Re: What do people use public suffix for?

2013-04-19 Thread Bjørn Mork
Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com writes:

 - Original Message -
 From: John Levine jo...@iecc.com

 The public suffix list contains points in the DNS where (roughly
 speaking) names below that point are under different management from
 each other and from that name. It's here: http://publicsuffix.org/
 
 The idea is that abc.foo.com and xyz.foo.com have the same management,
 but abc.co.uk and xyz.co.uk do not.
 
 You don't have to tell me that it's a gross crock, but it seems to
 be a useful one. What do people use it for? Here's what I know of:
 
 * Web browsers use it to manage cookies to keep a site from putting
 cookies that will affect other sites, e.g. abc.foo.co.uk can set a
 cookie for foo.co.uk but not for co.uk.
 
 * DMARC (www.dmarc.org) uses it to find a policy record in the DNS
 that describes a subtree, e.g., if you get mail that purports to be
 from e...@reply1.ebay.com it checks the policy at ebay.com.
 
 What other current applications are there?

 Seems to me that it's a crock because *it should be in the DNS*.

It is already, isn't it?  The NS and SOA records will tell you all there
is to know about zone splits and cross zone relations.

 I should be able to retrieve the AS (administrative split) record 
 for .co.uk, and there should be one that says, yup, there's an
 administrative split below me; nothing under there is mine unless 
 you also get an exception record for a subdomain.

Use the SOA record.  If it is identical for two zones, then the
adminstrative authority for those zones is the same.

For example, microsoft.co.uk and microsoft.com can be considered
under the same administration:

 bjorn@nemi:~$ dig +short soa microsoft.co.uk 
 ns1.msft.net. msnhst.microsoft.com. 2013032601 1800 900 2419200 3600
 bjorn@nemi:~$ dig +short soa microsoft.com
 ns1.msft.net. msnhst.microsoft.com. 2013041803 300 600 2419200 3600

While apple.co.uk and apple.com may be, depending on how strict you
are going to be when comparing:

 bjorn@nemi:~$ dig +short soa apple.co.uk 
 nserver.euro.apple.com. hostmaster.apple.com. 10 1800 900 2592000 1800
 bjorn@nemi:~$ dig +short soa apple.com
 gridmaster-ib.apple.com. hostmaster.apple.com. 2010086586 1800 900 2016000 
86500


etc.


Bjørn



Re: What do people use public suffix for?

2013-04-19 Thread Joe Abley

On 2013-04-19, at 14:17, Bjørn Mork bj...@mork.no wrote:

 It is already, isn't it?  The NS and SOA records will tell you all there
 is to know about zone splits and cross zone relations.

Not really.

In general, just because a zone is served by the same nameservers as another 
zone doesn't mean that they are administratively equivalent (e.g. for cookie 
hygiene purposes).

Just because two zones are served on different nameservers doesn't mean they 
are administratively separate. Lots of administratively-separate domains share 
the same nameservers.

Drawing related conclusions from similarity of SOA RDATA between zones, or the 
number of zone cuts between a particular zone and the root, or the number of 
labels in a domain name is similarly flawed.

If the rule was just the nameservers need to be the same and the SOA RDATA 
needs to be the same, for some well-documented meaning of 'same' then gaming 
that rule (e.g. for purposes of cookie injection) as a miscreant is 
unpleasantly straightforward.


Joe




Re: What do people use public suffix for?

2013-04-19 Thread Tony Finch
Joe Abley jab...@hopcount.ca wrote:

 If the rule was just the nameservers need to be the same and the SOA
 RDATA needs to be the same, for some well-documented meaning of 'same'
 then gaming that rule (e.g. for purposes of cookie injection) as a
 miscreant is unpleasantly straightforward.

To reinforce Joe's point, there doesn't even need to be a zone cut for
there to be an administrative cut. There are various ISPs and dynamic DNS
providers that put all their users in the same zone, and the common suffix
of a zone like this should be treated as public suffix even though there
is no zone cut.

Tony.
-- 
f.anthony.n.finch  d...@dotat.at  http://dotat.at/
Forties, Cromarty: East, veering southeast, 4 or 5, occasionally 6 at first.
Rough, becoming slight or moderate. Showers, rain at first. Moderate or good,
occasionally poor at first.



Re: What do people use public suffix for?

2013-04-19 Thread Dave Crocker



On 4/19/2013 12:57 PM, Tony Finch wrote:

To reinforce Joe's point, there doesn't even need to be a zone cut for
there to be an administrative cut. There are various ISPs and dynamic DNS
providers that put all their users in the same zone, and the common suffix
of a zone like this should be treated as public suffix even though there
is no zone cut.



Zones are nice constructs for partitioning operational management of DNS 
data, but I believe they were not intended to impart semantics about 
organizational boundaries.


