Abstract:
A system and methods utilizing the network layer to provide security in distributed computing systems in order to thwart denial of service attacks. The system and methods of the present invention utilize puzzles placed at the network layer level to protect against denial of service attacks. The system and methods of the present invention advantageously provide a robust and flexible solution to support puzzle issuance at arbitrary points in the network, including end hosts, firewalls, and routers and thereby a defense against denial of service attacks.

Description:
[0001]     This application claims priority of provisional application U.S. Ser. No. 60/498,204, filed Aug. 26, 2003. 
     
    
       [[0002]]     The U.S. Government has a paid-up license in this invention and the right in limited circumstances to require the patent owner to license others on reasonable terms as provided for by the terms of NSF ANI-0230960 awarded by the National Science Foundation 
     
    
     FIELD OF THE INVENTION  
       [0003]     The present invention relates to providing security in distributed computing systems. More specifically, the present invention relates to a system and methods for using client puzzles to protect against denial of service attacks.  
       BACKGROUND  
       [0004]     The Internet is a publicly available internationally interconnected system of computers (and the information and services provided to users) that uses the IP suite of packet switching communications protocol. In addition to the beneficial communications, the traffic on the Internet includes an enormous amount of potentially deleterious communications.  
         [0005]     One form of such deleterious communication involves computer viruses and worms. Computer viruses and worms are programs that make copies of themselves and spread by attaching themselves to a host, often damaging the host in the process. The host may be another computer program, such as an operating system, which then may infect the applications transferred to other computers. Viruses take advantage of standard network protocols such as the World Wide Web, e-mail, and file sharing systems to spread. Notable computer viruses and related worms include the Sasser worm, the MyDoom, the Sobig worm, the Blaster worm, the SQL Slammer worm, the Klez worm, the Code Red worm, the Sircam worm, the VBS/Loveletter worm, and the Melissa worm.  
         [0006]     Other deleterious communications involve the use of packets. A packet is the fundamental unit of information carriage in all modern computer networks. Packets can be used to mount denial of service attacks (also identified herein with the acronym “DoS”) or distributed denial of service attacks (also identified herein with the acronym “DDoS”), and distributed reflected denial of service attacks (also identified herein with the acronym “DRDoS”). For purposes of this invention, the term DoS attacks will commonly refer also to DDoS and DRDoS attacks.  
         [0007]     A DoS attack is an attack on a computer system or networking involving the misuse of packets that causes a loss of service to users (e.g., loss of network connectivity) but not to gain access to the systems. DoS attacks can be perpetrated in a number of ways, such as: (1) consumption of computational resources, such as bandwidth, disk space or central processing unit (CPU) time; (2) disruption of configuration information, such as routing information; and (3) disruption of physical network components.  
         [0008]     A DDoS attack is a more advanced and more dangerous form of DoS flooding attack. A DDoS attack doesn&#39;t use a single source to attack a target, but instead multiple synchronized launch sites. In a distributed attack, the attacking computer hosts are often personal computers with broadband connections to the Internet. A single master program is installed on one system while agent programs are installed on other computers, thereby turning them later into what are termed “slaves” or “zombies”. The master program machine—termed also the “Zombie Master”—then is used to instruct the agent programs—in “zombie” machines—to launch simultaneous DoS attacks against a target or targets. The resultant attack is massive and anonymous since many slave computers are used and without their owner&#39;s knowledge. The initial instigator cannot clearly be traced. This is the organization used by many distributed attack tools—such as the windows-hosted “Evil bots” and the “Evil goat Evil bot”. With numerous slave hosts, the services of even the largest and most well-connected websites can be denied. Many worms such as Code Red effectively launch a DDoS attack. All DDoS attacks employ the standard suite of communications protocols used to connect hosts on the Internet, termed Internet Protocol (“IP”) messages, but employ them in non-standard ways.  
