Re: identifiers and security
Erik Nordmark <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.multi6 |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
> I am not sure how slightly this is... > > suppose a host A with Locator LA > A server B with locator LB > and an attacker X with locator LX > > A usually connects to B to get some information, for instance the news. > > Now, X manages to be on the path between A and B for a while. > Now, X starts a communication with A and pretends to be B, and X > creates a state in A mapping the identifier of A with locator LX. > Note that it can do that because the verification will be based on the > RR and X will succeed because he is on the path. > Then, X leaves the place and goes to somewhere more comfortable for him > > Now, in the future when A tries to reach B he will contacting X... > forever ;-) > > I don't feel that this would be acceptable I agree at some level, because this was the conservative approach that was taken in the MIPv6 security design. But one can argue against that by: - if the attacker was on the path, why couldn't the attacker leave a small device (running on a battery for a month for instance) attached? Erik