[quicwg/base-drafts] Need to prevent amplification attack for any case where the server's response is big (#1309)

ekr <notifications@github.com> Fri, 20 April 2018 01:39 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@github.com>
X-Original-To: quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28BF1127076 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Apr 2018 18:39:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.606
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.606 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_28=1.404, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=github.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 UXCyVNrGjY7q for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Apr 2018 18:39:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-5.smtp.github.com (out-5.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.196]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 27A9A126C83 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Apr 2018 18:39:35 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 18:39:34 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1524188374; bh=IBXe/We7YA9FSc/4x/4hwrdXhcY31lnUCkwimVbkx9o=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:Subject:List-ID:List-Archive:List-Post: List-Unsubscribe:From; b=iJVw8M0UG3WxUHd0kCL+8Wko/ALipbBULx6oZfnYnm1yREZzm+2YLu1kcdIbxK+f1 XVjYOy0UBbI+LZr92ewmz9zdcsgkbX527cgtnf/Sb5Mduae4GQyvP7NXOS8IptqU1Z 7a6ajHM7neBNbphIjg21FFWYMS0Z37Zq11SsIOKQ=
From: ekr <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4abb5bf82440d376141d1d1861f8057f9b5b26bb27492cf0000000116f106d692a169ce12d73e29@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1309@github.com>
Subject: [quicwg/base-drafts] Need to prevent amplification attack for any case where the server's response is big (#1309)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5ad944d66492_4b712b0ac0798f606013e"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: ekr
X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues
X-GitHub-Reason: subscribed
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/JkrKoX8KAUD0F3tzVn4Bcss-nU8>
X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
List-Id: Notification list for GitHub issues related to the QUIC WG <quic-issues.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/quic-issues>, <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/quic-issues/>
List-Post: <mailto:quic-issues@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/quic-issues>, <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 01:39:37 -0000

S 4.4.3 says

```
If the server expects to generate more than three Handshake packets in response to an Initial packet, it SHOULD include a PATH_CHALLENGE frame in each Handshake packet that it sends. After receiving at least one valid PATH_RESPONSE frame, the server can send its remaining Handshake packets. Servers can instead perform address validation using a Retry packet; this requires less state on the server, but could involve additional computational effort depending on implementation choices.
```

However, there are two other cases where the server might generate >3 packets outside of the handshake:

* The application data protocol is a server speaks first protocol and it has a large banner it wants to send in 0.5 RTT
* The client is doing 0-RTT

There are ways to fix this, but it's not clear to me that the protocol actually documents them.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1309