Just did a bit of thinking and arrived at the  following understanding for
ESP Encryption + AH Authentication based on the snippet from the RFC.

ESP Encryption + AH Authentication + transport mode  -----> ESP does
encryption first and then AH authenticates the entire packet

ESP Encryption + AH Authentication + tunnel mode  -----> AH does
authentication first and then ESP encapsulates the authenticated packet.


Wireshark should give a better picture...


With regards
Kings

On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 4:58 PM, Kingsley Charles <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi all
>
> When IPSec uses ESP encryption with ESP authentication or ESP encryption
> with AH authentication, what would be order of encryption and
> authentication? Will the encryption be done first and then authentication or
> the vice versa?
>
> For ESP encryption with ESP authentication, my understanding is that the
> data is first encrypted and then authentication is done.. The authentication
> happens from the ESP header to the ESP trailer. So with transport mode, the
> original IP address is not authentication and in tunnel mode, the new IP
> header is not authenticated.
>
> When ESP encryption and AH authentication is used, what would be the order?
> The following snippet confuses me a bit.
>
> The following snippet
>
> Snippet  from http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1827.html
>
> 4.3. Authentication
>
>    Some transforms provide authentication as well as confidentiality and
>    integrity.  When such a transform is not used, then the
>    Authentication Header might be used in conjunction with the
>    Encapsulating Security Payload.  There are two different approaches
>    to using the Authentication Header with ESP, depending on which data
>    is to be authenticated.  The location of the Authentication Header
>    makes it clear which set of data is being authenticated.
>
>    In the first usage, the entire received datagram is authenticated,
>    including both the encrypted and unencrypted portions, while only the
>    data sent after the ESP Header is confidential.  In this usage, the
>    sender first applies ESP to the data being protected.  Then the other
>    plaintext IP headers are prepended to the ESP header and its now
>    encrypted data. Finally, the IP Authentication Header is calculated
>    over the resulting datagram according to the normal method.  Upon
>    receipt, the receiver first verifies the authenticity of the entire
>    datagram using the normal IP Authentication Header process.  Then if
>    authentication succeeds, decryption using the normal IP ESP process
>    occurs.  If decryption is successful, then the resulting data is
>    passed up to the upper layer.
>
>    If the authentication process were to be applied only to the data
>    protected by Tunnel-mode ESP, then the IP Authentication Header would
>    be placed normally within that protected datagram.  However, if one
>    were using Transport-mode ESP, then the IP Authentication Header
>    would be placed before the ESP header and would be calculated across
>    the entire IP datagram.
>
>    If the Authentication Header is encapsulated within a Tunnel-mode ESP
>    header, and both headers have specific security classification levels
>    associated with them, and the two security classification levels are
>    not identical, then an error has occurred.  That error SHOULD be
>    recorded in the system log or audit log using the procedures
>    described previously.  It is not necessarily an error for an
>    Authentication Header located outside of the ESP header to have a
>    different security classification level than the ESP header's
>    classification level.  This might be valid because the cleartext IP
>    headers might have a different classification level after the data
>    has been encrypted using ESP.
>
>
>
> With regards
> Kings
>
_______________________________________________
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out 
www.PlatinumPlacement.com

Reply via email to