IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] About key tags

John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com> Sat, 02 March 2024 21:04 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.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 9D618C14F5F6 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 Mar 2024 13:04:57 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.408
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.408 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b="QrE9RN2K"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b="WsN/Y8qT"
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nB2X6UfZJVgp for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 Mar 2024 13:04:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 60B40C14F5EF for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Sat, 2 Mar 2024 13:04:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 43776 invoked from network); 2 Mar 2024 21:04:50 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=aafd65e39472.k2403; bh=d+JuOxnIfWl0ItRJ502+q7RMB0l0pT5q/umWiNTQuho=; b=QrE9RN2KMojfmTRa1HTEacjqYwG5LWZx7fYcYQjrdgoVZI8CLZYu2vpzvXL5ZnydBGJL5b2LCPqy4MB2ZNyhQjYxMOD3hcAJGm1PRMOpscfDI5ttDDwd/VZTsL2/S0mrJqKHwtyGtKWu8B1qudjZNNFn3zVkZ0XBkmtANOzVGpAXtsmuRbOKnySPk4MkylbTg/lJy56MLAIIj37Zsr42J2QPTlGMcGY0MwzttOSVJsVH4AlUWLo84f5Yx5TwgfQZ2QU0w3kty2VxmdiawbH5byB7Cdw3hBLPNPoicRj3hx24xvUWXzZpA7F5mf2SCMbJYXeN7etTQ3x+BvKBE2iriQ==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=aafd65e39472.k2403; bh=d+JuOxnIfWl0ItRJ502+q7RMB0l0pT5q/umWiNTQuho=; b=WsN/Y8qTfbNcrAc8h1t/7ZLQ0xYkTRspUBjp57qLNR+lC3gb6WGzWUx2br7hu0am2Jxn85SwGZNvRNnpM5eAK4XlUZfMTIw9VzcNz8SGjF8QtunXjajvzPLIitjHyZIjbkGruRNfCF5ZEh/+NvVsQNpOtxgocSUHdMuvNawCtuUl+Vi4cPQdpNcYLekIRkLVHTE5rNITVw6tmEpFT/fRUvSwLmj9nhuqKHGF7z3K1zmCohDS3bui0nZ7x+VfRt0ih+kthb3SNJQeuCxg2K8J9sYBDWZljeVsnuVCBU3uaiGeI8TJyD8K9J/tr9uwHpiWAqUbdNR4Q35qIXRhgBlmXw==
Received: from ary.qy ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.3 ECDHE-RSA CHACHA20-POLY1305 AEAD) via TCP6; 02 Mar 2024 21:04:49 -0000
Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id 950598452225; Sat, 2 Mar 2024 16:04:49 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ary.qy (Postfix) with ESMTP id 028BC8452207; Sat, 2 Mar 2024 16:04:49 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sat, 02 Mar 2024 16:04:48 -0500
Message-ID: <ce01d2e1-3f70-e0f1-5302-6ab081b23e78@taugh.com>
From: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: Peter Thomassen <peter@desec.io>
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org
X-X-Sender: johnl@ary.qy
In-Reply-To: <8e618813-346c-4abd-ac3c-8196445ea719@desec.io>
References: <4F386814-7ED3-47D3-81C1-1E575FD3C686@icann.org> <741B4E2D-C869-48B7-BD27-5EDC4E1877C1@nohats.ca> <8e618813-346c-4abd-ac3c-8196445ea719@desec.io>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/d2KrYnfQIbPFm_-19XX818_wU_M>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] About key tags
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Sat, 02 Mar 2024 21:04:57 -0000

On Sat, 2 Mar 2024, Peter Thomassen wrote:
> On 2/29/24 18:06, Paul Wouters wrote:
>>>  (If no action is taken, malicious activity might follow now that it is 
>>> described, but I have not heard of a historical case of it.) 
>> 
>> This attack was more or less described five year ago: 
>> https://essay.utwente.nl/78777/ <https://essay.utwente.nl/78777/>
>> 
>> They didn’t get to the same amplification levels but if attackers had been 
>> interested, they could have picked it up as a tool to improve. scripts to 
>> run were attached to the paper.
>
> My take is that with the current mitigations (tolerate a very small but 
> nonzero number of keytag collisions), it's unlikely that this will be 
> exploited in any significant way, as the attacker's gain is very limited.

I think we're in violent agreement here.  The current mitigations are 
adequate, and nobody has offered a reason to believe that if we made 
things tighter, e.g., no keytag collisions at all, that it would make much 
practical difference.

Regards,
John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email