How to Implement Patterns to Match Brute Force Login and Port Scanning Attacks using Flink CEP - apache-flink

I have a use case where a large no of logs will be consumed to the apache flink CEP. My use case is to find the brute force attack and port scanning attack. The challenge here is that while in ordinary CEP we compare the value against a constant like "event" = login. In this case the Criteria is different as in the case of brute force attack we have the criteria as follows.
username is constant and event="login failure" (Delimiter the event happens 5 times within 5 minutes).
It means the logs with the login failure event is received for the same username 5 times within 5 minutes
And for port Scanning we have the following criteira.
ip address is constant and dest port is variable (Delimiter is the event happens 10 times within 1 minute). It means the logs with constant ip address is received for the 10 different ports within 1 minute.

With Flink, when you want to process the events for something like one username or one ip address in isolation, the way to do this is to partition the stream by a key, using keyBy(). The training materials in the Flink docs have a section on Keyed Streams that explains this part of the DataStream API in more detail. keyBy() is the roughly same concept as a GROUP BY in SQL, if that helps.
With CEP, if you first key the stream, then the pattern will be matched separately for each distinct value of the key, which is what you want.
However, rather than CEP, I would instead recommend Flink SQL, perhaps in combination with MATCH_RECOGNIZE, for this use case. MATCH_RECOGNIZE is a higher-level API, built on top of CEP, and it's easier to work with. In combination with SQL, the result is quite powerful.
You'll find some Flink SQL training materials and examples (including examples that use MATCH_RECOGNIZE) in Ververica's github account.
Update
To be clear, I wouldn't use MATCH_RECOGNIZE for these specific rules; neither it nor CEP is needed for this use case. I mentioned it in case you have other rules where it would be helpful. (My reason for not recommending CEP in this case is that implementing the distinct constraint might be messy.)
For example, for the port scanning case you can do something like this:
SELECT e1.ip, COUNT(DISTINCT e2.port)
FROM events e1, events e2
WHERE e1.ip = e2.ip AND timestampDiff(MINUTE, e1.ts, e2.ts) < 1
GROUP BY e1.ip HAVING COUNT(DISTINCT e2.port) >= 10;
The login case is similar, but easier.
Note that when working with streaming SQL, you should give some thought to state retention.
Further update
This query is likely to return a given IP address many times, but it's not desirable to generate multiple alerts.
This could be handled by inserting matching IP addresses into an Alert table, and only generate alerts for IPs that aren't already there.
Or the output of the SQL query could be processed by a de-duplicator implemented using the DataStream API, similar to the example in the Flink docs. If you only want to suppress duplicate alerts for some period of time, use a KeyedProcessFunction instead of a RichFlatMapFunction, and use a Timer to clear the state when it's time to re-enable alerts for a given IP.
Yet another update (concerning CEP and distinctness)
Implementing this with CEP should be possible. You'll want to key the stream by the IP address, and have a pattern that has to match within one minute.
The pattern can be roughly like this:
Pattern<Event, ?> pattern = Pattern
.<Event>begin("distinctPorts")
.where(iterative condition 1)
.oneOrMore()
.followedBy("end")
.where(iterative condition 2)
.within(1 minute)
The first iterative condition returns true if the event being added to the pattern has a distinct port from all of the previously matching events. Somewhat similar to the example here, in the docs.
The second iterative condition returns true if size("distinctPorts") >= 9 and this event also has yet another distinct port.
See this Flink Forward talk (youtube video) for a somewhat similar example at the end of the talk.
If you try this and get stuck, please ask a new question, showing us what you've tried and where you're stuck.

Related

Apache Flink - Matching with fields having different values in successive patterns

Consider the use case where we need to find the pattern for a attack like 10 failed logons from the same device and same username followed by a success logon from different device but same username. This should happen within 10 mins.
Let us say we have 10 login failed windows events with user A as username and B as devicename and we have a success logon from user A with different device C, we should raise an alert. Please let me know how flink CEP can be used to solve the case.
This is rather similar to Apache Flink - Matching Fields with the same value. In this case you might try MATCH_RECOGNIZE with something this:
PARTITION BY user
...
PATTERN (F{10} S) WITHIN INTERVAL '10' MINUTE
DEFINE
F.status = 'failure' AND (LAST(F.device, 1) IS NULL OR F.device = LAST(F.device, 1)),
S AS S.status = 'success' AND S.device <> LAST(F.device, 1)
The idea is to check that each new F is for the same device as the previous one, and S is for a different device.
BTW, in practice you might rather specify F{10,} so that the pattern matches 10 or more failed attempts in a row, rather than exactly 10.

Flink CEP - timeout and Dynamic Patterns

Is there a way to achieve the following with Flink CEP
Continue matching pattern of all events have not arrived within time. For example A -> B -> C are supposed to match within 20 seconds, and only event A has arrived, right now I see timeout happens at 20 seconds. After timeout if B arrives the pattern doesn't match. How do we make sure it continues to match after the timeout has occurred.
Multiple timeouts - Is it possible to alert multiple times on a given pattern. I have a use case where in I need to alert at time t1, t2, t3. Is there a way to achieve that ?
Multiple Patterns - Is have seen some articles where NFACompiler.NFAFactory is maintained in a map and based on the data, the right one is looked up and used. Is there an example that I can find how to do it with current version of Flink.

