Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

an address can be validated with a security protocol like DTLS, TLS, OSCORE, #15

Closed
emanjon opened this issue Feb 8, 2022 · 2 comments

Comments

@emanjon
Copy link
Collaborator

emanjon commented Feb 8, 2022

I think this is only true for TLS and DTLS without connection ID

  • OSCORE just sends the response back to where the request came from. In the case of a new address Echo needs to be used. This could likely be missed by implementations.
  • The connection ID draft states that some mechanism need to used when the addess change.

I will update the text and likely make a figure.

@boaks
Copy link

boaks commented Feb 9, 2022

Let me add, that the "address validation" has different aspects.

Using (upcoming) RFC9146 the source identity of the peer (given by the cid) is verified by the MAC. What is not (longer) verified is the source ip-address. So the uncertainness here is not about the received data, it's about the source ip-address to send back data.
If some data is sent back (encrypted), it's doesn't introduce a new leaking risk. What is added as risk is the possibility of being misused for an amplification attack. In difference to the more common proactive DDoS threats (attacker is able to initiate sending records with manipulated source addresses), this one is a passive one (attacker needs to wait for a valid record and then manipulates the source address). If such a passive attack is really reasonable for DDoS, may be discussed. That depends also on the usage of DTLS CID by a next layer. E.g. with CoAP / NSTART-1, I'm not sure, if enough records are send out to be manipulated and if the responses are large enough to offer amplification. And sometimes implementing protection as RRC or draft-ietf-core-echo-request-tag seems to have the smaller effort than such a discussion.

@emanjon
Copy link
Collaborator Author

emanjon commented Jan 17, 2023

Please continue discussion at
t2trg/t2trg-amplification-attacks#6

(Due to lack of owner rights I could not transfer this repository and instead had to make a new one, I will manually create new issues there for any open issues).

@emanjon emanjon closed this as completed Jan 17, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants