Fast-Flux Networks While Considering Domain-Name Parking
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Proceedings Learning from Authoritative Security Experiment Results LASER 2017 Arlington, VA, USA October 18-19, 2017 Proceedings of LASER 2017 Learning from Authoritative Security Experiment Results Arlington, VA, USA October 18–19, 2017 ©2017 by The USENIX Association All Rights Reserved This volume is published as a collective work. Rights to individual papers remain with the author or the author’s employer. Permission is granted for the noncommercial reproduction of the complete work for educational or research purposes. Permission is granted to print, primarily for one person’s exclusive use, a single copy of these Proceedings. USENIX acknowledges all trademarks herein. ISBN 978-1-931971-41-6 Table of Contents Program . .. v Organizing Committee . vi Program Committee . vi Workshop Sponsors . vii Message from the General Chair . viii Program Understanding Malware’s Network Behaviors using Fantasm . 1 Xiyue Deng, Hao Shi, and Jelena Mirkovic, USC/Information Sciences Institute Open-source Measurement of Fast-flux Networks While Considering Domain-name Parking . 13 Leigh B. Metcalf, Dan Ruef, and Jonathan M. Spring, Carnegie Mellon University Lessons Learned from Evaluating Eight Password Nudges in the Wild . 25 Karen Renaud and Joseph Maguire, University of Glasgow; Verena Zimmerman, TU Darmstadt; Steve Draper, University of Glasgow An Empirical Investigation of Security Fatigue: The Case of Password Choice after Solving a CAPTCHA . 39 Kovila P.L. Coopamootoo and Thomas Gross, Newcastle University; Muhammad F. R. Pratama Dead on Arrival: Recovering from Fatal Flaws in Email Encryption Tools . 49 Juan Ramón Ponce Mauriés, University College London; Kat Krol, University of Cambridge; Simon Parkin, Ruba Abu-Salma, and M. Angela Sasse, University College London The Impacts of Representational Fluency on Cognitive Processing of Cryptography Concepts . 59 Sumra Bari, Joseph Beckman, Victor Chen, Melissa Dark, and Baijian Yang, Purdue University Self-Protective Behaviors Over Public WiFi Networks . 69 David Maimon, Michael Becker, Sushant Patil, and Jonathan Katz, University of Maryland Measuring the Success of Context-Aware Security Behaviour Surveys . 77 Ingolf Becker, Simon Parkin, and Angela Sasse, University College London USENIX Association LASER 2017 • Learning from Authoritative Security Experiment Results v Organizing Committee Terry Benzel (USC ISI), General Chair Brendan Dolan-Gavitt (NYU), Program Chair David Balenson (SRI International), Funding/Local Arrangements/Scholarships Laura S. Tinnel (SRI International), Publicity/Web/IT Services Fanny Lalonde Levesque (Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal), Publications Carrie Gates (Consultant), Advisor Greg Shannon (CMU/CERT), Advisor Program Committee Brendan Dolan-Gavitt (NYU), Chair Christian Collberg (University of Arizona) Kovila Coopamootoo (Newcastle University) Eric Eide (Utah) Lori Flynn (SEI/CMU) Thomas Gross (Newcastle University) Bart Knijnenburg (Clemson) Jelena Mirkovic (USC Information Sciences Institute (ISI)) Pradeep Murukannaiah (RIT) Daniela Oliveira (University of Florida) Konrad Rieck (TU Braunschweig) John Seymour (UMBC) Xinyu Xing (Penn State) Michael Zhivich (Akamai) vi LASER 2017 • Learning from Authoritative Security Experiment Results USENIX Association Workshop Sponsors USENIX Association LASER 2017 • Learning from Authoritative Security Experiment Results vii Message from the General Chair Welcome to the 2017 Workshop on Learning from Authoritative Security Experiment Results (LASER). Each year, LASER focuses on an aspect of experimentation in cyber security. The 2017 workshop focus was on improving the rigor and quality of security experimentation through experimental methods and research that exemplifies sound scientific practice. The event was structured as a workshop with invited talks and a variety of guided group discussions in order to best meet the overall workshop goals. LASER 2017 sought research papers exemplifying the practice of science in cyber security, whether the results were positive or negative. Papers documenting experiments with a well-reasoned hypothesis, a rigorous experimental meth- odology for testing that hypothesis, and results that proved, disproved, or failed to prove the hypothesis were sought. This year, many of the papers and talks for the 2017 LASER Workshop included aspects of measurement and analy- sis of experimental approaches. This theme was highlighted in the invited talk “The Advancement of Science in Cyber Security” by Dr. Laurie Williams from North Carolina State University, who gave a report on the NSA Lablet program efforts designed to more aggressively advance the science of cyber security. A key motivation of this work is to