Re: [v6ops] [OPSEC] [EXTERNAL] Re: [IPv6] Why folks are blocking IPv 6 extension headers? (Episode 1000 and counting) (Linux DoS)

Andrew Campling <andrew.campling@419.consulting> Sun, 28 May 2023 17:12 UTC

Return-Path: <andrew.campling@419.consulting>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24957C14CF18; Sun, 28 May 2023 10:12:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.12
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.12 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=netorgft5189650.onmicrosoft.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3MDLd1AHEs-2; Sun, 28 May 2023 10:12:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from GBR01-LO2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-lo2gbr01on0628.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fe15::628]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2C257C14CF17; Sun, 28 May 2023 10:12:57 -0700 (PDT)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=Cp1bRYoWs5N7YhhSezFJ9Kw7dPJdIxeyj0FtpKZ4AVBndn9SMdbGK43sg+6r/0BeT9wiai2RTJMekSJMwGVUa2mytEUnvwsm3Zou/KIBxFe8uV9LBvkbW4BcMHsZ3oqvCxJiaEQyvQCS8UBqgDO8E61sZCA3sm16dpp4tebyBWvBoMgCgHYOlEbxYoFxXT47jIUQPkGHINKQj0dBmdxx+Bezy6vgLnZB7CeAxhLzIGtXQ3XqGsMEaVdPiHCFh93ee1+kuf3Y009cR0OB4oupli8nFEPItB87uwNsRps9GKbRLccyUtgNW4S7SnP8dAr3izxRrbhUvGa/cEDsgK6koA==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=C/019gouYV55i+Q7DHkamRKwooIfd82bal13aTc2gaU=; b=dEuclSB4nUFP9owpAcOzuaP4i8XeMmwzWmSoDlAeP6jit53mD10agCV0w95zVH5IM+oqQBU9uOJYy+8ApSk8bEOV+l67yUufSbiQ9OMmKX8mblWAXAh11Ij7i3dMoyRsqXXi3V3VhSC9ImWxxr3AuHt4yCY178NT9mSJtabhFoTYaZShHnnw9j6QFwzv5LnqV/840O2l8X8fTh9lbQo5EiYhquxSAcnghIb4RQTFnEWEa++pZTHmV7dHEJkuRCU3kNJwR/UgYfna3+5FrTM7yStx5XewIQSou2nFXvSdeJyhcL4iT4SR4KY+CDL37KiwjvkPixnJKaYonhWmSTDn+A==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=419.consulting; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=419.consulting; dkim=pass header.d=419.consulting; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=NETORGFT5189650.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-NETORGFT5189650-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=C/019gouYV55i+Q7DHkamRKwooIfd82bal13aTc2gaU=; b=Q6rryQZySo9q0wRzuAYMjjvKuJmUBmnnyXp3lUoBgRJla822CZEYubfb0YHxicABB5ZRXjvNbz5uf5Fg4Qo+oDyuVdEBDBejxA9tiRl8cl+mdvy+RmkXU3Thcn+5iepBjyWBJQzfNm2P+utJiCp7VGKuLSXsqRalxkXNEBXi/B8=
Received: from CWXP265MB5153.GBRP265.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (2603:10a6:400:196::5) by LO4P265MB6400.GBRP265.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (2603:10a6:600:2d4::10) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.6455.14; Sun, 28 May 2023 17:12:53 +0000
Received: from CWXP265MB5153.GBRP265.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([fe80::eea4:d29a:355e:bed]) by CWXP265MB5153.GBRP265.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([fe80::eea4:d29a:355e:bed%5]) with mapi id 15.20.6455.020; Sun, 28 May 2023 17:12:52 +0000
From: Andrew Campling <andrew.campling@419.consulting>
To: Tom Herbert <tom=40herbertland.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, "Manfredi (US), Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@boeing.com>
CC: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>, "ipv6@ietf.org" <ipv6@ietf.org>, "opsec@ietf.org" <opsec@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [OPSEC] [EXTERNAL] Re: [IPv6] [v6ops] Why folks are blocking IPv 6 extension headers? (Episode 1000 and counting) (Linux DoS)
Thread-Index: AQHZkCmEy8wtWvOQdkKz3pe0k4Rdoa9uYJkAgAA//YCAAA2wAIABOp5w
Date: Sun, 28 May 2023 17:12:52 +0000
Message-ID: <CWXP265MB51535486342FD27A30CFEE6EC2459@CWXP265MB5153.GBRP265.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
References: <11087a11-476c-5fb8-2ede-e1b3b6e95e48@si6networks.com> <CALx6S343f_FPXVxuZuXB4j=nY-SuTEYrnxb3O5OQ3fv5uPwT8g@mail.gmail.com> <CAN-Dau1pTVr6ak9rc9x7irg+aLhq0N8_WOyySqx5Syt74HMX=g@mail.gmail.com> <a087b963-1e12-66bf-b93e-5190ce09914b@si6networks.com> <CALx6S349nNA8L5+_1hrbWayqp8GfTYypWy_SP57c_Xxams=csg@mail.gmail.com> <51a066b3-4b4c-d573-ffbe-d6b44a4f193f@gont.com.ar> <a411a1b0-c521-c456-3d44-d99a1cc0975b@gmail.com> <CWXP265MB5153E4687BE45480DBC5A531C2439@CWXP265MB5153.GBRP265.