         [0009]     More specifically, DDoS attacks involve bombarding a web server with a flood of fake requests to prevent legitimate requests from reaching a location and may crash the server. The attack is coordinated with various other hacked computers making it difficult to identify and block the source of the attack. First, an intruder finds one or more systems on the Internet that can be compromised and exploited, typically with a high-bandwidth connection to the Internet. Second, the compromised system is loaded with hacking and cracking tools such as scanners, exploit tools, root kits, and DDoS programs. This system becomes the master which finds a number of other systems that can be compromised and exploited. The attacker scans large ranges of IP network addresses to find systems running services known to have security vulnerabilities. Automated tools remotely compromise a number of hosts and install the DDoS agents on those systems. The actual DDoS attack occurs when the attacker runs a program at the master system that communicates with all hosts.  
         [0010]     A DRDoS attack is a more advanced malicious packet flood attack. In the case of a DRDoS attack, the compromised hosts send their flood traffic to a third party, which unwittingly sends a reply to the forged source/target of the flood. This added stop is used to further obfuscate the true location of the compromised hosts, and in some cases, to multiply the effective attack bandwidth. In other words, a malicious hacker located on the Internet floods Internet routers with connection-requesting packets. The requesting packets carry the fraudulent (spoofed) source protocol. Therefore, the routers believe that the packets are coming from a reliable source, and they reply.  
         [0011]     One solution that has been offered to defend against distributed denial of service attacks involves the use of “client puzzles”, and, in particular, “application layer puzzles”. Client puzzles are generated by the server and solved by the client. To understand the current defense strategy provided by the application layer use of client puzzles, one must understand the Opens Systems Interconnect (“OSI”) model of network architecture. The OSI architecture is split between seven layers (from highest to lowest): 1. physical layer; 2. data link layer; 3. network layer; 4. transport layer; 5. session layer; 6. presentation layer; and 7. applications layer. Each layer uses the layer immediately below it and renders services to the layer above. Of particular relevance to the present invention are the network layer, the transport layer, and the application layer.  
         [0012]     As stated, the network layer is the third lowest layer in the OSI seven layer model. At that level, the routing of packets of data from a sender to a receiver via the data link layer is determined. The most common network layer protocol is the “Internet Protocol or “IP”. This is the only protocol that is common across all forms of Internet communication.  
         [0013]     The transport layer is in the middle layer of the OSI seven layer model. It is at this layer that it is determined how the network layer may be used to facilitate the provision of an error-free, point-to-point connection so that one host can send messages to another host without corruption and in correct order. The transport layer establishes and dissolves connections between hosts. One example of a transport layer protocol is the Transmittal Control Protocol (“TCP”).  
         [0014]     The application layer is the top layer of the OSI seven layer model. At this layer, issues such as network transparency, resource allocation, and problem partitioning are handled. One example of an application layer protocol is the Hyper-Text Transport Protocol (“HTTP”).  
         [0015]     Under normal conditions, a server accepts any connection request from any client. To effect a client puzzle defense, a server or network that is to be protected generates and sends to a client that is requesting connection a cryptographic puzzle that the client must answer correctly before it is given service. The server allocates the resources necessary to support a connection only to those clients that respond correctly to the puzzle within a predetermined time period. While the non-attacking client will experience only a slight delay in obtaining a connection during an attack, the attacker—given the high volume of connection requests generated by it—will require an incredible amount of processing power to sustain the number of requests necessary for a noticeable interruption in service, thereby thwarting the attack. The client puzzle defense, however, has only been used as an application and transport layer defense against attacks. Placing a defense at such layers does not provide a robust defense.  
         [0016]     Therefore, a need exists for a robust defense against all types of denial of service attacks across all forms of Internet communication. The present invention satisfies the demand by placing a puzzle defense system within the network layer to protect all applications from DoS attacks.  
       SUMMARY  
       [0017]     The system and methods of the present invention defend against forms of deleterious Internet communication such as a variety of DoS attacks. The system and methods utilize client puzzles. Puzzles are advantageous in that they are resilient to denial of service attacks itself because the protocols and implementations of them can be made efficient. The ability to generate, give out, and remember puzzles are orders of magnitude faster and cheaper than the ability to answer them. Specifically, it is extremely hard for flooding attacks to saturate a system&#39;s ability to issue puzzles and it is possible for the defended system to support a large number of puzzle answers using mechanisms such as cookies. (For purposes of this application, a cookie is a little piece of information delivered to a client by a server that contains information that can be retrieved by the server later.) Placing puzzles at the network layer, not at the application layer, gives the present invention particular robust qualities.  