The fact that they often correlate moderately well makes it easy to miss 
the facts that a) that's not their job, and b) the correlation isn't 
perfect.  And the imperfections matter.


That is why there is the current interest in developing a cheap, 
accurate method that /is/ intended to define organizational boundaries.


d/
--
 Dave Crocker
 Brandenburg InternetWorking
 bbiw.net



Re: What do people use public suffix for?

2013-04-19 Thread Jimmy Hess
On 4/19/13, Dave Crocker d...@dcrocker.net wrote:
 On 4/19/2013 12:57 PM, Tony Finch wrote:
 To reinforce Joe's point, there doesn't even need to be a zone cut for
 there to be an administrative cut. There are various ISPs and dynamic DNS
 providers that put all their users in the same zone, and the common
[snip]

In this case, there really is no administrative cut though... the
provider administers the DNS record.

 The fact that they often correlate moderately well makes it easy to miss
 the facts that a) that's not their job, and b) the correlation isn't
 perfect.  And the imperfections matter.

 That is why there is the current interest in developing a cheap,
 accurate method that /is/ intended to define organizational boundaries.


It seems this is more about providing a security function to DNS, to
inform the public, about where the responsible parties change.

The right place for this, is clearly the  DNSSEC extensions

If  the DS record identifies a different signer, then you have an
administrative split,
or if the e-mail address field in the SOA fields of the parent zone
are different, then you have an administrative split, OR if one of the
two zones has  RP (responsible party records),  and the list of RP
records are different for the two zones, then you have an
administrative split.


If the DS record identifies the same signer, ANDthee-mail
address in the SOA records is the same;  or the  list of e-mail
addresses in the two zones'   RP records are identical,
then you don't have an administrative split.


--
-JH



Re: What do people use public suffix for?

2013-04-19 Thread John Levine
If  the DS record identifies a different signer, then you have an
administrative split,
or if the e-mail address field in the SOA fields of the parent zone
are different, then you have an administrative split, OR if one of the
two zones has  RP (responsible party records),  and the list of RP
records are different for the two zones, then you have an
administrative split.

Sigh.  See messages from about an hour ago about why zone cuts aren't
the same as management boundaries.  Sprinking DNSSEC pixie dust on the
zone cuts doesn't change that.




Re: What do people use public suffix for?

2013-04-19 Thread Dave Crocker


On 4/19/2013 4:33 PM, Jimmy Hess wrote:

It seems this is more about providing a security function to DNS, to
inform the public, about where the responsible parties change.



Absent a view that somehow says all metadata is a security function, I 
don't see how the marking of administrative boundaries qualifies as a 
security function.


It's easy to imagine security functions that are 'in support of' the 
enforcement of the boundaries, but that's quite different from having an 
annotation mechanism to assert the boundaries.


Let's be careful not to overload functions here.

d/
--
 Dave Crocker
 Brandenburg InternetWorking
 bbiw.net



Re: What do people use public suffix for?

2013-04-19 Thread Jimmy Hess
On 4/19/13, Dave Crocker d...@dcrocker.net wrote:
 On 4/19/2013 4:33 PM, Jimmy Hess wrote:
[snip]
 Absent a view that somehow says all metadata is a security function, I
 don't see how the marking of administrative boundaries qualifies as a
 security function.

The security function comes in immediately, when you consider any
actual uses for said kind of metadata.

The issues are alleviated only by assuming that an administrative
division always exists, unless you can show otherwise,   and showing
that the records are in the same zone is one way of showing otherwise.


When you come to rely on it, there are new security issues.

It becomes such that;   It   is perfectly safe to assume that there is
an administrative division when there is not   (in the worst case, you
break some desired function, such as the sharing of cookies  across
subdomains within the same administrative boundary).

But if you assume no administrative division exists, when there is
supposed to be one -- you have some kind of access control permit
leakage or data leaking through permissions that are supposed to block
operations across the administrative boundaries.


Only a zone signed with DNSSEC can really be trusted not to be
tampered with;  therefore,  any declaration of an administrative
division cannot be proven, and should not be relied upon,  if   any
parent zone up the tree is not signed with delegation validated using
signed records.



 Let's be careful not to overload functions here.

The function becomes pretty useless,  if you cannot safely rely on it
in the real world.
Because tampering can occur through lack of integrity validation,

Or by a child domain claiming to not be administratively divided (when
actually, there is supposed to be an administrative division).


In those cases,  a static list is safer.



 d/
--
-JH



Re: What do people use public suffix for?

2013-04-19 Thread Dave Crocker
1. Explicitly marking an administrative boundary is not inherently a 
'security' function, although properly authorizing and protecting the 
marking no doubt would be.


2. Defining a marking mechanism that is built into a security mechanism 
that is designed for other purposes is overloading functionality, as 
well as setting up a problematic critical dependency.  That's not just 
asking for trouble, it's guaranteeing it.


