Re: [kitten] One question about Kerberos Protocol in the RFC 4120

Derek Atkins <derek@ihtfp.com> Wed, 18 August 2021 18:04 UTC

Return-Path: <derek@ihtfp.com>
X-Original-To: kitten@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: kitten@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F1533A084A for <kitten@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 11:04:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=ihtfp.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 ocQM5bra-Vno for <kitten@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 11:04:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail2.ihtfp.org (MAIL2.IHTFP.ORG [204.107.200.7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D74BD3A08CB for <kitten@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 11:04:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.ihtfp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FC22E2040; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 14:03:28 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mail2.ihtfp.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail2.ihtfp.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 18642-02; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 14:03:24 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by mail2.ihtfp.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id E6820E2045; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 14:03:23 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ihtfp.com; s=default; t=1629309803; bh=03iocM6BX1y6etupRGGx6NWuDzPiN7uoxziEM5p7LAo=; h=In-Reply-To:References:Date:Subject:From:To:Cc; b=eZmZ1cPJ5Qgp7x9QJQOT0b709tvachB/xTu6b+QYCc6QF0gfHwVfyYBWgriFqQuta mPzx4z85fUoHs7PDZflXd3t2Ugn4siqw+2MFbDD2+hVC69f8jIvDkmNu+ZExJZrVor mX3X5IxeBsuFK0tamtHtnHTOfp0Dtk8iRrmD9QqY=
Received: from 192.168.248.243 (SquirrelMail authenticated user warlord) by mail2.ihtfp.org with HTTP; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 14:03:23 -0400
Message-ID: <6e2d2c9a41b1ef12cb74dff687d15258.squirrel@mail2.ihtfp.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAD8oZZEofs7pYoiVJThme1iOrUZ5rmqi8L9ur-wHirr6QJTt0g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAD8oZZEofs7pYoiVJThme1iOrUZ5rmqi8L9ur-wHirr6QJTt0g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2021 14:03:23 -0400
From: "Derek Atkins" <derek@ihtfp.com>
To: "bc a" <mrcatcrack@gmail.com>
Cc: kitten@ietf.org
User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.22-14.fc20
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Importance: Normal
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.2a
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/kitten/5I6dMRpU-Q3NVcAOq1Oq9eRBVIc>
Subject: Re: [kitten] One question about Kerberos Protocol in the RFC 4120
X-BeenThere: kitten@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Common Authentication Technologies - Next Generation <kitten.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/kitten>, <mailto:kitten-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/kitten/>
List-Post: <mailto:kitten@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:kitten-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/kitten>, <mailto:kitten-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2021 18:04:07 -0000

HI,

No session keys are ever the same.
Whenever the KDC creates a session key, it is supposed to be randomly unique.

The only time keys are "the same" is long-lived authentication keys, the
keys shared between the KDC and a user, or between the KDC and a service. 
Those long-term keys are used to encrypt the unique session keys.

Hope this helps.

-derek

On Wed, August 18, 2021 11:53 am, bc a wrote:
>  Dear Kitten members,
>
> I'm Xiaoxing Xu and I'm a cyber security researcher from China. I had a
> question about Kerberos v5 when I read the RFC 4120 paper, which expects
> you to get your reply.
> The question is, I see the "key" appears in the "enc-part" field in the
> "tickets" chapter of section 5.3, just like the first picture shows, and
> the "key" is used to pass the session key.
> So we can think the authentication server creates a session key and put it
> in the "enc-part" of the "tickets" field in the AS-REQ phrase.
> [image: image.png]
> Then in the  section 5.4.2, I found that there is also a "key" exists in
> the "enc-part" of "KDC-REP",  that is to say, there is also a "key" in the
> "enc-part" of the AS-REP phase,
> not the "enc-part" of the "ticket".
> So I want to know whether it can be considered that the authentication
> server creates two "keys" in the AS-REP phase, one in the "enc-part" of
> the
> "ticket" field,
> and the other one is in the separate "enc-part" , And whether these two
> "key" values are the same?
> Thank you so much for your help.
> [image: image.png]
> Best regards
> Xiaoxing Xu
> _______________________________________________
> Kitten mailing list
> Kitten@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/kitten
>


-- 
       Derek Atkins                 617-623-3745
       derek@ihtfp.com             www.ihtfp.com
       Computer and Internet Security Consultant