         [0018]     The puzzles of the present invention are resilient to circumvention or misuse. In particular, the protocols and implementation guard against replay attacks and answer “hi-jacking”. (“Hi-jacking” is considered to be the capability of using someone else&#39;s answer to get access to a service.) With client puzzles at the network layer, it is not possible for third parties to deny clients access to services by inserting themselves into or tampering with the puzzle protocols. Subversive attacks are especially important to guard against if puzzles are to be implemented at the network IP layer. Consider a router that receives a puzzle from a downstream node. (A node is considered to be an alternate network device or an end host.) Due to the weakness of the Internet&#39;s identification mechanisms and the distributed nature of the routing infrastructure, the router is unable to determine the authenticity of the puzzle issuer&#39;s identity and whether or not the issuer is actually providing any service. Using the methods and protocols described, an attacker either spoofing the IP address of a legitimate source or claiming to be a legitimate source cannot disable the victim by falsely triggering the puzzle mechanisms against it.  
         [0019]     Puzzles have clear similarity to explicit congestion notification and network congestion control in general. Puzzles are effectively mandatory multi-resolution congestion controls. As with congestion control, control algorithms are essential for proper operation. There are several issues that make the control of puzzles difficult. The first is that puzzles can be adjusted to many levels. For a particular node, the network or end host has the ability to dynamically determine the level of difficulty of the puzzle that is appropriate in order to control the node&#39;s behavior. The second is the same puzzle had non-uniform impact across different nodes.  
         [0020]     There are many benefits for thwarting DoS attacks, for example, eliminating downtime, reducing expenses associated with the attacks, reducing or slow down spam, maintaining service in times of heavy load induced by DoS attacks. Further, network puzzles can be applied to all communication from a client. Attacks that use seemingly innocent communication channels for coordination can be thwarted by having difficult puzzles applied to the coordination traffic in addition to the attack traffic. In addition, while being able to defend against a variety of in-network attacks, network puzzles can also be used to make previously voluntary protocols mandatory. For example, network layer puzzles can be used to enforce mandatory congestion control. If a server becomes congested, it can force its clients to slow down by using harder puzzles.  
         [0021]     The present invention provides an effective puzzle-based alternative to TCP&#39;s slow-start, fast recovery, and congestion avoidance algorithms and current approaches for active queue management. The present invention provides much better control via multi-resolution congestion feedback as well as the ability to handle non-responsive flows. As an interesting side effect, puzzle-based congestion control replaces the arbitrary bias against clients with long round-trip times with an equally arbitrary bias against clients with slow CPUs. In particular, one embodiment of the present invention places puzzles in a layer that is common to all network activity, the IP layer.  
         [0022]     Specifically, properties of functions such as congestion control and DoS prevention are destroyed if any adjacent or underlying protocol in a layer does not implement it. As IP packet flooding thwarts DoS-resistant authentication protocols, the placement of puzzles in the network layer (such as in IP) permits the network layer to no longer be the weakest link. Thus, the present invention is a puzzle protocol and algorithm at the network layer.  
         [0023]     The present invention is directed to a system and methods of mitigating the effects of DOS attacks, particularly DDoS attacks and DRDoS attacks.  
         [0024]     One object of the present invention is to provide a system and methods of providing protection against simultaneous attacks across a wide range of applications and protocols by placing efficient, scalable, fine grained, adaptable and controllable puzzles at a layer common to all network applications, the network layer. Thus, the protocol is flexible to support puzzle issuance at arbitrary points in the network, including end hosts, firewalls and routers.  
