Re: [dns-privacy] [Ext] Re: ADoT requirements for authentication?

Brian Dickson <brian.peter.dickson@gmail.com> Thu, 31 October 2019 21:41 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.peter.dickson@gmail.com>
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 4D502120806 for <dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:41:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.997
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.997 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 SP3pM853HNCI for <dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:41:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vk1-xa34.google.com (mail-vk1-xa34.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::a34]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 53312120074 for <dns-privacy@ietf.org>; Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:41:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-vk1-xa34.google.com with SMTP id e205so1753601vke.2 for <dns-privacy@ietf.org>; Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:41:17 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=uV1oK9oJRkSIqUHO+n0UIduyst48no2QmVp0xCZHoR0=; b=g90eHJ1jSOTR1r7F95t25zzWy7c3c4agf/yWtXttFQtRppgGpX1owHMTQ7lm6WZIv/ atGBnQlbQxc8EVHHW3Ly1ec8TVrhOMSeLDPJh9CX2L0AM/E6RYJJCeVRprwBskxr+7d+ nE4qe/ZSrd0caVR/b0gP21Vwp8pEexcwaYk2F2zBmFZWaPgdb2k4qt6+1ZArCmoKOtsU nmG6095J9v4cEhoBCVsVJsCfe3FjDkt4Sg/VpxXYcDRrGEqbBFFX2xZrfNg4LdDtr0+Z qK5HqWotYV6baPmqVXtBBCu6iMiFMJvarGVaC7PF1MgFx6372JNiw+DDxMeRftCirjQp xA6Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=uV1oK9oJRkSIqUHO+n0UIduyst48no2QmVp0xCZHoR0=; b=CTnpIw1bPpmfVzKHtPf4jOaGL5LZvLDNHu1y32SL7t9bsFir5q26U53l4fk4xwtxzP jkCK+wVGnkVQChORlgmvjbB90fPWF6bg+6T8WyULscTXdvxiznancluRWA1SCfGoyQYM 6CxhezrhCc2oQ7HP6CAYySxn3gTTcClE/arC+/0LErh+LqZz3mfIpkWUvDVYhnU9GSzw xTlPcGY5/3J+wnlmwJ944tkUAojBbDVWxRjOUx5euHKwIS2b/YSm4VZfe1mW3I6sA4aq DBCUb7f1S+31wWI6jsFhWEfbVEcY5DcgbHy11ewjlj3JZQmYeNY7dipKRcdXytuiPP0a bFXQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUrpxGmJV7a/SHvw5X7v9YYEk8e9LkIY6BAPOpJh6xVqBaKYNs/ hqcyrcO/e6oB/TTyc8tOqnSNH7ygBWMMuz+y/Oc=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxxZchbMK0hlH5pxCsUbARF/KyFisOyjX/9/wJoiKIYPSSTyYz+gzrGNA/GiEEjMeQZjFOX5Hnb1v704dZlHBw=
X-Received: by 2002:a1f:54c5:: with SMTP id i188mr2311446vkb.65.1572558076206; Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:41:16 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAHbrMsDwDoTQN8Y5Zk7rSVepjwwyatEyAA6f0oJ9DESmAfHfXg@mail.gmail.com> <20191031211222.A6422DBC1C7@ary.qy>
In-Reply-To: <20191031211222.A6422DBC1C7@ary.qy>
From: Brian Dickson <brian.peter.dickson@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2019 16:40:44 -0500
Message-ID: <CAH1iCiqYoXMZ0U3yt8AjUXyZVRdDnmHzSpHvYmg++ACZ-U6=zA@mail.gmail.com>
To: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
Cc: dns-privacy@ietf.org, Ben Schwartz <bemasc@google.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000085628505963bb586"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dns-privacy/DD0vFyN60xkj31JJO1RomEtT-oI>
Subject: Re: [dns-privacy] [Ext] Re: ADoT requirements for authentication?
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: Thu, 31 Oct 2019 21:41:19 -0000

On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 4:12 PM John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:

> In article <
> CAHbrMsDwDoTQN8Y5Zk7rSVepjwwyatEyAA6f0oJ9DESmAfHfXg@mail.gmail.com> you
> write:
> >The ideas floated here about ADoT to the root are not, in my view, about
> >privacy (directly).  They're about using ADoT to protect the integrity of
> >(currently) unsigned data in the root zone.
> >
> >An alternative solution is to get ADoT bootstrap info from the child zone,
> >where it could be signed, before making a query that reveals the next
> >label.  This could work, but at the cost of an extra roundtrip.  (How
> often
> >this latency penalty applies depends on the details of the construction.)
>
> Thinking about it a little more, I think it is likely that there will
> be islands of ADoT sort of like there used to be islands of DNSSEC.
> For example, I expect the people on this list are likely to deploy
> ADoT long before some of the 2LD's above them. Moreover, all of the
> problems about getting your DS into the zone above would apply to
> getting your ADoT signal there.  Even with the cost of an extra lookup
> it's probably going to work better to have each island describe itself
> so you don't need an unbroken chain of ADoT from the root.
>

IMNSHO, ADoT at the leaf + QNAME minimization is all that is required for
privacy.
I.e. No need for ADoT anywhere other than at the leaf zone's name server
(whose NS name might not be in-bailiwick, FYI).

Brian