Re: Honeyclients info

David Jiménez Domínguez <[email protected]> Wed, 20 Apr 2005 19:20:35 -0500
Newsgroups gmane.comp.security.honeypots
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Hi Kathy!!

As I can see, is like looking for attacks  from HTTP, FTP, DNS
servers..... (If I'm not wrong)

but, does the idea is to do the scan by itself (like a spider) or
while I'm using my web browser?

Is it going to report the events to a centralized sever... (may be a
honeyserver)?

It looks like a interesting idea... just like dinamic honeypots....



2005/4/20, Kathy Wang <[email protected]>:
> Hi David,
> 
> Saw your message, and thought I should respond...
> 
> I first came up with the concept of honeyclients back in November
> of last year, as a way to detect new attacks. As great as the honeypot
> technology is, I consider it to be a passive device. This means it
> sits on the network, and waits. Many users nowadays are experiencing
> attacks from malicious servers, and existing honeypots cannot detect
> these types of attacks.
> 
> Honeyclients are the opposite of honeypots. The purpose of a honeyclient
> is to go out and hit servers, thus looking for bad stuff. These servers
> can serve HTTP or other services such as DNS, FTP, P2P, etc.
> 
> I wrote a whitepaper last year about the types of attacks that can be
> detected using honeyclients, and plan on releasing a honeyclient tool
> at RECON. Unfortunately, I cannot release the whitepaper at this time.
> The honeyclient will be a BSD-licensed HTTP honeyclient, so you'll be
> able to try it out for yourself, shortly.
> 
> Kathy
> 
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 01:09:39PM -0500, David Jiménez Domínguez <[email protected]> stated:
> >Hi folks!!!
> >
> >Do you know what a honeyclient is??
> >
> >What is the difference between a high-interaction honeypot and a honeyclient?
> >
> >Do yo have docs about it?
> >
> >In Recon 2005 there is a speaker (Kathy Wang) who is going to speak
> >about it, but I'm not going to be there.... I have seen that some
> >honetnet projects are moving to this kind of technology.... but what
> >is it?
> >
> >------------------
> >David.
>