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.

Key insight

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.
Attack surface

Negotiation and fallbacks are where security silently becomes optional—treat them as hostile.

Model & invariants

Defense is about cost asymmetry. If the attacker spends 11 and you spend 100100, you lose.

CostdefenseCostattack (per unit of damage prevented).\mathrm{Cost}_\text{defense} \ll \mathrm{Cost}_\text{attack}\ \text{(per unit of damage prevented)}.

Treat observability as a dependency: protect it from overload and manipulation.

Define which operations fail closed vs fail open. Do it before an incident.

Invariant

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.
Pitfall

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 --> detect

Implementation notes

Keep evidence pipelines alive: you can’t respond blind.

Rule of thumb

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 radius

Verification 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.
Operational note

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

1.
Let’s Encrypt. Let’s Encrypt Incident Reports [Internet]. Web; Available from: https://community.letsencrypt.org/c/incidents/16/l/top
2.
LearnTLA. Learn TLA+ [Internet]. Web; Available from: https://learntla.com/