Re: [rtcweb] Summary of ICE discussion

Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> Tue, 04 October 2011 15:31 UTC

Return-Path: <ekr@rtfm.com>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D801521F8CF7 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Oct 2011 08:31:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.976
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.976 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GPwQjAfkaUfp for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Oct 2011 08:31:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ey0-f172.google.com (mail-ey0-f172.google.com [209.85.215.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0897B21F8CC5 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Oct 2011 08:31:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by eye4 with SMTP id 4so681008eye.31 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 04 Oct 2011 08:34:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.213.7.14 with SMTP id b14mr756380ebb.59.1317742477325; Tue, 04 Oct 2011 08:34:37 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.213.22.211 with HTTP; Tue, 4 Oct 2011 08:33:57 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4E8B20BA.3080906@jesup.org>
References: <4E8B192E.80809@ericsson.com> <4E8B20BA.3080906@jesup.org>
From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2011 08:33:57 -0700
Message-ID: <CABcZeBOxoMd+MsP6ADLtvfW4MqMoysXqdNiw8Ph46-TzJDwB6Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Randell Jesup <randell-ietf@jesup.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0015174c441244365e04ae7ad4b1
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Summary of ICE discussion
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <rtcweb.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb>
List-Post: <mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2011 15:31:39 -0000

On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 8:05 AM, Randell Jesup <randell-ietf@jesup.org>; wrote
>
> One observation about the security/attack-vector side of this:  Any
> objection that includes "if an attacker is in a MITM position they could
> trick the rtcweb client into sending media" is an invalid objection.  A MITM
> attacker could inject or re-route any amount of traffic they wanted already
> if they're in the media path.


Concur. ICE is primarily about web attackers, not network attackers.

-Ekr