Can using this command
nmap www.google.com
Cause dos attack. It gave me some output but I do not understand it. I have never used nmap before.
One computer trying to analyze one site is very unlikely to cause a denial of service to happen. You are more likely to run out of resources on your own machine before you put in any kind of dent in a properly set up web server.
Your question is kind of confusing. nmap primarily is a port scanner. It tries to to find open ports on a single or multiple selected targets (in your case www.google.com) by sending a TCP SYN package to every port (of the 1000 most used ports) and checking if an ACK package is received. If an ACK is received the port is considered open. Although port scanning can be regarded kind of malicious when done on a system not owned by you, it is not a dos attack when done once and from a single source system.
Related
I have two applications that need to communicate with each other running on the same system.
I've been using the very strange practice of opening a TCP COM channel between the two applications for communication.
Is this practice frowned-upon in anyway? Is there any alternative (apart from using stdio, not possible due to other reasons).
Is there a restriction on maximum transfer rate and/or any latency involved (compared to piped stdio)?
I'm using the local (127.0.0.1) address for both server and client, will the connection be guaranteed to stay within the local machine itself or could it relay off the nearest router before coming back to itself and does the network card influence the properties of the connection at all?
I worked on a system a while ago with Java. and I was looking for the same question. I don't have much experience with it. But I ended up using tcp connections for communications for the following advantages:
1) The ability to put the different application in different servers in the future if needed to.
2) The applications are totaly independent. one application could crash without effecting the other one. If the working application then tries to connect it gets an error and you can handle that.
I saw this used in many other type of applications. So I went with it and it is working fine. But you have to be carefull and handle networks errors and IO errors and closing all open sockets after finishing with the connection. I was only closing the socket from the client end so I ended up with many CLOSE_WAIT ports in the server.
Regards,
It's pretty common to use TCP for inter-application communication.
Performance should not be an issue.
Sockets On Same Machine For Windows and Linux
You should consider security. What will happen if another user on the machine connects to the port, how will the application authenticate etc.
I wrote an server application in erlang and a client in C#. They communicate through 3 TCP ports. Port numbers are hardcoded. Now I'd like to do this dynamically. This is my first time doing network programming, so please pardon my inability to use proper terminology :-D
What I would like to do is make a supervisor which would accept a TCP connection from a client on a previously known port (say, 10000, or whatever), then find 3 free ports, start a server application on those 3 ports and tell the client those port numbers so client can connect to the server.
My particular problem is: how do I find 3 ports which are not in use? (clarification: which module:fun() to use to find a free port?)
My general problem is: I'm sure this kind of stuff (one server allocating ports and redirecting clients) is quite common network programming problem and there should be a bunch of (erlang-specific or general) resources about this, but I just don't have the terminology to google it out.
According to the Erlang documentation here, if the Port argument to the gen_tcp:listen/2 function is 0, then the OS will assign any available port to the socket. The latter can then be retreived using inet:port/1 .
You can therefore do something like this :
{ok, Listen} = gen_tcp:listen(0, [Options]),
Port = inet:port(Listen).
just in case you didn't know that - you dont have to allocate new ports for each client, it's perfectly fine to have all clients to connect to same ports
UPDATE:
if there is a reason to allocate new ports for incoming clients then it's far beyond your first "introduction to network programming" program.
separate ports could mean you want to completely isolate environments of different groups of clients. it's comparable to providing completely different IP addresses to connect to. if you want to write a simple ping-pong program - you don't need it. and i honestly believe you will never need to use such solution in your whole life - that's how incredibly rarely it is.
regarding cpu/ports overhead - allocating ports and starting a server that listens to that port is already far bigger overhead than accepting clients on same port.
You need to avoid commonly known ports, ftp, http, smtp etc, But I don't think there is any master list of which ports other software uses that you should avoid. I think your best bet is to come up with a range of ports you want to use. Check at runtime if anybody else answers ( is using the ports ) on the numbers you choose dynamically, if not issue it to the client.
So, I've taken a handful of programming courses(object-oriented, web) but never had "hands-on" projects where it's outside of coding.
