Re: NAT-Traversal - Security Considerations
Francis Dupont <Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr> Thu, 16 May 2002 16:57 UTC
Received: from lists.tislabs.com (portal.gw.tislabs.com [192.94.214.101]) by above.proper.com (8.11.6/8.11.3) with ESMTP id g4GGv6L17436; Thu, 16 May 2002 09:57:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by lists.tislabs.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) id MAA07891 Thu, 16 May 2002 12:16:50 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <200205161628.g4GGSqT89870@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr>
From: Francis Dupont <Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr>
To: mlafon@arkoon.net
cc: ipsec@lists.tislabs.com
Subject: Re: NAT-Traversal - Security Considerations
In-reply-to: Your message of Thu, 16 May 2002 00:59:26 +0200. <C1256BBA.007E4B51.00@arkoon-mail.arkoon.net>
Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 18:28:52 +0200
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-milter (http://amavis.org/) at enst-bretagne.fr
Sender: owner-ipsec@lists.tislabs.com
Precedence: bulk
In your previous mail you wrote:
Math (M) is behind NAT and establish an SA with Gateway (GW) using a
specific Trafic Descriptor (TS). Using Tunnel Mode, Math will normally
use his private IP address but can also used a spoofed one: Server (S)
or VeryImportantMachine (VIM).
=> Math can spoof the address but not the identity so the attack is
a Denial of Service.
This can be used by a malicious user to steal packets for VIM or to
deny communication with S.
=> first (steal packets) should not be critical because M may not
spoof an identity so may not know keys. Second is a DoS and there is
a third one: redirect the traffic to (i.e. flood) a victim.
Am I right or am I missing something ?
=> you don't miss something: NAT traversal capability gives to bad guys
on the path all NAT possibilities and they don't need to stay on the
path (so I call this problem the "transient pseudo-NAT attack").
How GW can decide if Math's IP is valid and is not a spoofed one ?
=> it can't. The stupid defense (authentify the IP address) works but
disables the NAT traversal.
Regards
Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr
- Re: NAT-Traversal - Security Considerations mlafon
- NAT-Traversal - Security Considerations mlafon
- Re: NAT-Traversal - Security Considerations Ari Huttunen
- Re: NAT-Traversal - Security Considerations Francis Dupont
- Re: NAT-Traversal - Security Considerations Ari Huttunen
- Re: NAT-Traversal - Security Considerations mlafon