On Jul 31, 2015 8:49 AM, "Viktor Dukhovni" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 08:33:31AM -0700, Watson Ladd wrote:
>
> > > Perhaps you're using the phrase "local resolver" in some novel way
> > > that I don't understand.  Why shouldn't an application trust
> > > responses from 127.0.0.1:53?  Those are in my view more trustworthy
> > > than any library the application might attempt to use to perform
> > > validation.
> >
> > Because the stub resolver on the box uses a recursive resolver on the
ISP
> > which doesn't send back the information required to determine validity,
but
> > a single bit.
>
> I did say "127.0.0.1", not ISP iterator.  I keep saying *local*
> (perhaps I should have said "loopback") resolver, but nobody seems
> to be reading the fine print. :-(
>
>     stub resolver <---> validating loopback iterator <---> Untrusted
nameservers
>
> If the *local/loopback* resolver happens to use the ISP as a
> forwarder, that's not especially relevant, modulo the usual privacy
> considerations.

It absolutely is relevant. It means an OS provided component can completely
change the security guarrienties of an application with no visible sign. I
don't like that.

>
> I think we need to return the core subject of this discussion (high
> level addrquery architecture).  Authentication technology aside for
> the moment, is the
>
>         MUA <---> MSA <---> MX host
>
> transaction model acceptable or not?  We can then talk about how
> to authenticate each hop.  If this is not acceptable, how does
> addrquery get to the MX host?  [ I'd be very reluctant to implement
> a new MX host service which has many orders of magnitude more remote
> clients than the existing MX host SMTP service. ]
>
> This proposal looked promising because it piggy backs on the existing
> SMTP backbone.  If it abandons that, then my enthusiasm for it will
> likely wane.
>
> --
>     Viktor.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Uta mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta
_______________________________________________
Uta mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta

Reply via email to