catalyze a shift in relevant areas towards a more organized and cohesive scientific community for a science of cyber security. Invited speaker Dr. Josiah Dykstra’s talk “She Blinded Me with Science: Understanding Misleading, Manip ulative, and Deceptive Cybersecurity” described how people are often misled, manipulated, or deceived by real and bogus science, wild claims, and marketing trickery. Dykstra’s work explores the dangers of vendor-sponsored studies, surveys, and spurious (false) correlations. Drawing on his book Essential Cybersecurity Science, Dykstra discussed how researchers can improve communication with security practitioners and the dangers of manipulative graphics and visualizations that work through mental shortcomings and perception or because of the data they omit. The workshop received 15 submissions, which were each reviewed by at least 3 members of the Program Committee. The Program Committee accepted 8 full papers, which they believed embodied the workshop spirit and focus of LASER 2017. This year, the LASER Workshop returned to its roots and was held in October and was hosted by SRI International at their Arlington, VA facility. LASER recognizes that the future of cyber security lies with the next generation of researchers. As such, LASER sponsors students who are working to become researchers to attend and participate in the workshop. In 2017, four students received full sponsorship. On behalf of LASER 2017, I wish to thank the many people who made this workshop possible: • Our program chairs, who worked diligently to put together a strong technical program that would benefit the community • The authors, who submitted papers to this workshop • The members of the Program Committee, who carefully reviewed the submissions and participated in paper discussions • Our organizing committee, who provided guidance and donated their time to handle everything from publicity to logistics • The National Science Foundation, ACSA, SRI and USENIX , who provided the funding and facilities neces- sary to make the workshop a reality • The attendees, without whom there would be no workshop at all. We look forward to meeting everyone at LASER 2018! Terry Benzel, USC Information Sciences Institute LASER 2017 General Chair viii LASER 2017 • Learning from Authoritative Security Experiment Results USENIX Association Understanding Malware’s Network Behaviors using Fantasm Xiyue Deng Hao Shi [email protected] [email protected] Information Sciences Institute Information Sciences Institute Jelena Mirkovic [email protected] Information Sciences Institute Abstract 1 Introduction Background: There is very little data about how often contemporary malware communicates with the Internet Malware today evolves at an amazing pace. Kaspersky and how essential this communication is for malware’s lab [1] reports that more than 300,000 new malware sam- functionality. ples are found each day. While many have analyzed Aim: We aim to quantify what fraction of contempo- malware binaries to understand its purpose [7, 9], little rary malware samples are environment-sensitive and will has been done on analyzing and understanding malware exhibit very few behaviors when analyzed under full con- communication patterns [17,22]. Specifically, we do not tainment. We then seek to understand the purpose of the know how much malware needs outside connectivity and malware’s use of communication channel and if malware what impact limited connectivity has on malware’s func- communication patterns could be used to understand its tionality. We further do not understand which application purpose. and transport protocols are used by contemporary mal- Method. We analyze malware communication be- ware, and what is the purpose of this communication. havior by running contemporary malware samples on Understanding these issues is necessary for two reasons. bare-metal machines in the DeterLab testbed, either in First, much malware analysis occurs in full containment full containment or with some limited connectivity, and due to legal and ethical reasons. If communication is recording and analyzing all their network traffic. We essential to malware, then analyzing it in full contain- carefully choose which communication to allow, and we ment makes what defenders observe very different from monitor all connections that are let into the Internet. This how malware behaves in the wild. Second, understand- way we can guarantee safety to Internet hosts, while ex- ing malware communication patterns may be useful to posing interesting malware behaviors that do not show understand its functionality, even when malware code is under full containment. obfuscated or encrypted. Results. We find that 58% of samples exhibit some We hypothesize that communication may be essen- network activity within the first five minutes of run- tial to malware