Re: about violation of standards - security matters relevant to IPWAVE WG and to 6MAN WG

[Alexandre Petrescu <[e-mail]>]

Le 19/04/2019 à 02:50, 神明達哉 a écrit :
> At Fri, 19 Apr 2019 02:07:20 +0200, Fernando Gont 
> <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
> 
>> [....]
> Sometimes even a disruptive update can be justified (like an extreme
>  case of some security matters). [...]

I take advantage of your message about security.

I am not a security expert.

I am not suggesting to use this security matter - it is not extreme - in 
order to justify the ll discussion.

I will not blow whistles.

--------------------------------------------------------------
I often listen to packets at 5.9GHz (DSRC, 802.11-OCB, 802.11p, WAVE,
ITS-G5), that are emitted by Road-Side Units, that are relevant to
IPWAVE WG and to 6MAN WG

Rarely - if ever at all - can I hear encrypted packets.
Some times they have signatures, but their CAs are not widely ack'ed.

The messages that I listen to are IP, CAM, SPAT, MAP and DENM.
Sometimes the DENM packets warn of accidents.  The DENM packet contains
some warning.  The DENM packet is in clear.  Anyone can fake it.  If I
remember correctly, I think I saw a DENM containing an accident warning,
that was not signed nor encrypted.  Anyone can send a fake DENM message
with an accident warning which, if taken seriously, may actually provoke
some accident.

Some times I hear SPAT messages that may contain the status of the
traffic lights.  I am happy because I can see that status without being
there.  But I wonder what happens if someone fakes them.

There are also IPv6 RA packets, that are not encrypted, not signed.  It
does not surprise me, because I know how hard is it to secure RAs.

I recently (April 2019) encountered one RSU with a dongling (dangling?)
Ethernet cable that anyone on the curbside (trottoir) could plug.  It is 
an area under construction but the cars do circulate at 50km/h or so.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Alex