IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dnsext] Clarifying the mandatory algorithm rules

"Jeffrey A. Williams" <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com> Thu, 18 November 2010 17:44 UTC

Return-Path: <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>
X-Original-To: dnsext@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsext@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E3BB3A6891 for <dnsext@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 09:44:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.419
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.419 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.180, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JAHHzuzr5pIG for <dnsext@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 09:44:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from elasmtp-kukur.atl.sa.earthlink.net (elasmtp-kukur.atl.sa.earthlink.net [209.86.89.65]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8A5D3A6876 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 09:44:14 -0800 (PST)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=ix.netcom.com; b=XdA6TstHNoEf9OYdHBk98AVWsHGZ8dTwdIMPkfqmJSRO3/Ytf1Y9bDJSmyJJ+9nA; h=Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:To:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP;
Received: from [209.86.224.50] (helo=mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net) by elasmtp-kukur.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>) id 1PJ8Xe-0004y2-Je for dnsext@ietf.org; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 12:45:02 -0500
Received: from 99.93.224.206 by webmail.earthlink.net with HTTP; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 12:45:02 -0500
Message-ID: <12356613.1290102302582.JavaMail.root@mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 11:45:02 -0600
From: "Jeffrey A. Williams" <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>
To: dnsext@ietf.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: EarthLink Zoo Mail 1.0
X-ELNK-Trace: c8e3929e1e9c87a874cfc7ce3b1ad11381c87f5e519606889dbb8068406702f535815e5838f2e061350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
X-Originating-IP: 209.86.224.50
Subject: Re: [dnsext] Clarifying the mandatory algorithm rules
X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: "Jeffrey A. Williams" <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>
List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list <dnsext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsext>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 17:44:16 -0000

Florian and all,

SHA-1 was broken aroud 3 years ago now.  1024k keysize was
not long ago broken by the University of Mich. 


-----Original Message-----
>From: Florian Weimer <fweimer@bfk.de>
>Sent: Nov 18, 2010 8:05 AM
>To: "W.C.A. Wijngaards" <wouter@nlnetlabs.nl>
>Cc: dnsext@ietf.org
>Subject: Re: [dnsext] Clarifying the mandatory algorithm rules
>
>* W. C. A. Wijngaards:
>
>> That is what unbound does.  And it gets algorithm downgrade protection
>> security as a benefit (for the algorithms that it implements).
>
>And I don't see any other way to get a priori downgrade protection.
>There is no ordering of algorithm strengths.  For example, we don't
>know if SHA-1 or SHA-256 will be broken first.
>
>A posterio, you can drop validation for known-to-be-broken algorithms.
>But even that might be not so easy because it's somewhat subjective
>when an algorithm is broken.
>
>-- 
>Florian Weimer                <fweimer@bfk.de>
>BFK edv-consulting GmbH       http://www.bfk.de/
>Kriegsstraße 100              tel: +49-721-96201-1
>D-76133 Karlsruhe             fax: +49-721-96201-99
>_______________________________________________
>dnsext mailing list
>dnsext@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext

Regards,
Jeffrey A. Williams
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email