IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Giving up security & privacy when manually configuring addresses - rfc4291bis text

Erik Kline <ek@google.com> Wed, 07 June 2017 08:53 UTC

Return-Path: <ek@google.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28F4212EB17 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Jun 2017 01:53:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com
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 lDj09WTb90hW for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Jun 2017 01:53:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yb0-x22a.google.com (mail-yb0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c09::22a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1E4B812EB0E for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 7 Jun 2017 01:53:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yb0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id o9so1373793yba.3 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 07 Jun 2017 01:53:27 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=OfjDqfrsbTQu/w+VkWQDx2LTzU7BSUjOXCuyfxX2H2Q=; b=rqSU1jtRH1y+LNS5TOKgU7RM6Rp+nc1HmpPd667RpjjN2Z16ddqWf5FAj2kBzN6PCQ 9ibtKkSk29qj+yvYwByn1cJvBcYzwoCoMkY6mWLclcbLgbMHgM1OQIa+5mwSWi0/SRvF BMh8zsY9gQCPG8PJwHRuNVlMFr+XTjJBubQ9v2++3I8NRo/liZ4kx8xe3mg/8Y6vHICe 81yRK+xM4e6JliWIwzwyRjxsI0efvaaogFOFFYVmhNlpubszj68G8l0RN3ERKdYQix58 H3hi55/MOhH0Hp6yft1bwAMcB/GZL2yBP/i347YmJaUZBDpXg+SmIDyknFEfL28lr5oq HFhw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=OfjDqfrsbTQu/w+VkWQDx2LTzU7BSUjOXCuyfxX2H2Q=; b=Nezp5WampSlS1HLj/sCiMxun5T+jW6vDn8nePPDKyRMGXmhZgdUzIgUVrYsTT5jkbx 7EPkA7q4x4iIVvMjWdABBiy1vNphQ9WdfMdhFt2f6jVYHX7gp3/DwQ1d0QzRdJE3cgJO wuz87dnUn13DWut0HkxRpygIf08OKkFRBnCek/2X/K2AwbJ8BSCcZfb8kc6/c22101jl qWtUVKvmyTtKLnvjNYkvt+kK4oxImz4KV/2MuOTn2+rr/bSM8RL/LiZkz5+UXF7xNfEi hcG/FJwOrP24N8xEIvsw7S+h4a+kQw+3Enwn/2bw2F8V0Ylx4cGnI7DYLNUbWkGDKkFd Dv2A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcAG2ZQavltBORt1grk8Xb922WFus1IuhsSa1HKFQHwhQyzFzs6w qBAfuLOdPe7gXb9hcrW7ltupx6BbESSv
X-Received: by 10.37.195.66 with SMTP id t63mr6142821ybf.98.1496825606213; Wed, 07 Jun 2017 01:53:26 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.37.50.141 with HTTP; Wed, 7 Jun 2017 01:53:05 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20170607.075131.74727436.sthaug@nethelp.no>
References: <CAO42Z2ziUZnK+n2f9N_Xvb5TZBppApXgNSmDsRLxaT1_taLvFw@mail.gmail.com> <EB4E2A17-B77F-40B8-B565-B3BBC1E378B3@gmail.com> <20170607.075131.74727436.sthaug@nethelp.no>
From: Erik Kline <ek@google.com>
Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2017 17:53:05 +0900
Message-ID: <CAAedzxqWqShdneSBVTEN=5b+KsyQdCroOoyviH9AOJKV262xyg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Giving up security & privacy when manually configuring addresses - rfc4291bis text
To: sthaug@nethelp.no
Cc: Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>, Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com>, job@instituut.net, IETF IPv6 Mailing List <ipv6@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha-256"; boundary="001a114d74de92537b05515ade81"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/Zw_rFbbbNVNeCO6ZNxzdVzWKidU>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2017 08:53:29 -0000

On 7 June 2017 at 14:51, <sthaug@nethelp.no> wrote:

> > > That doesn't mention that security and privacy properties of addresses
> > > will be compromised if the manually configured addresses are from a
> > > small prefix.
> >
> > Or advertised in DNS?
> >
> > I would expect that any address configured manually would also be
> advertised in DNS, the latter being the reason for the former. If the
> address is publicly announced, does one have a reasonable expectation of
> privacy?
>
> That's precisely the point. I configure fixed addresses typically for
> servers, and I put the addresses in the DNS. I *want* those addresses
> to be publically known. Security and privacy is not relevant in this
> particular case.
>

For an authoritative server, sure.

But if you're a recursive resolver then using privacy addresses while doing
recursion (and changing the privacy addresses frequently) might indeed be
very useful.  (In fact: a unique source address per query is wonderful.)

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email