Re: draft-state-sip-relay-attack-00

Raphael Coeffic <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.sip
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Michael Procter wrote:
> Raphael Coeffic wrote:
>   
>> Dan Wing wrote:
>>     
>>> Thanks for publishing that attack.  It has similarities with the attack
>>> described by Hadriel in
>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kaplan-sip-baiting-attack.
>>>
>>>   
>>>       
>> Yes, it also modifies part of the request which are not signed by the
>> authentication/signature algorithm. I should mention this draft in a
>> later version.
>>
>> However, the goal is not the same. Hadriel's draft is focused on
>> impersonation, whereby the other draft is focused on breaking the
>> authentication done at the proxy. The second difference is that it
>> works right now with any publicly reachable SIP provider.
>>
>>     
>
> I'm intrigued by the variation in fig2.  How often are you finding two
> proxies in different administrative domains that use the same
> credentials?  Or is the attack more focussed towards Alice using
> multiple sets of credentials?
>
>   
They are not using the same credentials, which is the reason why 
'proxy.com' won't remove Alice's credentials from the request, and thus 
enable the attack.


> I think that the variation in fig3 can be addressed to some degree by
> using GRUU, but I don't think that completely solves the problem.
>
>   
I am not quite sure that I understand how this helps: could you develop 
your thoughts a little bit more?


Regards,
Raphael.

_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use [email protected] for questions on current sip
Use [email protected] for new developments on the application of sip
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.