IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [ntpwg] Parsing NTP packets regarding MACs and EXTs.

Rob Seaman <seaman@noao.edu> Tue, 21 June 2016 16:56 UTC

Return-Path: <ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B7C612DAC9 for <ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 09:56:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.215
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.215 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=gmail.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 ZvEF2j3SAq7I for <ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 09:56:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::7]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9DCD12D1E6 for <ntp-archives-ahFae6za@lists.ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 09:56:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [149.20.68.7]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFA0886DB0A for <ntp-archives-ahFae6za@lists.ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 16:56:06 +0000 (UTC)
X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org
Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org
Received: from mail1.ntp.org (mail1.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::5]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F71386D55E for <ntpwg@lists.ntp.org>; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 16:56:01 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-ob0-x236.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4003:c01::236]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <robertlewisseaman2@gmail.com>) id 1bFOxu-000Jhq-BK for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 16:56:01 +0000
Received: by mail-ob0-x236.google.com with SMTP id mu6so30869453obc.3 for <ntpwg@lists.ntp.org>; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 09:55:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:subject:mime-version:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=eAHX09mER86YumFCTsH4p9eIYhArPWHjaLLwOiHp27w=; b=gEYl8P6AqPuUOWr/E4f9Od+c028fhuDaAx/RwQU0HGixcqxpveNK9uVQlnQiOzS3JW T27ZiAL/W/uw32s+QU2VBDK8FqZNf8C4SmmaeKbGP1wvVj4iUbmLlty2Rw1pKMk5yWW7 yRQ4GqzmC3LdmD7kVBRgccd9T0jzII5uRGJj3zgAmge90p1oVO33wcMc5IyDg7kSAvZp hqjbtNkQKtoPCm5raKsiK4JZJ90aT9WXMeyguphW8nO4/6M0pbkaPI+RcZ9gVZZYjSal ZvNKLoBaaOJ7wfOcKbbnPvxDLG5Udoo6qIu7O0XRX82aABsN/4i7ZEXxC3B0Ei+0XyWW lTjA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:subject:mime-version:from:in-reply-to :date:cc:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=eAHX09mER86YumFCTsH4p9eIYhArPWHjaLLwOiHp27w=; b=HtPNQGZyXcIa4iVC2Xw1OHWEhuSa9+0d25O3Lf01CjB45b+DlsVdou4F4Ucibc+qEH W2hbgBFTj+F2AtXBqy669v0NTDDdyXMJBXx3/e0CRNwLbqgg/SL7A181M+6RMGkaDfOC Fx2ZMi1gvnL8Bubw/dqj3twbuh3Hdtg9TzMCegaNQwscmSs87zkgIsuqesqC9cHLRKpn AolxNEbpzFwRBFAsXhd6kWiY1KpcUWYSK52pk+L/zGSQ8rBFcEtN9uhgjvbKchbQJRWl jsDPpHEOspmZO0fLoK7jA8GmpCH4ln40GN9E6WKAqIWuvkC3+ajEXB1xGR1sKibpgDCd UOvw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tLtp2Aonp1DbGS1EXx0JuY47mIzxpvkyxDgSU/iJ6vrmwBXHQX2IJV2HaXmqLQLcg==
X-Received: by 10.157.20.133 with SMTP id d5mr17196945ote.76.1466528153480; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 09:55:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.162] (fourkccd.lpl.arizona.edu. [150.135.111.98]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 48sm21040555oti.1.2016.06.21.09.55.52 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 21 Jun 2016 09:55:52 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
From: Rob Seaman <seaman@noao.edu>
In-Reply-To: <096803445d424904b9d6d42838dddd96@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 09:55:51 -0700
Message-Id: <9033792F-0C3B-4B55-98A5-9FECA33D0638@noao.edu>
References: <stenn@ntp.org> <E1bFCJh-000G0C-Bf@stenn.ntp.org> <20160621093932.BD9A7406057@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net> <f4f6f8f969ac49ff819ccae06ec2e3db@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <d5934cd7-5808-3e2b-3ed6-b5e1b3f9e2df@ntp.org> <CAJm83bAHcSQtOHRjUHVk7o27KmbSqH_dad+dLMAhQ6Vh3hnsWw@mail.gmail.com> <d201d6d1-e769-c9c3-492c-409f129e54a9@ntp.org> <89190d0a867f4906b04431dda735cf8a@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <35fe3778-3580-001f-67a7-e91d3ef7584e@ntp.org> <096803445d424904b9d6d42838dddd96@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com>
To: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 2607:f8b0:4003:c01::236
X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: robertlewisseaman2@gmail.com
X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org)
Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Parsing NTP packets regarding MACs and EXTs.
X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol <ntpwg.lists.ntp.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ntp.org/options/ntpwg>, <mailto:ntpwg-request@lists.ntp.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.ntp.org/pipermail/ntpwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:ntpwg@lists.ntp.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ntpwg-request@lists.ntp.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg>, <mailto:ntpwg-request@lists.ntp.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: "ntpwg@lists.ntp.org" <ntpwg@lists.ntp.org>, Hal Murray <hmurray@megapathdsl.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org
Sender: ntpwg <ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org>

On Jun 21, 2016, at 9:52 AM, Salz, Rich <rsalz@akamai.com> wrote:

>> The intention is not to limit ourselves and AES-GCM is only one of the
>> algorithms. The RFC needs to be updated but the reference implementation
>> will support what's available and should be be flexible enough to switch
>> algorithms in case any of them become regarded as vunerable.
> 
> Theoretically yes, but if AES-GCM is broken we'll all be using sundials anyway :)

If UTC is redefined sundials won’t help.

Rob Seaman

_______________________________________________
ntpwg mailing list
ntpwg@lists.ntp.org
http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email