Now I'm trying to figure out what these SSH stuff is about, I can't even figure out which client to use, so picked filezilla for now.
My question is, where can I read more about these terms like ports, and whatnots, in a way so I'm not learning aimlessly.
Thanks!
Basically, SSH is a way to command another computer exactly what to do over the Internet. You can execute any commend the remote system has, and your user has permission for.
The Internet
The Internet runs on a series of protocols collectively named TCP/IP. TCP/IP defines a way to find and address individual computers (IP) and a way to communicate between them (TCP).
You can think of computers on the Internet as a large collection of office buildings all close together. Each office has the exact same number of windows: 65535. Offices (computers) communicate by stringing channels between windows (ports). Each channel has two ends, called sockets. Each socket is associated with a port on the respective computer. We send data back and forth, and then the connection is closed.
Client/Server
There are two types of computers on the Internet: clients, and servers. Clients request information, and servers provide it. Ports 1-1024 are reserved for servers, 1 port per protocol. The full list is here, and as you can see, it is not without contention.
Let's say you visit a website
Your browser, the client program, sees that you typed "stackoverflow.com", and using DNS, discovers that stackoverflow.com is computer number 64.34.119.12. This is it's IP address. It allows your computer to find the network stackoverflow.com is located in, route to it, and establish a connection to the Stack Overflow web server. The web server is a program that accepts client requests from a browser like yours.
They speak in a protocol called HTTP - it allows your browser to request a page determined by a URL. The server sees the request, runs a program to construct a web page (or retrieves an HTML file, image, or any other file), and sends the result back to the browser. Port 80 has been reserved for HTTP. That means, your computer chooses a random port to connect from, and connects to port #80 on the server.
Unix and the shell
The majority of the Web (The Internet, even) runs on an OS called Linux (a Unix variant), instead of something like Windows. Unix systems possess a command-line interface, running a program called a "shell", which is a direct interface to the system. The shell accepts input, one command at a time. You type text in, and it spits out the out put of the command.
Secure Shell
SSH allows you to do this securely. All data traffic is encrypted using a well-studied published "public-key" cryptographic system. (In fact, it was major news when a vulnerability was discovered in a supporting encryption scheme, see these advisories).
SSH is a protocol commonly running on port 22. Anyone with a computer on the Internet (not behind a firewall) can run an SSH server, and allow users to connect to it and execute commands.
The majority of systems administrators and software developers using Unix on the server use SSH to configure, control, and upload programs to that server (located in some data center somewhere).
More
There are many many more details to all of this. Any term or acronym above can be typed into Wikipedia for pretty comprehensive information. There are plenty of books on Unix, Networking, and Web programming.
SSH is originally a secured replacement for telnet. The need for SSH arose from the fact that telnet does not support encryption and therefore everything (commands, output and password) was plainly visible on the network for all to see.
Because in the beginning SSH encryption (based on key exchange) was supposed to be strong (and it was indeed a marked improvement), and was open source, it took off rapidly and several extensions to the protocol were added, especially in the domain of remote file manageent and transfer.
In addition, SSH is used in tunelling and port forwarding configurations.
In the domain of file copy there are several options.
SCP: cp (copy). Inspired by rcp, an early file transfer extension to ssh.
SFTP: SSH File Transfer Protocol, a newer SSH extension to support File copy and browsing (but not really like FTP with 2 ports). It is more feature rich than both scp and ftp. Think of it as a remote file system protocol (however, however somewhat slower than scp).
FTPS: FTP over TLS/SSL. Needs 2 ports like ftp, one for command and one for data. Both connections can be encrypted.
Secure FTP. Real FTP tunelled over SSH.
The site to which you will need to connect probably offers SFTP. You just need to declare the remote server connection configuration in Filezilla site manager. You will need to provide the server ip address or name, the SSH server port, usually 22 but there are other possibilities (you should have been provided with this info) and select sftp as server type). When the connection is established, accept the public key and that should be it.
You can then drop your devs on the remote server.
OS choice
You shall first make a kind of choice between 2 worlds (MS or Linux).
