Re: [Sidrops] trying to limit RP processing variability

Job Snijders <job@ntt.net> Tue, 05 May 2020 11:36 UTC

Return-Path: <job@instituut.net>
X-Original-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87CBF3A1646 for <sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 May 2020 04:36:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.649
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.649 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
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 cF9bC0fmP4ul for <sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 May 2020 04:36:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wr1-f52.google.com (mail-wr1-f52.google.com [209.85.221.52]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 66AE93A1644 for <sidrops@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 May 2020 04:36:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wr1-f52.google.com with SMTP id z8so1402678wrw.3 for <sidrops@ietf.org>; Tue, 05 May 2020 04:36:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=N7bB/elqYIyntubbnS3u8gswCCBlF01HEhV0bymmHsE=; b=pkXMVbKotcPw7PBnplw9Q6R8om5SHqS2sWW/x1dSGh2YAPlMtqFH7ii87bPRy2UaZf xkulURgGv1Had1qPvUeGKA3jDAfCFkj3/b+O6HigbtUB/YpRbS8g3AWZtkHOE9/KCA+U g6B+neQrMRS2IdG2+TWaqXwCKNTSqDhocRhVcxguqegbeOZVG3JN+OVvmzOmeUuddg0h /1Yc2xercqESChrq/EjXpMeYUiVf3HPoKAfKbr1XxH98QcRZTP8/2+32wmzMxBEyXI9D HHyigHbEe5qw8jHOR1BNhj9MfiEWaZ1DOaYf+AjpVi8C4Haucjg1Tqc+dCBcynPGfhRM CkqQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuY8aheWpKbflXdZni36o8hdruAAYZ8SCCs2D1ZbRr9uLxQQXPXw qcXqBM9rRGbvFITSS1tHpk8X9ofoBCg=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypIupp7VvyeoK1hqboWD+Onl3s+Ejwl0e0ThM1wdtEDLOCHxK7g7mYwadqwq0forDbbQJ0qb8g==
X-Received: by 2002:adf:fe41:: with SMTP id m1mr3227764wrs.52.1588678610298; Tue, 05 May 2020 04:36:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vurt.meerval.net (vurt.meerval.net. [192.147.168.22]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e13sm2835866wrw.88.2020.05.05.04.36.48 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 05 May 2020 04:36:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (vurt.meerval.net [local]) by vurt.meerval.net (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPA id 7b7ece02; Tue, 5 May 2020 11:36:48 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Tue, 5 May 2020 11:36:47 +0000
From: Job Snijders <job@ntt.net>
To: sidrops@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20200505113647.GA93200@vurt.meerval.net>
References: <a9448e54-320f-300c-d4f9-d01aca2b6ef4.ref@verizon.net> <a9448e54-320f-300c-d4f9-d01aca2b6ef4@verizon.net> <63c18696-fe3b-c66f-d8ae-fb132f78ee9f@ripe.net> <a0067385-adb8-cadd-3a7f-3a362176d265@verizon.net> <e3bcba98-c664-0c27-850f-137251cc314a@ripe.net> <a1c7b748-6dda-c555-0ab7-3727d34bc672@verizon.net> <20200415124611.7af291b1@glaurung.nlnetlabs.nl> <974eeeaa-32e6-45b2-860f-6b1408ae14e6@www.fastmail.com> <24215.11555.329412.270610@oz.mt.att.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <24215.11555.329412.270610@oz.mt.att.com>
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidrops/7h016NYt1hIGtf7gHd3U0w3RR_s>
Subject: Re: [Sidrops] trying to limit RP processing variability
X-BeenThere: sidrops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: A list for the SIDR Operations WG <sidrops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sidrops>, <mailto:sidrops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/sidrops/>
List-Post: <mailto:sidrops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sidrops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidrops>, <mailto:sidrops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 May 2020 11:36:53 -0000

On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 11:49:55AM -0400, Jay Borkenhagen wrote:
> Job Snijders writes:
>  > On Wed, Apr 15, 2020, at 12:46, Martin Hoffmann wrote:
>  > > An attacker who can delete files can as easily replace them with
>  > > something else with the same result. So I am not sure the added code
>  > > complexity is worth it.
>  > 
>  > Agreed. 
>  > 
>  > fwiw: rpki-client runs as "openrsync -rlt --delete rsync://xxx/repository xxx/repository"
>  > 
> 
> I agree with this behavior as well.

I think I was wrong to agree here. I had discussions with some people
about 'where does the publication point exist?' - is it a remote entity?
or is a local construction of pulled data? I'm now leaning more towards
an interpretation that the publication point only exists in the mind of
the RP.

Phrased differently: It seems somewhat strange to let unauthenticated
untrusted network data (aka 'rsync --delete') destroy an otherwise
perfectly healthy and valid CA.

What perhaps should be done:

- rsync pulls data in (without '--delete')
- the validation process deletes files that are not listed on the valid
  manifest (iff a valid contemporaneous CRL exists)
- Additionally, implementers will need to pull the untrusted RPKI data
  into a staging area, to guard against letting the rsync overwrite
  otherwise healthy .roa files with garbage.

Kind regards,

Job