IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] amplification attack using Retry and VN triggered by coalesced Initial packets (#2259)

Marten Seemann <notifications@github.com> Thu, 27 December 2018 18:19 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 286F512DD85 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Dec 2018 10:19:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.661
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.661 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.065, 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] 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 7MwxosbAd0Rg for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Dec 2018 10:19:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out-6.smtp.github.com (out-6.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.197]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 85DB2126F72 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Thu, 27 Dec 2018 10:19:06 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2018 10:19:05 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1545934745; bh=f/49naR43k9+qG+Yjymax6Qn/bMGNF9T5FDA7Ypx8cs=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=zQpLdt4Gf7kb+WNQKEBBPiXJTcRcsmT085x4QVn1pieCiTr+7lV6VZUmOFatrTht9 5pmf0RMqF4F8LZMHxaICuaSJgETSiCOpoIdPwWXp/y/KwPFUVOuWqO1Mcwq+GR2FoJ FQmTWwRvCc3JlAGoPiXyE802nRbpUvd7s7jPIQ4M=
From: Marten Seemann <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4ab160d98144bc07bdcc71c4d7aca45a0a0caa74ccc92cf00000001183cd99992a169ce177f0208@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2259/450204149@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2259@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2259@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] amplification attack using Retry and VN triggered by coalesced Initial packets (#2259)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5c251799457f0_4d8e3f9b5d4d45bc22907ef"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: marten-seemann
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/VEG9mrZd1t5PezvreDw7vAu6jqs>
X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Thu, 27 Dec 2018 18:19:08 -0000

@nibanks Why would you do that? If an implementation is not capable of using QUIC PADDING for some reason (and I can't think of any reason why this would pose an insurmountable challenge), it can just pad the rest of the UDP packet directly. There's no need to use a second Initial packet.

-- 
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/2259#issuecomment-450204149

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email