IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OPSEC] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6274 (7887)

Justin Iurman <justin.iurman@uliege.be> Mon, 08 April 2024 18:50 UTC

Return-Path: <justin.iurman@uliege.be>
X-Original-To: opsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: opsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57B3CC151545 for <opsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Apr 2024 11:50:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.094
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.094 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=uliege.be
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id O2dJcFYBvIj9 for <opsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Apr 2024 11:50:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from serv108.segi.ulg.ac.be (serv108.segi.ulg.ac.be [139.165.32.111]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EFA5AC15107A for <opsec@ietf.org>; Mon, 8 Apr 2024 11:50:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.55] (125.179-65-87.adsl-dyn.isp.belgacom.be [87.65.179.125]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by serv108.segi.ulg.ac.be (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EE0C4200C98D; Mon, 8 Apr 2024 20:49:58 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 serv108.segi.ulg.ac.be EE0C4200C98D
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=uliege.be; s=ulg20190529; t=1712602199; bh=YySCUWgx+5qMDw9tXqiuXVeuC9GoGUdftew5doLrzR8=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=vhp2QVMcupQPqroz1KuY+3RDFSFGwjzVPFTGvxCLfmUMD7wic+lV31IKHzD50aSNV vb+FG2V2GRUJl+2kUqcf+/BkEjNtJM6d/7qSvGVE6VLklY6wTfN2LVVeyT/GBJ38A+ OX4UGiR49QQyadlo0uFYJxZLAAIdgIaYXxePDmKjyAJZTuZ5e/z/plofAbFUOKqFew AJJu5Q9l04yHTUMNekapk6QcNE+Mvv3PJtCtJ1rAk5CnVTKrgjVHNpIEV9RkWAuBaX BpfC92fjYlQ53rPU/94hzs52aMt7DHDCA8NGmUfF5OItaT5O7F1k8KpQUO2rx0KBM8 MFdbkxNeZvfIA==
Message-ID: <e1e3ac89-0019-48d1-9af4-b44e2cf8e84b@uliege.be>
Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2024 20:49:58 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
To: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: niklas.baerveldt@gmail.com, fernando@gont.com.ar, opsec@ietf.org
References: <20240408181508.46E0FCE3DB@rfcpa.amsl.com>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Justin Iurman <justin.iurman@uliege.be>
In-Reply-To: <20240408181508.46E0FCE3DB@rfcpa.amsl.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/opsec/6DagHGd45Q-5gdgzmdC3oQNzQ5M>
Subject: Re: [OPSEC] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6274 (7887)
X-BeenThere: opsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: opsec wg mailing list <opsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/opsec>, <mailto:opsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/opsec/>
List-Post: <mailto:opsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:opsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec>, <mailto:opsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2024 18:50:06 -0000

This errata report looks correct and should be verified IMHO.

On 4/8/24 20:15, RFC Errata System wrote:
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6274,
> "Security Assessment of the Internet Protocol Version 4".
> 
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7887
> 
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Editorial
> Reported by: Niklas Baerveldt <niklas.baerveldt@gmail.com>
> 
> Section: 3.8.4
> 
> Original Text
> -------------
> The attacker is:
> 
>     o  Four hops away from A.
> 
>     o  Four hops away from B.
> 
>     o  Four hops away from C.
> 
>     o  Four hops away from D.
> 
>     In the network setup of Figure 3, the only system that satisfies all
>     these conditions is the one marked as the "F".
> 
> 
> Corrected Text
> --------------
> The attacker is:
> 
>     o  Four hops away from A.
> 
>     o  Four hops away from B.
> 
>     o  Four hops away from C.
> 
>     o  Three hops away from D.
> 
>     In the network setup of Figure 6, the only system that satisfies all
>     these conditions is the one marked as the "F".
> 
> 
> Notes
> -----
> Since the packets that D gets has a TTL of 62 while A,B and C gets packets with TTL of 61, it should be that D is one less hop away than the others. This also seems to be illustrated in Figure 6.
> 
> Text that seems to refer to the network setup of Figure 6 references to incorrect figure number 3.
> 
> Instructions:
> -------------
> This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". (If it is spam, it
> will be removed shortly by the RFC Production Center.) Please
> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party
> will log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.
> 
> --------------------------------------
> RFC6274 (draft-ietf-opsec-ip-security-07)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : Security Assessment of the Internet Protocol Version 4
> Publication Date    : July 2011
> Author(s)           : F. Gont
> Category            : INFORMATIONAL
> Source              : Operational Security Capabilities for IP Network Infrastructure
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OPSEC mailing list
> OPSEC@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email