[secdir] SecDir review of draft-ietf-enum-3761bis-04

"Laganier, Julien" <julienl@qualcomm.com> Wed, 21 October 2009 15:45 UTC

Return-Path: <julienl@qualcomm.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 885F328C12F; Wed, 21 Oct 2009 08:45:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -105.655
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.655 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.944, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 DPlbpXa+osDO; Wed, 21 Oct 2009 08:45:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wolverine01.qualcomm.com (wolverine01.qualcomm.com [199.106.114.254]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7197128C122; Wed, 21 Oct 2009 08:45:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=qualcomm.com; i=julienl@qualcomm.com; q=dns/txt; s=qcdkim; t=1256139922; x=1287675922; h=from:to:date:subject:thread-topic:thread-index: message-id:accept-language:content-language: x-ms-has-attach:x-ms-tnef-correlator:acceptlanguage: content-type:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version: x-ironport-av; z=From:=20"Laganier,=20Julien"=20<julienl@qualcomm.com> |To:=20"secdir@ietf.org"=20<secdir@ietf.org>,=20"iesg@iet f.org"=20<iesg@ietf.org>,=0D=0A=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20"d raft-ietf-enum-3761bis@tools.ietf.org"=0D=0A=09<draft-iet f-enum-3761bis@tools.ietf.org>,=0D=0A=20=20=20=20=20=20 =20=20"enum-chairs@tools.ietf.org"=0D=0A=09<enum-chairs@t ools.ietf.org>,=0D=0A=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20"enum-ads@to ols.ietf.org"=0D=0A=09<enum-ads@tools.ietf.org>|Date:=20W ed,=2021=20Oct=202009=2008:44:28=20-0700|Subject:=20SecDi r=20review=20of=20draft-ietf-enum-3761bis-04 |Thread-Topic:=20SecDir=20review=20of=20draft-ietf-enum-3 761bis-04|Thread-Index:=20AcpSZV/MTRjN04DDQ9SkGrtr69VywA =3D=3D|Message-ID:=20<BF345F63074F8040B58C00A186FCA57F1C6 48CA073@NALASEXMB04.na.qualcomm.com>|Accept-Language:=20e n-US|Content-Language:=20en-US|X-MS-Has-Attach: |X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:|acceptlanguage:=20en-US |Content-Type:=20text/plain=3B=20charset=3D"us-ascii" |Content-Transfer-Encoding:=20quoted-printable |MIME-Version:=201.0|X-IronPort-AV:=20E=3DMcAfee=3Bi=3D"5 300,2777,5777"=3B=20a=3D"25758214"; bh=RbTrByrhV03zimWlUAkgAnPbkAbXX8F9KcRg8Y0L1xA=; b=maFOW38UIodv5SDwQca55zswKA0l8V9/4V5AkZJ4jZd49p+mYEL300Ks eYWfUxsvonTA36mQPaP1L9cbDowwwmin73RZbNgyAeKay9i8tZ6SHfvhR /Epv6es/Bg1di5DypM4BgfDfnXb7JG6DotwLL61qRJXlTa0JojYIvcc8K w=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5300,2777,5777"; a="25758214"
Received: from pdmz-ns-mip.qualcomm.com (HELO numenor.qualcomm.com) ([199.106.114.10]) by wolverine01.qualcomm.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 21 Oct 2009 08:45:07 -0700
Received: from totoro.qualcomm.com (totoro.qualcomm.com [129.46.61.158]) by numenor.qualcomm.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/1.0) with ESMTP id n9LFj6fn002047 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 21 Oct 2009 08:45:07 -0700
Received: from nasanexhub02.na.qualcomm.com (nasanexhub02.na.qualcomm.com [10.46.143.120]) by totoro.qualcomm.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/1.0) with ESMTP id n9LFj2iL015770 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT); Wed, 21 Oct 2009 08:45:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nalasexhub01.na.qualcomm.com (10.47.130.49) by nasanexhub02.na.qualcomm.com (10.46.143.120) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.176.0; Wed, 21 Oct 2009 08:44:51 -0700
Received: from NALASEXMB04.na.qualcomm.com ([10.47.7.114]) by nalasexhub01.na.qualcomm.com ([10.47.130.49]) with mapi; Wed, 21 Oct 2009 08:44:30 -0700
From: "Laganier, Julien" <julienl@qualcomm.com>
To: "secdir@ietf.org" <secdir@ietf.org>, "iesg@ietf.org" <iesg@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-enum-3761bis@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-enum-3761bis@tools.ietf.org>, "enum-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <enum-chairs@tools.ietf.org>, "enum-ads@tools.ietf.org" <enum-ads@tools.ietf.org>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 08:44:28 -0700
Thread-Topic: SecDir review of draft-ietf-enum-3761bis-04
Thread-Index: AcpSZV/MTRjN04DDQ9SkGrtr69VywA==
Message-ID: <BF345F63074F8040B58C00A186FCA57F1C648CA073@NALASEXMB04.na.qualcomm.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: [secdir] SecDir review of draft-ietf-enum-3761bis-04
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: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 15:45:14 -0000

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.

This document describes a Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS) application relying on the DNS database for storage of E.164 numbers, and resolution of those into URIs to be used to contact the recipients via various services (e.g., SIP, H323). 

I have found the description of the DDDS application well written and easily understandable. The security considerations section seemed fair and reasonable in pointing out the insecure character of DNS used alone, referencing DNSSEC as a mechanism countering the threats specific to DNS, and recommending services to authenticate peers as part of the setup process for the service itself rather than blindly trust the addressing mechanisms in use.

I have one minor suggestion on rewording this sentence:

   Because of these threats, a deployed ENUM service SHOULD include
   mechanisms to ameliorate these threats.

Don't you want to say "counter" rather than "ameliorate" (or maybe "ameliorate the security of the service under these threats") ?

--julien