IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Lsvr] [OPSEC] security against what?

Erik Kline <ek@google.com> Tue, 04 September 2018 08:50 UTC

Return-Path: <ek@google.com>
X-Original-To: lsvr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lsvr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12A4B130E58 for <lsvr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Sep 2018 01:50:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -17.51
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-17.51 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, ENV_AND_HDR_SPF_MATCH=-0.5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL=-7.5] 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 l8lykE-yt7bm for <lsvr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Sep 2018 01:50:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wr1-x42f.google.com (mail-wr1-x42f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42f]) (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 AE826130E51 for <lsvr@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Sep 2018 01:50:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wr1-x42f.google.com with SMTP id o37-v6so3044794wrf.6 for <lsvr@ietf.org>; Tue, 04 Sep 2018 01:50:01 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=mJsjGVHovkD4AtEpEKyyl8EST9H3unF9+vAQvdiAimg=; b=CpZhZXgR3mTEBUJKqYWFTHrFvCyTtaUHKNQ3XYiIQX1XhH6qNbmF6BRxjZNxOBP9oi /9+8F5QQDPwGKwOPXfU3xJa6+pyJlG5buTFsU3FvZexuJ7tWlQA9TEmeB7Sy3OosukD7 PAchjF0FMR+2Rnyv3CDFTh6szYaKizu4UvSElgjelcA48XmHZexTnhJtEliPMB3i8u4v QFDFdBbM5wUCG7mX+HwJfNAzDYm0GLFl3FbOxAMqFxhXHUf+vZGPGJ+bNjWCRG+fJMdA KOd4wQjncgn8SZ/Oa48ZI6j/x411s7un+lsRWFlj5IVjIiy7Umtu5EG29RLR8laX9CpA V9lQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=mJsjGVHovkD4AtEpEKyyl8EST9H3unF9+vAQvdiAimg=; b=BoPdIVVn4OXUmCsYbPLvHS75zIkVaRntaWhgxSQJE+v7iolv9fOX/+g+98F+vIRMhi mdp0xNiFHUvJwBpJ24HamcPe/iZgaeDF8eZTXtNC+Uy7jbSm5L9gjcGzDjVKTd8EWQzR ihGDmTgh0orAMVrgr+CZJRiaPvQV/LHFOcvd6/JXCbuYpv1nD2/ZHLoSbufJVxqgghkS kgu7/Mr7NhX5aRkFO+QpBPc2h9AA9SQ5soFR0gna6Al2/DFz1pQ+c3WvYO8V3BjY8bHO Vrof36bc4z3xORTfDdyN0HwhSeGeFcXi2+aF+9WTnos4JlTf1vYoG4XudXWOkcKiS+TP By/Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: APzg51ALAVnUAZ5d4JNReVUE64xDGdmVDXhJiA/7Qu/vbeVWkm8IlWUi dOKNo1S76NtYN6COXtRagGtA9XL+pzavht7PnBs8FQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0Vdbeu7KK9WZi6wOqxXVhtBkws5et4VppjMKp3cJzZiuJz1l1gwraxuFe/8TTENVmZQikbJe7p8cmDfepZZxjMgM=
X-Received: by 2002:adf:9d1c:: with SMTP id k28-v6mr12363404wre.104.1536050999709; Tue, 04 Sep 2018 01:49:59 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <m21sbkjba8.wl-randy@psg.com> <AM5PR0701MB172966DC99841C55D5E26CA2E0030@AM5PR0701MB1729.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <AM5PR0701MB172966DC99841C55D5E26CA2E0030@AM5PR0701MB1729.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
From: Erik Kline <ek@google.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2018 17:49:46 +0900
Message-ID: <CAAedzxrX5TWxYtA-uCfA3QyF_N1L3-tmjtqWTNThXvNNi4Uppw@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Van De Velde, Gunter (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)" <gunter.van_de_velde@nokia.com>
Cc: lsvr@ietf.org, opsec@ietf.org, Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha-256"; boundary="0000000000003a8e86057507be22"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsvr/43xlhFy_Jcxfx2sbZXuKc7ImosY>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 04 Sep 2018 01:51:25 -0700
Subject: Re: [Lsvr] [OPSEC] security against what?
X-BeenThere: lsvr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
Precedence: list
List-Id: Link State Vector Routing <lsvr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lsvr>, <mailto:lsvr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lsvr/>
List-Post: <mailto:lsvr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lsvr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsvr>, <mailto:lsvr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2018 08:50:06 -0000

Is recommending 802.1x possible/sufficient (given the description in
Randy's strawperson comment)?
On Tue, 4 Sep 2018 at 17:16, Van De Velde, Gunter (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)
<gunter.van_de_velde@nokia.com> wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> Holiday season is over, maybe time to progress the discussion about DC security properties.
>
> Any constructive comments regarding the below "crude guess as a straw" from Randy?
>
> Brgds,
>
> Gunter VdV
> LSVR WG co-chair
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lsvr <lsvr-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Randy Bush
> Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2018 06:10
> To: Little Strange Very Real <lsvr@ietf.org>
> Subject: [Lsvr] security against what?
>
> at the montréal meeting, a few datacener operators said they were seriously concerned about security.  befofe thinking about any solution space, i am interested in the basic question, what is the threat model?
>
> here is my crude guess as a straw
>
>     not so much intentional mitm by an attacker
>
>     strange/unauthorized device plugs into a port.  92.3% of the problems
>     will be a miswire.  datacenter clos miswires are a major issue.
>
>     someone plugs a (accidentally) poisoned laptop into a clos port.
>
> clue bat from the ops, please.
>
> randy
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lsvr mailing list
> Lsvr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsvr
>
> _______________________________________________
> OPSEC mailing list
> OPSEC@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email