Re: [xmpp] IQ Handling vulnerabilities

"Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr)" <jhildebr@cisco.com> Fri, 07 February 2014 15:11 UTC

Return-Path: <jhildebr@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 403531A8034 for <xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Feb 2014 07:11:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.036
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.036 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.535, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id J2t617BQ7XbP for <xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Feb 2014 07:11:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alln-iport-1.cisco.com (alln-iport-1.cisco.com [173.37.142.88]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F26831AC3DD for <xmpp@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Feb 2014 07:11:14 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=491; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1391785875; x=1392995475; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=YjgupvkglwsdcUaq0i/pc6U//lir1nFbdN21bab83v4=; b=Kba7RVtLIk2Q62d0PXDdkoPscsS7gT9LDSq5VwCT0WwYvw8mtPB0bXTb +gfkQsrgZw0Fc8i/im19iSNrAmCfc0p9zKVJ9AnfHHSc/b7gqZ0VoBro/ +Jmn/FXtGskMz04AAm3gh7WY70LRwHSlSAKubdnDxrOP7IB+w+yvBju2Y g=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ai0FAFr39FKtJXG+/2dsb2JhbABZgwyBD7pmhAKBDhZ0giYBAQQ6PxACAQg2EDIlAgQBDQWIBcxsF459B4Q4AQOYK5Ihgy2CKg
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.95,801,1384300800"; d="scan'208";a="18740535"
Received: from rcdn-core2-3.cisco.com ([173.37.113.190]) by alln-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 07 Feb 2014 15:10:59 +0000
Received: from xhc-aln-x14.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x14.cisco.com [173.36.12.88]) by rcdn-core2-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s17FAxSB026404 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Fri, 7 Feb 2014 15:10:59 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com ([169.254.15.55]) by xhc-aln-x14.cisco.com ([173.36.12.88]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Fri, 7 Feb 2014 09:10:59 -0600
From: "Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr)" <jhildebr@cisco.com>
To: Thijs Alkemade <thijs@xnyhps.nl>, Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
Thread-Topic: [xmpp] IQ Handling vulnerabilities
Thread-Index: AQHPIy5NY8RkLrfuaUqqtuYhYOIBR5qopVEAgACdaoCAAL9TgP//w6cA
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2014 15:10:58 +0000
Message-ID: <CF1A369C.38BE2%jhildebr@cisco.com>
References: <CAOb_FnxS-dMT85N7LHj5M9JWk3pL85=ugrDqaT7j5d28HBr0Cw@mail.gmail.com> <CF194491.38AD3%jhildebr@cisco.com> <2F5E925F-021D-408E-91D9-3CC5BEB6BEC6@nostrum.com> <48F4D361-4403-47E6-862D-FBDDDEBCC642@xnyhps.nl>
In-Reply-To: <48F4D361-4403-47E6-862D-FBDDDEBCC642@xnyhps.nl>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.3.9.131030
x-originating-ip: [10.21.82.234]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <2937D75C7167544696B938336C2B0611@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: XMPP Working Group <xmpp@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [xmpp] IQ Handling vulnerabilities
X-BeenThere: xmpp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: XMPP Working Group <xmpp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/xmpp>, <mailto:xmpp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/xmpp/>
List-Post: <mailto:xmpp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xmpp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xmpp>, <mailto:xmpp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Feb 2014 15:11:21 -0000

On 2/7/14 2:46 AM, "Thijs Alkemade" <thijs@xnyhps.nl> wrote:

>The property we really want from ids is that predicting the next one(s)
>given
>some historic ones is hard.

(as individual)

I agree with everything you said to this point.  However, I think we need
to strengthen this a little: we want to ensure predicting the next one(s)
in *any* way is hard.

Luckily using the from address also mitigates this need slightly for some
of the use cases.

-- 
Joe Hildebrand