IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] NSEC/NSEC3 for unsigned zones and aggressive use

"Peter van Dijk" <peter.van.dijk@powerdns.com> Fri, 21 July 2017 23:47 UTC

Return-Path: <peter.van.dijk@powerdns.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 15764129AFF for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Jul 2017 16:47:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 vaZonfrQd-YZ for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Jul 2017 16:47:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shannon.7bits.nl (shannon.7bits.nl [89.188.0.40]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7B31D126B7F for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Jul 2017 16:47:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.16] (095-096-086-198.static.chello.nl [95.96.86.198]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: peter) by shannon.7bits.nl (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 577651BD15; Sat, 22 Jul 2017 01:47:26 +0200 (CEST)
From: Peter van Dijk <peter.van.dijk@powerdns.com>
To: dnsop@ietf.org
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2017 01:47:21 +0200
Message-ID: <F170ACA9-320E-4E36-8DC3-0CC81EB18F43@powerdns.com>
In-Reply-To: <20170720150031.GA22702@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org>
References: <20170718094654.GA31988@jurassic> <6EE82876-6085-42FA-B2F1-850E9EAE6083@vpnc.org> <20170718125056.GA7982@jurassic> <20170720150031.GA22702@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.6r5347)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/m2KX5zGpdb4HpAAYZ0NG6x35OBM>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] NSEC/NSEC3 for unsigned zones and aggressive use
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Fri, 21 Jul 2017 23:47:30 -0000

On 20 Jul 2017, at 17:00, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:

> draft-ietf-dnsop-nsec-aggressiveuse is more aggressive (because it can
> now synthetizes answers) so it seems to me the same reasons should
> apply?

That it is more aggressive, -and- that it relies on a feature of DNSSEC, 
suggests that we SHOULD be stricter here, and the only interpretation of 
‘stricter’ I can imagine is requiring DNSSEC.

However, I have advocated (offline) in the past for allowing unsigned 
NSEC to be used to deter PRSD attacks, allowing the resolver to reduce 
queries to the targeted auth by >90% - a win for both sides. It is a 
tricky balance. If somebody is under attack, that surely is the worst 
time for them to upload a DS, while enabling DNSSEC on their end (which 
would come with RRSIGs that validators then ignore) as a mitigation 
strategy that actually works, would be wonderful to have.

Kind regards,
-- 
Peter van Dijk
PowerDNS.COM BV - https://www.powerdns.com/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email