         [0025]     For purposes of this application, a firewall is a set of related programs, located at a network server that protects the resources of a private network from users of other networks. Basically, a firewall, working closely with a router program, filters all network packets to determine whether to forward them toward their destination. A firewall is often installed away from the rest of the network so that no incoming request can get directly at private network resources. Further, a router determines the next network point to which a data packet should be forwarded toward its destination. The router is connected to at least two networks and determines which way to send each data packet based on its current understanding of the state of the networks it is connected to. Routers create or maintain a table of the available routes and uses this information to determine the best route for a given data packet.  
         [0026]     A further object of the present invention is to provide a system and methods that effectively thwart DoS attacks, enables the puzzles to be scalable, tamper-resistance, fair, and controllable. The protocol supports the issuance of puzzles at arbitrary resource granularities such as on a per host, per flow, or per packet basis. Specifically, puzzles can be issued at any point during the lifetime of a flow provided the system and methods do not limit replay attacks over time and space. Puzzle answers are not valid indefinitely and not usable by other clients. The system prevents attacks from adversaries that do not lie along the path from the client to the issuer, or server.  
         [0027]     An additional object of the present invention is to provide a system and methods that implement the protocol within the fast path of network hardware which gives every network device along the path from the client to the server the choice of participating as a puzzle issuer or not. When no intermediate network devices wish to participate, the server is responsible for issuing puzzles itself. The present invention uses a puzzle to issue firewall protection to the server allowing the server to focus on its original tasks.  
         [0028]     The present invention will be further appreciated, and its attributes and advantages further understood, with reference to the detailed description below of some presently contemplated embodiments, taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, in which: 
     
    
     DRAWINGS  
       [0029]      FIG. 1  shows a computing or communications system according to the present invention;  
         [0030]      FIG. 2  is a network puzzle defense system of the puzzle protocol framework according to the present invention; and  
         [0031]      FIG. 3  is an alternate embodiment of a network puzzle defense system of the puzzle protocol framework according to the present invention. 
     
    
     DETAILED DESCRIPTION  
       [0032]      FIG. 1  is a computing or communications system  100  according to the present invention. The illustrated system  100  includes a server  102  protected by a firewall  103  and that communicates with a plurality of clients, for example clients  104 - 106 . Router  108  can route packets from a plurality of computers or servers  102  based on network layer information and routing tables, often constructed by routing protocols based on communication that takes place through a network  107 .  
         [0033]     Network  107  includes a set of layers  50 : physical layer  51 ; data link layer  52 ; network layer  53 ; transport layer  54 ; session layer  55 ; presentation layer  56 ; and applications layer  57 . Each of the layers  50  uses the layer immediately below it and renders services to the layer above. A solution to defend against DoS attacks involves the use of “client puzzles” placed at the network layer because it is shared across all applications. One example of such a solution is “IP layer puzzles”. The puzzle defense system  200  ( FIG. 2 ) is placed on the network layer  53  that is shared across all applications to simultaneously protect all applications against DoS attacks.  
         [0034]     Network  107  can include any type of wire or wireless communication channel which couples computing nodes. This includes, for example, a local area network, a wide are a network or a combination of networks. For purposes of the present invention, network  107  includes the Internet. The Internet may be hosted by an Internet service provider or ISP.  
         [0035]     Server  102  and clients  104 - 106  include any type of computer system, for example, a computer system based on a microprocessor, a mainframe computer, a digital signal processor, a portable computing device, a personal organizer, a device controller, and a computation engine. Clients  104 - 106  communicate across the network  107 , and the server  102  services requests from the clients  104 - 106  for computation. The present invention utilizes a network  107  at which client puzzles are requested to protect the system  100  against a variety of DoS attacks including DDoS.  
         [0036]     The network-level puzzle protocol of the present invention clearly supports constant-state operation. By adopting nonce mechanisms used in, for example, cookies and in other security protocols, the protocol of the present invention allows a server to issue puzzles and verify their answers without having to store additional states. (For purposes of this application, a nonce is a random value sent in an authentication communications protocol exchange, often used to detect replay attacks. A cookie is a little piece of information delivered to a client by a server that contains information that can be checked by the server later.)  
