Close
  • Latest News
  • Cybersecurity
  • Big Data and Analytics
  • Cloud
  • Mobile
  • Networking
  • Storage
  • Applications
  • IT Management
  • Small Business
  • Development
  • Database
  • Servers
  • Android
  • Apple
  • Innovation
  • Blogs
  • PC Hardware
  • Reviews
  • Search Engines
  • Virtualization
Read Down
Sign in
Close
Welcome!Log into your account
Forgot your password?
Read Down
Password recovery
Recover your password
Close
Search
Menu
Search
  • Latest News
  • Cybersecurity
  • Big Data and Analytics
  • Cloud
  • Mobile
  • Networking
  • Storage
  • Applications
  • IT Management
  • Small Business
  • Development
  • Database
  • Servers
  • Android
  • Apple
  • Innovation
  • Blogs
  • PC Hardware
  • Reviews
  • Search Engines
  • Virtualization
More
    Home Applications
    • Applications
    • Cybersecurity

    Block E-Mail Bounces with BATV

    By
    Larry Seltzer
    -
    July 27, 2006
    Share
    Facebook
    Twitter
    Linkedin

      Imagine your incoming e-mail volume suddenly leaping 360 times above normal. Its not spam, not strictly speaking. Its a misdirected bounce attack.

      Bounces used to be a good and useful thing. When you send an e-mail to an invalid address or make some other sort of error, you want to know that it didnt go well. But along the way, bounces got abused just like everything wholesome about e-mail to the point where you had to avoid them as a matter of course.

      First, bounces became accomplices to spamming through directory harvest attacks. In this attack, a spammer picks a domain and sends out a large number of messages, guessing at the user name portion of the e-mail address and probably pulling a lot of them out of a directory of names (e.g., [email protected], [email protected], etc.). If the spammer gets a bounce on a message, then its not an address in that domain. The messages that dont bounce are real addresses, and then you spam them. Because of this threat, many domains dont send back bounces for wrong addresses anymore.

      Another threat these days is what is sometimes called spam blowback. As most of you know, when an e-mail is sent on the Internet from [email protected] to [email protected], there is no mechanism with which the folks at bar.com can confirm that the message was in fact sent by [email protected], or from anyone at foo.com.

      So imagine that the message is false and not sent by anyone at foo.com and that there is no user “recipient” at bar.com. If bar.com still sends bounce messages, it will send them to foo.com. [email protected] (if there is such a user), receiving the bounce message, will say to himself, “Huh? I didnt send this.”

      /zimages/1/28571.gifSMTP authentication standards work may have hit a wall, but the industry has taken the ball and run with it. Click here to read more.

      Now imagine that a major phishing attack goes out with millions of e-mails sent from [email protected] Some percentage of these messages, amounting to a very large absolute number, will be wrong, and the bounces will “blow back” to the mail server at Faceless National.

      This has the potential to massively clog the banks infrastructure. According to IronPort, one bounce attack against US Life Insurance increased its inbound mail volume from the typical 10,000 messages to 3,653,201. A jump like that will cause anyone problems. And often the bounce messages themselves will contain malware.

      Next page: The answer to blowback.

      The Answer to Blowback

      Of course, all the general efforts at SMTP authentication, like DKIM (DomainKeys Identified Mail), would solve this problem along the way to solving even more serious ones, but theyre too revolutionary. We might all agree theyre good things and worth supporting, but they only achieve usefulness when they have been widely adopted.

      Thats why BATV (Bounce Address Tag Validation) was invented. BATV allows the targets of blowback attacks to protect themselves with minimal effort and without anyone elses cooperation. Its effective as a unilateral measure. IronPort Systems is announcing this week that BATV will be included for no charge in the regular software updates to its own devices.

      Heres how BATV works: The MAIL-FROM address in the messages envelope, which is the opening portion of the SMTP transaction, is digitally signed with a private key known only to the mail server. The normal format for the envelope is:

      MAIL FROM [email protected]

      With BATV, this becomes (for example, in IronPorts implementation):

      MAIL FROM [email protected]

      The “EA6D0F” part is the hex representation of the first three bytes of the SHA-1 HMAC—in other words, a hash—of the other parts of the address and a private key. The “415” is a portion of a time stamp.

      The IronPort implementation differs slightly from the current BATV specification. The spec is continually evolving, and if administrators are careful it shouldnt matter if more than one version has to be supported at once.

