Re: [MMUSIC] Handling of unverified data and media

Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com> Fri, 31 March 2017 17:53 UTC

Return-Path: <roman@telurix.com>
X-Original-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0242312778E for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Mar 2017 10:53:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.388
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.388 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=telurix-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 Cs-26tLDDmEB for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Mar 2017 10:53:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pg0-x22d.google.com (mail-pg0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c05::22d]) (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 9E056126D74 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Fri, 31 Mar 2017 10:53:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pg0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id 21so77808810pgg.1 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Fri, 31 Mar 2017 10:53:50 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=telurix-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=d2u6MOhf1fECrCqa7KWDwzFRHD8khCSaPxGkCBVhJSg=; b=LkgO4glVHBTXL2RaNkAo5NB80I7pUwJBp0IFQetzljv1cYKgNLk8CkpByL1yGV9Tab 2RNfh04H1M2VUDE4cSYKkAtMXmHIscq0vBeaeNaQOe3Y8K+3/s6qyw5oRW8pmhZ4J49Q HkzZZQZgSAAjmWqof7+DIO+79ldDMiOJBq4m1WZBwp37LPKLR1FMZYQZdPByL4UBNzJy XJV9rtuSJvTBapECmjgsVg6jg4ZmnK3KmLAmrXqyRyIgz8KlKp2VYEQnp074+b3uCiyU nkFoV+EUfzmGynpYKmTULP6oNR04od+9KGZKEGiwMpI21UzxRNiEBZgd4tSPdiuASV4j tyXw==
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=d2u6MOhf1fECrCqa7KWDwzFRHD8khCSaPxGkCBVhJSg=; b=gHVc/d4Hj4LKQ6QT+Y1MRPeBek59b4bkj166mvxj1AW9qwuVsySN9b0tktiDN9/xKw 5vR9SOXDxb4mORTBDqp9FGHqEPeRDcVWgjxzjaeNxAQTh30U3tVqCK3YvdDi0wdotciQ PyKzlxd36EX2r7RlcBuPwLq1JPNZlQaoIyPXs+Qo7QceDSfLbh6s9BqYWnJou+Ru2zZ1 GfhnsXfYEhe3+RGYnqH7nqxX222hA7/HuVzoO8q7H0eiaVGD6i6KtNVZ3D2+3clawJ31 +RnKpGAwx9RfQcVQSC4gVHamI4LQw0RGyhW95D2O8MmQJFKdBtzKw59Z0QBeqQphgiXe Iuxg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H3aM5ZuCsDShwd4OLFIX6ez/8VWEEpEUqF/WivHQc7TrQ/EzQ006a2/e6d/dP5b/g==
X-Received: by 10.99.181.25 with SMTP id y25mr4280442pge.214.1490982830046; Fri, 31 Mar 2017 10:53:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pg0-f46.google.com (mail-pg0-f46.google.com. [74.125.83.46]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g75sm11800944pfj.107.2017.03.31.10.53.49 for <mmusic@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 31 Mar 2017 10:53:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pg0-f46.google.com with SMTP id 21so77808355pgg.1 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Fri, 31 Mar 2017 10:53:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.99.122.78 with SMTP id j14mr4272634pgn.52.1490982829107; Fri, 31 Mar 2017 10:53:49 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.100.145.151 with HTTP; Fri, 31 Mar 2017 10:53:48 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAD5OKxtMLbRkm782oKw19bkOPQnxLFO71a8CK=P5pAHZ-6rBXw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAOW+2dseq8AmLKXFGUaiss8ahpkY1ZzYUD_KdirFE1rskfvqjw@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnUc-XsYivUzSs6W4it_Krykr-reJMDJXqKf5FvGw_NBPg@mail.gmail.com> <CAD5OKxvXTsTPaKFNdwS6tPBTAksD=jgiAFGuGMgbepOtBoFT+Q@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBO9MP0fqg=ubpgU8+3L9koB5grCyp-O8hS9Pis942-rhA@mail.gmail.com> <CAOW+2due+uNyWn-3GQnpXrR-L55XVZSXXRmC0E9-5BSGKynUYA@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBPr4OjUBSUdS3wWmUuRJh7XmgxfVaY1F15mjMAqjbTZRg@mail.gmail.com> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B4CB06D6C@ESESSMB109.ericsson.se> <67E58DC2-89CB-45AB-9452-C6A7DFEA34A4@vidyo.com> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B4CB0B034@ESESSMB109.ericsson.se> <CF91D618-CC36-4811-A1BE-CAC48EF66900@iii.ca> <CAJrXDUGy10nV3bWYsiLFc0czu5ydmwU-uf9AC=O+zfUxken+=w@mail.gmail.com> <E427CC84-257A-4894-9B81-E8A46F824B2A@gmail.com> <CABkgnnXcf+TVqG=W6gJmxK7424EA1nxeRmO3wA+nr7i6Viiuyw@mail.gmail.com> <CAJrXDUG5gmgR5HQz99z9ie184SoBHuckuOEYLno-PLRm7kFniA@mail.gmail.com> <CAD5OKxtMLbRkm782oKw19bkOPQnxLFO71a8CK=P5pAHZ-6rBXw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 13:53:48 -0400
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAD5OKxvwV38dJXR3mYSiQEnNoX3X7nfMY2hBe1S4kxj7h6WZWA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAD5OKxvwV38dJXR3mYSiQEnNoX3X7nfMY2hBe1S4kxj7h6WZWA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com>
Cc: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, Bernard Aboba <bernard.aboba@gmail.com>, mmusic <mmusic@ietf.org>, Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca>, Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f403045c5df4e53c23054c0a7d89
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mmusic/k0FuOXotUfuatfLKoYZhK1GDmRY>
Subject: Re: [MMUSIC] Handling of unverified data and media
X-BeenThere: mmusic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiparty Multimedia Session Control Working Group <mmusic.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mmusic>, <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mmusic/>
List-Post: <mailto:mmusic@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic>, <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 17:53:53 -0000