         [0037]      FIG. 2  illustrates the basic protocol of the present invention that supports a constant-state operation at the server and client. The protocol functions at the network layer  53  and is unique to the system. The only state required is a set of randomly-generated, periodically-updated client nonces and server nonces that are kept secret from others.  
         [0038]     In the one method of the present invention shown  FIG. 2 , a network puzzle defense system  200  is shown in which each client, e.g., clients  104 ,  104  and or  106 , or proxy (see  FIG. 3 ) acting on behalf of the client, attaches a nonce including a cache packet  204  and cookie  206  to a first packet  202 . A timestamp can be also attached. The client, e.g., client  104  caches its packets for retransmissions in case of packet loss. The puzzle issuer, that is server  102  the network device or end host which issues the puzzle. Client can be the client  104  or proxy  109  that solves the puzzles.  
         [0039]     The puzzle protocol begins with a client request stream that consists either of packets or connection requests. The client keeps track of a periodically updated, randomly-generated, nonce array indexed by a timestamp. Preferably, a circular nonce array can be used. Because a nonce is kept secret from all others and changes with time, it is easy to tell whether or not an attempt at replay or reproduction of a puzzle or answer is legitimate. The nonce and timestamp within a cookie can be compared directly to actual nonces and timestamps at the client or server. If they are valid, the attempt is authorized, otherwise the attempt is not authorized.  
         [0040]     New nonces are generated and placed in the array replacing older expired nonces. In addition, a client managed expiry time is added to each nonce entry to give the client control over how long its nonces remain valid. The client sends a client cookie with each request or packet consisting of a nonce and a timestamp. This can be done using a separate option or using unused fields in protocol headers, such as the IP identifier field.  
         [0041]     The packet  202 , with cache packet  204  and cookie  206  is transferred to the server  102  via the Internet  214 . If the server  102 , router  108 , or firewall  103  is configured to request that the client, e.g., client  104 , solve a puzzle  208  before forwarding on the packet received from the client  104 , the system drops the packet  210 . Otherwise, the system forwards the packet  212 . If the packet is dropped, it is simply deleted by the router  108  or firewall  103 . If the packet is forwarded  212 , it is simply passed to the appropriate interface based on what the routing table indicates (i.e. it is processed as normal packets are in routers). If the system recognizes the packet as communication that is deleterious  102 , it drops the packet  210  and the system issues to the client  104  a puzzle. The system can be configured to recognize deleterious communication from standard mechanisms such as firewall rule sets, known lists of compromised or malicious machines (supplied by Dshield or by Spam blacklists), or intrusion detection system information (such as Snort). For purposes of the application, an issuer may not only be a server  102 , but also a router  108 , firewall  103 , or proxy  109  each having the capability of generating a puzzle along the path of communication.  
         [0042]     In order for a server  102  to issue a valid puzzle to the client  104 , the server  102  must echo the client nonce and timestamp back in order to get the client to solve a puzzle. A client  104  receiving a puzzle also receives the echoed timestamp, uses the timestamp as an index into its local nonce cache, and verifies that the echoed nonce is still valid before solving the puzzle. An advantage of this method is that client nonces prevent spoofing attacks from malicious third parties that are not along the path of the stream. This also prevents a puzzle issuer from generating and giving back puzzles indefinitely to the client, when the client is no longer receiving service from it. Puzzle issuers must have received a recent nonce from the client in order to issue a valid puzzle.  
         [0043]     In addition to the issuer generating a puzzle and answer, the server further generates a hash of the answer, the server nonce, the puzzle expiration time, the puzzle maturity time, and the flow identifier. This hash allows the server to check the client&#39;s subsequent answer without having to store the answer itself. It also binds the puzzle and subsequent answer to the original packet. The client can not attach the answer to any other communication through the issuer. Finally, the hash prevents the client from re-using the answer indefinitely.  
