* Viktor Dukhovni <[email protected]>:
> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 08:17:27AM +0200, Olle E. Johansson wrote:
> 
> > > Yes, but we likely can't specify the lookup keys in an application
> > > neutral manner.  Rather we can discuss the problem generally, and
> > > allow individual application protocols to construct appropriate
> > > keys.  Still there could be some guidance on how to apply DANE to
> > > TLS client identity (when the client identity can be mapped to a
> > > suitable name in DNS).
> > 
> > That is something that also applies to SIP, where we have an RFC
> > about connection reuse in SIP/TLS. For server to server connections
> > it is important to be able to verify a list of domains each side
> > is authorized to use. Today we do this with a long list of domains in SAN,
> > but since my DANE/SIP draft removes that list for server certificates,
> > we are now in a situation where client certs use SAN and the server,
> > if using DANE, does not. 
> > 
> > The question it then boils down to is how I verify an incoming connection
> > from an IP address with a name. Maybe a DNSsec-secured reverse lookup
> > is a starting point. What's the state of DNSsec in .arpa ?
> 
> IP addresses are a terrible identity lookup key, they are often
> dynamically assigned, and even when static often controlled by a
> different organization than the one actually operating the host.

ACK

> My thinking on client authentication with DANE is that it works
> best when the client represents that is acting as or on behalf of
> some domain, and when associated TLSA records are present (lookup
> key TBD) authenticates the legitimacy of the client.
> 
> For example, with SMTP, clients impute a hostname with EHLO:
> 
>       S: 220 s.example ESMTP
>       C: EHLO c.example
> 
> the server might then perform a lookup (work-around: only if
> "c.example IN A ?" returns a validated response, possibly
> validated NXDOMAIN or empty):
> 
>     _clientauth.c.example. IN TLSA ?
> 
> if this yields secure TLSA records, the server requires that the
> client presents a matching certificate and infers a secure client
> identity.

Sidenote: Ask for client certificate only if TLSA is present? I like that.
This would safe us interop errors from clients that can't handle being asked
for a client certificate. 

p@rick


> So for server-to-server, SIP the question I would ask is whether
> the application protocol carries some sort of client domain assertion?
> 
> If SIP is wrapped in SSL (no STARTTLS unlike SMTP, IMAP, ...) then
> the server would always solicit client certs, just in-case, and
> verify them once the client indicates its domain in the application
> protocol.
> 
> -- 
>       Viktor.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dane mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dane

-- 
[*] sys4 AG
 
https://sys4.de, +49 (89) 30 90 46 64
Franziskanerstraße 15, 81669 München
 
Sitz der Gesellschaft: München, Amtsgericht München: HRB 199263
Vorstand: Patrick Ben Koetter, Marc Schiffbauer
Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Florian Kirstein
 

_______________________________________________
dane mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dane

Reply via email to