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <27d28224-0cb0-eec2-8d54-f0d175596c85@gmail.com> <f5758380-9967-b67b-744d-dc36b7b599ab@si6networks.com> <4FCF75B585A1D068+7D9B99BB-B24B-4FE8-A3FD-54877C7C1131@cfiec.net> <375ea678-b05f-7bb6-5ae2-43c54cd271f4@si6networks.com> <CALx6S34u5=2UxEz3zeApv+_-W=PTj0PzMRHS1UC=zRchqVCDyQ@mail.gmail.com> <882610dc-cf8f-e08d-8d9e-0e786097f520@si6networks.com> <CALx6S34AnMaVyEVQxaO0b1JGbQetQvDC+xDHk6aH5vbXM-KT7A@mail.gmail.com> <2a02905427604fa6a4c95e2eaa1dd165@boeing.com> <CALx6S36pmsZighJVBLEZWvYqTh1tJtU4SH2Ym0V7oS87dPWAHQ@mail.gmail.com> <6b3a40ef922c47a483860468aac73502@boeing.com> <CALx6S36Vv57AZFr=2adfEMYnVSOECsowXw1c7pTo_E-FWokB6Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALx6S36Vv57AZFr=2adfEMYnVSOECsowXw1c7pTo_E-FWokB6Q@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=419.consulting;
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: CWXP265MB5153:EE_|LO4P265MB6400:EE_
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 2b5d4ebc-472b-4943-f742-08db5f9ec5af
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-ms-exchange-antispam-relay: 0
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 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
x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:CWXP265MB5153.GBRP265.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(13230028)(39830400003)(366004)(346002)(376002)(396003)(136003)(451199021)(66574015)(110136005)(54906003)(186003)(83380400001)(86362001)(478600001)(38070700005)(2906002)(66899021)(66476007)(66946007)(44832011)(66446008)(64756008)(66556008)(4326008)(52536014)(122000001)(76116006)(71200400001)(316002)(9686003)(26005)(53546011)(6506007)(7696005)(33656002)(5660300002)(8676002)(41300700001)(8936002)(38100700002)(55016003)(46492015)(221023011); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101;
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata-chunkcount: 1
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata-0: KBO9MNG2QFFA/Skt399dG2VLuTDpOOSEk7nqJtUvHkiYy2LQCXWIPkAtLMY2TVt1nwTd4jhhDXmp4K26Yi/+z4G2jOZR66PPBMYkytrVueJC/j64tulfeAqG7uhbxF/VKbpsCtc6n1zHfLd0Fpsdu02kbfQWWF1eisbbl4GO0QkzWHf9GQry0cjA/bLSlQ6/yYiD96nanY7xZWQfDwvfACKvEkc4PqyPilZbLb4D2AT+N8IbSuvjyMKyT+pcHMBzAsXoG2m2DEnzv+xBuU4uezb2YUABGy17qlA9RRcW1xcuoeg90FX+8NfsoynwwuW7bdah158Uc6UT8Jsi9HmF1y+R23UuLYuKo2P01eaQOnv+plNOkUKyQ07O217OaIl0xDwqxjDzW0QAvQPZ7FNZLty+Stwqg+oDtprr2sNdDoPVQfiPSk2LwaJV6aO15vo/NG3C7ByL+8DOrNNAaA+pHGsoTWROMdWidmk28eHx+T6GSM77hsYHecDGCAy01egdLMG3wGVxzjHk2FSxqtcr8Oxv1sqoXK6vd6g42Yn3tUhovAPLOX/YLtb1I08JMkKo4W9azer6mhs/vGvF8VcwQwGKfApXAiVQ/2umtoZKYOuqltFnBPITFMvz5Kv1gq8XyAMiF0+4OCcpwI3ZNxUBLnoC+vEpSunavHsidbHlW6e1wCKUTUf1p5WKUGhw0pIC0zqBlhIe8IxBTph6yWSb+zBOuRlEqwDfQnagTTb6wRypLGqaY9wktmK/bz13pI/I8l3aHPfXVDKUzjDiO/o3nCJJuBVLEh6RdYq+XA9t3NnU4zTd7/cNKwScj4ZpyJiHyMbBvycIgdmRP0wEGIJIEPTZdFiwdVqg+AzIXjN56wx0qZ0TabwuSC1M1QuYZBNF+8TumogN8qKlpNsYL7VbdX6w/L4PDMTyhPs4Qlyt5BZAYlvdFZt0vQgvXdcbmJIJOA0LsrIoIfFYM13SmuXVsTAGrrCuukX8pe5fDFGbcTpweTypZBPeQipDdcbgd613d+zZ4CXRqEKXcyDOZfpmrSmTdsiPpYA1HfwGL9tIWwStPKid7HKAdCNWdy+PV0XQKFJf/O+DQ/y+yo8zgIL0LCAGOzfO/6WakYDB+72W0vK4pfa3M6xjIckN2VMUgPX06tnjNhJvlGVfg3IJdrIThexRu1q2FhA6vN949APXnrNBY+Uyd1Rizl5BVpjbjG8uhNg+i9xw8KfX7R7huWerV1GPP6VJWBwDh8BDjmYg6ZxzAVgEkVeJHW3RddDUyFLkbQDc7XFs6duX2rrgEpXGtPQ/4aWLkDZfV2r5rtZ4k7qJhclcYeiq9xQW/exS5v1ke6VsgYbZ6HJ8U2aRahw+ZRNz27XRuRpa2bY7EU94T+IKHZ2k4+2S0n0LYYGkdt88G8azANVySS/Gd0RQhBBNW1dN9hAkowy5hTz3qsX/zFvbcDj5g3TwAiAGvWS5RNYiXBRt2DABL2z9BSfd8b95teNT1AvnaknmIe7ZeiMxK8DlyEaR0xQooK1jcQRKSmw6ymFnbXHytaupuRUSJxq2UA/Zqbs7pMZODSIRMgnryeDcqIoOMCIFnkIpyPeY9FJjFJhsnoK0zllgOXhxEFTRJw==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: 419.consulting
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: CWXP265MB5153.GBRP265.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 2b5d4ebc-472b-4943-f742-08db5f9ec5af
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 28 May 2023 17:12:52.8870 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 9c2ced3e-7522-4755-87dc-f983abc66ec3
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: M9qjuuDQXVYAwfd2uAQEya4+pffMzbNWmUC4jBqwnHRMYKKiEAp63d2LLTsxCVHzzBLyE2S2rP6fI6AYovg6Au7Y8WIL84WkQDKWOo0cY70=
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: LO4P265MB6400
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/fKd5SVTZPU-5YuA5rF2U0w6bPCg>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] [OPSEC] [EXTERNAL] Re: [IPv6] Why folks are blocking IPv 6 extension headers? (Episode 1000 and counting) (Linux DoS)
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 28 May 2023 17:12:58 -0000