         [0044]     A hash is a one-way function that is infeasible to reverse the process to determine the original message. Also, a hash function will not produce the same message digest from two different inputs. An algorithm that maps or translates one set of bits into another (generally smaller) set in such a way that: A message yields the same result every time the algorithm is executed using the same message as input. It is computationally infeasible for a message to be derived or reconstituted from the result produced by the algorithm or to find two different messages that produce the same hash result using the same algorithm. Among its functions, the hash binds the puzzle and its answer specifically to the flow&#39;s packet.  
         [0045]     The client nonce ensures that the issuer is actually along the path of the communication and that the puzzles are not being spoofed by a third party. The secret server nonce is used to validate that an answer is correct. The hash is generated using the server nonce and the answer. The server checks the client&#39;s answer by recalculating the hash when the client has calculated and attached the answer in its retransmission. The estimated puzzle difficulty level, the puzzle maturity time, and the puzzle expiration time may be optionally sent. Sending this information serves several purposes. It allows the server to tightly bind the time in which the puzzle is valid allowing it to pre-issue puzzles ahead of time. The mechanisms also allow the client to determine whether or not it has the resources available to answer the puzzle in time and to allow for a smooth transition between puzzle answers. Finally, sending the cookie allows the server to verify the answer and the timestamps without having to store each locally.  
         [0046]     Upon receiving a request or packet that triggers the puzzle mechanisms, the puzzle issuer, e.g., server  102 , generates and dispatches a puzzle  216  to the client  104  via a packet  216 . The packet, for example, can be an Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMP) packet. There are many types of ICMP packets including the ICMP puzzle message that is an aspect of the present invention. The ICMP puzzle message delivers the puzzle to the end-host. Again, the issuer  102  may further generate a server cookie consisting of a server timestamp, an estimated puzzle difficulty level, a puzzle maturity time, a puzzle expiration time, and a hash of the puzzle answer, the server nonce, the server timestamp, and the client cookie.  
         [0047]     The present invention utilizes a server cookie which permits the server  102  to verify a subsequent answer from the client  104  without remembering either the puzzle or the answer. The cookie binds to particular header fields of the packet so that the puzzle (and its answer) can only be used for that particular packet (or a limited set of packets). This prevents port scanning activity. The client, assuming the client nonce was echoed successfully, can then solve the puzzle  218 .  
         [0048]     The client  104 , upon receiving the puzzle, can calculate the solution  218  and attach the answer  222  to a retransmission packet. The client  104  then transmits the packet with the answer, in addition to anything else that it received from the server  102 . The packet transmissions are integrated with other packets of flow  226 . In addition to the answer, it echoes the server cookie which allows the server  102  to validate the puzzle. Upon receipt of this message, the server may take the server timestamp, uses it to index into the server nonce cache to obtain the server nonce, checks that the nonce has not expired, and verifies the cookie by regenerating the hash and comparing it against what the client sent. The inclusion of the puzzle difficulty and the timestamp server also serve a dual purpose in that they allow the server to easily determine how quickly an answer was generated. This can be used as feedback to the puzzle control algorithm to adapt the puzzle difficulty.  
         [0049]     The server  102 , given the answer attached to the packet, recalculates the cookie and compares it against the cookie that the client  102  has echoed. If it is valid  224 , the packet is forwarded. If not, it is dropped and another puzzle is issued.  
         [0050]      FIG. 3  is an alternate embodiment of a network puzzle defense system of the puzzle protocol framework according to the present invention. This embodiment utilizes a proxy  109 . (A proxy is a firewall mechanism that replaces the IP address of a host on the internal (protected) network with its own IP address for all traffic passing through it. In other words, a proxy is an intermediate server that sits between the client and the origin server. A proxy refers to a special kind of server that functions as an intermediate link between a client application and a server. The proxy server intercepts requests for information from the real server and whenever possible, fills the request. When it is unable to do so, the request is forwarded to the real server.)  
         [0051]     The proxy accepts requests from clients, transmits those requests on to the origin server, and then returns the response from the origin server to the client. If several clients request the same content, the proxy can deliver that content from its cache, rather than requesting it from the origin server each time, thereby reducing response time.  
