On 2011-06-15 15:51, Noel Rocha wrote:
In this situation:
- KSK signed ZSK(DNSKEY RR).
- ZSK signing others RR of zone.

I don't see reason for the KSK be present in operations unless
add/delete RR DNSKEY.
I had the same idea roughly a year ago. And while you're right, it doesn't change much in practice. I'll explain my case, and assume it applies to you as well.

Since you allow dynamic updates, the ZSKs need to be online. I think we can all agree on this. In theory, you could still sign the ZSKs "manually" with the KSK once not-too-often and keep the KSK offline in between. You believe this makes your zone more secure.

However, I don't see any security-benefits in this scenario: If the attacker gets hold of the credentials to update the zone dynamically, he can do so in both cases (KSK online or offline). If your server is compromised, he can add/remove records in both cases. In case of ZSK compromise, you can generate&sign new ZSKs in both cases. In case of KSK compromise, you generate new KSKs and upload them to the parent. The only difference is that in the offline case, KSK compromise is a little less likely.

So in the end, I decided to leave my KSK online and have BIND automatically perform ZSK rollovers for me (KSKs are needed for this, although you could pre-calculate all needed RRSIGs during all stages of the rollover if you really want to)

Greets,
Niobos

_______________________________________________
bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users

Reply via email to