How to Prevent Hotlinking by Using AWS WAF

There is an AWS document that explains how to do it for oneself, i.e. how to allow only one's pages to hotlink and reject all others: https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/how-to-prevent-hotlinking-by-using-aws-waf-amazon-cloudfront-and-referer-checking/
I'd like to know if WAF is the right choice for my use case, which is a bit different from the one above.
At the company I work for, we intend to sell data through a JS widget.
We'd like to restrict access to those data so that only authorized REFERERs are able to show our data to their users, while rejecting all other REFERERs.
The possibility of spoofing the REFERER is not an important threat for us.
We expect to grow our customer base to some hundreds.
The reason I'm asking this question is due to noticing that there are some strict limits on WAF: https://docs.aws.amazon.com/waf/latest/developerguide/limits.html, according to which I understand that for our use case, WAF wouldn't scale nicely.
WAF is not the right tool for that job.
First, even if there are max 10 rules, each with max 10 conditions, each with max 10 filters, there is a strong max of 100 string conditions per AWS account.
Second, conditions and filters do not compose nicely for our use case. Conditions of a rule get composed with an AND and filters of a condition get composed with an OR. For example, a rule like r(x) := (x=a + x=b + x=c) * (x=d + x=e) would give r(d) = false without ever getting to test x=d.

Two type of triggers on one window?

I need your advice, really
In my task i need to aggregate events by two type of aggregation.
First type - is onCount, second type - is onTime.
If event is for onCount aggregation - it has fields number - number of event, and totalCount - what count of events we should accumulate before aggregate.
If event is for onTime aggregation - it has field time - it's date after which we should get all accumulate events and start aggregating.
I can groupped events by type, start window and set trigger:
stream
.keyBy(e => (e.clientSystemId, e.onMode))
.window(GlobalWindows.create())
.trigger(new WindowAggregationTrigger())
But in trigger i need to have state - total count or time.
And in best solution - i need two different triggers - first is about counting and second - is about time aggregation.
My question is - how beautifully to solve this problem?
When i need two triggers with different logic - first about counting, second- about time trigger.
I do not ask to solve the problem for me, I ask for advice.
We developing on Apache Flink 1.4.
It is not possible to apply two different triggers in the same window operator, but you can implement a single trigger to distinguish the onCount and onTime cases.
However, I would recommend to split the stream into two streams (using split() or side outputs), apply window operators with different triggers on the splitted streams, and later union() the streams together (if that is necessary).

Flink - Grouping query to external system per operator instance while enriching an event

I am currently writing a streaming application where:
as an input, I am receiving some alerts from a kafka topic (1 alert is linked to 1 resource, for example 1 alert will be linked to my-router-1 or to my-switch-1 or to my-VM-1 or my-VM-2 or ...)
I need then to do a query to an external system in order to enrich the alert with some additional information linked to the resource on which the alert is linked
When querying the external system:
I do not want to do 1 query per alert and not even 1 query per resource
I rather want to do group queries (1 query for several alerts linked to several resources)
My idea was to have something like n buffer (n being a small number representing the nb of queries that I will do in parallel), and then for a given time period (let's say 100ms), put all alerts within one of those buffer and at the end of those 100ms, do my n queries in parallel (1 query being responsible for enriching several alerts belonging to several resources).
In Spark, it is something that I would do through a mapPartitions (if I have n partition, then I will do only n queries in parallel to my external system and each query will be for all the alerts received during the micro-batch for one partition).
Now, I am currently looking at Flink and I haven't really found what is the best way of doing such kind of grouping when requesting an external system.
When looking at this kind of use case and especially at asyncio (https://ci.apache.org/projects/flink/flink-docs-release-1.4/dev/stream/operators/asyncio.html), it seems that it deals with 1 query per key.
For example, I can very easily:
define the resouce id as a key
define a processing time window of 100ms
and then do my query to the external system (synchronously or maybe better asynchrously through the asyncio feature)
But by doing so, I will do 1 query per resource (maybe for several alerts but linked to the same key, ie the same resource).
It is not what I want to do as it will lead to too much queries to the external system.
I've then explored the option of defining a kind of technical key for my requests (something like the hashCode of my resource id % nb of queries I want to perform).
So, if I want to do max 4 queries in parallel, then my key will be something like "resourceId.hashCode % 4".
I was thinking that it was ok, but when looking more deeply to some metrics when running my job, I found that that my queries were not well distributed to my 4 operator instances (only 2 of them were doing something).
It comes for the mechanism used to assign a key to a given operator instance:
public static int assignKeyToParallelOperator(Object key, int maxParallelism, int parallelism) {
return computeOperatorIndexForKeyGroup(maxParallelism, parallelism, assignToKeyGroup(key, maxParallelism));
}
(in my case, parallelism being 4, maxParallelism 128 and my key value in the range [0,4[ ) (in such a context, 2 of my keys goes to operator instance 3 and 2 to operator instance 4) (operator instance 1 and 2 will have nothing to do).
I was thinking that key=0 will go to operator 0, key 1 to operator 1, key 2 to operator 2 and key 3 to operator 3, but it is not the case.
So do you know what will be the best approach to do this kind of grouping while querying an external system ?
ie 1 query per operator instance for all the alerts "received" by this operator instance during the last 100ms.
You can put an aggregator function upstream of the async function, where that function (using a timed window) outputs a record with <resource id><list of alerts to query>. You'd key the stream by the <resource id> ahead of the aggregator, which should then get pipelined to the async function.

Resources