[119377] in North American Network Operators' Group

home help back first fref pref prev next nref lref last post

Re: AH is pretty useless and perhaps should be deprecated

daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Barak)
Mon Nov 16 22:10:38 2009

Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 19:10:04 -0800 (PST)
From: David Barak <thegameiam@yahoo.com>
To: "mysidia@gmail.com" <mysidia@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <6eb799ab0911161807v152f964cre87fc28943bb07b@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org

+1.  

I know of a network whose owners are far more worried about a replay attack than about data being revealed to the outside world.
 They need to verify the provenance of data (i. e. Make sure that it hasn&#39;t bee Natted), and AH is a simple way to do these precise things.

-David Barak

James Hess wrote: 
> On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 6:23 PM, Jack Kohn <kohn.jack@gmail.com> wrote:
>> However, i still dont understand why AH would be preferred over
>> ESP-NULL in case of OSPFv3. The draft speaks of issues with replaying
>> the OSPF packets. One could also do these things with AH.
>> Am i missing something?
> Neither protects against replay without additional measures.
> However,  AH  is very close...   consider using  AH-authenticated
> packets with the timestamp option   and  clock synchronization between
> peers.
> Discard packets arriving that are more than 5 minutes old.
> In transport mode for security between LAN peers, ESP NULL  verifies
> the integrity of only the data  payload in the packet.  AH  secures
> the header,  the IP header fields and options.
> Therefore changing the timestamp to replay would  be detected.
> This evil act would not be detected if you are using ESP NULL,  the
> attacker can potentially replay this packet, while the SPI is still
> good, and you'll never know.
> One of AH's  most visible disadvantages (cannot be used with NAT) is a
> side-effect of the increased security coverage it provides.  Many IPv4
>  networks  require NAT,  making  AH  impractical.
> However,  matters  could change for  IPv6  networks  with  high
> security requirements,   that need to validate authenticity of more
> than just packet contents...
> --
> -J



      


home help back first fref pref prev next nref lref last post