On Sat, May 27, 2023 at 11:05 PM Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com> wrote:

> Application developers and stack developers are also players in this 
> game. And while each network provider might have the luxury of only 
> focusing on their customer set, developers have to potentially 
> address the needs of all users across the Internet.  This is why 
> network providers' attempts to protect the user are irrelevant to 
> application developers-- without consistency across the Internet 
> this level of security may as well not exist from their perspective. 
> Obviously this situation didn't materialize overnight and it shouldn't 
> be surprising that we've had to implement work-arounds to this 
> problem. For instance, encryption goes a long way in limiting the 
> network's visibility in the packet, but that does have its limits.

Tom

Let's not forget that some of those same developers are responsible for implementing surveillance capitalism, one of the most egregious invasions of user privacy and surely contrary to RFC 7258 - I know that people generally seem to focus on network-based monitoring, however application-based monitoring is potentially far more invasive.  Some of the application-based "work-arounds" to network security measures you reference could be helpful in allowing those applications to exfiltrate user data; if applications behave increasingly like malware then it should not come as a surprise if they are treated as such by networks in an effort to protect users.  

As noted elsewhere, I believe that it would be beneficial to the IETF community if greater efforts were made to engage with enterprise and public network CISOs, as well as more network operators.  This would help inject more understanding of current operational security practices and considerations into protocol development activity, which might help to avoid puzzlement when new developments are unleashed, only to find them blocked or only greeted with luke-warm enthusiasm by those that have operational responsibility for security, customer service etc.  

Andrew