On Jul 13, 2011, at 9:14 AM, Arturo Servin wrote:

>  What's the point?
> 
>   If you asume unrealistic scenarios to prove your concept, then you
> have a problem with your solution.
> 
>   The problem is that you have a link where the attacker can have
> 2^64 different addresses to spoof and it can send NS request at any
> rate.

I think what's most interesting is that the nature of the "threat" on the IPv6 
capable Internet is the ability to generate high PPS rate activity easily.  One 
needs to look no further than the risk and high PPS attacks on the IPv4 side of 
things.  It's quite reasonable to expect to have 10k or more unique 
hosts(source IPs) participating in an attack.

If you are a CDN, Major Web Property, or even Residential provider your risk in 
IPv4 is one per host or routed IP.  The scale involved here is much larger by 
design, and the potential of a poorly behaving NDP implementation to be 
overwhelmed is quite easy.  Not many vendors can handle 10k or 100kpps in their 
control-plane.

To (re)state the biggest design issue with NDP again, it's outlined in 7.3 of 
the v6nd-enhance draft:

-- snip --
7.3.  NDP Protocol Gratuitous NA

   Per RFC 4861, section 7.2.5 and 7.2.6 [RFC4861] requires that
   unsolicited neighbor advertisements result in the receiver setting
   it's neighbor cache entry to STALE, kicking off the resolution of the
   neighbor using neighbor solicitation.
-- snip --

Forcing an entry to STALE if you see an unsolicited NA (assuming it matches the 
existing NA) seems unnecessary and counterproductive as it can interrupt 
traffic to existing hosts.

Solving a remotely-exploitable specification problem is much different than 
solving a layer-2 compromise.  Those are different risks and require a 
different solution and mitigation, (eg: duplicate IP detection in v4 and 
various layer-2 security features dhcp-guard, etc).

- Jared
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to