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

Theo Zourzouvillys <theo@crazygreek.co.uk> Sat, 07 March 2009 23:22 UTC

Return-Path: <theo@crazygreek.co.uk>
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 BAD313A6929 for <sip@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 7 Mar 2009 15:22:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.744
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.744 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.233, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 Oof2rTxk07i8 for <sip@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 7 Mar 2009 15:22:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from exprod7og113.obsmtp.com (exprod7og113.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.179]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 9A7003A67D6 for <sip@ietf.org>; Sat, 7 Mar 2009 15:22:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from source ([72.14.220.154]) by exprod7ob113.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKSbMB7dttJkpEkPl4Eg/zLm7U1/CKVHXp@postini.com; Sat, 07 Mar 2009 15:23:26 PST
Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id 16so642291fgg.25 for <sip@ietf.org>; Sat, 07 Mar 2009 15:23:25 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.86.31.18 with SMTP id e18mr2932524fge.72.1236468205084; Sat, 07 Mar 2009 15:23:25 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <E6C2E8958BA59A4FB960963D475F7AC314C4DE62C1@mail>
References: <49AE593F.6080807@iptel.org> <0a8001c99d0f$0b21e210$c2f0200a@cisco.com> <49AF9FC8.2020200@iptel.org> <E6C2E8958BA59A4FB960963D475F7AC314C46BD96D@mail> <20090307195045.GC4364@x61s.janakj.ryngle.net> <E6C2E8958BA59A4FB960963D475F7AC314C4DE62A5@mail> <167dfb9b0903071326u7a44d55fub7ebdb426460ce61@mail.gmail.com> <E6C2E8958BA59A4FB960963D475F7AC314C4DE62C1@mail>
Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2009 23:23:25 +0000
Message-ID: <167dfb9b0903071523x5eacc1a6w19efc32313b3b0be@mail.gmail.com>
From: Theo Zourzouvillys <theo@crazygreek.co.uk>
To: Hadriel Kaplan <HKaplan@acmepacket.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "sip@ietf.org" <sip@ietf.org>, Dan Wing <dwing@cisco.com>
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 23:22:54 -0000

On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 10:39 PM, Hadriel Kaplan <HKaplan@acmepacket.com> wrote:

> And email has been getting less spam and phishing and viruses ever since.

SIP also has one major advantage than email does: we've not *yet* got
the same penetration that SMTP did when it started really suffering.
Although I do see exactly the same apathy to the problem in voice
service providers and network operators now that I did in ISPs 10
years ago: "not a problem yet, can't afford to spend time on that".

> If the open SIP providers don't employ some counter-measures for spoofing, user authentication, and service control, then they will when the issues crop up.

It's difficult to do *that* much: a lot of the counter-measures need
support from the endpoint vendors for various features.  A look at the
quality (or even existence) of mutual TLS and related things in almost
all UAs speaks loads on their interest in such matters!

> But anyway, that's why I want a SIP Identity mechanism that actually works, fwiw.

i'll give 10 pounds (of the Great British variety) and a bottle of
sheppy's finest Somerset cider to whoever comes up with such a thing.

 ~ Theo