IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dns-privacy] [Ext] Threat Model

Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> Fri, 08 November 2019 21:37 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@nohats.ca>
X-Original-To: dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2DA0120805 for <dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Nov 2019 13:37:11 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nohats.ca
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oq3R-jmPBdDM for <dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Nov 2019 13:37:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx.nohats.ca (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:2a03:6000:1004:1::68]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AD4A8120255 for <dns-privacy@ietf.org>; Fri, 8 Nov 2019 13:37:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 478try6vpDzFkn; Fri, 8 Nov 2019 22:37:06 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nohats.ca; s=default; t=1573249026; bh=7jZtKYKqGjyZuFq2s1KkZtX4ThVFkX2v2mJgry/6s7g=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=sg5WXCmqt/+p72t8TnOkvFxasf3/TdlooLXM0aEAIKhTVtKo6NZ5izY/eEJpIwxoZ ydmioCBu1yKcg1CTRwcW4LwOvPqPl+SXlgxv54e6pna56JK7PRNP+Jx9I25bZmdhzt xMSlyaUzYr/LxGL30a2XPgZB5JAbuPcBXHbHXnYY=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mx.nohats.ca
Received: from mx.nohats.ca ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:::1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ry7Pw3X-dfxy; Fri, 8 Nov 2019 22:37:05 +0100 (CET)
Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (bofh.nohats.ca [76.10.157.69]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Fri, 8 Nov 2019 22:37:05 +0100 (CET)
Received: by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 8034C607C99F; Fri, 8 Nov 2019 16:37:04 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CB0423D124; Fri, 8 Nov 2019 16:37:04 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2019 16:37:04 -0500
From: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
To: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@icann.org>
cc: "dns-privacy@ietf.org" <dns-privacy@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <d465d9e5-5a9f-8968-8f73-1493ec5f2c36@icann.org>
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.21.1911081633490.9092@bofh.nohats.ca>
References: <CABcZeBMQEJ=LE8ATQYnJj59srsK47hf4HT3BMMg3X2crVfSUXQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAHw9_i+e8veeAz+KYXjvchmjKJz6OZHX1pEYx_Tvs8n5xnfBnQ@mail.gmail.com> <6D6233DC-4D7C-45BC-9D4E-08E6E882C1A5@nohats.ca> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1911042035571.29247@grey.csi.cam.ac.uk> <CAH1iCioH86q1CX7A+F8ON4uzpGqipUy8m3iczyNqSKirAsYBQg@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.LRH.2.21.1911041652450.5093@bofh.nohats.ca> <CABcZeBOtY3saJe5DWTu=Jqy5guqdoKPKSR+XYddbvxwxKsxmig@mail.gmail.com> <CAHw9_iKaeT0VEjZfoCi9Nddc+VBBj0JHWDHv+=g3xzvb6L+Nvg@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.LRH.2.21.1911050941090.30046@bofh.nohats.ca> <CAHw9_i+MxMCd7dDO7N0-hc1SDjvBeoLoUvbg4JWDzXyjR0u4xQ@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.LRH.2.21.1911051437000.11602 @bofh.nohats.ca> <CAHw9_iKhaA9Nb+eH92YfzdepU90_DgLyS-ZDaMAehKOFO0ksEA@mail.gmail.com> <FC51D8EC-5ADC-4415-82EB-C6C6E4E8D84A@fl1ger.de> <F0DD4028-2404-4232-90F8-E9937877C261@nohats.ca> <b7108cff-0e50-d168-aa49-2626eb83ee22@cs.tcd.ie> <d465d9e5-5a9f-8968-8f73-1493ec5f2c36@icann.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dns-privacy/CDcB91aZGBONH0H_P--OGZKNGK8>
Subject: Re: [dns-privacy] [Ext] Threat Model
X-BeenThere: dns-privacy@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <dns-privacy.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dns-privacy>, <mailto:dns-privacy-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dns-privacy/>
List-Post: <mailto:dns-privacy@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dns-privacy-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy>, <mailto:dns-privacy-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2019 21:37:12 -0000

On Wed, 6 Nov 2019, Paul Hoffman wrote:

> Given that we are (still supposedly) talking about requirements and not solutions, I would be unhappy with a requirement that prevents a resolver that is not validating

Why would a _resolver_ not be validating ?

I understand the reasons for web applications that do not want to do
validating, though I disagree with those. But for actual DNS resolvers,
running as DNS caching server on either laptop or in an enterprise, I
see no valid reason why it should not be validating at this point.

> Any protocol we develop for ADoT capability discovery should prevent downgrade attacks but should also work fine for resolvers that do not validate.

I strongly disagree. Resolvers towards Authoritative servers are core
infrastructure, and that core should have no problems using the latest
DNS RFC's.

Paul

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email