Re: [secdir] Routing loop attacks using IPv6 tunnels

Dong Zhang <zhangdong_rh@huaweisymantec.com> Mon, 14 September 2009 01:26 UTC

Return-Path: <zhangdong_rh@huaweisymantec.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 7F00C3A6972; Sun, 13 Sep 2009 18:26:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.065
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.065 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.559, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RDNS_NONE=0.1]
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 hPpjGlpafV-G; Sun, 13 Sep 2009 18:26:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mta1.huaweisymantec.com (unknown [218.17.155.14]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F4703A67E2; Sun, 13 Sep 2009 18:26:12 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Content-type: text/plain; charset=gb2312
Received: from hstml02-in.huaweisymantec.com ([172.26.3.41]) by hstga01-in.huaweisymantec.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 6.3-8.03 (built Apr 24 2009; 32bit)) with ESMTP id <0KPX00EM4TCLRT10@hstga01-in.huaweisymantec.com>; Mon, 14 Sep 2009 09:26:45 +0800 (CST)
Received: from z90001956 ([10.27.154.76]) by hstml02-in.huaweisymantec.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 6.3-8.03 (built Apr 24 2009; 32bit)) with ESMTPA id <0KPX006OATCKW600@hstml02-in.huaweisymantec.com>; Mon, 14 Sep 2009 09:26:45 +0800 (CST)
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2009 09:26:44 +0800
From: Dong Zhang <zhangdong_rh@huaweisymantec.com>
To: "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.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>
Message-id: <200909140926442553863@huaweisymantec.com>
X-Mailer: Foxmail 6, 10, 201, 20 [cn]
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 13 Sep 2009 23:56:38 -0700
Cc: v6ops <v6ops@ops.ietf.org>, Christian Huitema <huitema@microsoft.com>, "ipv6@ietf.org" <ipv6@ietf.org>, "secdir@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: Mon, 14 Sep 2009 01:26:13 -0000

Hi Temlin,

Please see inline.

Templin, Fred L 2009-09-12 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.
>
IMHO, most of the threats of automatic tunnels, like ISATAP and 6to4,
are resulting from spoofing. If SEND or CGA is possible to be used, 
many attacks could be mitigated.

Thx.

>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
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------


------------------				 
Dong Zhang
2009-09-14