Provided that the Linux community is somehow significantly less reluctant to share explanations. Also you will loose less time by choosing one or the other one, avoiding to wonder the same questions twice, with different answers depending on which OS you chose.
I experienced both, starting to search for solutions in the MS world, that I knew. Big mistake, loss of time. Then I changed, too late, to the Linux world. So I would advice to go straight to the linux OS for learning. Really many distributions for this. I would advice Debian (opened, user friendly, simple, safe, huge community) but you'll get as many proposals as there are admin.
OS understanding
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/l-bash.html
http://tldp.org/LDP/abs/html/
Specific Questions about SSH
It depends a lot on the system you will choose but you could easily build a small client and a small server, then configure both and use ssh. Your 2 servers could even be hosted on the same machine, locally if you wish. Then you will learn how to set up the ssh-client side (often called ssh_config) and the ssh server side (often named sshd_config, with "d" standing for daemon).
Here you can find explanations about ssh for both worlds :
http://support.suso.com/supki/SSH_Tutorial_for_Linux
Some keywords for your google searches
List_of_TCP_and_UDP_port_numbers
ssh-keygen : encrypted keys (private/public),
ssh-add ssh agent
Gentoo keychain
and later but soon if you administrate your server on your own
The two main ones :
1) iptables
You may start with this and then go further with that one
2) fail2ban
this is a complement tool for which you'll find easily plenty of docs
...
Have fun :-)
EDIT: you can easily experience a Linux machine hosted in a windows OS, using virtualization (virtualbox, vm-ware..). It's a safe start and offer a good payback for this time investment. It would allow you to host as many machines (for example one linux server and one linux client) as you wish, in the limits of your HD room.
I assume you need to learn shell scripting. I recommend this book.
Filezilla is a FTP client. Try Putty - free SSH Client. And of course you need Linux server.
If you want to learn about SSH in depth then may I advise you this book SSH: The Secure Shell The Definitive Guide
See here for more info: http://www.snailbook.com/
I've read the book and learned really a lot. It teaches you all about setting up servers, clients, key agents and various (practical) applications.
I am to design a server that needs to serve millions of clients that are simultaneously connected with the server via TCP.
The data traffic between the server and the clients will be sparse, so bandwidth issues can be ignored.
One important requirement is that whenever the server needs to send data to any client it should use the existing TCP connection instead of opening a new connection toward the client (because the client may be behind a firewall).
Does anybody know how to do this, and what hardware/software is needed (at the least cost)?
What operating systems are you considering for this?
If using a Windows OS and using something later than Vista then you shouldn't have a problem with many thousands of connections on a single machine. I've run tests (here: http://www.lenholgate.com/blog/2005/11/windows-tcpip-server-performance.html) with a low spec Windows Server 2003 machine and easily achieved more than 70,000 active TCP connections. Some of the resource limits that affect the number of connections possible have been lifted considerably on Vista (see here: http://www.lenholgate.com/blog/2005/11/windows-tcpip-server-performance.html) and so you could probably achieve your goal with a small cluster of machines. I don't know what you'd need in front of those to route the connections.
Windows provides a facility called I/O Completion Ports (see: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc302334.aspx) which allow you to service many thousands of concurrent connections with very few threads (I was running tests yesterday with 5000 connections saturating a link to a server with 2 threads to process the I/O...). Thus the basic architecture is very scalable.
If you want to run some tests then I have some freely available tools on my blog that allow you to thrash a simple echo server using many thousands of connections (1) and (2) and some free code which you could use to get you started (3)
The second part of your question, from your comments, is more tricky. If the client's IP address keeps changing and there's nothing between you and them that is providing NAT to give you a consistent IP address then their connections will, no doubt, be terminated and need to be re-established. If the clients detect this connection tear down when their IP address changes then they can reconnect to the server, if they can't then I would suggest that the clients need to poll the server every so often so that they can detect the connection loss and reconnect. There's nothing the server can do here as it can't predict the new IP address and it will discover that the old connection has failed when it tries to send data.
And remember, your problems are only just beginning once you get your system to scale to this level...
