IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [secdir] Secdir review of draft-ietf-behave-nat64-learn-analysis-03.txt

Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com> Wed, 11 April 2012 18:28 UTC

Return-Path: <alexey.melnikov@isode.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 D677E11E80BA; Wed, 11 Apr 2012 11:28:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.342
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.342 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.257, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 OaSTOMA0z47P; Wed, 11 Apr 2012 11:28:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rufus.isode.com (rufus.isode.com [62.3.217.251]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE8FA11E8098; Wed, 11 Apr 2012 11:27:59 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1334168873; d=isode.com; s=selector; i=@isode.com; bh=bP3AjX2fSnhYKRfX0/cnpviC9QxjgNNNrg/Z9IB3+MI=; h=From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version: In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description; b=vYmHHLNOrYV7EDCoKxGjztR7QepvPpZk/R/KHhwvBpj3BYQhwDIjSvdrlwokX/ajL+Chwp t6l2+y/aygZQs2Zy9h8W0DbkZLX/Z9angKGRg5crq18ntXQATiYG5QbgPewqSyRgY+L5M+ VJdGjduBxUrrEv0b9fn6igHCoeGe4tQ=;
Received: from [172.16.1.29] (shiny.isode.com [62.3.217.250]) by rufus.isode.com (submission channel) via TCP with ESMTPSA id <T4XNJgAg23Uz@rufus.isode.com>; Wed, 11 Apr 2012 19:27:53 +0100
X-SMTP-Protocol-Errors: PIPELINING
Message-ID: <4F85CD46.2020205@isode.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 19:28:22 +0100
From: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:10.0.2) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.2
To: jouni korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
References: <4F842937.9050305@isode.com> <ADB7473F-7CA7-4993-B31A-DBB8E6820AC7@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <ADB7473F-7CA7-4993-B31A-DBB8E6820AC7@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Teemu Savolainen <teemu.savolainen@nokia.com>, IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, Dan Wing <dwing@cisco.com>, secdir@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [secdir] Secdir review of draft-ietf-behave-nat64-learn-analysis-03.txt
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
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, 11 Apr 2012 18:28:01 -0000

On 11/04/2012 11:00, jouni korhonen wrote:
> Hi,
Hi Jouni,
> Thank you for the review. See my comments inline.
>
> On Apr 10, 2012, at 3:36 PM, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
  [...]
>> One other possible issue that you should consider:
>>
>> 5.1.2.  Analysis and discussion
>>
>>    The CONs of the proposal are listed below:
>>
>> I don't know how much of an issue this is in a real world, but one thought:
>>
>> Can use of a well known IPv4-only FQDN be used for tracking applications/hosts which try to employ this algorithm? Such IPv4-only host might be an attractive target for compromise, if such information is valuable to an attacker.
> I guess it could be possible in theory.. if we assume the
> DNS server hosting the IPv4-only FQDN would be hostile,
Not necessarily, for example it can be compromised.
> which is not a realistic assumption imho.
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email