IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] DNSSEC in local networks

Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> Mon, 04 September 2017 15:02 UTC

Return-Path: <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
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 C6A7312426E for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Sep 2017 08:02:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5] 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 JXhaa0Y1phdm for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Sep 2017 08:02:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx4.nic.fr (mx4.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:2218:2::4:12]) (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 71C07132CE7 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Sep 2017 08:01:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx4.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 054FC28058E; Mon, 4 Sep 2017 17:01:52 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix, from userid 500) id F39DD2805B2; Mon, 4 Sep 2017 17:01:51 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from relay01.prive.nic.fr (unknown [10.1.50.11]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECCCF28058E; Mon, 4 Sep 2017 17:01:51 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from b12.nic.fr (b12.users.prive.nic.fr [10.10.86.133]) by relay01.prive.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9A75606D941; Mon, 4 Sep 2017 17:01:51 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by b12.nic.fr (Postfix, from userid 1000) id E1EA040360; Mon, 4 Sep 2017 17:01:51 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2017 17:01:51 +0200
From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
To: "Walter H." <walter.h@mathemainzel.info>
Cc: Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com>, dnsop WG <dnsop@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <20170904150151.h7v3da7s3jp4yhec@nic.fr>
References: <150428805872.6417.9525310755360551475@ietfa.amsl.com> <59A9B760.2060209@mathemainzel.info> <alpine.DEB.2.11.1709012044210.2676@grey.csi.cam.ac.uk> <59A9BCA2.6060008@mathemainzel.info> <20170903043202.GA18082@besserwisser.org> <59AC4E42.9080600@mathemainzel.info> <60304450-DFA3-4982-B01D-CC33C49BDCFC@isc.org> <59f8c88caaf82a5884aa87223d49e7e4.1504505559@squirrel.mail> <3B75D240-13B9-4A94-B56D-24E83B4A4A8F@rfc1035.com> <3fe7bc511a990b0288b645dc176e1ef3.1504515284@squirrel.mail>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3fe7bc511a990b0288b645dc176e1ef3.1504515284@squirrel.mail>
X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 9.1
X-Kernel: Linux 4.9.0-3-amd64 x86_64
X-Charlie: Je suis Charlie
Organization: NIC France
X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2)
X-Bogosity: No, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000202, version=1.2.2
X-PMX-Version: 6.0.0.2142326, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.2107409, Antispam-Data: 2017.9.4.145116
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/yEccOqbYNCVFzcRh5QxXPY5orPU>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] DNSSEC in local networks
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: Mon, 04 Sep 2017 15:02:03 -0000

On Mon, Sep 04, 2017 at 10:54:44AM +0200,
 Walter H. <walter.h@mathemainzel.info> wrote 
 a message of 25 lines which said:

> I'd say: "either you trust the local net or not";

I don't claim to be a security expert, but I think it is a
mistake. Many local networks are vulnerable to packets with an
internal address coming from the outside, routing attacks diverting
traffic outside, etc. Not to mention the internal attacks, for
instance by a MS-Windows zombie.

It seems to me that having TLS, DNSSEC and SSH and so on even in the
local net is Best Practice.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email