On 28 Jan 2003, Mika Liljeberg wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-01-28 at 08:33, Pekka Savola wrote:
> > TCP has to be modified anyway, I see no way around that.
> > 
> > Even with RR mechanism, TCP has to be modified to reconnect to the new 
> > unicast address.  This is basically the same.
> 
> Not necessarily. The <anycast,unicast> binding could be stored in the
> binding cache as in MIPv6 and TCP could continue using the anycast
> address.

That would require anycast be used as source address, or home address 
option, right?  (Plus some modifications in clients etc.)

This really should need a bit fleshening up, in a short I-D.
 
> > Actually, there's no need for additional messages at all -- as SYN-ACK 
> > includes the sequence number sent in SYN as ack number.  So there's some 
> > small proof in this.  But then TCP would have to changed to change the 
> > endpoint address in TCB etc.  That's what my proposition tried to avoid.
> 
> Me too. Reconnecting to a unicast address changes the TCB as well. This
> is a change in semantics that is visible to applications (unexpected
> peername). I'd be hesitant to change API semantics that have remained
> the same for the past 20 years.

Well, I guess that's true, unless someone invents some nice hack to work 
around that.  I'm not sure how damaging though.
 
> > > Either way, this would still make the TCP "security" weaker, because it
> > > would make it possible (by guessing the ISN) to high-jack both
> > > directions of a TCP connection, rather than just one. Needless to say,
> > > this would be a lot more valuable to the attacker.
> > 
> > Sure.. but consider the big picture.  To guess the ISN in the first 3 
> > messages would be rather difficult.  To know when exactly the source node 
> > has communicated with an anycast address about equally so (to get into the 
> > SYN_SENT window for that address).  Especially the latter is something 
> > that off-path attackers should find really difficult.
> 
> I didn't say guessing the ISN or timing the attack would become any
> easier. The point is simply that guessing the ISN would now make
> applications vulnerable to man-in-the-middle attacks by off-path
> attackers. Assuming sufficient ISN randomness, 

and timing requirements

> perhaps this is not a
> problem.

I agree but I think the total security level is not _all_ that different.  
 
> > > However, it would be preferable not to have to have to modify TCP at
> > > all. Maintaining the binding at TCP level would simply be a pain. The
> > > better option would seem to be to hide the address change from TCP by
> > > employing a routing header and something similar to the home address
> > > option. Might as well require that all hosts sporting TCP servers at
> > > anycast addresses must also support MIPv6.
> > 
> > TCP modifications would be about the same level as with the RR procedure.
> 
> Which is why existing mechanisms (e.g. MIPv6) should be reused rather
> than inventing new ones.

I'd like to see a roadmap for these. :-)
 
> > MIPv6-like approaches would be one option of course, rather heavy though.
> 
> A light-weight compromise might be to have TCP authenticate the binding,
> but use MIPv6 mechanisms for the routing. This would avoid the change in
> API semantics as well.
> 
> I have a hard time seeing anycast TCP used in the global network or
> beyond selected applications in local networks. That being the case,
> requiring that the client hosts to support MIPv6 route optimisation
> (with some tweaks) should not be that big a deal.

Perhaps not a big deal, assuming every node that should be capable of 
(anycast) TCP would be able to act as an IPv6 CN..

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to