Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Yet another BGP hijacking towards AS16509

2022-08-24 Thread Randy Bush
as a fellow researcher said the other week, ROV, ASPA, ... are intended to provide safety, not security. randy

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Yet another BGP hijacking towards AS16509

2022-08-24 Thread Job Snijders via NANOG
Heya, On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 09:17:03AM +0200, Claudio Jeker wrote: > On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 08:07:29PM +0200, Job Snijders via NANOG wrote: > > In this sense, ASPA (just by itself) suffers the same challenge as > > RPKI ROA-based Origin Validation: the input (the BGP AS_PATH) is > > unsigned

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Yet another BGP hijacking towards AS16509

2022-08-24 Thread Claudio Jeker
On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 08:07:29PM +0200, Job Snijders via NANOG wrote: > On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 05:18:42PM +, Compton, Rich A wrote: > > I was under the impression that ASPA could prevent route leaks as well > > as path spoofing. This "BGP Route Security Cycling to the Future!" > >

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Yet another BGP hijacking towards AS16509

2022-08-23 Thread Job Snijders via NANOG
On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 05:18:42PM +, Compton, Rich A wrote: > I was under the impression that ASPA could prevent route leaks as well > as path spoofing. This "BGP Route Security Cycling to the Future!" > presentation from NANOG seems to indicate this is the case: >

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Yet another BGP hijacking towards AS16509

2022-08-23 Thread Compton, Rich A
I was under the impression that ASPA could prevent route leaks as well as path spoofing. This "BGP Route Security Cycling to the Future!" presentation from NANOG seems to indicate this is the case: https://youtu.be/0Fi2ghCnXi0?t=1093 Also, can't the path spoofing protection that BGPsec provides