Re: [tcpm] question about TCP-AO and rekeying
Eric Rescorla <ekr@networkresonance.com> Fri, 19 June 2009 04:32 UTC
Return-Path: <ekr@networkresonance.com>
X-Original-To: tcpm@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcpm@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2911B3A6839 for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Jun 2009 21:32:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.403
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.403 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.815, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB=0.888, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, J_CHICKENPOX_23=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_33=0.6, RDNS_DYNAMIC=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 P9rVmn54Swhm for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Jun 2009 21:32:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from kilo.networkresonance.com (74-95-2-169-SFBA.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [74.95.2.169]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E1AA3A6826 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Jun 2009 21:32:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from kilo.local (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by kilo.networkresonance.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C06E1BE12E; Thu, 18 Jun 2009 21:33:28 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 21:33:28 -0700
From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@networkresonance.com>
To: Joe Touch <touch@ISI.EDU>
In-Reply-To: <4A3A4A5D.2060504@isi.edu>
References: <4A2AB973.3030203@isi.edu> <20090616131807.75C481BC6EB@kilo.networkresonance.com> <4A37A202.9020500@isi.edu> <20090617054551.A4E0C1BCA23@kilo.networkresonance.com> <4A388C37.3030703@isi.edu> <20090617140939.A3AB61BCC72@kilo.networkresonance.com> <4A390EC0.6070003@isi.edu> <20090617161518.5276C50822@romeo.rtfm.com> <4A3917B7.20301@isi.edu> <20090617232813.1C49D50822@romeo.rtfm.com> <4A39C800.2030901@isi.edu> <20090618051622.719361BDC6B@kilo.networkresonance.com> <4A39CE62.9050201@isi.edu> <20090618135721.164F31BDF06@kilo.networkresonance.com> <4A3A4A5D.2060504@isi.edu>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.5 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/22.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Message-Id: <20090619043328.6C06E1BE12E@kilo.networkresonance.com>
Cc: tcpm Extensions WG <tcpm@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] question about TCP-AO and rekeying
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <tcpm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tcpm>
List-Post: <mailto:tcpm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 04:32:47 -0000
At Thu, 18 Jun 2009 07:08:29 -0700, Joe Touch wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > > > Eric Rescorla wrote: > ... > >> It's a bit overgeneralized above, but clamp it down a bit more and it > >> might still make sense, e.g.: > >> > >> alpha from ME:ANY to JOE:BGP KEYID=6 > >> beta from ME:ANY to JOE:ANY KEYID=7 > >> > >> I.e., I may want to lock BGP with a different key than other connections > >> between the two, but OK to use a single key for the rest. > > > > Why would you want to do this? > > > > The configuration you propose would still leave you vulnerable to > > packet injection by someone who knew key alpha. > > > > Going up a level, I'm skeptical of this entire line of argument. > > The existing rationale for this technology (BGP DoS prevention) > > doesn't really justify engineering for extensively complicated > > key use policies. > > The policy above would be used to utilize a stronger key/algorithm for > BGP, and a weaker one for other exchanges - such as would be used to > protect the transport of other protocols used in tandem with BGP, e.g., > SNMP or DNS (each over TCP). Well, remember that this technology really only makes sense as an anti-DoS measure. Otherwise you might as well use TLS. So, I'm not overly concerned with the idea that people want to use it as a generic communication protection measure for arbitrary TCP-based protocols *and* that they want to use this clumsy a key management scheme. > I agree that non-overlap is necessary to avoid injection. The trouble is > that there are different ways to avoid non-overlap which we are > currently leaving as "implementation dependent". If we leave them open, > I am concerned that KMPs will not be able to ensure that two endpoints > will pick corresponding MKTs for a given segment. Really? I would imagine this is precisely the invariant that some putative KMP would enforce. -Ekr
- [tcpm] question about TCP-AO and rekeying Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] question about TCP-AO and rekeying Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] question about TCP-AO and rekeying Eric Rescorla
- Re: [tcpm] question about TCP-AO and rekeying Eric Rescorla
- Re: [tcpm] question about TCP-AO and rekeying Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] question about TCP-AO and rekeying Eric Rescorla
- Re: [tcpm] question about TCP-AO and rekeying Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] question about TCP-AO and rekeying Eric Rescorla
- Re: [tcpm] question about TCP-AO and rekeying Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] question about TCP-AO and rekeying Eric Rescorla
- Re: [tcpm] question about TCP-AO and rekeying Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] question about TCP-AO and rekeying Eric Rescorla
- Re: [tcpm] question about TCP-AO and rekeying Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] question about TCP-AO and rekeying Eric Rescorla
- Re: [tcpm] question about TCP-AO and rekeying Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] question about TCP-AO and rekeying Eric Rescorla
- Re: [tcpm] question about TCP-AO and rekeying Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] question about TCP-AO and rekeying Eric Rescorla
- Re: [tcpm] question about TCP-AO and rekeying Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] question about TCP-AO and rekeying Eric Rescorla
- Re: [tcpm] question about TCP-AO and rekeying Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] question about TCP-AO and rekeying Eric Rescorla
- Re: [tcpm] question about TCP-AO and rekeying Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] question about TCP-AO and rekeying Eric Rescorla
- Re: [tcpm] question about TCP-AO and rekeying Eddy, Wesley M. (GRC-MS00)[Verizon]
- Re: [tcpm] question about TCP-AO and rekeying Eric Rescorla
- Re: [tcpm] question about TCP-AO and rekeying Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] question about TCP-AO and rekeying Joe Touch