VMware NSX 4.x Tier-0 Gateway Router Security Technical Implementation Guide

If multicast traffic is forwarded beyond the intended boundary, it could be intercepted by unauthorized or unintended personnel. Limiting where within the network a given multicast group's data is permitted to flow is an important first step in improving multicast security.

A scope zone is an instance of a connected region of a given scope. Zones of the same scope cannot overlap while zones of a smaller scope will fit completely within a zone of a larger scope. For example, Admin-local scope is smaller than Site-local scope, so the administratively configured boundary fits within the bounds of a site. According to RFC 4007 IPv6 Scoped Address Architecture (section 5), scope zones are also required to be "convex from a routing perspective"; that is, packets routed within a zone must not pass through any links that are outside of the zone. This requirement forces each zone to be one contiguous island rather than a series of separate islands.

As stated in the DOD IPv6 IA Guidance for MO3, "One should be able to identify all interfaces of a zone by drawing a closed loop on their network diagram, engulfing some routers and passing through some routers to include only some of their interfaces." Therefore, it is imperative that the network engineers have documented their multicast topology and thereby knows which interfaces are enabled for multicast. Once this is done, the zones can be scoped as required.

A compromised router introduces risk to the entire network infrastructure, as well as data resources that are accessible via the network. The perimeter defense has no oversight or control of attacks by malicious users within the network. Preventing network breaches from within is dependent on implementing a comprehensive defense-in-depth strategy, including securing each device connected to the network. This is accomplished by following and implementing all security guidance applicable for each node type. A fundamental step in securing each router is to enable only the capabilities required for operation.

A malicious platform can use a compromised host in an enclave to launch cyberattacks on third parties. This is a common practice in "botnets", which are a collection of compromised computers using malware to attack other computers or networks. Distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks frequently leverage IP source address spoofing to send packets to multiple hosts that in turn will send return traffic to the hosts with the IP addresses that were forged. This can generate significant amounts of traffic. Therefore, protection measures to counteract IP source address spoofing must be taken. When uRPF is enabled in strict mode, the packet must be received on the interface that the device would use to forward the return packet; thereby mitigating IP source address spoofing.

If the same keys are used between External Border Gateway Protocol (eBGP) neighbors, the chance of a hacker compromising any of the BGP sessions increases. It is possible that a malicious user exists in one autonomous system who would know the key used for the eBGP session. This user would then be able to hijack BGP sessions with other trusted neighbors.

The ICMP supports IP traffic by relaying information about paths, routes, and network conditions. Routers automatically send ICMP messages under a wide variety of conditions. Mask Reply ICMP messages are commonly used by attackers for network mapping and diagnosis.

The effects of prefix de-aggregation can degrade router performance due to the size of routing tables and also result in black-holing legitimate traffic. Initiated by an attacker or a misconfigured router, prefix de-aggregation occurs when the announcement of a large prefix is fragmented into a collection of smaller prefix announcements.

In 1997, misconfigured routers in the Florida Internet Exchange network (AS7007) de-aggregated every prefix in their routing table and started advertising the first /24 block of each of these prefixes as their own. Faced with this additional burden, the internal routers became overloaded and crashed repeatedly. This caused prefixes advertised by these routers to disappear from routing tables and reappear when the routers came back online. As the routers came back after crashing, they were flooded with the routing table information by their neighbors. The flood of information would again overwhelm the routers and cause them to crash. This process of route flapping served to destabilize not only the surrounding network but also the entire internet. Routers trying to reach those addresses would choose the smaller, more specific /24 blocks first. This caused backbone networks throughout North America and Europe to crash.

Maximum prefix limits on peer connections combined with aggressive prefix-size filtering of customers' reachability advertisements will effectively mitigate the de-aggregation risk. BGP maximum prefix must be used on all eBGP routers to limit the number of prefixes that it should receive from a particular neighbor, whether customer or peering autonomous system (AS). Consider each neighbor and how many routes they should be advertising and set a threshold slightly higher than the number expected.

The Neighbor Discovery (ND) protocol allows a hop limit value to be advertised by routers in a Router Advertisement message being used by hosts instead of the standardized default value. If a very small value was configured and advertised to hosts on the LAN segment, communications would fail due to the hop limit reaching zero before the packets sent by a host reached its destination.

A compromised router introduces risk to the entire network infrastructure, as well as data resources that are accessible via the network. The perimeter defense has no oversight or control of attacks by malicious users within the network. Preventing network breaches from within is dependent on implementing a comprehensive defense-in-depth strategy, including securing each device connected to the network. This is accomplished by following and implementing all security guidance applicable for each node type. A fundamental step in securing each router is to enable only the capabilities required for operation.