forums
November 21, 2008, 08:13:44 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: ChicagoCon 2-Day Ethical Hacking Conference with MS Blue Hats Oct 31 - Nov 1. Tickets Only $100! www.chicagocon.com/content/view/103/51/
 
   Home   Help Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: DoS  (Read 830 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
servercrasher365
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 11


View Profile
DoS
« on: April 30, 2008, 06:26:20 AM »

Continuing from ystdays post on server crashing(thats my uni project to build a server test tool),I've identified the following DoS attacks-
Apache2
back
Mailbomb
Neptune
Ping of death
Process Table
Smurf
Teardrop
UDP Storm
syslogd

Does it make sense that I focus on these attacks or are they no more effective these days?like for instance the Ping of Death is no more a threat....how good is the rest of the list?

Cheers
Logged
RoleReversal
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 457


View Profile WWW
« Reply #1 on: April 30, 2008, 07:39:59 AM »

ServerCrash,

the listed attack vectors only make sense if the box you are trying to test is running the vulnerable service. For example the Apache2 DoS requires an apach2 deamon to be running, syslogd requires syslogd etc.

At the same time if you are testing a specific server configuration and you find an attack vector that has no impact on the box then this will be as valuable to your university project as finding a vector that drops the server to it's knees. Therefore implementing the old exploits like Ping of Death may not be a waste of time provided you can explain why devices are no longer as vulnerable to once crippling attacks.

From my experience from University projects (specialised in monitoring systems) it can be more advantageous to explain why things don't work rather than have a state of the art technical solution. From your perspective I imagine that the methodology and techniques for testing systems may be more important than actual functionality.

Hope this helps.
Logged

A little bit of sanity:
http://www.infosanity.co.uk
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.7 | SMF © 2006-2008, Simple Machines LLC
Joomla Bridge by JoomlaHacks.com
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.031 seconds with 23 queries.
 
Sponsors

cwnp_moto__120x90.gif

Polls
During the most recent election, I:
 
Support EH-Net


Support EH-Net by
Buying all of your
Amazon items using
the search bar above.

cbtnuggets_logo_125.jpg
Try CBT Nuggets Free!
Recent Forum Topics
Vote For EH-Net

progenic.com
Click here to Vote!

Sadikhov.com
Top IT Cert Sites

binarica.com
Binarica Logo

Add to Technorati Favorites
technorati fave

 
         
Advertisement

© 2008 The Ethical Hacker Network
Joomla! is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL License.