• 제목/요약/키워드: Session Hijack

검색결과 4건 처리시간 0.019초

모바일 IPv6 바인딩 업데이트의 보안 향상 기법 (Clue for Secure Route Optimization in Mobile IPv6)

  • 송세화;최형기;김정윤
    • 정보처리학회논문지C
    • /
    • 제17C권2호
    • /
    • pp.153-158
    • /
    • 2010
  • Mobile IPv6는 이동 단말의 이동 중에도 세션을 유지하는 기법 중 하나이다. 기존 Mobile IPv4에서의 삼각라우팅 문제를 해결하기 위해, Mobile IPv6에서는 단말과 대응노드가 서로 직접 통신할 수 있는 기법을 제공하고 있다. 하지만, 현재 Mobile IPv6의 기법은 공격자가 일반적인 사용자의 세션을 뺏어오거나, 그것을 응용한 여러 공격이 가능하도록 하고 있어 개선이 필요하다. 우리는 이러한 문제점을 개선하기 위해 기존에 사용되던 두 개의 토큰에게 연관성을 부여하는 방법을 통하여 보안을 향상시킬 수 있는 방법을 제안한다. 이를 위해 현재 표준의 문제점을 분석하고, 보다 강화된 보안을 제공하기 위한 요구사항을 도출 및 이를 만족하는 프로토콜을 정의하였다. 그리고 여러 방면에서의 성능 분석을 수행하였다.

BcN(Broadband Convergence Network) 환경에서의 중요정보에 대한 도청방지 메카니즘 (The core information protection mechanism in the BcN(Broadband Convergence Network))

  • 오석환;이재용;김병철
    • 대한전자공학회논문지TC
    • /
    • 제45권1호
    • /
    • pp.14-26
    • /
    • 2008
  • 인터넷 접속기술로서 IP over Ethernet 기술이 널리 상용화되어 적용되고 있는데 이 기술은 IP 주소를 MAC 주소로 변환하기 위한 주소번역 프로토콜로서 ARP(Address Resolution Protocol)를 사용하고 있다. 최근들어 이러한 ARP에 대한 보안 공격은 IP 주소와 이와 대응하는 MAC 주소를 의도적으로 변경하는 공격으로서, 이를 수행하기 위해 "snoopspy"등과 같은 다양한 툴을 사용한다. ARP 공격을 수행함으로써 원래 의도한 목적지와는 다른 MAC 주소로 패킷을 보내어 공격자가 내용을 도청하거나, 내용을 변경하거나, 연결을 가로채기 할 수 있다. ARP 공격은 데이터링크 계층에서 수행되므로 Secure Shell(SSH) 또는 Secure Sockets Layer(SSL)와 같은 방법에 의해 방어할 수 없다. 따라서 이 논문에서는 ARP 공격을 방향성에 따라 하향공격인 ARP spoofing 공격과 상향공격인 ARP redirection 공격으로 각각 분류하고, IP주소를 획득시 얻는 DHCP 정보를 이용하여 대처하는 새로운 보안 기법을 제안하였다. 즉, ARP spoofing 공격에 대해서는 "DHCP snoop 기법" 또는 "DHCP sniffing/inspection 기법"을 제안하였고, ARP redirection 공격에 대해서는 "static binding" 기법을 제시하였다. 이 논문에서 제안한 ARP 공격은 BcN을 비롯한 차세대 인터넷 접속망의 보안성을 강화하는데 널리 사용될 수 있을 것이다.

항공기(航空機) 사고조사제도(事故調査制度)에 관한 연구(硏究) (A Study on the System of Aircraft Investigation)

