Concerning over undocumented BGP announcements - 44net

Colin Bodor

30 Jan 30 Jan

8:42 p.m.

Hello, nice work! And that's interesting/possibly concerning data. I am AS 55016, and doing exactly as you mentioned, I got a /22 and am announcing it as /24s instead. I may split one or two of the /24s out which is why it was done this way. Thought I would just let everyone know those are legitimate announcements (55016 is in the portal under the related /22 of course) -Colin -----Original Message----- From: 44Net <44net-bounces+colin.bodor=imperium.ca(a)mailman.ampr.org> On Behalf Of Nat Morris via 44Net Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2021 19:35 To: AMPRNet working group <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org> Cc: Nat Morris <nat(a)nuqe.net> Subject: [44net] Concerning over undocumented BGP announcements Hello all, Over the last few months I have noticed some odd BGP announcements of prefixes which have no allocations in the AMPRnet portal. After spotting 5 or 6 of these it made me wonder how many existed. This evening I took a snapshot of the RIPE RIS data for announcements within 44.0.0.0/9 and 44.128.0.0/10, which took place in 2021. Then scraped the allocations from the AMPRnet portal, compared prefixes directly and then used a radix tree to find a best match. The resulting data https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nb4cTYVG1tm4HpxgPp7TAcgZ_qOlcej1whd… At first glance there are some expected entries, for example users with a /22 or /23 announcing a more specific /24. What really worries me is the amount of announcements of /24s where the closest portal documented prefix is a /16. Are these being used legitimately? do AMPR co-ordinators what details about them? or have they been hijacked? Look for example at /24 announcements within country assignments, but no specific description! I would like to start a discussion around these specific prefixes. The scripts I wrote are here https://github.com/natm/amprnet-observer Kind regards, Nat. -- Nat https://nat.ms +44 7531 750292 _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net

Reply

G1FEF

31 Jan 31 Jan

3:35 a.m.

Hi Guys, This is something that I keep an eye on, and I do act on any unauthorised announcements. Just this last week several blocks were hijacked with malicious intent, I spent several hours contacting their upstreams to get them blocked as well as altDB & RADB to get their unauthorised route objects removed. Successfully I am pleased to say. As for more specific prefixes being announced from within larger allocated prefixes - this really depends on when the larger block was allocated: Before 2020 there was no specific restriction mentioned in the LOA regarding this, however as this has been an issue, all LOAs issued from near the start of 2020 have a clause that specifically prohibits this. Again, I do keep an eye on this. On a related subject, ARDC have recently opened an account with RADB, many folks struggle to add route objects to an IRR DB after I have issued an LOA, it is a recurring problem I deal with by adding their route object to altDB. The problem with altDB is that not all carriers build their filters from there (presumably because it is a free IRR DB and anyone can add any route object they like, including hijackers). RADB is a more respected and more widely used IRR DB. The intention is to automate the creation and removal of route objects via their API from the Portal. Adding visibility of the origin ASN to BGP announced allocations is also on the list for the Portal development. Min/Max expected prefixes is not something that has been considered before, however I can see that it would be quite useful, and not at all difficult to implement, so I have added that to the list - thanks for that Nat. Regards, Chris - G1FEF

...

On 31 Jan 2021, at 02:47, Nat Morris via 44Net <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org> wrote: Hi Colin, Thanks for the prompt response to the thread, yes your exact use case is one which I was expecting to see! I'm more worried about the more specific announcements within the portal covering /16 entries. It would certainly be handy to have publically visible origin ASN fields per BGP assignment, plus max / min expected prefix lists (like RIPE route objects) that would allow for some automated alerting to be built. Nat, On Sun, Jan 31, 2021 at 2:42 AM Colin Bodor <colin.bodor(a)imperium.ca <mailto:colin.bodor@imperium.ca>> wrote:

