[IPsec] draft-mglt-ipsecme-diet-esp-iv-generation

"Valery Smyslov" <svanru@gmail.com> Tue, 15 July 2014 07:23 UTC

Return-Path: <svanru@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C2D41B2824 for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Jul 2014 00:23:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 2.896
X-Spam-Level: **
X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, STOX_REPLY_TYPE=0.439, STOX_REPLY_TYPE_WITHOUT_QUOTES=1.757] autolearn=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 vKb8ih501l2A for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Jul 2014 00:23:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-la0-x235.google.com (mail-la0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::235]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C15A1A031C for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Jul 2014 00:23:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-la0-f53.google.com with SMTP id gl10so1612737lab.40 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Jul 2014 00:23:55 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:from:to:cc:references:subject:date:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=FjjcSp5WLuPdkM+0pm/JCDDim5Wg7E51767xjayvABY=; b=YNdR6fdfl4GwmdaXD/0hUl80le3E21AWNP2HQPj7nbA2Q0g+mTTBuZGT4wWD35gh4r wrbgz3cg5OWaa/UYjCvZrfr/bj1FmYtbMZMEUmjxiYDa0eJlAe+YRzIfdhCNwO9oBhOF a/bhz9T5ODsEAz8gMwQRtDsvEieV8p5ZTvSFQiyK7nOWdBoQoOtPyrJaTuu2xqegaame ZNYLoSe1tqO3IAnwpvr5GR6hVe5l7yfaEjX1VQyz71PO8DS8ku4FDC491VFAYSWWga5+ Pcluatdej4b4IFSIKZdLVAENgdOOlL6tWUuV7E7jCYWpGoVeSPQPF1veNKeyRY2DSHne mjpg==
X-Received: by 10.112.136.164 with SMTP id qb4mr5731388lbb.61.1405409035517; Tue, 15 Jul 2014 00:23:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from buildpc ([93.188.44.200]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id j13sm6505526lab.39.2014.07.15.00.23.53 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 15 Jul 2014 00:23:54 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <E7229C5FA6D74B19823BA343439FBD81@buildpc>
From: Valery Smyslov <svanru@gmail.com>
To: Daniel Migault <mglt.ietf@gmail.com>
References: <CADZyTk=DUkRDX8sfXLS+HTqGw61ZMPexMC9yQadnKd4z9HwmGg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 11:23:55 +0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"; charset="UTF-8"; reply-type="original"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipsec/cRP2TjRaWEP0m8uD5RmSZ3QTQDs
Cc: ipsec@ietf.org
Subject: [IPsec] draft-mglt-ipsecme-diet-esp-iv-generation
X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols <ipsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipsec/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 07:23:58 -0000

Hi,

I have some comments regarding the draft.

First, it is not absolutely clear from the draft how 
the IV is generated for each packet. I presume
that the IVs are taken sequentially for every new
ESP packet to send from the bit string generated
by prf+. But then it is not clear for me how the receiver
would regenerate the same IV in case of packets loss
and reordering. Sending LSB of IV would help here a bit, 
but then receiver would do quite a lot of work to guess
the right IV, the overall process is not deterministic
and opens a possibility for simple DoS attack.
The receiver would also look at the sequence number to 
deal with packets loss and reordering, but as far as 
I understnad the SN is optional in Diet-ESP.

Then, I'm not a crypto expert, but using the same
key for both encryption and IV generation looks
like a bit unsound. 

Finally, I would prefer defining new transorms
(for example AES-CBC with implicit IV) instead of 
negotiating IV compression separately.

Regards,
Valery Smyslov.