IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Validating responses when following unsigned CNAME chains...

Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Wed, 29 April 2020 23:31 UTC

Return-Path: <mellon@fugue.com>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC3B33A0A1A for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 16:31:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 6QbYttDbBdnH for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 16:31:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qt1-x82b.google.com (mail-qt1-x82b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::82b]) (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 E30E53A0A16 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 16:31:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt1-x82b.google.com with SMTP id b1so3531244qtt.1 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 16:31:34 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=u+M44QMRKZ6aJrjHur10Bl+Rzn8YdN5czxe/x7P5H+s=; b=CStXdd+ZwiBb59+L1uiYHIXYRJDaUzTcQ1v8Fr2HE/DyPy8WpjFd8lbKV9hCwqBVmj s3CYWo2hbkXjQFwLRIzGqW4kneI8CgzvhBPw0yApqzeXbwXTctSS/bgA299VzOWKO9Me s+ePrBWwFoJEGvI3gAD2Jxh1RYZrhALrIVn6vNZPJ+l3Qo9L3Gbz3DMlW5/d58KKThF8 zBoLHtmjvA5OfRtqvwKau9kaSfWJ07SwRmhODzCzq8lt3ZXL7BYX2dg7RKkyF6+/AOUq Y+86dU9DkWdrBkoAtBH84snbHRnGGNqm05enrs2otEgVyLH6cTLNpCdQUEDpTxHNytzO 4koQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=u+M44QMRKZ6aJrjHur10Bl+Rzn8YdN5czxe/x7P5H+s=; b=WGFM6rNq9rt+MJZtjobZKoggQGrqdrtF53Yg5UM4j3S17vNEHpqu5oSxIKp8SDBtWr gGmoXRiC9CTbxIfDjEkjK3pF1L33qUBIpNAH8tPtVenwP+f89dncCmI16qWNVVCNYwFi iqxmmxPfFDpLFFufA+sIQV/PctLGPi/mGggKqu4nnxHeNFF78IEbihyPWMLAv5w6IV7z AFuMzi1hpZda/bZitf6lB2MVtw4q5j/vTwWvqwW2aZ5N9MnOgZxR6jBcUE0523bFsAoa fPiXJfuSG5egH4Dx0tIVX65cGcmdF9VhAL8fYJdXODi9diNmIlZMtjhZgCEIrIE+g1E4 vYqQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuaiAf6FmbYhZ/W4qurXzUfhaJh2t7OFtfBsByRxOk7zQqZUkEnZ iwzCJOlXKVzwNEWv6p8OpMDq6rlAHNg=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypKJzVErrd1/Ed1cZexQxDPf2LvcX3fvRL6uVphlE8X2QfPcOCTFgD3iU6KWd4FnZWp1S0ejpw==
X-Received: by 2002:aed:2f25:: with SMTP id l34mr809919qtd.339.1588203093838; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 16:31:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2601:18b:300:36ee:e518:6559:325d:1a5f? ([2601:18b:300:36ee:e518:6559:325d:1a5f]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e4sm483876qkn.11.2020.04.29.16.31.32 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 29 Apr 2020 16:31:32 -0700 (PDT)
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Message-Id: <F41F931D-7EAF-4EF5-9897-A20638CBC29B@fugue.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_615A31DA-9D54-42AB-847F-192CCC759FA2"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3636.0.1\))
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2020 19:31:32 -0400
In-Reply-To: <1C2F884B-1A96-41BB-A11E-A652DF3091D1@isc.org>
Cc: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
To: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
References: <1EA6A13C-6E60-4ED9-9A50-E33D9D17504C@fugue.com> <1C2F884B-1A96-41BB-A11E-A652DF3091D1@isc.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3636.0.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/2fFPf46K5ov_lo5AnYpdAs839MI>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Validating responses when following unsigned CNAME chains...
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2020 23:31:37 -0000

On Apr 29, 2020, at 7:27 PM, Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> wrote:
> provably insecure:  proved no DS records at a delegation at or above the name, proved that there are only
> 	unsupported algorithms in the DS RRset at a delegation at or above the name, not under a trust-anchor.

When I’m talking about an unsigned CNAME, this is what I mean.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email