      If a bounce comes in to the system to the same address, the server can look up and confirm that the tag is valid and then deliver the bounce message. If it just comes in to [email protected], or to some BATV value that doesnt correspond to a valid one, the server can ditch it at the SMTP envelope conversation. This aborts the transaction at an early stage, before the large majority of the message transfer has been performed. So it doesnt really stop the attack, but it mitigates it to the degree that it is much more manageable.

      Its not hard to imagine some problems caused by all the messing with addresses. For instance, I heard one report that the variability in the address from date stamp changes can cause challenge/response systems to complain, but thats hardly the first problem with challenge/response. Also its also somewhat disappointing that the perpetrator of the attack doesnt learn from the process that the attack failed.

      BATV can piggyback on top of SMTP authentication efforts. One day in the hypothetical future when DMIM or some such standard is ubiquitous, BATV can be turned off. But, in the meantime, its an unusually low-impact way to eliminate some real threats.

      Many thanks to John Levine for help with this and other articles Ive written. John is principal author of “The Internet for Dummies” and co-author, with the famous Dave Crocker and others, of the BATV specification.

      Security Center Editor Larry Seltzer has worked in and written about the computer industry since 1983.

      Check out eWEEK.coms for the latest security news, reviews and analysis. And for insights on security coverage around the Web, take a look at eWEEK.com Security Center Editor Larry Seltzers Weblog.

      More from Larry Seltzer

      Avatar
      Larry Seltzer
      Larry Seltzer has been writing software for and English about computers ever since—,much to his own amazement—,he graduated from the University of Pennsylvania in 1983.He was one of the authors of NPL and NPL-R, fourth-generation languages for microcomputers by the now-defunct DeskTop Software Corporation. (Larry is sad to find absolutely no hits on any of these +products on Google.) His work at Desktop Software included programming the UCSD p-System, a virtual machine-based operating system with portable binaries that pre-dated Java by more than 10 years.For several years, he wrote corporate software for Mathematica Policy Research (they're still in business!) and Chase Econometrics (not so lucky) before being forcibly thrown into the consulting market. He bummed around the Philadelphia consulting and contract-programming scenes for a year or two before taking a job at NSTL (National Software Testing Labs) developing product tests and managing contract testing for the computer industry, governments and publication.In 1991 Larry moved to Massachusetts to become Technical Director of PC Week Labs (now eWeek Labs). He moved within Ziff Davis to New York in 1994 to run testing at Windows Sources. In 1995, he became Technical Director for Internet product testing at PC Magazine and stayed there till 1998.Since then, he has been writing for numerous other publications, including Fortune Small Business, Windows 2000 Magazine (now Windows and .NET Magazine), ZDNet and Sam Whitmore's Media Survey.

      MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

      Android

      Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro: Durability for Tough...

      Chris Preimesberger - December 5, 2020 0
      Have you ever dropped your phone, winced and felt the pain as it hit the sidewalk? Either the screen splintered like a windshield being...
      Read more
      Cloud

      Why Data Security Will Face Even Harsher...

      Chris Preimesberger - December 1, 2020 0
      Who would know more about details of the hacking process than an actual former career hacker? And who wants to understand all they can...
      Read more
      Cybersecurity

      How Veritas Is Shining a Light Into...

      eWEEK EDITORS - September 25, 2020 0
      Protecting data has always been one of the most important tasks in all of IT, yet as more companies become data companies at the...
      Read more
      Big Data and Analytics

      How NVIDIA A100 Station Brings Data Center...

      Zeus Kerravala - November 18, 2020 0
      There’s little debate that graphics processor unit manufacturer NVIDIA is the de facto standard when it comes to providing silicon to power machine learning...
      Read more
      Apple

      Why iPhone 12 Pro Makes Sense for...

      Wayne Rash - November 26, 2020 0
      If you’ve been watching the Apple commercials for the past three weeks, you already know what the company thinks will happen if you buy...
      Read more
      eWeek


      Contact Us | About | Sitemap

      Facebook
      Linkedin
      RSS
      Twitter
      Youtube

      Property of TechnologyAdvice.
      Terms of Service | Privacy Notice | Advertise | California - Do Not Sell My Information

      © 2021 TechnologyAdvice. All Rights Reserved

      Advertiser Disclosure: Some of the products that appear on this site are from companies from which TechnologyAdvice receives compensation. This compensation may impact how and where products appear on this site including, for example, the order in which they appear. TechnologyAdvice does not include all companies or all types of products available in the marketplace.

      ×