Re: [Mud] [OPSAWG] putting quarantined IoT devices behind a captive portal

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Wed, 10 July 2019 01:05 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: mud@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mud@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D94C1200C4; Tue, 9 Jul 2019 18:05:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 yuE763QwAASr; Tue, 9 Jul 2019 18:05:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3CCF51200F6; Tue, 9 Jul 2019 18:05:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.21]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21B8D3808A; Tue, 9 Jul 2019 21:02:59 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id D37E45D0; Tue, 9 Jul 2019 21:05:01 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: "Montgomery, Douglas (Fed)" <dougm@nist.gov>
cc: "M. Ranganathan" <mranga@gmail.com>, "opsawg@ietf.org" <opsawg@ietf.org>, "mud@ietf.org" <mud@ietf.org>, Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>, captive-portals@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <420BE1C3-BA84-4306-BD72-B7CE9905B659@nist.gov>
References: <B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABAA49CD8C1@nkgeml513-mbx.china.huawei.com> <CAFpG3gc4ijy+xH7O_9EzpzwcROu3XcTA4xpSAH9P+oyhWQzMyg@mail.gmail.com> <4486.1562683318@localhost> <7534958E-E1A6-470D-B4BB-6B88CD27B54C@cisco.com> <27334.1562697538@localhost> <CAHiu4JNjPwFu=4OEX8_HuFf+Pcgmg=fCkqd2gzki35=Qu7wM=A@mail.gmail.com> <420BE1C3-BA84-4306-BD72-B7CE9905B659@nist.gov>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 24.5.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2019 21:05:01 -0400
Message-ID: <21832.1562720701@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mud/IgY9EP6jWgF9WOo4Ymz5_iI_JCI>
Subject: Re: [Mud] [OPSAWG] putting quarantined IoT devices behind a captive portal
X-BeenThere: mud@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of Manufacturer Ussage Descriptions <mud.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mud>, <mailto:mud-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mud/>
List-Post: <mailto:mud@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mud-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mud>, <mailto:mud-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 01:05:06 -0000

Montgomery, Douglas (Fed) <dougm@nist.gov> wrote:
    > Most of the devices I think of as actual IoT devices have no direct
    > UI/shell.  Your only interaction with them after initial
    > “install/configure” is through their cloud web service interface.

That's true for many devices, but not all.
Even light bulbs have output interfaces :-)

    > Having said that I think your model is fine.

Good.

    > I would suggest detecting device reboot would be one signal to clear
    > quarantine state.  Since MUD “misbehavior” is mostly instantaneously
    > detectable (1 packet), I am not that concerned that the device might
    > reboot for others reasons and still be infected.

Device reboot probably needs an attestation to be believed.

    > One might keep a counter and a time stamp of quarantine clears and if
    > you a device had N MUD violations after quarantine clears in X time,
    > lock it down in quarantine or completely take it off line.

Reasonable, but in the space of quality of implementation, I think.

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-