Re: requirements and the security considerations

It looks like the suggested text from Jong-Hyouk on the motivation section of REQ6 has attempted to provide the security considerations in the DMM environment. 

H Anthony Chan


-----Original Message-----
From: Jouni Korhonen [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 9:58 PM
To: h chan
Cc: [email protected]; KIM, BYOUNG-JO J (BYOUNG-JO; Jong-Hyouk Lee
Subject: Re: [DMM] requirements and the security considerations


On Jun 21, 2013, at 3:14 AM, h chan <[email protected]> wrote:

> The comments from Byoung-Jo Kim to REQ6 and Section 6 in version 4 were the following:
> There are too much text in the security REQ6 that are vague and too wide. 
> 
> And Section 6. Security considerations should say "none", 'cause that's usually the section that discusses security considerations related to the draft itself. Since this is a requirement draft, there is no such thing.
> There is a separate requirement earlier to cover security issues due to DMM.

In some recent requirements documents I have seen rather extensive Security Consideration sections. What I would assume to see here, is a generic discussion on the security considerations on distributed environment. That is not about requirements itself per se.

- JOuni (as an individual.. too hot here to wear any hat etc :)


> 
> REQ6:  Security considerations
> 
>          DMM protocol solutions MUST consider security risks introduced
>          by DMM into the network.  Examples of such risks to be
>          considered may include authentication and authorization mechanisms
>          that allow a mobile host/router to use the mobility
>          support provided by the DMM solution; redirecting traffic to
>          the wrong host when providing DMM support; signaling message
>          protection for authentication, integrity and confidentiality.
> 
>          Motivation: Various attacks such as impersonation, denial of
>          service, man-in-the-middle attacks, and so on, may become newly 
>          possible or easier to mount due to the introduction of DMM.  Proof
>          of possession of past and new IP addresses may be needed.
> 
> H Anthony Chan
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of 
> Jouni Korhonen
> Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 2:40 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [DMM] requirements and the security considerations
> 
> <no co-chair cap/bowler>
> 
> Folks,
> 
> I have been reading Section 6 Security Considerations:
> 
>   It is necessary to provide sufficient defense against possible
>   security attacks, or to adopt existing security mechanisms and
>   protocols to provide sufficient security protections.  For instance,
>   EAP-based authentication can be used for access network security,
>   while IPsec can be used for end-to-end security.
> 
> I think this text still deserves some tweaking. First, "provide sufficient defense against possible security attacks".. against whom?
> 
> Second, should the text say something that the DMM protocol itself must not be usable as a tool to launch an attack by a malicious mobile node that happens to know that it is attached to a network implementing DMM and knows (somehow) how the DMM protocol functions?
> 
> - Jouni
> _______________________________________________
> dmm mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm