nanog mailing list archives

Re: BGP over TLS (was: Re: "Using Cloud Resources to Dramatically Improve Internet Routing")


From: Brandon Martin <lists.nanog () monmotha net>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2019 17:43:10 -0400

On 10/21/19 4:41 PM, Jeffrey Haas wrote:
I'm not someone qualified, but I'll regurgitate what I've distilled from past conversations with those who are.:-)

Presuming your key is strong enough, it may be infeasible to break it in a time that's of interest to the parties 
involved.  The primary issue is the usual issue of trying to keep anything secret: eventually disclosure becomes an issue.  
And if you have no procedure for periodically updating your keys, it becomes a problem.

Going back to my thought of using IKE vs. a static SPI, we run into the same problem with rekeying the long-term secret. If it's symmetric, you have to get both parties involved. That will be true if it's IKE with a PSK, a static SPI, or TCP-MD5.

I guess the meat of my question is, given modern cryptography (algorithms, best practices, actual system implementations, etc.), is the periodic re-keyed offered by IKE with PSK any better than simply establishing a static SPI (treating the SPI session secret as a slightly less human-friendly PSK)? If not, then you can do away with IKE entirely which drastically simplifies things. It's also the status quo for many implementations of OSPFv3-over-IPsec that I've seen.

My impression is that any means by which a long-lived session using the same symmetric cipher secret can compromise the security of either that session or any other session keyed using the same "parent" keying material is now considered a weakness in the cipher or cryptosystem, as appropriate, and modern ciphers and systems as such do not exhibit such deficiencies.

It's also no worse than TCP-MD5 which, as you pointed out, requires both ends to cooperate in a re-keying, too. I'm not even aware of any mechanisms to allow key overlap during a re-keying process in TCP-MD5 which might otherwise be one advantage of IKE using PSK. If your SPI secret gets disclosed, you re-key manually. If your TCP-MD5 secret gets disclosed, you rep-key manually. If your IKE PSK secret gets disclosed, you re-key manually.

My only real goal, here, is to be as good or better than TCP-MD5 to address earlier concerns about people not liking TCP options while also not resorting to TLS. (As a note, I'm thinking out loud with all this, not trying to suggest policy proposal)

--
Brandon Martin


Current thread: