nanog mailing list archives
Re: md5 for bgp tcp sessions
From: Jared Mauch <jared () puck nether net>
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 11:27:38 -0400
On Thu, Jun 23, 2005 at 05:57:05AM -0400, Todd Underwood wrote:
ras, all, On Thu, Jun 23, 2005 at 12:14:12AM -0400, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:On Wed, Jun 22, 2005 at 10:04:09PM -0400, Todd Underwood wrote:a) many (all?) implementations of md5 protection of tcp expose new, easy-to-exploit vulnerabilities in host OSes. md5 verification is slow and done on a main processor of most routers. md5 verification typically takes places *before* the sequence number, ports, and ip are checked to see whether they apply to a valid session. as a result, you've exposed a trivial processor DOS to your box.Well, I think they've finally fixed this one by now, at least everyone that I'm aware of has done so. Immediately following the whining to start deploying MD5 is was certainly the case that many implementations did stupid stuff like process MD5 before running other validity checks like sequence numbers which are far less computationally intensive, and there were a few MSS bugs that popped up, but they should have all been worked out by now. I don't think that anyone running modern code is suffering any more attack potential because of this.my understanding is that md5 is still checked before the ttl-hack check takes place on cisco (and perhaps most router platforms). new attack vector for less security than you had before. oh well. ras: can you confirm that it is possible to implement ttl-hack and have it check *before* md5 signature checks?
Last I knew there was still a bug open on this that has gotten little/no action for at least half a year on this issue, I would think that in 6mos someone at Cisco could take the time to research the bug and fix it. (I'll leave out the part about releasing TAC supported code with a fix). I believe the bugid is CSCee73956 - Jared -- Jared Mauch | pgp key available via finger from jared () puck nether net clue++; | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/ My statements are only mine.
Current thread:
- md5 for bgp tcp sessions Todd Underwood (Jun 22)
- Re: md5 for bgp tcp sessions Richard A Steenbergen (Jun 22)
- Re: md5 for bgp tcp sessions Patrick W. Gilmore (Jun 22)
- Re: md5 for bgp tcp sessions Todd Underwood (Jun 23)
- Re: md5 for bgp tcp sessions Jared Mauch (Jun 23)
- Re: md5 for bgp tcp sessions Richard A Steenbergen (Jun 23)
- Re: md5 for bgp tcp sessions Eric Gauthier (Jun 23)
- Re: md5 for bgp tcp sessions Joe Abley (Jun 23)
- Re: md5 for bgp tcp sessions Robert E . Seastrom (Jun 23)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: md5 for bgp tcp sessions Barry Greene (bgreene) (Jun 23)
- RE: md5 for bgp tcp sessions Hannigan, Martin (Jun 23)
- Re: md5 for bgp tcp sessions Todd Underwood (Jun 23)
- Re: md5 for bgp tcp sessions Jared Mauch (Jun 23)
- Re: md5 for bgp tcp sessions Todd Underwood (Jun 23)
- Re: md5 for bgp tcp sessions Richard A Steenbergen (Jun 22)