IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ntp] NTP Security (was NTPv5: big picture)

Philip Prindeville <philipp@redfish-solutions.com> Sun, 17 January 2021 02:23 UTC

Return-Path: <philipp@redfish-solutions.com>
X-Original-To: ntp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ntp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6CDF3A1B60 for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 16 Jan 2021 18:23:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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 AqJyxwYyONot for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 16 Jan 2021 18:23:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.redfish-solutions.com (mail.redfish-solutions.com [45.33.216.244]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A8E313A150D for <ntp@ietf.org>; Sat, 16 Jan 2021 18:23:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.3.4] ([192.168.3.4]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.redfish-solutions.com (8.16.1/8.16.1) with ESMTPSA id 10H2NLXJ439686 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Sat, 16 Jan 2021 19:23:21 -0700
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.40.0.2.32\))
From: Philip Prindeville <philipp@redfish-solutions.com>
In-Reply-To: <20210117013452.498EF40605C@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net>
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 2021 19:23:21 -0700
Cc: Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com>, NTP WG <ntp@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <E4B10E81-7CE3-427C-BA61-EAFDFCEADC67@redfish-solutions.com>
References: <20210117013452.498EF40605C@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net>
To: Hal Murray <hmurray@megapathdsl.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.40.0.2.32)
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 192.168.1.3
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ntp/I_Ny0hivUyOd27-q-0OdB4U7pjU>
Subject: Re: [Ntp] NTP Security (was NTPv5: big picture)
X-BeenThere: ntp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ntp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ntp>, <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ntp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ntp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ntp>, <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2021 02:23:24 -0000


> On Jan 16, 2021, at 6:34 PM, Hal Murray <hmurray@megapathdsl.net> wrote:
> 
> 
> watsonbladd@gmail.com said:
>> I'd like to see some input from people who operate the pool on what solutions
>> would work for them. Right now we're sort of flying blind. Perhaps we can
>> discuss at IETF 110? 
> 
> I think there are 2 levels to discuss.  One is technical.  If I have something 
> like the pool, how can I distribute the information about which systems are 
> "in the pool" from pool-central to pool clients in a secure way that allows 
> clients to verify that they are talking to the specified server.
> 
> The other is how to setup a system run by many many volunteers so that you 
> only get "good" volunteers.
> 
> Until we solve the second problem, I think discussing the technical issues is 
> misleading.
> 


Google "Trust in loosely federated distributed systems"... zero hits...

Okay, I'm exaggerating, but it's not a big body of work.  Saw this:

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/book/10.1002/9780470751787

But it's already 11 years old.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email