3. Since you made reference to assumptions a couple of times: the goal 
here is an explicit marking mechanisms.  No assumptions involved.


d/

On 4/19/2013 7:58 PM, Jimmy Hess wrote:

On 4/19/13, Dave Crocker d...@dcrocker.net wrote:

On 4/19/2013 4:33 PM, Jimmy Hess wrote:

[snip]

Absent a view that somehow says all metadata is a security function, I
don't see how the marking of administrative boundaries qualifies as a
security function.


The security function comes in immediately, when you consider any
actual uses for said kind of metadata.

The issues are alleviated only by assuming that an administrative
division always exists, unless you can show otherwise,   and showing
that the records are in the same zone is one way of showing otherwise.


When you come to rely on it, there are new security issues.

It becomes such that;   It   is perfectly safe to assume that there is
an administrative division when there is not


--
 Dave Crocker
 Brandenburg InternetWorking
 bbiw.net

--
 Dave Crocker
 Brandenburg InternetWorking
 bbiw.net



Re: What do people use public suffix for?

2013-04-19 Thread Jimmy Hess
On 4/19/13, Dave Crocker d...@dcrocker.net wrote:

That is only theoretically possible, if every boundary keeper participates.
In reality, you  would wind up with some zones having explicit marking,
and most zones not having any marking at all,  just because the admin
didn't bother to pick up on the new idea  and implement it.

 3. Since you made reference to assumptions a couple of times: the goal
 here is an explicit marking mechanisms.  No assumptions involved.

 d/

--
-JH



Re: What do people use public suffix for?

2013-04-16 Thread Matthias Leisi
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 11:34 PM, Geoffrey Keating geo...@geoffk.orgwrote:


 They'd really like to have a process which is less ad-hoc.  For
 example, it'd be great if these points were annotated in the DNS
 itself, perhaps with a record which points to the corresponding
 whois server


Btw., this would similarly apply to reverse DNS. Having a well-defined way
to identify administrative control (maybe some better wording would be
required) could be helpful in defining boundaries for reputation systems
(eg all IPs in this IPv6-/32 belong to the same ISP, but the adjacent /32
is someone else.).

-- Matthias


Re: What do people use public suffix for?

2013-04-16 Thread Danny McPherson

On Apr 15, 2013, at 5:34 PM, Geoffrey Keating wrote:
 
 CAs use it as part of a procedure to determine whether it's safe to
 issue a wildcard domain (as in, if it's on the list, it's not safe).  See
 https://www.cabforum.org/Baseline_Requirements_V1_1_3.pdf, section 11.1.3.
 
 They'd really like to have a process which is less ad-hoc.  For
 example, it'd be great if these points were annotated in the DNS
 itself, perhaps with a record which points to the corresponding
 whois server.


Concur - I think codifying DNS's dynamic structure in an outside medium is only 
going to cause problems down the road (e.g., especially with namespace 
diffusion from the likes of new gTLDs, etc..).

While an unfortunate naming collision here (i.e., the SOPA RR), I think an 
approach such as [1] has some merit - but much work needs to be done.  

-danny

[1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-sullivan-domain-origin-assert-02






Re: What do people use public suffix for?

2013-04-15 Thread Matthias Leisi
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 3:10 PM, John Levine jo...@iecc.com wrote:


 You don't have to tell me that it's a gross crock, but it seems to
 be a useful one.  What do people use it for?  Here's what I know of:


At dnswl.org, we use a heuristic (and manual checks) to derive different
levels of management (ie, foo.example.org may or may not be under the
same operational responsibility as bar.example.org). Using
publicsuffix.orgdata would allow us to automate some of that work (I
just have not yet got
around to implement it).

--  Matthias


Re: What do people use public suffix for?

2013-04-15 Thread Derek Andrew
dnswl.org should look at publicsuffix.org to correct errors.


On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 7:55 AM, Matthias Leisi matth...@leisi.net wrote:

 On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 3:10 PM, John Levine jo...@iecc.com wrote:


  You don't have to tell me that it's a gross crock, but it seems to
  be a useful one.  What do people use it for?  Here's what I know of:
 

 At dnswl.org, we use a heuristic (and manual checks) to derive different
 levels of management (ie, foo.example.org may or may not be under the
 same operational responsibility as bar.example.org). Using
 publicsuffix.orgdata would allow us to automate some of that work (I
 just have not yet got
 around to implement it).

 --  Matthias




-- 
Copyright 2013 Derek Andrew (excluding quotations)

+1 306 966 4808
Information and Communications Technology
University of Saskatchewan
Peterson 120; 54 Innovation Boulevard
Saskatoon,Saskatchewan,Canada. S7N 2V3
Timezone GMT-6

Typed but not read.


Re: What do people use public suffix for?

