[trill] TRILL IPsec encapsulation
Yaron Sheffer <firstname.lastname@example.org> Wed, 22 July 2015 17:48 UTC
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B01A61B2CD8 for <email@example.com>; Wed, 22 Jul 2015 10:48:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.276 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=0.723, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([18.104.22.168]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Xcy4VzZxHoFt for <firstname.lastname@example.org>; Wed, 22 Jul 2015 10:48:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-x22f.google.com (mail-wi0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::22f]) (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 70F9F1B2CD3 for <email@example.com>; Wed, 22 Jul 2015 10:48:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wibxm9 with SMTP id xm9so174075008wib.0 for <firstname.lastname@example.org>; Wed, 22 Jul 2015 10:48:36 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=T6NLYCpwZMp9dYBQMiZE0MKC/LjAmf7kJUN2R1969uU=; b=KM/8135cLexvRNwFP89iq8h0oHLUVtwYcsyXb428bc/wJNYBm3yojI7nVOlv4v0eM4 ieDlU5Cj8aIpXSJWNCPjNXYNSIrf1rvqy4ryD7toSxxFC1lU0rH5v/dl4yYoYcBzBXbS aPsz2Fi3oZfEm+fyeSFUtfuDT7neRbon7aCWia9rmRkYS5djFZCUsHrWvrNPfq2ogX5V ECTYSHlS0+lhSAjxnxF8F7+pyzbMovowJg+sbcfQD7I6sUzkUzbSyWgtgdUBjr/tRlzf p7iTywb9OoZaQJW1ddgJi4r7h0gMrRSXP9AfAVblfmx0Fq9gnxQgT2rehZFayknsxNsF BHxQ==
X-Received: by 10.194.109.167 with SMTP id ht7mr7228979wjb.60.1437587316282; Wed, 22 Jul 2015 10:48:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2001:67c:370:176:201d:ca09:67c1:93b1? ([2001:67c:370:176:201d:ca09:67c1:93b1]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id k2sm4462702wif.4.2015.07.22.10.48.34 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 22 Jul 2015 10:48:35 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 19:48:34 +0200
From: Yaron Sheffer <email@example.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8"
Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org, Stephen Farrell <email@example.com>
Subject: [trill] TRILL IPsec encapsulation
List-Id: "Developing a hybrid router/bridge." <trill.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/trill>, <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trill>, <mailto:email@example.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 17:48:38 -0000
So here are some comments:
- The draft currently uses IPsec but not IKE or any kind of key management. The end result is that data is being encrypted by very long-lived keys, not enjoying the benefit of forward secrecy etc. Please use IKEv2 and do NOT use IPsec directly. RFC 4107 explains why.
- There is in fact IPsec-with-multicast, but it's not widely deployed and is based on the obsolete IKEv1. Instead, I suggest to use unicast encapsulation with IKEv2. I suppose this means that you'd want to only encapsulate data but not IS-IS frames.
- The draft currently derives encryption keys from IS-IS keys. This is problematic at several levels:
* The IS-IS key is common to a large group of devices (a.k.a. "a group key") and so is likely to be compromised.
* The key is used directly for encryption, as noted.
* The key is derived using HMAC, which is specified incorrectly in the draft (one parameter instead of two).
* The derived key is identical for all routers/links.
- I would suggest to use a derived key for authentication only, and to derive it differently for each link - although I realize that this does not raise the security level significantly. Something like: link-psk = HMAC(IS-IS-key, 6-byte-system-id-1 | 6-byte-system-id-2).
- Note that IKE generates a different encryption key for each link even if everybody is using the same authentication key (pre-shared secret). But it's still a bad practice for all principals to have the same key...
- Longer term it would improve security hugely if each router had an authenticated identity of its own. In other words, its own certificate and private key.
- Please don't define your own MTI algorithms. Just use RFC 7321.