         [0052]     In this embodiment, the first packet of flow  202  is generated from the client  104  and passed to a proxy  109 . The proxy  109  acts on behalf of the client  104 , attaches a nonce including a cache packet  204  and cookie  206  to a first packet  202 . The packet  202 , with cache packet  204  and cookie  206  is transferred to the server  102  via the internet  214 . If the server  102  is configured to request that the proxy  109  solve a puzzle  208  before forwarding on the packet received from the proxy  109 , the system drops the packet  210 . Otherwise, the system forwards the packet  212 . If the packet is dropped, it is simply deleted, for example by the router  108  or firewall  103 . If the packet is forwarded  212 , it is simply passed to the appropriate interface based on what the routing table indicates. If the server  102  drops the packet  210 , the server  102  issues a puzzle and answer  216  to the proxy  109 .  
         [0053]     Upon receiving a request or packet that triggers the puzzle mechanisms, the puzzle issuer, e.g., server  102 , generates and dispatches a puzzle  216  to the proxy  109  via a packet  216 . The proxy  109  solves the puzzle  218 .  
         [0054]     The proxy  109 , upon receiving the puzzle, can calculate the solution  218  and attach the answer  222  to a retransmission packet. The proxy  109  then transmits the packet with the answer, in addition to anything else that it received from the server  102 . The packet transmissions are integrated with other packets of flow  226  from the client  104 .  
         [0055]     The puzzle protocol includes the following components:  
                                   Protocol Field   Description                   Client Cookie   TS C , N C         Server Cookie   TS S , TS m , TS e , h (A, TS C , N C , TS S , N S , TS m , TS e , F)       Puzzle   Puzzle and Parameters (hints, difficulty)       F   Flow identifier       Answer   Puzzle Answer       TS C     Client Logical Timestamp       N C     Client Nonce       TS S     Issuer Timestamp       N S     Issuer Nonce       TS m     Puzzle Maturity Time       TS e     Puzzle Expiry Time       h( )   Keyed hash function                  
 
         [0056]     While the puzzle protocol framework allows for constant state server operation with some protection against replay attacks, puzzles at the network layer must also support fine-grained control of high-speed links and high throughput servers.  
         [0057]     Irrespective of any puzzle algorithm used in conjunction with the present invention, in terms of efficiency, the puzzle generates and the answer is verified in the shortest length of time possible in order to support large streams of packets and connections from a vast number of clients. In terms of granularity, it is possible to finely control end-point behavior with puzzles to maintain high utilization. The present invention operates using any puzzle mechanism, for example, time-lock puzzles, hash-reversal puzzles, multiple hash-reversal puzzles, and hint-based hash-reversal puzzles.  
         [0058]     Time-lock puzzles advantageously control the particular amount of computation time a client must expend in order to solve the puzzle. One of the more promising approaches for implementing time-lock puzzles is based on the notion of repeated squaring: an inherently sequential process that forces the client to compute in a tight loop for a pre-determined amount of time. With such time-lock puzzles, the server estimates the number of squaring operations a client can perform per second (S), and determines the amount of time it wants a client to spend in solving the puzzle (T). Given this, it calculates t=T×S, the number of “squarings” that must be performed to solve the puzzle and forces the client to calculate b=a 2t (mod n). For the present invention, it is important to note that puzzle generation is limited by the calculation of two values:
 
 e= 2 t (mod(( p− 1)( q− 1))) and  b=a   e (mod  pq ).
 
         [0059]     Hash-reversal puzzles force clients to reverse hashes calculated at the server. To provide a variety of difficulty levels, such puzzles are typically based on reversing a one-way hash given the original input with a certain number of bits (n) erased. The client must perform a brute-force search on the remaining bits of input by hashing each pattern in the space until it finds the answer. Since the hashes can be performed very quickly and are compact, puzzle generation times and puzzle sizes are smaller than that of time-lock puzzles. Unlike time-lock puzzles, however, hash-based puzzles of adjacent difficulties vary by a factor of two. Reversing a hash with n bits of the input string erased is twice as hard as reversing a hash with n−1 bits of the input string erased.  
