IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Security implications of host candidates

Nils Ohlmeier <nohlmeier@mozilla.com> Tue, 17 July 2018 14:33 UTC

Return-Path: <nohlmeier@mozilla.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 F1EF3130DF9 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 07:33:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=mozilla.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 wJiKup9ayoXl for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 07:33:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-it0-x232.google.com (mail-it0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8041D12D7F8 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 07:33:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-it0-x232.google.com with SMTP id v71-v6so2173393itb.3 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 07:33:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mozilla.com; s=google; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=cAdB8+/TnG2DLputSPa1F4fp3vwds/+abr9xTnj2LIE=; b=R9hcbOy9GZxmREKRAtPaZO1dsfzm0Veasiwmx1rPQz+SAh1SfPiH+TwFubknsPmgCz 4SMb1Gmoe62zeyWPXsDygGU1HwlCkJop84ERpK0shUj+TBidcaWfIKy1n5YHSK6HZUog 2AicLLXbLSjO4Bti+OJHt7IsI/HXsHZKp7bDM=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=cAdB8+/TnG2DLputSPa1F4fp3vwds/+abr9xTnj2LIE=; b=BVsYDL8+ytjw8cUvj1gY0nw2vu8aufyMccclJbHCcoNR5OmdnWuMH4JEkWUCKMp46G H+XBmXEzMnWbagmEm7VG65DxRXWrDd/tSJcekmS+N8dILMA375M450aOShq9035k54Uu dbcxs3zlgNWNtMmhGoc/XXPQkbb+eTsVo5KWQYNrvVX8LRjhiGR8Z+LqQNYt86Jgy75Q i8Utuijf29QpsQayFGSGaVK9P9bHxEWLAwxC2dGjIYukE1f+Pe8JY+fUmw31wYKzL9fR Zc0B28ac2W/GT9fThAoPpGM7G1NIPzaq/vpArPUiuQduSYLU3brAlCyVeXeGV0+w7tkb tBog==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlFzER/qnLaCQFDt5m5mB/JiF+V+xns12evY8wwxXqEkxXDWwRIa +pzzsH4tr47bVsvc/DeNGHCbXQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpfxUVpVDzJliWUfrVbjd5ztCZP+6/m3vuT6OSSe5LR3/Gcd6MkTCJCsxd/Xk3+ER0/nywOB8w==
X-Received: by 2002:a02:b70b:: with SMTP id g11-v6mr1764164jam.34.1531837992886; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 07:33:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2001:67c:1232:144:c9a9:3ee:fb81:bd96? ([2001:67c:1232:144:c9a9:3ee:fb81:bd96]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u129-v6sm734254ita.5.2018.07.17.07.33.10 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 17 Jul 2018 07:33:11 -0700 (PDT)
From: Nils Ohlmeier <nohlmeier@mozilla.com>
Message-Id: <4712E24B-907F-40B3-A7E7-8FCBF46F6BC4@mozilla.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_8B39836B-7F53-41ED-82B5-19AD3ED6B685"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2018 10:33:09 -0400
In-Reply-To: <CAOJ7v-3CF5hXxOGkufzdP6VqrvjHW6BhnB1mjVnHjwv8pcP7KA@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Lennart Grahl <lennart.grahl@gmail.com>, RTCWeb IETF <rtcweb@ietf.org>
To: Justin Uberti <juberti=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
References: <CAOJ7v-1t_BDEEHmA4eqiS9ksYOOyHUz9LFLhQxs8FhjTdswP5w@mail.gmail.com> <CAOJ7v-3moUqwgxkz1Fek4vy-XV+WpDaO-PsQZEw4ougoCHjLww@mail.gmail.com> <CANN+akZ=Ebw41mA2wEX7-4u6q5WcZbFtM=VMLX4nDK39S=QGOQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAOJ7v-3X2Sj8Yid+i0=xadyH_Hmf4pMOF_iuOV+56Ty8HNnJuw@mail.gmail.com> <0ED74BE5-AC02-44C5-80E1-18532BD3D1FF@westhawk.co.uk> <CAOJ7v-0TGqvp=MUmeEUjYZTcvV37qbYSTV0pFMoi1J0CJQ7Q4A@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnXBTC5TERquJPO4dgiAKz037Cm0Omw4YrobtCW=wmGPyQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAOJ7v-0yzvu9POvR4Auokykqc63eju6_CveAzyVpcSd1kkK6Nw@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnXL6sdCDt=hjX+7KbP+xYm9jCmgjJNy4CvPPna_0oin=g@mail.gmail.com> <CAOJ7v-33ODGTsmbHEp_U7UdROvuKR7O7bne2_0tX6ivVf-+C5A@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnWJM4CE2ZLHYOOd=VYUj7kn5wFMAbeGB1HRyp++nvbPoQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAOJ7v-2WGyHSbSJwgbVVHLs-GO71rMLS2+OTetNyMhb0TM3ZcA@mail.gmail.com> <54EB6378-5DA2-4125-A4F4-84151D0E4F04@apple.com> <CAOJ7v-2dw1coDTpovTrKa__Oak7Jjn5EYgvWtByaRYmxfDDtXw@mail.gmail.com> <1d60feec-3a36-2deb-e4a7-703fb7144ed1@alvestrand.no> <68bb5744-d9f2-462c-446d-ae47f2f27e5e@gmail.com> <CAOJ7v-3CF5hXxOGkufzdP6VqrvjHW6BhnB1mjVnHjwv8pcP7KA@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/eVNdv4sWTDnNvsn4G_sMn2n0iDA>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Security implications of host candidates
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 17 Jul 2018 14:33:15 -0000

> On Jul 11, 2018, at 19:01, Justin Uberti <juberti=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> Thanks for the suggestions on intermediate modes. I think we're converging on the following potential replacements for Mode 2:
> 2b) IPv4 mDNS + RFC 4941 IPv6
> 2d) mDNS of any private IPv4/IPv6  + any public v4/v6 (as determined via STUN query)

Can you please explain what do you consider as a private IPv6 vs a public IPv6 address?

Thanks
  Nils Ohlmeier

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email