This problem is related to the so-called C10K problem. The C10K page lists a large number of good resources for addressing the problems you will encounter when you try to allow thousands of clients to connect to the same server.
I've come across the APE Project
a while back. It seems like a dream come true. They can support up to 100k concurrent clients on a single node. Spread them across 10 or 20 nodes, and you can serve millions. Perfect for RESTful applications. Might want to look deeper for any shared namespace. One drawback is that this is a standalone server, as in supplementary to a web server. This server is of course Open Source, so any cost is hardware/ISP related.
You cannot use UDP. If the client sends a request and you don't reply immediately, a router is going to forget the reverse route in 30 seconds or less, so your server will never be able to reply to the client.
TCP is the only option, and it, too, will give you headaches. Most routers are going to forget the route and/or drop the connection after a few minutes, so your client/server code is going to have to send "keep alives" fairly often.
I recommend setting up a "sniffer", to see how the phone companies are staying in touch with your smartphone for their "push" technology. Copy whatever they're doing, because that stuff works!
As Greg mentioned, the problem you are describing is C10K (or rather "C1M" in your case )
I recently made a simple TCP echo server on linux that scales very well with the number of sessions (only tested up to 200.000 though), by using the epoll queue. On BSD, you have something similar called kqueue.
You can check out the code if you want to. Hope this helps and good luck!
EDIT: As noted in the comments below, my original assertion that there is a 64K limit based on the number of ports is incorrect, however there is a 32K limit on the number of socket handles, so my suggested design is valid.
With a typical TCP/IP server design, you're limited in the number of simultaneous open connections you can have. The server has one listening port, and when a client connects to it the server makes an accept call, and that creates a new socket on a random port for the rest of the connection.
To handle more than 64K simultaneous connections I think you need to use UDP instead. You only need one port for the server to listen on, and you need to manage the connections using a 32-bit client ID in the packet data instead of having a separate port for each client. The 32-bit client ID could be the client's IP address, and the client can listen on a known UDP port for messages coming back from the server. That port would be the only one that needs to be open on the firewall.
With this approach, your only limitation is how quickly you can handle and respond to UDP messages. With millions of clients, even sparse traffic could give you large spikes, and if you don't read the packets fast enough your input queue will fill up and you'll start dropping packets. The C10K page Greg points to will give you strategies for that.
I am considering using SCTP instead of TCP for a p2p app written in C. Should I do it? Also how does the speed of SCTP compare to the speed of TCP?
EDIT:
I found that SCTP can be tunneled over UDP with the only problem being tunneled SCTP is not interoperable with untunneled SCTP.
Have you considered whether your target systems will all have SCTP pre-installed on them or whether your application will need to include SCTP itself? In my experience I would not expect all systems to have SCTP installed on them, and I would expect them not to if it were Windows.
If you include SCTP in the application itself then that will more than double the number of messages being passed into an out of the Kernel which will impact performance when compared with using the pre installed TCP.
Have you considered what benefits you want from SCTP? You mentioned fault tolerance but for this to work with SCTP it requires the application to have multiple ethernet ports and and IP addresses. Is this likely on your app?
As much as I love SCTP (!) I would seriously consider sticking with TCP unless you are sure SCTP is needed or unless you control the hosts your app is deployed on.
Regards
If it's for a local area network, sure go for it.
Note however that if you plan to use it on the open internet many consumer grade firewalls aren't flexible enough to permit unrecognised IP protocols through them.
How does it help you?
You're P2P, so every peer must have at least one socket open to every other peer.
If you've got a socket open, then you can do everything you need to do over that. If you've taken the approach of one socket per file and you have multiple files being tranferred concurrently between two given peers, then SCTP will save you one socket per file. However, on a normal P2P network of any size, you will almost never have multiple files being transferred concurrently between two peers.
Just have one socket and have your own little protocol; send a packet with a header, the header indicates content type, e.g. a command, or part a file - and if so, which file, and which byte range.
Of course, you get a little overhead for that, whereas if you have one socket for commands and one per file, you're more efficient. Is saving one socket per peer (assuming one download at a time) worth the time/hassle/complexity of using SCTP?