Re: IQ Handling vulnerabilities
Thijs Alkemade <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.xmpp |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 7 feb. 2014, at 16:50, Dave Cridland <[email protected]> wrote: > What are the attacks possible against an entity using predictable stanza ids, but which otherwise acts properly (ie, checks to/from on responses, etc)? > > I'm a bit confused - if an entity isn't checking the to/from of the responses, then sure there's a slew of attacks possible. If it *also* has predictable ids, then the attacks are easier - but they're the same attacks. Aren't they? The least far-fetched scenario I can think of: you're offering a file transfer to someone's MUC room nick. The person disconnects, someone else takes their nick and intercepts the file transfer by guessing the 'id' that was used. This is also a scenario where a per-address counter will not protect you. (Though a better fix is probably to cancel all pending queries to participants when you see them disappear from the room...) > I'm not saying that we shouldn't generally recommend unpredictable ids - it seems relatively simple and causes little harm - but cryptographically secure ones seems overkill, and I'm always nervous of imposing unneeded drains on the entropy store of a system. > > Also, I've mentioned this elsewhere, but I'll mention it here too: much of the XMPP community seems focussed on clients exhibiting this class of bug, and attacks against those clients. I strongly suspect that not all servers are immune to this, and the attacks on servers are likely to be just as fascinating. I'm trying to think of a situation where the server sends a iq 'get' to the client, but I don't really know any. A lot of iq 'set's, where the server informs the client of something (and probably doesn't really care whether that results in an 'error' or 'result'), but nothing where the server wants to know something from the client. Could you give an example? Thijs _______________________________________________ xmpp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xmpp
signature.asc
(application/pgp-signature, 841 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJS940PAAoJELRGwhIrI4PE9jAP/R56/hTL+YxFS76RODWuw7Mu 3QzhN193Aux+gGDK9ORBYWbfX3MX2wocVIOdm63GM4Ls94R+sEHJM8F+I1Me9Ajq FLnpXlJKO6if2FPAxWcnRPRVGCc5u4JPZPSMfZN/6BsVBg0FWBkPRKMk5ScGVGyz F8O70JQMo3VBu7x/YUc43iuwYTQuwoLZ61gDrw4ENamDHMk8zNPfQ0BfRIV5lct1 zPpui++Nt2ekXflS1N/aaNbFE2EETVYxFi8qi22IvfwjjYjc2KvZNHuuj54o1ghj QSK5HrhnGfcHjzfODZQmSHvtNBdKUoYtQn2va1raoXCbzsEw8Lym8h8/T7XYJO97 LPh5qy65BcV2U9KRTplnSrCs9djxAPulct1Bcmf6WgkROMFpM847fgnodDWtTK4l tcan78dKUkD0YHuW9RsYolS/3OxCWfdY/tExZGtBS6OFKRReJazJASQrGKFvn7NP g0fRX16+CYPPCdzV+46DZ2/yDTyV3jZPNBS+jRfXcn88h/PTC3YD4Uc1Lb/rTljV RqUgvKm0ZRk1mKXt8+BGtHVYDKMovxfqyMOCkkt7mUbxQWvKSA1jdgbNofKcTEik jbRTlGYU5+3mGkKJl77XH5uYLduQrmy4w6ZIV+LoKuPjOARj7HgJpPW2cDG1sYGm P0reAftGLJTXxiFwgiju =JbgC -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----