On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 6:03 AM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
> forward secrecy
> ---------------
>
> IIUC for (b), the failing forward secrecy window is constrained by the
> duration of the PSK/session resumption ticket.  That's doesn't seem
> particularly worrisome to me for DNS.
>

I'd expect many operators to re-use ticket encryption keys for far too
long, as we see with HTTPS today, so the effect is that a dns server bug
may unlock years of 0RTT data. For DNS, the query is always likely to fit
in there.


> replay protection
> -----------------
>
> For DNS we don't particularly care about replay attacks initially, but
> replayable traffic might have some privacy implications.
>
> For example, if Mallory can monitor the traffic to and from the DNS
> resolver, and a TLS-wrapped DNS request is made that is answered from
> the cache, then the attacker has no additional information about what
> the answer is.
>
> But if the request is replayable, Mallory can capture it, and replay it
> at different intervals (when parts of the cache might be expired) to try
> to coax the recursor to call out to the authoritative resolvers, which
> might provide more information about the original query.
>

There's a simpler attack too; if the RRSet contains multiple RRs, it's
common for resolvers to rotate the order of the RRs in a fixed and
predictable order. So you can query a name you suspect was queried, then
replay the target query, then query the name again, and confirm your
suspicion. This requires only a copy of the target 0RTT section, and access
to query the resolver, so a typical wifi scenario would do. Multi-RR
responses are very common these days too.

-- 
Colm
_______________________________________________
dns-privacy mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy

Reply via email to