IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dns-privacy] Authentication in draft-ietf-dprive-opportunistic-adotq

Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> Wed, 17 February 2021 02:41 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 8712D3A1440 for <dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 18:41:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-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 yQbXZDNKW392 for <dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 18:41:47 -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 174173A143E for <dprive@ietf.org>; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 18:41:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DgMYN6r7wzrn; Wed, 17 Feb 2021 03:41:44 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nohats.ca; s=default; t=1613529704; bh=FU5txJFN5u2S9RyjjBzD/axK69ichw7nzs/C89mBpG4=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=OuVkQjrl0xkV4n0WCGlveRlZ5vf1Ddu6kAO01GlQBW96RnM3G4ujN9J3bcpHUcWKM InwqmztqM16yuzW0yV3TqTOvH5U9/nPmRLwFF+scmb4pR8PJswS7BzXthCM45aDnB3 zvE0RIQyNWO2xDevBzNjo65trvDn2+j8U8UXMAZk=
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 cIrGhmNgJ6Zm; Wed, 17 Feb 2021 03:41:44 +0100 (CET)
Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (bofh.nohats.ca [193.110.157.194]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Wed, 17 Feb 2021 03:41:43 +0100 (CET)
Received: by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B1F3A6029AF9; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 21:41:42 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id A974566B1E; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 21:41:42 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2021 21:41:42 -0500
From: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
cc: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@icann.org>, "dprive@ietf.org" <dprive@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <ff1e6d9-6e66-dadf-2847-3e071b34618@nohats.ca>
Message-ID: <664338a9-68d8-5412-9cda-cca569352e13@nohats.ca>
References: <230F580F-BA87-4921-B45B-2909ACE385B1@icann.org> <CABcZeBPcBT0UY-ghaMm_nN+qZ+B0ozmCfK30XX-R05z+PLtqmQ@mail.gmail.com> <137b74ff-887f-056a-74e3-7a80358b5156@cs.tcd.ie> <CABcZeBMyULUznkCVzxb6ufCx1XaT1zKx0jLLwxXhL7hRwMkv+A@mail.gmail.com> <fd132f9d-630e-112d-d777-0e6a7a767e84@cs.tcd.ie> <ff1e6d9-6e66-dadf-2847-3e071b34618@nohats.ca>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dns-privacy/yQx8dDy5gdA8bD6LoYQ16_q5Ji0>
Subject: Re: [dns-privacy] Authentication in draft-ietf-dprive-opportunistic-adotq
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: Wed, 17 Feb 2021 02:41:50 -0000

On Mon, 15 Feb 2021, Paul Wouters wrote:

> Here is a different sentinel:
>
> _53._dns.ns0.example.com. IN TLSA x y z <base64ofCert>
>
> Then do (D)TLS
>
> Now you can choose:
>
> 1) Use DNS(SEC) for validation
> 2) Use WebPKI[*] for validation
> 3) TOFU
> 4) Take at face value

as PaulH pointed out, the TLSA RFC does not allow one to accept a TLSA
RRset without DNSSEC signature protection. To allow for deployment
without DNSSEC, you could instead use the CERT RRtype that has no such
requirement.

Paul W

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email