Re: [sidr] David M's point about the bgpsec protocol (embarrassing)

Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> Fri, 13 February 2015 02:59 UTC

Return-Path: <randy@psg.com>
X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 280F01A1A32 for <sidr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 18:59:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pVWW66R7i3o0 for <sidr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 18:59:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [198.180.150.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 81F481A1A29 for <sidr@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 18:59:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.psg.com.psg.com) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <randy@psg.com>) id 1YM6TK-0004SS-Dv; Fri, 13 Feb 2015 02:59:15 +0000
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2015 09:59:13 +0700
Message-ID: <m2bnkyo6ta.wl%randy@psg.com>
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: Sandra Murphy <sandy@tislabs.com>
In-Reply-To: <C28E78CF-4428-4EE6-B494-5123243F51B4@tislabs.com>
References: <4C184296-F426-40EF-9DB6-3AE87C42B516@tislabs.com> <82de0e0b8d59df99675cf4eb22996d08@mail.mandelberg.org> <87iof9r8wg.fsf@rebma.mikesoffice.com> <54DA7C98.4040604@mandelberg.org> <C28E78CF-4428-4EE6-B494-5123243F51B4@tislabs.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/22.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/oBBbv3103qTrAmyOQTDJfl6TIAQ>
Cc: Rob Austein <sra@hactrn.net>, sidr@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [sidr] David M's point about the bgpsec protocol (embarrassing)
X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing <sidr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sidr>, <mailto:sidr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sidr/>
List-Post: <mailto:sidr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sidr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr>, <mailto:sidr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2015 02:59:20 -0000

> This is embarrassing for the whole wg for not spotting the syntax
> laxness.  And embarrassing to all the security folk.  There's a
> standard problem in security protocols about not signing any old group
> of bits you are given because the signed bits might be used in some
> other context.  So this should have been spotted much earlier.

bettr late than never.  and a good security geek did spot it.  good on
david.

randy