Hi -

> From: "Juergen Schoenwaelder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
...
> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 11:13 AM
> Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Gen-ART LC 
> reviewofdraft-ietf-opsawg-snmp-engineid-discovery-02.txt
... 
> Any suggestion how to fix this? Would if be sufficient to add "if a
> security model does not provide a suitable discovery mechanism for
> contextEngineIDs", that is:
> 
>    If a device configuration permits non-secure SNMPv1/v2c access to a
>    target system, then reading the snmpEngineID variable of the SNMP-
>    FRAMEWORK-MIB will also reveal a suitable contextEngineID value for
>    subsequent SNMPv3 usage.  However, implementations should not rely
>    on non-secure SNMPv1/v2c access and therefore MUST implement this
>    specification to enable secure contextEngineID discovery if a
>    security model does not provide a suitable discovery mechanism for
>    contextEngineIDs.

This looks fine to me.

> > BTW, I admit to being a bit baffled by the second paragraph of the
> > security considerations section - why are we worried about attackers
> > learning snmpEngineID values?  Just exactly what attack would having
> > this information facilitate?
> 
> Depending on how the snmpEngineID is constructed, it may contain the
> enterprise ID identifying the device manufacturer or it may contain a
> MAC address which is otherwise not accessibe (and which also gives a
> hint about the manufacturer), or it might contain an administratively
> assigned text that might be useful to further target an attack.
> 
> Is this something to be seriously worried about? I can't judge. Do we
> have such text in USM RFC 3414? Obviously not. Is the fact that USM is
> silent about this sufficient to not be worried? Again, I can't judge.

Though obviously not the same, I'd lump this in with RFC 3414's
commentary on traffic analysis attacks.  The recommended VACM
configuration in appendix A of RFC 3415 gives noAuthNoPriv read
access to this information anyway.

Randy

_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

Reply via email to