Re: [Sip] draft-state-sip-relay-attack-00

Jan Janak <jan@ryngle.com> Sat, 07 March 2009 19:08 UTC

Return-Path: <jan@ryngle.com>
X-Original-To: sip@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sip@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B69D28C12F for <sip@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 7 Mar 2009 11:08:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[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 xIDROxIxyh2A for <sip@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 7 Mar 2009 11:08:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-bw0-f178.google.com (mail-bw0-f178.google.com [209.85.218.178]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73B2C3A6A2B for <sip@ietf.org>; Sat, 7 Mar 2009 11:08:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: by bwz26 with SMTP id 26so740622bwz.37 for <sip@ietf.org>; Sat, 07 Mar 2009 11:09:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.102.228.10 with SMTP id a10mr1722226muh.26.1236452964213; Sat, 07 Mar 2009 11:09:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from x61s.janakj (r9ea97.net.upc.cz [78.102.130.97]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id u9sm4133153muf.55.2009.03.07.11.09.23 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sat, 07 Mar 2009 11:09:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: by x61s.janakj (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 21BE24403F8; Sat, 7 Mar 2009 20:09:22 +0100 (CET)
Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2009 20:09:22 +0100
From: Jan Janak <jan@ryngle.com>
To: Theo Zourzouvillys <theo@crazygreek.co.uk>
Message-ID: <20090307190922.GB4364@x61s.janakj.ryngle.net>
References: <49AE593F.6080807@iptel.org> <167dfb9b0903050631r383fdb28x75c964a48e31ea3b@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <167dfb9b0903050631r383fdb28x75c964a48e31ea3b@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
Cc: sip@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Sip] draft-state-sip-relay-attack-00
X-BeenThere: sip@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Session Initiation Protocol <sip.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>, <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sip>
List-Post: <mailto:sip@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>, <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2009 19:08:54 -0000

On 05-03 14:31, Theo Zourzouvillys wrote:
> However, you don't cover the more interesting cases of multi-hop proxy
> authentication or end-to-end WWW authentication: these are the harder
> ones to deal with, and may result in some "real" issues in SIP itself
> rather than shoddy implementations and insecure proxies.

Yes, after reading the discussion here I agree, perhaps the next revision of
the ID (if there is going to be any) should describe more difficult cases,
such as multi-hop authentication and challenging proxies reachable through one
common proxy. These are much harder cases to deal with.

   Jan.