2013-04-15 Thread Jay Ashworth
- Original Message -
 From: John Levine jo...@iecc.com

 The public suffix list contains points in the DNS where (roughly
 speaking) names below that point are under different management from
 each other and from that name. It's here: http://publicsuffix.org/
 
 The idea is that abc.foo.com and xyz.foo.com have the same management,
 but abc.co.uk and xyz.co.uk do not.
 
 You don't have to tell me that it's a gross crock, but it seems to
 be a useful one. What do people use it for? Here's what I know of:
 
 * Web browsers use it to manage cookies to keep a site from putting
 cookies that will affect other sites, e.g. abc.foo.co.uk can set a
 cookie for foo.co.uk but not for co.uk.
 
 * DMARC (www.dmarc.org) uses it to find a policy record in the DNS
 that describes a subtree, e.g., if you get mail that purports to be
 from e...@reply1.ebay.com it checks the policy at ebay.com.
 
 What other current applications are there?

Seems to me that it's a crock because *it should be in the DNS*.

I should be able to retrieve the AS (administrative split) record 
for .co.uk, and there should be one that says, yup, there's an
administrative split below me; nothing under there is mine unless 
you also get an exception record for a subdomain.

The people who know authoritatively that their subdomains are within
someone else's administrative span of control *are the people who own
those domains*.

No?

Cheers,
-- jra
-- 
Jay R. Ashworth  Baylink   j...@baylink.com
Designer The Things I Think   RFC 2100
Ashworth  Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII
St Petersburg FL USA   #natog  +1 727 647 1274



Re: What do people use public suffix for?

2013-04-15 Thread Joe Abley

On 2013-04-15, at 12:00, Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote:

 Seems to me that it's a crock because *it should be in the DNS*.
 
 I should be able to retrieve the AS (administrative split) record 
 for .co.uk, and there should be one that says, yup, there's an
 administrative split below me; nothing under there is mine unless 
 you also get an exception record for a subdomain.

I've always quite liked that idea (if we accept for the point of discussion 
that there are use-cases like cookie naming that make identifying this kind of 
boundary useful).

There's a concern though that there are multiple ways to spoof such a DNS 
response, and do so in a distributed fashion that might not be easy to detect 
by an individual client application. If the AS (or whatever) record was signed, 
that would make things better. But only if you could rely upon clients to 
validate those responses (or have a sufficiently clean DNS path out that 
validation was even possible).

There's also the question of what to do with a TLD (or other part of the 
namespace) that doesn't include this record. Some of the zones we're talking 
about are generated by registry machinery with long software development 
lifecycles.

If your starting point is (a) the records might not be there, (b) we might not 
be able to find them even if they are there, and (c) if we get them we can't 
always be sure they are genuine, then the natural conclusion is that you can't 
rely on the mechanism to work and you look for another answer.

If you need the mechanism to work (say you're say a browser vendor who is going 
to get heat if cookie-leakage causes widespread privacy violations) then I can 
see why fetching and caching a browser list over SSL (and perhaps shipping with 
a baseline version of it) seems attractive.

And that I guess takes us back to where we are.


Joe




Re: What do people use public suffix for?

2013-04-15 Thread David Conrad
On Apr 15, 2013, at 9:30 AM, Joe Abley jab...@hopcount.ca wrote:
 [...]
 If you need the mechanism to work (...) then I can see why fetching and 
 caching a browser list over SSL (and perhaps shipping with a baseline version 
 of it) seems attractive.

Sounds like this could've been good logic for the use of HOSTS.TXT :)

Regards,
-drc




Re: What do people use public suffix for?

2013-04-15 Thread John R. Levine

They'd really like to have a process which is less ad-hoc.  For
example, it'd be great if these points were annotated in the DNS
itself, perhaps with a record which points to the corresponding
whois server.


I've been thinking about a way to do that, but I want to understand the 
use cases first.


Regards,
John Levine, jo...@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of The Internet for Dummies,
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature


Re: What do people use public suffix for?

2013-04-15 Thread Geoffrey Keating
John Levine jo...@iecc.com writes:

 The public suffix list contains points in the DNS where (roughly
 speaking) names below that point are under different management from
 each other and from that name.  It's here: http://publicsuffix.org/
 
 The idea is that abc.foo.com and xyz.foo.com have the same management,
 but abc.co.uk and xyz.co.uk do not.
 
 You don't have to tell me that it's a gross crock, but it seems to
 be a useful one.  What do people use it for?
...

CAs use it as part of a procedure to determine whether it's safe to
issue a wildcard domain (as in, if it's on the list, it's not safe).  See
https://www.cabforum.org/Baseline_Requirements_V1_1_3.pdf, section 11.1.3.

They'd really like to have a process which is less ad-hoc.  For
example, it'd be great if these points were annotated in the DNS
itself, perhaps with a record which points to the corresponding
whois server.