Hello, nice work! And that's interesting/possibly concerning data. I am AS 55016, and doing exactly as you mentioned, I got a /22 and am announcing it as /24s instead. I may split one or two of the /24s out which is why it was done this way. Thought I would just let everyone know those are legitimate announcements (55016 is in the portal under the related /22 of course) -Colin -----Original Message----- From: 44Net <44net-bounces+colin.bodor=imperium.ca(a)mailman.ampr.org> On Behalf Of Nat Morris via 44Net Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2021 19:35 To: AMPRNet working group <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org> Cc: Nat Morris <nat(a)nuqe.net> Subject: [44net] Concerning over undocumented BGP announcements Hello all, Over the last few months I have noticed some odd BGP announcements of prefixes which have no allocations in the AMPRnet portal. After spotting 5 or 6 of these it made me wonder how many existed. This evening I took a snapshot of the RIPE RIS data for announcements within 44.0.0.0/9 and 44.128.0.0/10, which took place in 2021. Then scraped the allocations from the AMPRnet portal, compared prefixes directly and then used a radix tree to find a best match. The resulting data https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nb4cTYVG1tm4HpxgPp7TAcgZ_qOlcej1whd… At first glance there are some expected entries, for example users with a /22 or /23 announcing a more specific /24. What really worries me is the amount of announcements of /24s where the closest portal documented prefix is a /16. Are these being used legitimately? do AMPR co-ordinators what details about them? or have they been hijacked? Look for example at /24 announcements within country assignments, but no specific description! I would like to start a discussion around these specific prefixes. The scripts I wrote are here https://github.com/natm/amprnet-observer Kind regards, Nat. -- Nat https://nat.ms +44 7531 750292 _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net

-- Nat https://nat.ms <https://nat.ms/> +44 7531 750292 _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org <mailto:44Net@mailman.ampr.org> https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net <https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net>

Reply

Charlie Smurthwaite

9:02 a.m.

Hi All, I just joined this list today because I just wanted to stick my oar in and say that there has been a lot of chatter recently about avoiding the use of RADB for the reasons highlighted in this thread. For this reason, and because of the benefit of RPKI, I'd definitely be interested to know whether there's the possibility of partnering with a RIR that offers proper authentication of routes. On a mildly related note, I notice that AMPRNet offers a whois services, but this doesn't seem to be forwarded to by the "44.0.0.0 - 44.191.255.255" object, so most people wanting to find out who owns IPs by using generic whois lookups are not likely to succeed. I'd be happy to potentially collaborate on a technical front with these projects if it would be helpful. Charlie On Sunday, January 31, 2021, 2:10:02 PM GMT, Nat Morris via 44Net <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org> wrote: On Sun, Jan 31, 2021 at 9:36 AM G1FEF via 44Net <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org> wrote:

...

This is something that I keep an eye on, and I do act on any unauthorised announcements. Just this last week several blocks were hijacked with malicious intent, I spent several hours contacting their upstreams to get them blocked as well as altDB & RADB to get their unauthorised route objects removed. Successfully I am pleased to say.

Which blocks did you report? Any explanation for these prefixes announced in the UK by AS61337, along side your portal prefixes, they are not documented at all in the portal: 44.127.128.0/24 44.190.122.0/24 44.190.124.0/24 44.190.125.0/24 44.190.128.0/24 44.190.129.0/24 44.190.130.0/24 44.190.131.0/24 44.191.0.0/20

...

On a related subject, ARDC have recently opened an account with RADB, many folks struggle to add route objects to an IRR DB after I have issued an LOA, it is a recurring problem I deal with by adding their route object to altDB. The problem with altDB is that not all carriers build their filters from there (presumably because it is a free IRR DB and anyone can add any route object they like, including hijackers). RADB is a more respected and more widely used IRR DB. The intention is to automate the creation and removal of route objects via their API from the Portal.

RADB is ok, but not sufficient for the future. A better investment would be for the ARDC to negotiation with one of the 5 RIRs for prefixes to be registered there, so we could all benefit from use of their RPKI trust anchors. Having prefixes in RADB will not provide trust anchor functionality.

...

Adding visibility of the origin ASN to BGP announced allocations is also on the list for the Portal development. Min/Max expected prefixes is not something that has been considered before, however I can see that it would be quite useful, and not at all difficult to implement, so I have added that to the list - thanks for that Nat.

Which repo is this development taking place in? I noticed the github.com AMPRnet Portal repo has been removed. Nat,

...

Regards, Chris - G1FEF

On 31 Jan 2021, at 02:47, Nat Morris via 44Net <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org> wrote: Hi Colin, Thanks for the prompt response to the thread, yes your exact use case is one which I was expecting to see! I'm more worried about the more specific announcements within the portal covering /16 entries. It would certainly be handy to have publically visible origin ASN fields per BGP assignment, plus max / min expected prefix lists (like RIPE route objects) that would allow for some automated alerting to be built. Nat, On Sun, Jan 31, 2021 at 2:42 AM Colin Bodor <colin.bodor(a)imperium.ca <mailto:colin.bodor@imperium.ca>> wrote:

