Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] DNSSEC Strict Mode

Paul Hoffman <> Thu, 25 February 2021 21:21 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E71443A0B8C; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 13:21:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WDrik_TW1rHb; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 13:21:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EDE223A0B6C; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 13:21:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by ( with ESMTPS id 11PLL9MB028832 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 25 Feb 2021 21:21:09 GMT
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.721.2; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 13:21:08 -0800
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 15.02.0721.008; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 13:21:08 -0800
From: Paul Hoffman <>
To: Ben Schwartz <>
CC: dnsop <>
Thread-Topic: [DNSOP] [Ext] DNSSEC Strict Mode
Thread-Index: AQHXC5A2nRyyXyHUjUGH7EaLceEWYqpp5z8A
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2021 21:21:08 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
x-originating-ip: []
x-source-routing-agent: Processed
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_895786D4-C165-4AD9-852A-7472F4A531D1"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha-256
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.369, 18.0.761 definitions=2021-02-25_14:2021-02-24, 2021-02-25 signatures=0
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] DNSSEC Strict Mode
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2021 21:21:18 -0000

On Feb 25, 2021, at 8:06 AM, Ben Schwartz <> wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 10:26 AM Paul Hoffman <> wrote:
>> In reading draft-schwartz-dnsop-dnssec-strict-mode, I still don't understand why it is even useful. If I am signing one of my zones with two algorithms, I must intend to do so. What is the value of me saying that only one of the signing algorithms is the strong one?
> That's not especially the intent.  Currently, if you sign with two algorithms, and either of those algorithms becomes insecure*, your zone becomes susceptible to forgery.  If you mark both algorithms as Strict, then your zone remains secure (for validators who implement both algorithms and this draft).
> *possibly unbeknownst to the public

If the algorithm becomes insecure and the public knows about it, I remove that signature from my zone.

If the algorithm because insecure and I don't know about it, I am at the same risk as if my private key was compromised and I don't know about it.

Again, this seems like it could only be marginally useful relative to good signing practices.

--Paul Hoffman