Rate limiting is a commonly-used tool to defend against application-layer (L7) DDoS attacks. However, the shortcomings of this approach raises the question of whether the cure is worse than the disease?
As more applications transition to web and cloud-based environments, application-layer (L7) DDoS attacks are becoming increasingly common and potent.
In fact, Radware research found that application-layer attacks have taken over network-layer DDoS attacks, and HTTP floods are now the number one most common attack across all vectors. This is mirrored by new generations of attack tools such as the Mirai botnet, which makes application-layer floods even more accessible and easier to launch.
It is, therefore, no surprise that more security vendors claim to provide protection against such attacks. The problem, however, is that the chosen approach by many vendors is rate limiting.
A More Challenging Form of DDoS Attack
What is it that makes application-layer DDoS attacks so difficult to defend against?
Application-layer DDoS attacks such as HTTP GET or HTTP POST floods are particularly difficult to protect against because they require analysis of the application-layer traffic in order to determine whether or not it is behaving legitimately.
For example, when a shopping website sees a spike in incoming HTTP traffic, is that because a DDoS attack is taking place, or because there is a flash crowd of shoppers looking for the latest hot item?
Looking at network-layer traffic volumes alone will not help us. The only option would be to look at application data directly and try to discern whether or not it is legitimate based on its behavior.
However, several vendors who claim to offer protection against application-layer DDoS attacks don’t have the capabilities to actually analyze application traffic and work out whether an attack is taking place. This leads many of them to rely on brute-force mechanisms such as HTTP rate limiting.
A Remedy (Almost) as Bad as the Disease
Explaining rate limiting is simple enough: when traffic goes over a certain threshold, rate limits are applied to throttle the amount of traffic to a level that the hosting server (or network pipe) can handle.
While this sounds simple enough, it also creates several problems:
- Rate limiting does not distinguish between good and bad traffic: It has no mechanism for determining whether a connection is legitimate or not. It is an equal-opportunity blocker of traffic.
- Rate limiting does not actually clean traffic: An important point to emphasize regarding rate limiting is that it does not actually block any bad traffic. Bad traffic will reach the original server, albeit at a slower rate.
- Rate limiting blocks legitimate users: It does not distinguish between good and malicious requests and does not actually block bad traffic so rate limiting results in a high degree of false positives. This will lead to legitimate users being blocked from reaching the application.
Some vendors have more granular rate limiting controls which allow limiting connections not just per application, but also per user. However, sophisticated attackers get around this by spreading attacks over a large number of attack hosts. Moreover, modern web applications (and browsers) frequently use multiple concurrent connections, so limiting concurrent connections per user will likely impact legitimate users.
Considering that the aim of a DDoS attack is usually to disrupt the availability of web applications and prevent legitimate users from reaching them, we can see that rate limiting does not actually mitigate the problem: bad traffic will still reach the application, and legitimate users will be blocked.
In other words – rate limiting administers the pains of the medication, without providing the benefit of a remedy.
This is not to say that rate limiting cannot be a useful discipline in mitigating application-layer attacks, but it should be used as a last line of defense, when all else fails, and not as a first response.
A better approach with behavioral detection
An alternative approach to rate limiting – which would deliver better results – is to use a positive security model based on behavioral analysis.
Most defense mechanisms – including rate limiting – subscribe to a ‘negative’ security model. In a nutshell, it means that all traffic will be allowed through, except what is explicitly known to be malicious. This is how the majority of signature-based and volume-based DDoS and WAF solutions work.
A ‘positive’ security model, on the other hand, works the other way around: it uses behavioral-based learning processes to learn what constitutes legitimate user behavior and establishes a baseline of legitimate traffic patterns. It will then block any request that does not conform to this traffic pattern.
Such an approach is particularly useful when it comes to application-layer DDoS attacks since it can look at application-layer behavior, and determine whether this behavior adheres to recognized legitimate patterns. One such example would be to determine whether a spike in traffic is legitimate behavior or the result of a DDoS attack.
The advantages of behavioral-based detections are numerous:
- Blocks bad traffic: Unlike rate limiting, behavioral-based detection actually ‘scrubs’ bad traffic out, leaving only legitimate traffic to reach the application.
- Reduces false positives: One of the key problems of rate limiting is the high number of false positives. A positive security approach greatly reduces this problem.
- Does not block legitimate users: Most importantly, behavioral traffic analysis results in fewer (or none at all) blocked users, meaning that you don’t lose on customers, reputation, and revenue.
That’s Great, but How Do I know If I Have It?
The best way to find out what protections you have is to be informed. Here are a few questions to ask your security vendor:
- Do you provide application-layer (L7) DDoS protection as part of your DDoS solution, or does it require an add-on WAF component?
- Do you use behavioral learning algorithms to establish ‘legitimate’ traffic patterns?
- How do you distinguish between good and bad traffic?
- Do you have application-layer DDoS protection that goes beyond rate limiting?
If your vendor has these capabilities, make sure they’re turned-on and enabled. If not, the increase in application-layer DDoS attacks means that it might be time to look for other alternatives.
Read “2017-2018 Global Application & Network Security Report” to learn more.
Eyal is a Product Marketing Manager in Radware’s security group, responsible for the company’s line of cloud security products, including Cloud WAF, Cloud DDoS, and Cloud Malware Protection. Eyal has extensive background in security, having served in the Israel Defense Force (IDF) at an elite technological unit. Prior to joining Radware, Eyal worked in Product Management and Product Marketing roles at a number of companies in the enterprise computing and security space, both on the small scale startup side, as well as large-scale corporate end, affording him a wide view of the industry. Eyal holds a BA in Management from the Interdisciplinary Center (IDC) Herzliya and a MBA from the UCLA Anderson School of Management.
*** This is a Security Bloggers Network syndicated blog from Radware Blog authored by Eyal Arazi. Read the original post at: https://blog.radware.com/security/2018/09/rate-limiting-a-cure-worse-than-the-disease/