IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: IID in LL and GUA - draft-ietf-6man-default-iids-09

otroan@employees.org Fri, 05 February 2016 18:07 UTC

Return-Path: <otroan@employees.org>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70B801A6FB1 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 10:07:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.402
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.402 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, J_CHICKENPOX_12=0.6, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 yq9mKtP2bBwb for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 10:07:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from cowbell.employees.org (cowbell.employees.org [IPv6:2001:1868:a000:17::142]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8F75E1A6FA8 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 10:07:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from cowbell.employees.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cowbell.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DE40D7888; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 10:07:06 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=employees.org; h=subject :mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id :references:to; s=selector1; bh=XGZMgQzXGymSYTM1ERHY61z/BEQ=; b= RVhX/eAe5/lh9rg+D1vk78RiX2EYR2zEJ0SRh3k2Fn6Ek97NdwvanZFH6WWeGa8W vYgTeCF+TxCGoAWiwSICqOt3Q4oUbAvsib5+2/HFiMZp0ByZZAQ+effvUR27PBgL F5H4AuvaD1Diyuob2tJq0yHhMVmT57dsIJM4IPiFETM=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=employees.org; h=subject :mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id :references:to; q=dns; s=selector1; b=bI+eC7wbDnufptU9nHS1T72x76 An24Gg1Tswp4vQY1nTt35CWuhOuWjLzJEGS5+jR74uWSSQ7WUXYhOCk1oCtKb9cE ke+YXkt11YxB+2ja+0MbmuDBqHuc2lWD1DxMieynQ3FXmewd8YrgHN2Xbh6UVk0h 2+A1IjT4VzLJ1vjck=
Received: from h.hanazo.no (unknown [195.159.234.46]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: otroan) by cowbell.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D1206D7887; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 10:07:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [IPv6:::1] (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by h.hanazo.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id B208F1080E18; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 19:07:05 +0100 (CET)
Subject: Re: IID in LL and GUA - draft-ietf-6man-default-iids-09
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.2 \(3112\))
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_3D46EEB7-ED97-45FB-8E82-66B162BE5103"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail 2.6b2
From: otroan@employees.org
In-Reply-To: <56B4CD9F.9090606@si6networks.com>
Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2016 19:07:04 +0100
Message-Id: <C6E767B9-A1DB-4A3A-A4EB-0A6CC38502CD@employees.org>
References: <56B48386.2040300@gmail.com> <FFCCFC5D-CE7C-41A3-BCC3-A7BCAC9BC63C@employees.org> <56B4CD9F.9090606@si6networks.com>
To: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3112)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/dz7D8ogmrwshGreVy6LUec2UsVY>
Cc: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Fri, 05 Feb 2016 18:07:07 -0000

Fernando,

[...]

>> 
>> What is the risk of using the same IID for link-local and global addresses?
>> Typically if you can snoop the link-local address then you're onlink and leak information about all addresses and their correlations anyway.
> 
> We discussed this one a hundred times now (including for RFC7217). The
> risk is that at times such addressess can leak, without the need of the
> attacker being pesent on the local link.
> 
> e.g., your MTA is on the local-link, and you end up connecting to it
> with a LL, which then appears in the email headers. (and there are a
> bunch of other possible reasons for that to happen).
> 
> Be proactive. MAC addresses in the IID are wrong. Putting them there is
> just waiting for trouble.

I didn't say the LL was based on a MAC.
my question was if there was any issue with re-using the IID from the link-local in the GUA. assume the link-local is generated f.ex with 7217.

cheers,
Ole

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email