         [0060]     Granularity problem is mitigated by randomizing the difficulty level so that the aggregate difficulty can be adjusted at a finer granularity. Alternatively, multiple “sub-puzzles” or multiple has-reversal puzzles of varying number of bits are attached to force the client to solve each. For example, assuming each hash requires u amount of work, if the difficulty required calls for (2 10 +2 8 )×u units of work, one could send one puzzle of 10 bits and one puzzle of 8 bits to the client instead of sending either a single 10-bit puzzle or a single 11-bit puzzle. The use of multiple sub-puzzles requires an understanding or how it impacts the puzzle granularity across the range of difficulties it covers. Unlike time-lock puzzles, which provide uniform granularity across puzzle difficulty, multiple hash-based puzzles provide finer granularity at lower ranges of work with gaps steadily increasing as the puzzle difficulty does. In order to maintain fine-grained control across heavier workloads and with faster client CPU speeds, the number of sub-puzzles given to a client must slowly increase. While dialing in the granularity is important, hash-based puzzles also have a problem in that their solution time can vary considerably based on how lucky the client is in its search. A search could terminate after the first try or after the 2 n  try. When applied over a significant number of puzzles (as would be the case for network puzzles), the average difficulty will converge to the desired level.  
         [0061]     While multiple sub-puzzles can improve puzzle granularity, it does so via a linear increase in generation time and cost. Because of this, one embodiment of this invention uses another mechanism for delivering fine-grained puzzles in which a single n-bit puzzle is given to the client along with a randomly calculated range of values that the answer falls within. To adjust the difficulty of the puzzle, the range or search space is increased or decreased. In addition this ability to vary the range also provides a method for manipulating network puzzle difficulties dynamically, although each device in the network may need to pass a puzzle back to the client.  
         [0062]     The present invention provides a method for increasing puzzle difficulty without attaching a new puzzle by dynamically increasing the calculated range of values passed back. Hint-based hash reversal puzzles are fine-grained puzzles in which a single hash-reversal puzzle is given to the client along with a hint that gives the client an idea of where the answer lies. The hint is a single value that is near the answer. To adjust the difficulty of the puzzle, the accuracy of the hint is increased or decreased. For example, suppose a randomly generated number x is used as the input to the hash h(x). To generate a puzzle with O(D) difficulty, the issuer passes the client the hash and a hint, x-u(0,2D) is a randomly chosen number uniformly distributed between 0 and 2d. The client then starts at the hint and searches the range linearly for the answer.  
         [0063]     To illustrate how the range may be varied, suppose a randomly generated secret x is used as input to the hash. To generate a puzzle with 0(D) difficulty, the issuer passes the client (h(x), x-u(0,2D)) where h(x) is the value of the hash to match, u(0,2D) is a randomly chosen number uniformly distributed between  0  and 2D, x-u(0,2D) is the beginning of the search range the client needs to search from. The client must search from the point given to find the x whose hash matches the value of h(x). As before, the amount of time actually taken by the client to find x can vary based on luck. This variation in the range also provides a method for manipulating network puzzle difficulties dynamically. The present invention increases puzzle difficulty without attaching a new puzzle by dynamically increasing the calculated range of values passed back. “Unit work” describes the basic operation the client must repeatedly perform to solve the puzzle and the average amount of time the operation requires on implemented system. “Range” describes the breadth of difficulties supported by the puzzle based on the size (in bits) of the secret. The “mean and maximum granularity” describes the average spacing between adjacent puzzle difficulties and the largest spacing between any two adjacent puzzle difficulties. “Exact” describes whether or not the load given to the client is exactly predictable or probabilistic. “Parallel computation” describes whether or not the client can distribute the computation to other machines in order to solve the puzzle more quickly.  
         [0064]     Thus, while a multitude of embodiments have been variously described herein, those of skill in this art will recognize that different embodiments show different potential features/designs which can be used in the other embodiments. Even more variations, applications and modifications will still fall within the spirit and scope of the invention, all as intended to come within the ambit and reach of the following claims.