Re: [rtcweb] Security Architecture: SDES support is a MUST

"Fabio Pietrosanti (naif)" <lists@infosecurity.ch> Fri, 20 July 2012 13:17 UTC

Return-Path: <lists@infosecurity.ch>
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 EE79221F860B for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:17:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 JI+uwJd4IUf9 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:17:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wg0-f44.google.com (mail-wg0-f44.google.com [74.125.82.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D50521F85EA for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:17:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wgbdr13 with SMTP id dr13so2569354wgb.13 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:18:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:x-gm-message-state; bh=c2Bw49yUEE/wtd13xm3/7PRhtfnXDKlV28CXYHXdDV8=; b=NPZGy2DtH8d9tyjo/FLGGZjR5ZFgxnkWeu/E/+aYMcFKIS0GahOaWufRM3k0lvmjH7 cvqU3B3pUm86qKf18LgVk5tzeecsbx6UUmtg1NS90JblYEauSYrj4RC4uISwG14i6CtR K0FjETZO4sg3D5bLOLAqu3Drzy4IlL0KnS2nVgqhh9UneHRObKPSmlQurkBK//WAmjeT zsotYKRK0QvXb0rhtWwzYivjCwSpRgmpih8h2lYeuk1ZQyKvMZQhUpYkabtGZeGlnLFu 0045E9FDyv6Sfdw37NhODuoOhqeZS/KZXKM1/ZMmWYAub8KF4U0oHv9FHf36IMWX/027 pMMQ==
Received: by 10.216.123.135 with SMTP id v7mr4036701weh.47.1342790319105; Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:18:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sonyvaiop13.local (93-57-41-37.ip162.fastwebnet.it. [93.57.41.37]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id y5sm44646953wiw.9.2012.07.20.06.18.37 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:18:38 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: Fabio Pietrosanti <naif@infosecurity.ch>
Message-ID: <50095AAC.7030104@infosecurity.ch>
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2012 15:18:36 +0200
From: "Fabio Pietrosanti (naif)" <lists@infosecurity.ch>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120614 Thunderbird/13.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
References: <201207190742.q6J7glf6008744@vivaldi29.register.it> <500834FE.5040809@alcatel-lucent.com> <500835E1.2070502@infosecurity.ch> <50084717.7060301@alcatel-lucent.com> <BLU169-DS1488EF1F32A1EB2027582093D90@phx.gbl> <5008F7B9.7020804@infosecurity.ch> <500957ED.90807@alvestrand.no>
In-Reply-To: <500957ED.90807@alvestrand.no>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnigwvNXSMLWgsGP5nUWIhIuuJeeds9LJjy/Wac1pRZNhfHGO6XokRPlF3ZVYhcMVZNdXRn
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Security Architecture: SDES support is a MUST
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: Fri, 20 Jul 2012 13:17:45 -0000

On 7/20/12 3:06 PM, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
>> Current security definition of WebRTC does not support end-to-end
>> security.
> The current security definition of WebRTC (with DTLS) provides
> fingerprints.
> If the application is able to verify those fingerprints, security is end
> to end; if it isn't - it isn't.

The security specification already does specify how the fingerprint must
be checked, against a third party system that must be trusted (unless
there is some recent update i didn't still checked).

The way the specification describe fingerprint must be checked, does not
enforce end-to-end security but always rely on trusted third party,
being IdP (identity providers).

The only way to achieve end-to-end security is not to have any kind of
trusted third party, as has been already discussed on
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/current/msg04043.html .

Until WebRTC security architecture specification does not clearly define
a peer-to-peer fingerprint verification system that does not rely on
trusted third party it cannot be considered to provide end-to-end security.

Fabio