Hi Yaron, if you further try to implement a prototype for a door opener then you might run into a number of issues, such as
* how does the garage opener discover the garage door? * what radio technology are you going to use? * how does the garage door authorize the garage opener? When you then answer all these questions you might realize (as I did) that you neither want to use IPsec there nor even IP. Ciao Hannes PS: I agree with your statement about mutual authentication. On 07/25/2014 06:37 PM, Yaron Sheffer wrote: > This might sound like a nit, but we have this text in the draft, as a > use case for null auth: > > "User wants to get some simple action from the remote device. Consider > garage door opener: it must authenticate user to open the door, but it > is not necessary for the user to authenticate the door opener. In this > case one-way authentication is sufficient." > > The problem is, this is an incorrect protocol. Specifically, a MITM (who > might be physically located by the kitchen door), could redirect the > protocol exchange to a door different from the one I intended to open. > Seeing that nothing happens, I will simply press the remote again and > open the garage door, too. > > This is of course a generic problem, where unauthenticated protocols > have unforeseen consequences. > > Thanks, > Yaron > > > _______________________________________________ > IPsec mailing list > IPsec@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
