So, this paper makes it clear that I don't understand some of this stuff
as well as I thought I did.  No surprise there; it's complicated and
this has not been my primary area of focus. so let's see if I can be
educated.

In the part of the world I'm familiar with, we address this problem by
authenticating the identity of the outer tunnel as part of the inner
tunnel.  For example for a TLS-based tunnel we might hash the TLS finish
message into the inner method.  We don't even try to do anything with
plaintext password methods: there's no point you're just kidding
yourself.  We do try and do something with things like SCRAM (think
mschapv2 roughly).  We're typically using the tunnel in order to fight
against dictionary attacks mounted by observers or to provide session
security later.

If I'm reading this paper right that's not what we're doing here in EAP.
We're taking some quantity from the inner method and binding to that?

What's the rationale for that?
_______________________________________________
Emu mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu

Reply via email to