Monthly research note. Theme: Adversarial Infrastructure & Global Systems.
TL;DR
BGP and Routing Attacks: Engineering for the Internet We Have as an engineering constraint: write down assumptions, make invariants executable, and design operational recovery as part of correctness.
Most failures are boundary failures: parsing, persistence, concurrency, retries, and upgrades.
Key takeaways
- Protect observability: you can’t respond blind, and telemetry can be attacked.
- Degraded modes are security decisions; write them down and test them.
- Engineer cost asymmetry: defense must be cheaper than attack per unit of damage prevented.
- Design rollbacks as part of the happy path.
- Write assumptions down; treat them as interfaces.
Why this matters
- Global dependencies (DNS, routing, PKI) are shared attack surfaces.
- Attackers exploit cost asymmetry: make abuse cheap and defense expensive.
- Degraded modes without explicit policy become accidental vulnerabilities.
- Privacy failures often come from metadata, not plaintext.
Key questions
- What is your degraded-mode behavior (and is it safe)?
- What is the minimum viable recovery path after a catastrophic event?
- Which controls fail first under load: auth, rate limits, storage, or observability?
- Which logs are trustworthy under compromise (append-only, signed, isolated)?
- How do you detect attacks that look like “normal traffic spikes”?
- How do you prevent dependency failures from becoming integrity failures?
Assumptions
- Observability pipelines can be attacked (cardinality explosions, log injection).
- Traffic spikes can be malicious or accidental; you must handle both.
- Attackers can manipulate routing and DNS indirectly (upstream failures, BGP issues).
- Some dependencies will fail open or fail closed unexpectedly.
Non-goals
- Treating degraded modes as “we’ll decide later.”
- Relying on dashboards that vanish during the incident.
Negotiation and fallbacks are where security silently becomes optional—treat them as hostile.
Model & invariants
Defense is about cost asymmetry. If the attacker spends and you spend , you lose.
Treat observability as a dependency: protect it from overload and manipulation.
Define which operations fail closed vs fail open. Do it before an incident.
Monotonicity beats timestamps: counters and epochs survive clock skew.
Security properties
- Authenticity: actions are bound to identity and purpose.
- Evidence: critical actions emit verifiable audit events.
- Integrity: invalid transitions are rejected (and detectable).
- Least authority: privileges are scoped by purpose and time.
Failure modes
- Recovery paths that only work when nothing is broken.
- Config drift that weakens security posture over time.
- Observability gaps during incidents (missing evidence).
- Mixed-version behavior that violates assumptions silently.
A recovery plan that isn’t exercised will fail when you need it.
Design sketch
flowchart LR
attack["Attack"] --> detect["Detect"]
detect --> contain["Contain"]
contain --> recover["Recover"]
recover --> learn["Learn/Regress"]
learn --> detectImplementation notes
Keep evidence pipelines alive: you can’t respond blind.
Acknowledge only after durability (or make “ack” explicitly best-effort).
Degraded-mode table (example):
Operation | Normal | Under attack | Rationale
Auth | full | strict | prevent abuse
Reads | full | cached/limited| protect core
Writes | full | queued/limited| preserve integrity
Admin | full | JIT + MFA | reduce blast radiusVerification strategy
- Observability stress: cardinality explosions and sampling under attack.
- Incident replay: reconstruct timeline from evidence pipelines.
- Policy tests: fail closed/open behaviors are unit-tested.
- Game days: simulate DDoS, dependency failure, and credential abuse.
- Dependency chaos: DNS issues, cert failures, upstream outages.
Operational notes
- Keep recovery paths simple: restore from known-good, rotate secrets, reissue certs.
- Protect the edge and the evidence: rate limits + SIEM + log integrity.
- Instrument cost: which defenses become expensive and when.
- Make emergency controls quick: feature flags, circuit breakers, safe defaults.
- Document and rehearse degraded-mode policy with on-call rotations.
Design playbooks as protocols: predictable steps, bounded risk, and clear ownership.
What to monitor
- Rollback events and the conditions that triggered them.
- Error budget burn + tail latency under load.
- Admission-control / rate-limit rejections (by reason).
- Authz failures and policy denials (unexpected spikes).
- Retry/timeout rates by endpoint and client cohort.
Rollback plan
- Prefer backward-compatible changes; avoid “flag day” upgrades.
- Define an explicit rollback trigger (metrics + thresholds).
- Use canaries and staged rollout; stop early when signals degrade.
- Preserve evidence (configs, artifacts, audit logs) to reconstruct what changed.
- Keep dual-write / dual-verify windows where appropriate.
Evidence
- Let's Encrypt Incident Reports (1) — Operational failures and recovery in real-world PKI.
- Evidence: Rotation and revocation are operational protocols; extract failure patterns into drills and automated rollbacks.
- Learn TLA+ (2) — Practical entry point for specification and model checking.
- Evidence: Model the smallest thing that can break; use model checking to validate invariants before optimizing.
Open questions
- How do you keep control-plane access during widespread incidents?
- What is your ‘safe mode’ when dependencies fail?
- Which operation, if abused, causes irreversible damage?
- Where do you pay cost asymmetry today—and can you flip it?
Checklist
- Failure modes enumerated with mitigations.
- Safety properties stated as invariants.
- Assumptions listed and reviewed.
- Rollback plan rehearsed and automated.
- Costs bounded (CPU/memory/bandwidth) under adversarial inputs.
- Telemetry captures correctness signals.
Further reading
- Cloudflare Outage (July 2, 2019) Postmortem — A concrete example of global failure, containment, and recovery lessons.
- Let's Encrypt Incident Reports — Operational failures and recovery in real-world PKI.
- RFC 4271: BGP-4 — Routing is part of your threat model whether you like it or not.
- RFC 6480: An Infrastructure to Support Secure Internet Routing — RPKI basics and why routing security is hard operationally.
- Learn TLA+ — Practical entry point for specification and model checking.
- Site Reliability Engineering (Google) — Error budgets, incident response, and reliability as an engineering discipline.