Re: [secdir] Routing loop attacks using IPv6 tunnels

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Tue, 15 September 2009 04:02 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: secdir@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: secdir@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F8643A68A0; Mon, 14 Sep 2009 21:02:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.427
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.427 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.172, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Q4uE6CuCgKNY; Mon, 14 Sep 2009 21:02:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pz0-f172.google.com (mail-pz0-f172.google.com [209.85.222.172]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5555E3A683F; Mon, 14 Sep 2009 21:02:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by pzk2 with SMTP id 2so3089468pzk.19 for <multiple recipients>; Mon, 14 Sep 2009 21:02:56 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=AC+QiEdQVuFSAuv/9izBJiSWxvQCZygrvtoZ9W0oZbk=; b=ag8+BfzRj0WeKX1hjelZ5nORAYL/4BCwZG8o7sEulr34kYVmIjmiqFZQY90rNo5iBb VOtD38ipNJ241T5Tcq2h+1zGNkZ+S/RpOGBKDUTgl4LhJOvGsqH/BFUmXzX3UXCw6Vrp YHoWCNcJMa9p7C0cbCNfpZsOxtjgnAGG4U+1s=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=Mk6NKlKC3D6UHhzJ0v24qBHA/t+NKbxm14rmF7nEOH/xrcEPZQo74O6HkvfNKx5CQj GWEbjNtF9s1dyMYrD+XsCjl55ayP5NylA0nwrPGqCaLvNScF01GY4m1Jjw5Jw6iS7BJC i9mHTMdEhIMlBrY3gVFwXOTyfyIOlSajqs5uE=
Received: by 10.114.214.25 with SMTP id m25mr12914876wag.71.1252987376006; Mon, 14 Sep 2009 21:02:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?130.216.38.124? (stf-brian.sfac.auckland.ac.nz [130.216.38.124]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 23sm21511pzk.12.2009.09.14.21.02.53 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 14 Sep 2009 21:02:55 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4AAF11ED.3000300@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2009 16:02:53 +1200
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
References: <31484.26522.qm@web45503.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <39C363776A4E8C4A94691D2BD9D1C9A106555B38@XCH-NW-7V2.nw.nos.boeing.com> <373420.97768.qm@web45509.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <39C363776A4E8C4A94691D2BD9D1C9A106599177@XCH-NW-7V2.nw.nos.boeing.com> <342868.34354.qm@web45502.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <39C363776A4E8C4A94691D2BD9D1C9A1065D7CB7@XCH-NW-7V2.nw.nos.boeing.com> <6B55F0F93C3E9D45AF283313B8D342BA0440F47F@TK5EX14MBXW652.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com> <702481.50824.qm@web45515.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <39C363776A4E8C4A94691D2BD9D1C9A1065D80A0@XCH-NW-7V2.nw.nos.boeing.com> <309242.20809.qm@web45513.mail.sp1.yahoo.com><39C363776A4E8C4A94691D2BD9D1C9A106624B24@XCH-NW-7V2.nw.nos.boeing.com><4AAAD7C1.2060709@gmail.com><39C363776A4E8C4A94691D2BD9D1C9A106624BD7@XCH-NW-7V2.nw.nos.boeing.com> <4AAAF8C8.6010103@gmail.com> <39C363776A4E8C4A94691D2BD9D1C9A10665C90F@XCH-NW-7V2.nw.nos.boeing.com>
In-Reply-To: <39C363776A4E8C4A94691D2BD9D1C9A10665C90F@XCH-NW-7V2.nw.nos.boeing.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: v6ops <v6ops@ops.ietf.org>, Christian Huitema <huitema@microsoft.com>, ipv6@ietf.org, secdir@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [secdir] Routing loop attacks using IPv6 tunnels
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Area Directorate <secdir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Tue, 15 Sep 2009 04:02:13 -0000

On 2009-09-15 04:25, Templin, Fred L wrote:
> Brian,
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Friday, September 11, 2009 6:27 PM
>> To: Templin, Fred L
>> Cc: v6ops; Christian Huitema; ipv6@ietf.org; secdir@ietf.org
>> Subject: Re: Routing loop attacks using IPv6 tunnels
>>
>> On 2009-09-12 11:12, Templin, Fred L wrote:
>>> Brian,
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com]
>>>> Sent: Friday, September 11, 2009 4:06 PM
>>>> To: Templin, Fred L
>>>> Cc: Christian Huitema; v6ops; ipv6@ietf.org; secdir@ietf.org
>>>> Subject: Re: Routing loop attacks using IPv6 tunnels
>>>>
>>>> On 2009-09-12 09:13, Templin, Fred L wrote:
>>>>
>>>> (much text deleted)
>>>>
>>>>> Otherwise, the best solution IMHO
>>>>> would be to allow only routers (and not hosts) on the
>>>>> virtual links.
>>>> This was of course the original intention for 6to4, so
>>>> that any misconfiguration issues could be limited to presumably
>>>> trusted staff and boxes. Unfortunately, reality has turned out
>>>> to be different, with host-based automatic tunnels becoming
>>>> popular.
>>> Thanks. I was rethinking this a bit after sending, and
>>> I may have been too premature in saying routers only
>>> and not hosts.
>>>
>>> What I would rather have said was that mechanisms such as
>>> SEcure Neighbor Discovery (SEND) may be helpful in private
>>> addressing domains where spoofing is possible. Let me know
>>> if this makes sense.
>> Except for the practical problems involved in deploying SEND.
> 
> Can it be said that there is any appreciable operational
> experience with SEND yet? Are there implementations?

I'd like to know that too.

> 
>> We still have an issue in unmanaged networks.
> 
> By "unmanaged", how unmanaged do you mean? 

I was thinking of home networks, the kind where Teredo or
6to4 starts up spontaneously. Probably not a concern for
ISATAP sites.

    Brian

> ISATAP is
> intended for networks where there is at least some modicum
> of cooperative management. We want that it can also be used
> in "loosly" managed networks where there is an overall mutual
> spirit of cooperation but where site-internal link-layer
> address spoofing may still be possible. Can SEND be used
> for that, or do we need something else in addition (e.g.,
> a nonce with every message)?
> 
> Thanks - Fred
> fred.l.templin@boeing.com
> 
>>     Brian
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
>> ipv6@ietf.org
>> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>