Greetings,

I gave a presentation called "One year of DANE - Tales and Lessons Learned" at
the 34th M³AA3WG General Meeting in Dublin a few weeks ago. Barry (Leiba)
asked me in an offlist mail to share the slides with you on this list and also
write about the experience we've made during the last 1,5 years.

# Slides
Here's a quick rundown to give an idea what my presentation was about:

The first part is technical. It starts off naming the issues traditional
opportunistic TLS faces today. Then they show an approach/plan to solve the
named issues only to present DANE as a solution next. The slides then show and
discuss current use cases for DANE (with a strong focus on email) - HTTPS,
SMTP, OPENPGPKEYS, SMIMEA.

The second part deals with adoption, possible markets and reasons why the one
or the other TLD has a better starting position to adopt DANE. It also lists
things we have learned during the last 1,5 years working with DANE or get to
hear often when we talk with people interested to DANE-enable their
infrastructure.

Download the slides at https://sys4.de/download/dane-maawg.pdf.


# Experience
Barry also suggested I summarize our experience with DANE. Here's a list of
things we've learned or I believe to have understood (sudden moments of clarity
are a great thing [tm]):

DANE is server and client
    DANE may be used by clients and offered to others. This is obvious once
    you've become aware of that, but people seem to focus at the "offering
    DANE part" above average. And they seem to fade out the client side.
    
    When they realize the server side isn't low hanging fruit they seem to get
    stuck. Shifting their focus to the client side helps. That's the low
    hanging fruit (assuming you have DANE capable clients at hand).

Using DANE in a client is easy
    You need a DNSSEC-capable resolver and DANE capable client software. It's
    simple, compared to offering DANE, because these componets are simplier to
    control and problems stay your own. Failures have comparatively limited
    effect. Postmasters change settings within their well-known application.
    They don't need to deal with a DNS server, which they might not know as
    well or need to talk a hostmaster to do something for them (they don't
    feel comfortable with).
    
DNSSEC-enabling your infrastructure requires careful thinking
    DNSSEC is about security. The right way [tm] to do DNSSEC on a host is to
    equip it with a local DNSSEC-capable resolver. If you want to add
    fallback resolvers (resolv.conf) *all* of them need to be DNSSEC-capable
    or you might end up with a (bad,insecure,...) DNS reply that would have
    been suppressed by a DNSSEC aware resolver.

Careful if your run your own, internal TLD
    Local TLDs are not DNSSEC signed by default. DNSSEC-aware resolvers will
    suppress answers unless you DNSSEC-enable the internal ZONE or configure
    the resolvers to ignore the DNSSEC chain of trust for that particular
    domain. Test before or you will risc needless service outage.

Check your firewalls
    TLSA, SMIMEA and OPENPGPKEYS queries to DNS servers end up in TCP answers.
    Your firewall must permit TCP on 53. (Most people will probably have that 
    in place if they also serve DKIM. If not this might be the answer to these
    strange DNS problems... ;)
    Check also that your firewall doesn't filter RRs. It might drop requests
    for TLSA and all the other new RRs. It works from inside, but fails for
    outside requests.

Offering DANE RRs is all about DNSSEC
    Offering DANE requires a DNSSEC-enabled DNS server. Everything after
    DNSSEC-enabling the DNS server is comparatively easy.

DNSSEC-enabling is the hardest part
    People are scared to DNSSEC-enable their domain(s). They have to upgrade
    their applications. They have to clean up/refactor/get a better
    understanding of their service. (You're up and running in a few minutes
    and once that works you don't spend time with DNS anymore - unless you're
    a large player or do DNS for business).
    
Registrars don't invest in DNSSEC
    Offering DNSSEC means to invest in security. It requires to invest in a
    race to the bottom market where cheaper seems to be more important than
    more secure. The market interest for DNSSEC isn't great enough at the
    moment to invest into DNSSEC. (In .nl the goverment subsidizes
    DNSSEC-enabled domains. Surveys indicate 50% of .nl is DNSSEC-enabled!)

DNSSEC-capable registrars are hard to find
    At least in .de its hard to find a registrar offering DNSSEC. One of the
    question we get to hear all the time is if we could recommend a list of
    DNSSEC registrars in Germany. To me this seems directly related to the
    little invest we see in DNSSEC on the registrars side - a chicken egg
    dilemma.

Monitor your DNSSEC domain
    Keep an eye on your zones signature TTL. If it expires DNSSEC-capable
    resolvers will suppress replies. They will ignore your domain until you've
    renewed the signature. Monitor your DNSSEC domain. Monitor TTLs and TLSA
    pinned certificate enddates (see next lesson).

RR rollover requires more careful handling
    If you need to roll in a new TLSA (or any other DANE related record) make
    you do it in advance. Leave the old one and add the new one. Wait two TTL
    cycles. Give clients out there time to revisit and learn the new RR. Only
    then remove the old one.

    If you forget to add the new RR you risk receiving no mail from DANE
    enabled clients. They check the RR and if you publish an old TLSA, but use
    a new cert they will not send. That's just how DANE should work. ;)

    Automate the rollover and make sure the rollover works reliably *before*
    you upload your zones signing key to your registrar and publicly
    DNSSEC-able your domain.

DNSSEC obstructs DANE
    People who critice DANE usually criticise it because of DNSSEC. They say
    DNSSEC hasn't been worked on for too long time. The standard should be
    updated. They say it doesn't provide the level of security it could and
    should for something as important as DANE to build upon. From their point
    of view DANE security is directly linked to the level of security DNSSEC
    provides. I'm no DNS expert to tell how much substance there is in their
    criticism. If there is updating DNSSEC standards might help to break the
    ice.

There's no market for DANE at the moment
    Everybody seems to wait for everybody else to start using/offering
    DNSSEC/DANE. Those who DANE enable their clients find only few DANE
    enabled servers to communicate with. Those who could DNSSEC-enable their
    domains and could start serving DANE-related RRs don't see the benefit to
    go through all the required work.

    We - heise.de (Germany's most popular IT magazine and portal), BSI
    (Federal Office for Information Security), DENIC (Germanys .de TLD
    registry) and sys4 - spent about half a year to prepare a DNSSEC-Day.

    DNSSEC-Day will take place next week Tuesday (June, 30th) between 2 p.m
    and 6 p.m. (CEST). It will be a (German language only) video livestream
    (see: http://www.heise.de/netze/dnssec-day) where all four parties will
    discuss topics related to DNSSEC and DANE. Articles and screencasts
    complement the broadcast.

DANE is for machine to machine communication
    As it is there's almost no support for DANE functionality in end user
    applications. If there is, the code is not part of the core, but an
    add-on. It should reside in the core for security reasons. The/some
    reasons why there's no core support in end user clients at the moment have
    been discussed on this list.
    For the time being DANE remains limited to machine to machine
    communication.


That's it for the moment. I hope this summary is useful and we will see wide
adoption of DANE soon.

p@rick

-- 
[*] sys4 AG
 
https://sys4.de, +49 (89) 30 90 46 64
Franziskanerstraße 15, 81669 München
 
Sitz der Gesellschaft: München, Amtsgericht München: HRB 199263
Vorstand: Patrick Ben Koetter, Marc Schiffbauer
Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Florian Kirstein
 

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

_______________________________________________
dane mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dane

Reply via email to