Hello, nice work! And that's interesting/possibly concerning data. I am AS 55016, and doing exactly as you mentioned, I got a /22 and am announcing it as /24s instead. I may split one or two of the /24s out which is why it was done this way. Thought I would just let everyone know those are legitimate announcements (55016 is in the portal under the related /22 of course) -Colin -----Original Message----- From: 44Net <44net-bounces+colin.bodor=imperium.ca(a)mailman.ampr.org> On Behalf Of Nat Morris via 44Net Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2021 19:35 To: AMPRNet working group <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org> Cc: Nat Morris <nat(a)nuqe.net> Subject: [44net] Concerning over undocumented BGP announcements Hello all, Over the last few months I have noticed some odd BGP announcements of prefixes which have no allocations in the AMPRnet portal. After spotting 5 or 6 of these it made me wonder how many existed. This evening I took a snapshot of the RIPE RIS data for announcements within 44.0.0.0/9 and 44.128.0.0/10, which took place in 2021. Then scraped the allocations from the AMPRnet portal, compared prefixes directly and then used a radix tree to find a best match. The resulting data https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nb4cTYVG1tm4HpxgPp7TAcgZ_qOlcej1whd… At first glance there are some expected entries, for example users with a /22 or /23 announcing a more specific /24. What really worries me is the amount of announcements of /24s where the closest portal documented prefix is a /16. Are these being used legitimately? do AMPR co-ordinators what details about them? or have they been hijacked? Look for example at /24 announcements within country assignments, but no specific description! I would like to start a discussion around these specific prefixes. The scripts I wrote are here https://github.com/natm/amprnet-observer Kind regards, Nat. -- Nat https://nat.ms +44 7531 750292 _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net

-- Nat https://nat.ms <https://nat.ms/> +44 7531 750292 _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org <mailto:44Net@mailman.ampr.org> https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net <https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net>

_________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net

-- Nat https://nat.ms +44 7531 750292 _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net

Reply

Chris Wilkie

4:22 p.m.

...

On 31 Jan 2021, at 14:09, Nat Morris via 44Net <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org> wrote: Any explanation for these prefixes announced in the UK by AS61337, along side your portal prefixes, they are not documented at all in the portal: 44.127.128.0/24 44.190.122.0/24 44.190.124.0/24 44.190.125.0/24 44.190.128.0/24 44.190.129.0/24 44.190.130.0/24 44.190.131.0/24 44.191.0.0/20

Hi Nat Owner/operator of AS61337 here. Chris G1FEF asked me to announce some rogue blocks in the hope of discouraging a hijacker who was using them for fraudulent purposes. 44.127.128.0/24 is mine (registered to M0NCW, which is me if that wasn’t obvious!) The remainder of the 44/8 announcements from my AS are for Chris himself who has a rack at one of my hosting sites, Creslow Park (www.creslowpark.com). Far be it from me to question whether he has legitimate claim to them! Chris

Reply

Damien Gardner

3:53 p.m.

Just wanted to double-check.. Is the spreadsheet ONLY the prefixes which don’t appear in the AMPR portal? (As my 44.136.201.0/24 is not appearing in that list, and it’s definitely appearing in BGP on lg.he.net :) ) I do agree on it being really bizarre that some regions only have a /16 listed in the portal, and none of their more specifics. That has thrown me a few times. Cheers, DG On Sun, 31 Jan 2021 at 1:36 pm, Nat Morris via 44Net <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org> wrote:

...

Hello all, Over the last few months I have noticed some odd BGP announcements of prefixes which have no allocations in the AMPRnet portal. After spotting 5 or 6 of these it made me wonder how many existed. This evening I took a snapshot of the RIPE RIS data for announcements within 44.0.0.0/9 and 44.128.0.0/10, which took place in 2021. Then scraped the allocations from the AMPRnet portal, compared prefixes directly and then used a radix tree to find a best match. The resulting data https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nb4cTYVG1tm4HpxgPp7TAcgZ_qOlcej1whd… At first glance there are some expected entries, for example users with a /22 or /23 announcing a more specific /24. What really worries me is the amount of announcements of /24s where the closest portal documented prefix is a /16. Are these being used legitimately? do AMPR co-ordinators what details about them? or have they been hijacked? Look for example at /24 announcements within country assignments, but no specific description! I would like to start a discussion around these specific prefixes. The scripts I wrote are here https://github.com/natm/amprnet-observer Kind regards, Nat. -- Nat https://nat.ms +44 7531 750292 _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net

Reply