[Last-Call] Secdir telechat review of draft-ietf-opsawg-mud-acceptable-urls-11

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Reviewer: Christian Huitema
Review result: Ready

acceptable-urls-10-secdir-lc-huitema-2024-02-19/), I made a number of
recommendations.

One of the first recommendation was to clarify whether the distinction between
"small changes" and "big changes" was really necessary, and maybe to just keep
the stricter "big changes" process. The authors did not do that, probably based
on their assessment of deployment considerations. However, they did address the
substance of the issue in several ways.

The draft now explicitly uses the same "small change/big change" terminology
that I used in my review. That's a good way to clarify the issue. In the "small
change" section, the draft now uses explicit references to the URL syntax in
RFC3986, instead of the "righmost '/'" text that was encouraging "shotgun
parsing". That's good.

The previous "small change" process was vulnerable to "rollback" attacks, in
which an attacker would reuse an old, more permissive, version of the MUD URL.
The new draft version addresses that issue explicitly, asking MUD managers to
keep track of previous versions so as to detect such rollback attacks. The
authors assess that keeping such logs is practical, and I am ready to believe
them.

The previous security review pointed out that the use of "detached signatures"
when evaluating "big changes" was somewhat unspecified. The introduction of
section 4 now includes an explicit reference to Section 13.2 of RFC8520 where
this problem is defined.

I added to my previous comment a remark about the possibility to generate
spurious intrusion alarms by sending spoofed messages through DHCP or LLDP. The
authors pointed out that this such spoofed messages can only happen if the
local network has been breached, and thus are valid alarms. There is already a
related discussion in section 3.2, with references to the "boy cries wolf"
issues.

The new draft version feels significantly improved from the version that I
reviewd, and I believe that my concerns have been addressed.


-- 
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call



[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Mhonarc]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux