[secdir] Security review of draft-shore-icmp-aup-06
"Hilarie Orman" <hilarie@purplestreak.com> Wed, 13 November 2013 07:44 UTC
Return-Path: <hilarie@purplestreak.com>
X-Original-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0EC511E8113; Tue, 12 Nov 2013 23:44:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 nC2pu0ITVveE; Tue, 12 Nov 2013 23:44:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out01.mta.xmission.com (out01.mta.xmission.com [166.70.13.231]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AF1D11E810E; Tue, 12 Nov 2013 23:44:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from in01.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.51]) by out01.mta.xmission.com with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from <hilarie@purplestreak.com>) id 1VgV7R-00010b-5s; Wed, 13 Nov 2013 00:44:09 -0700
Received: from [72.250.219.84] (helo=sylvester.rhmr.com) by in01.mta.xmission.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from <hilarie@purplestreak.com>) id 1VgV7O-0001bG-Gr; Wed, 13 Nov 2013 00:44:09 -0700
Received: from sylvester.rhmr.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sylvester.rhmr.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-2ubuntu1) with ESMTP id rAD7hr1r002179; Wed, 13 Nov 2013 00:43:53 -0700
Received: (from hilarie@localhost) by sylvester.rhmr.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id rAD7hqQg002177; Wed, 13 Nov 2013 00:43:52 -0700
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2013 00:43:52 -0700
Message-Id: <201311130743.rAD7hqQg002177@sylvester.rhmr.com>
From: Hilarie Orman <hilarie@purplestreak.com>
To: draft-shore-icmp-aup@tools.ietf.org
X-XM-AID: U2FsdGVkX1+D0nx641CQI/B+errFi7sl
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 72.250.219.84
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: hilarie@purplestreak.com
X-Spam-DCC: XMission; sa04 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1
X-Spam-Combo: *;draft-shore-icmp-aup@tools.ietf.org
X-Spam-Relay-Country:
X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 14 Nov 2012 14:26:46 -0700)
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on in01.mta.xmission.com)
Cc: iesg@ietf.org, secdir@ietf.org
Subject: [secdir] Security review of draft-shore-icmp-aup-06
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Hilarie Orman <hilarie@purplestreak.com>
List-Id: Security Area Directorate <secdir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/secdir>, <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/secdir>
List-Post: <mailto:secdir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secdir>, <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2013 07:44:16 -0000
Security review of draft-shore-icmp-aup-06 An Acceptable Use Policy for New ICMP Types and Codes Do not be alarmed. I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG. These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the security area directors. Document editors and WG chairs should treat these comments just like any other last call comments. The document discusses the current uses of ICMP and how it may or may not fit into management or control planes, depending on your view of what those are. The recommendation is to limit uses to reporting downstream forwarding anomalies, discovering on-link routers and hosts and network parameters. "ICMP should not be used as a routing or network management protocol." While there are ostensibly no new security considerations, it is worthwhile noting that ICMP plays a part in the Photuris protocol and was also used in SKIP (though that usage is deprecated). In general, I have some concern about using ICMP to discover network security parameters or to report on network security anomalies in the forwarding plane. I would recommend adding something to the security considerations about avoiding such usage or using special caution if defining new protocols. Hilarie
- [secdir] Security review of draft-shore-icmp-aup-… Hilarie Orman
- Re: [secdir] Security review of draft-shore-icmp-… Melinda Shore
- Re: [secdir] Security review of draft-shore-icmp-… Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)
- Re: [secdir] Security review of draft-shore-icmp-… Hilarie Orman