Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data

Dan Mahoney <dmahoney@isc.org> Tue, 30 July 2019 20:11 UTC

Return-Path: <dmahoney@isc.org>
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 9FA7412001A for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Jul 2019 13:11:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 xKu3dLwZPU9a for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Jul 2019 13:11:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.pao1.isc.org (mx.pao1.isc.org [149.20.64.53]) (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 EB19F120024 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 30 Jul 2019 13:11:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bikeshed.isc.org (bikeshed2.isc.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:1:f::88]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.pao1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A03423AB007; Tue, 30 Jul 2019 20:11:36 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by bikeshed.isc.org (Postfix, from userid 10302) id 82F934AA5D; Tue, 30 Jul 2019 20:11:36 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bikeshed.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FCE24AA5C; Tue, 30 Jul 2019 20:11:36 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2019 20:11:36 +0000
From: Dan Mahoney <dmahoney@isc.org>
To: Paul Ebersman <list-dnsop@dragon.net>
cc: dnsop@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <20190730200859.A424215E6AD4@fafnir.remote.dragon.net>
Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.21.9999.1907302009500.7062@bikeshed.isc.org>
References: <20190706213024.GA56650@isc.org> <alpine.BSF.2.21.9999.1907221704030.7062@bikeshed.isc.org> <CAN6NTqymm6+OMet0sMZC0Ms5E_5mj_nwONk3fR19HwgWXYNB4Q@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.LRH.2.21.1907251332070.10708@bofh.nohats.ca> <20190725183051.33DA315BFD9D@fafnir.remote.dragon.net> <alpine.BSF.2.21.9999.1907301916050.7062@bikeshed.isc.org> <20190730200859.A424215E6AD4@fafnir.remote.dragon.net>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.21.9999 (BSF 287 2018-06-16)
X-OpenPGP-Key-ID: 0xE919EC51
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/sAQf7NIIDqT-M61rBz8scrjuAY8>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] proposal: Covert in-band zone data
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: Tue, 30 Jul 2019 20:11:42 -0000


On Tue, 30 Jul 2019, Paul Ebersman wrote:

> I was also one of those folks that put things in txt zone files for
> years. My whole IP address management was comments in the in-addr.arpa
> zones. While I went to dynamic zones to make DNSSEC easy and lost that,
> I still see value in things that should be attachable to a zone but not
> zone data and not something you wanted to "publish" in the open DNS.
> 
> ebersman> I think we're allowed to replace something after 20+ years ;)
> 
> ebersman> Things that might go in:
> 
> ebersman> - AXFR/IXFR/*XFR
> ebersman> - zone meta data (create/modify/delete/digital-sigs)
> ebersman> - "covert" data
> 
> dmahoney> As far as extending/replacing the AXFR protocol, this is
> dmahoney> great, however, I still see an orthogonal need for the thing
> dmahoney> I'm asking for: Parseable metadata.  For humans.  Not as a
> dmahoney> gateway to some sort of clever signaling or key-transfer
> dmahoney> protocol.  Analagous more to HINFO than TXT.
> 
> Actually, I think this moves your goal nicely. If we could have things
> marked as "not zone data, sensitive" and dealt with only over a covert
> channel after various auth/acl checks are done, it would be easy enough
> to have metadata that won't leak.
> 
> Then we define some of these things we consider "private"/non-zone.
> 
> dmahoney> I also envision the "presentation format" looking like a
> dmahoney> regular comment so non-compatible implementations that tried
> dmahoney> to load a zone with these simply ignored them as they do
> dmahoney> regular comments.  Similar, perhaps to how server-side
> dmahoney> includes work in the web world.
> 
> Legacy/non-compatible would fall out because they wouldn't ever see this
> because they'd fail whatever auth/negotiation was necessary to believe
> that sending covert/metadata was OK and they'd never get it.
> 

Right, my argument was more in the case of the "without covert".  I.e. 
you've dumped your zone on bind and loaded it into NSD.  On disk, not 
wire.

-Dan