Peter,

Any comments on the ICE Lite scenario? I did see it in the wild.

Regards,

_____________
Roman Shpount

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 9:11 PM, Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com> wrote:

> Peter,
>
> What about ICE lite? If ICE lite sends an offer to WebRTC end point, it
> can get DTLS ClientHello before it got the answer response from the WebRTC
> end point. Since ICE lite client does not send ICE requests before sending
> data, it will respond with ServerHello and establish the connection. At
> this point data can be sent to it before the answer arrives and fingerprint
> can be verified.
>
> I think the right answer to this situation is not to send ServerHello
> until answer and fingerprint is received. ClientHello should be buffered
> and only handled when answer is received.
>
> Regards,
>
> _____________
> Roman Shpount
>
> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 7:40 PM, Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Bernard, you are right that this is possible with ORTC, even though I
>> think it's impossible with WebRTC.  But that's clearly out of scope for the
>> MMUSIC WG.  Perhaps the right forum to discuss Cullen's 1-800-fedex use
>> case is in the context of ORTC (or WebRTC NV).
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 3:50 PM Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> These both sound like legitimate cases where ICE can precede
>>> signaling.  I would recommend that the W3C think carefully about
>>> whether they might like to accept (potentially) invalid data before we
>>> spend a whole lot more time on the issue.
>>>
>>> On 30 March 2017 at 17:11, Bernard Aboba <bernard.aboba@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > The unverified media scenarios seem to depend on ICE connectivity being
>>> > bi-directionally enabled so as to permit the DTLS negotiation to
>>> proceed in
>>> > advance of remote fingerprint arrival. If ICE candidates are signaled
>>> > separately from the DTLS fingerprint exchange it might be feasible,
>>> such as
>>> > in ORTC signaling where the ICE parameters are exchanged before the
>>> > DtlsParameters.
>>> >
>>> > At the last WebRTC interim a scenario involving PRANSWER and Trickle
>>> ICE was
>>> > presented. In the scenario, the PRANSWER included a fingerprint, but
>>> > possibly one which did not match the certificate provided in DTLS
>>> unlike the
>>> > final answer. I do not see how this could work but perhaps I am missing
>>> > something.
>>> >
>>> > On Mar 30, 2017, at 14:14, Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > We have a mailing list discussion (here), a bug
>>> > (https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/issues/849) and a PR
>>> > (https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/pull/1026#issuecomment-279238215)
>>> about
>>> > this.  I've copied the following comments to the latter two, so I'm
>>> adding
>>> > them here as well.
>>> >
>>> > TL;DR: I don't think unverified media is compatible with ICE+DTLS.
>>> Here is
>>> > why (you can go see the bug, too):
>>> >
>>> > You can receive DTLS from the remote side before receiving the remote
>>> > description (and thus fingerprint). This happens if the remote side
>>> sends an
>>> > ICE connectivity check and the local side sends a response and then the
>>> > remote side sends a DTLS packet.
>>> >
>>> > You cannot send DTLS from the local side before receiving the remote
>>> > description (and thus fingerprint). This is because you can't send an
>>> ICE
>>> > connectivity check until you have the remote ICE ufrag and pwd, and
>>> thus
>>> > can't get an ICE connectivity check response, and thus can't send
>>> DTLS. This
>>> > is because you can't send anything other than ICE until you get an ICE
>>> > connectivity check response.
>>> >
>>> > Since you can't send DTLS, you can't complete the handshake, and thus
>>> can't
>>> > extract the SRTP key.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Maybe I'm missing something, but I think this is impossible.
>>> >
>>> > On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 1:12 PM Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On Mar 13, 2017, at 3:44 PM, Christer Holmberg
>>> >> <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> My question is: is this something that’s causing problems in real
>>> >> deployments, and requires a change in the standard?
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> 1-800 go fedex. See webrtc requirements documents from many years ago.
>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> mmusic mailing list
>>> >> mmusic@ietf.org
>>> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > mmusic mailing list
>>> > mmusic@ietf.org
>>> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > mmusic mailing list
>>> > mmusic@ietf.org
>>> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>>> >
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> mmusic mailing list
>> mmusic@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>>
>>
>