  • 김두환
    • 항공우주정책ㆍ법학회지
    • /
    • 제9권
    • /
    • pp.85-143
    • /
    • 1997
  • The main purpose of the investigation of an accident caused by aircraft is to be prevented the sudden and casual accidents caused by wilful misconduct and fault from pilots, air traffic controllers, hijack, trouble of engine and machinery of aircraft, turbulence during the bad weather, collision between birds and aircraft, near miss flight by aircrafts etc. It is not the purpose of this activity to apportion blame or liability for offender of aircraft accidents. Accidents to aircraft, especially those involving the general public and their property, are a matter of great concern to the aviation community. The system of international regulation exists to improve safety and minimize, as far as possible, the risk of accidents but when they do occur there is a web of systems and procedures to investigate and respond to them. I would like to trace the general line of regulation from an international source in the Chicago Convention of 1944. Article 26 of the Convention lays down the basic principle for the investigation of the aircraft accident. Where there has been an accident to an aircraft of a contracting state which occurs in the territory of another contracting state and which involves death or serious injury or indicates serious technical defect in the aircraft or air navigation facilities, the state in which the accident occurs must institute an inquiry into the circumstances of the accident. That inquiry will be in accordance, in so far as its law permits, with the procedure which may be recommended from time to time by the International Civil Aviation Organization ICAO). There are very general provisions but they state two essential principles: first, in certain circumstances there must be an investigation, and second, who is to be responsible for undertaking that investigation. The latter is an important point to establish otherwise there could be at least two states claiming jurisdiction on the inquiry. The Chicago Convention also provides that the state where the aircraft is registered is to be given the opportunity to appoint observers to be present at the inquiry and the state holding the inquiry must communicate the report and findings in the matter to that other state. It is worth noting that the Chicago Convention (Article 25) also makes provision for assisting aircraft in distress. Each contracting state undertakes to provide such measures of assistance to aircraft in distress in its territory as it may find practicable and to permit (subject to control by its own authorities) the owner of the aircraft or authorities of the state in which the aircraft is registered, to provide such measures of assistance as may be necessitated by circumstances. Significantly, the undertaking can only be given by contracting state but the duty to provide assistance is not limited to aircraft registered in another contracting state, but presumably any aircraft in distress in the territory of the contracting state. Finally, the Convention envisages further regulations (normally to be produced under the auspices of ICAO). In this case the Convention provides that each contracting state, when undertaking a search for missing aircraft, will collaborate in co-ordinated measures which may be recommended from time to time pursuant to the Convention. Since 1944 further international regulations relating to safety and investigation of accidents have been made, both pursuant to Chicago Convention and, in particular, through the vehicle of the ICAO which has, for example, set up an accident and reporting system. By requiring the reporting of certain accidents and incidents it is building up an information service for the benefit of member states. However, Chicago Convention provides that each contracting state undertakes collaborate in securing the highest practicable degree of uniformity in regulations, standards, procedures and organization in relation to aircraft, personnel, airways and auxiliary services in all matters in which such uniformity will facilitate and improve air navigation. To this end, ICAO is to adopt and amend from time to time, as may be necessary, international standards and recommended practices and procedures dealing with, among other things, aircraft in distress and investigation of accidents. Standards and Recommended Practices for Aircraft Accident Injuries were first adopted by the ICAO Council on 11 April 1951 pursuant to Article 37 of the Chicago Convention on International Civil Aviation and were designated as Annex 13 to the Convention. The Standards Recommended Practices were based on Recommendations of the Accident Investigation Division at its first Session in February 1946 which were further developed at the Second Session of the Division in February 1947. The 2nd Edition (1966), 3rd Edition, (1973), 4th Edition (1976), 5th Edition (1979), 6th Edition (1981), 7th Edition (1988), 8th Edition (1992) of the Annex 13 (Aircraft Accident and Incident Investigation) of the Chicago Convention was amended eight times by the ICAO Council since 1966. Annex 13 sets out in detail the international standards and recommended practices to be adopted by contracting states in dealing with a serious accident to an aircraft of a contracting state occurring in the territory of another contracting state, known as the state of occurrence. It provides, principally, that the state in which the aircraft is registered is to be given the opportunity to appoint an accredited representative to be present at the inquiry conducted by the state in which the serious aircraft accident occurs. Article 26 of the Chicago Convention does not indicate what the accredited representative is to do but Annex 13 amplifies his rights and duties. In particular, the accredited representative participates in the inquiry by visiting the scene of the accident, examining the wreckage, questioning witnesses, having full access to all relevant evidence, receiving copies of all pertinent documents and making submissions in respect of the various elements of the inquiry. The main shortcomings of the present system for aircraft accident investigation are that some contracting sates are not applying Annex 13 within its express terms, although they are contracting states. Further, and much more important in practice, there are many countries which apply the letter of Annex 13 in such a way as to sterilise its spirit. This appears to be due to a number of causes often found in combination. Firstly, the requirements of the local law and of the local procedures are interpreted and applied so as preclude a more efficient investigation under Annex 13 in favour of a legalistic and sterile interpretation of its terms. Sometimes this results from a distrust of the motives of persons and bodies wishing to participate or from commercial or related to matters of liability and bodies. These may be political, commercial or related to matters of liability and insurance. Secondly, there is said to be a conscious desire to conduct the investigation in some contracting states in such a way as to absolve from any possibility of blame the authorities or nationals, whether manufacturers, operators or air traffic controllers, of the country in which the inquiry is held. The EEC has also had an input into accidents and investigations. In particular, a directive was issued in December 1980 encouraging the uniformity of standards within the EEC by means of joint co-operation of accident investigation. The sharing of and assisting with technical facilities and information was considered an important means of achieving these goals. It has since been proposed that a European accident investigation committee should be set up by the EEC (Council Directive 80/1266 of 1 December 1980). After I would like to introduce the summary of the legislation examples and system for aircraft accidents investigation of the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Germany, The Netherlands, Sweden, Swiss, New Zealand and Japan, and I am going to mention the present system, regulations and aviation act for the aircraft accident investigation in Korea. Furthermore I would like to point out the shortcomings of the present system and regulations and aviation act for the aircraft accident investigation and then I will suggest my personal opinion on the new and dramatic innovation on the system for aircraft accident investigation in Korea. I propose that it is necessary and desirable for us to make a new legislation or to revise the existing aviation act in order to establish the standing and independent Committee of Aircraft Accident Investigation under the Korean Government.

  • PDF