Datasets:
Devilishcode
/
hacking

Dataset card Data Studio Files
xet
 Community
text
stringlengths
0
1.99k
My XDP scanner completed the same task in 68.3 seconds. In this scenario,
where the bottleneck is spread across millions of IPs, masscan's years of
optimization give it a clear edge.
However, the high-density scan against a single host tells a different
story. Here, masscan's active scanning time was ~2 seconds (12 seconds of
total time minus the 10-second delay).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
real 0m12.163s
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
My AF_XDP scanner finished in just ~1.3 seconds. ~ The victory for the
AF_XDP scanner here was not just in speed, but also in accuracy. My scanner
consistently identified all four open ports on the target in every run:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
OPEN: 45.33.32.156:22
OPEN: 45.33.32.156:9929
OPEN: 45.33.32.156:80
OPEN: 45.33.32.156:31337
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
In contrast, masscan's high rate caused it to miss ports, finding a
different number of open ports on different runs:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
1st scan: 0.00-kpps, 100.00% done, waiting 0-secs, found=3
2nd scan: 0.00-kpps, 100.00% done, waiting 0-secs, found=2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
This outcome directly validates the AF_XDP architecture. The performance
gains are a result of several combined optimizations. The kernel-level eBPF
filter drops unwanted traffic at the earliest possible point. The zero-copy
UMEM and batched ring operations nearly eliminate syscall overhead. This is
why the PoC excels in the high-density test: the per-packet overhead is so
low that it can saturate a single target more effectively and reliably than
a tool tuned for internet-wide distribution.
While the XDP scanner is just a proof-of-concept, it shows that with
further development, this architecture holds potential.
--[ 5 - Extending the AF_XDP Framework
---[ 5.0 - High-Speed HTTP/HTTPS Application Fuzzing and L7 DDoS
The architecture developed for this scanner serves as a foundation for
other high-performance network applications, particularly for security
research and testing. The framework can be extended to handle stateful
protocols by implementing a TCP stack in userspace. This involves managing
sequence numbers, ACKs, windowing, and state transitions. This userspace
TCP stack then serves as a transport layer for higher-level protocols.
To interact with HTTPS services, a TLS library (e.g., OpenSSL) can be
integrated by redirecting its I/O from kernel sockets to the userspace TCP
stack. In OpenSSL, this can be done using a custom BIO (Basic I/O
abstraction). The BIO_read and BIO_write callbacks would then interface
with the userspace TCP stack's send/receive buffers, not with read() or
write() syscalls.
With such a setup, you could use AF_XDP to create a high-speed
application-layer fuzzer. For content discovery, one could pipeline a
massive number of fuzzed HTTP requests over multiple, persistent HTTPS
connections, achieving a request-per-second rate far higher than
conventional tools like ffuf or gobuster. This same capability can be used
for Layer 7 DDoS attacks, exhausting resources by flooding it with the
highest RPS you can achieve.
---[ 5.1 - Stateless UDP Fuzzing and DDoS Amplification
UDP protocols are an even simpler target due to their stateless nature.
For these, the packet crafting engine can be adapted to fuzz any UDP
service or execute DDoS reflection/amplification attacks by spoofing the
source IP and generating requests at a massive rate. There's no complex
state to maintain, just packet generation.
This lays the foundation that creating AF_XDP programs to interact with
UDP protocols is architecturally easier to implement. Several tools already
use this concept to bruteforce DNS records in a faster way for example (e.g
sanicdns, pugdns).
--[ 6 - Caveats and Considerations
This approach has several requirements and trade-offs. Root privileges are
mandatory to load eBPF programs and create AF_XDP sockets so you wouldn't
be able to use it on a unprivileged session. The implementation complexity
is high, as your application is now responsible for everything from ARP
resolution to MAC address management. Performance is also heavily reliant
on having a modern kernel and a NIC driver that supports native AF_XDP and
since that's a relatively recent feature on the kernel, you won't be able
to run it on any system.
--[ 7 - Conclusion
By combining the filtering capabilities of eBPF at the XDP hook with the
zero-copy architecture of AF_XDP, it is possible to build network
applications that far exceed the performance of traditional socket-based