Re: [MMUSIC] Review of draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle-negotiation-32 - Magnus' comments - MID security

[Eric Rescorla <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 12:54 PM, Christer Holmberg <
[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
>
> My intention was not to claim we have consensus. I just wanted to put
> forward some text to see whether it’s something we can work on.
>
>
>
> Or, would you prefer to not saying anything?
>

I don't think we need to say anything normative.

-Ekr


>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Christer
>
>
>
> *From:* mmusic [mailto:[e-mail]] *On Behalf Of *Eric
> Rescorla
> *Sent:* 12 October 2016 19:57
> *To:* Christer Holmberg <[e-mail]>
> *Cc:* Magnus Westerlund <[e-mail]>; Paul Kyzivat <
> [e-mail]>; [e-mail]; Cullen Jennings <[e-mail]>
> *Subject:* Re: [MMUSIC] Review of draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle-negotiation-32
> - Magnus' comments - MID security
>
>
>
> I don't think there is anything like consensus for a 2919-level
> RECOMMENDED to encrypt the MID.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 4:47 AM, Christer Holmberg <
> [e-mail]> wrote:
>
> Pull request created.
>
> https://github.com/cdh4u/draft-sdp-bundle/pull/11
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Christer
>
>
> On 12/10/16 12:32, "mmusic on behalf of Christer Holmberg"
> <[e-mail] on behalf of [e-mail]>
> wrote:
>
>
> >Hi,
> >
> >Based on the discussions, and input that has been provided, are people ok
> >with adding the text Magnus suggested (see below) to the Security
> >Considerations of BUNDLE?
> >
> >Regards,
> >
> >Christer
> >
> >
> >>>> The identfication-tag when included in the RTP MID SDES item,
> >>>> independent of transport, RTCP SDES packet or RTP header extension,
> >>>> can expose the value to parties beyond the signaling chain.
> >>>> Therefore, the identification-tag MUST NOT contain any user related
> >>>> information. However, the implementation's method for generating
> >>>> identfication-tags combined with hardware configuration can enable
> >>>> fingerprinting of the endpoint device and thus its user. As the
> >>>> identification-tag is also used to route the media stream to the
> >>>> right application functionality it is also important that the value
> >>>> received is the one intended by the sender, thus integrity and the
> >>>> authenticity of the source are important to prevent denial of
> >>>> service on the application. At least to prevent third parties from
> >>>> modifying the identification-tag value.
> >>>>
> >>>> Due to the security risks associated with the MID values in RTP and
> >>>> RTCP it is strongly RECOMMENDED that the MID SDES item is both
> >>>> confidentiality protected as well as source authenticated when
> >>>> transported in either RTCP or RTP header extensions. The security
> >>>> mechanisms used SHALL provide corresponding levels of security for
> >>>> both RTP header extensions and RTCP. Confidentiality mechanisms for
> >>>> RTP/RTCP are discussed in Options for Securing RTP Sessions
> >>>> [RFC7201], for example SRTP [RFC3711] with SRTCP encryption enabled
> >>>> combined with [RFC6904] can provide the necessary security
> >>>> functions.
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >mmusic mailing list
> >[e-mail]
> >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>
> _______________________________________________
> mmusic mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>
>
>