Bill Sommerfeld wrote:
> my apologies for taking so long to get back to this.
>
> On Tue, 2007-07-31 at 23:35 -0700, Alan Wright wrote:
> > To be consistent with the guidance given in the PSARC/2007/177
> > opinion, that software packages must not permit operation using
> > placeholder sensitive values, the default password is an empty
> > string and the NDMP service will not accept client connections
> > if the password is an empty string.  In order to initiate NDMP
> > protocol services, a non-empty password is required, which would
> > typically be set using the ndmpadm(1M) command.
> >
> > The team acknowledges concerns expressed with respect to NDMP
> > protocol security but the protocol is external to this case,
> > and, as the project is only delivering an NDMP server, there
> > is no scope to influence the negotiated client-server security
> > implementation.  From the same email discussion mentioned above,
> > the way forward seemed to be to write an opinion and try to
> > progress the protocol security concerns with the appropriate
> > standards groups.
>
> There's a missing piece here.  The opinion for 2007/177 says that the
> facilities it provides are not sufficient on their own to comply with
> the existing Security SWG Policy for storing sensitive data in the
> filesystem.
>
> The Policy is at:
>
> http://sac.eng/cgi-bin/bp.cgi?NAME=passwords-storage.bp
>
> or externally at:
>
> http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/arc/bestpractices/passwords-files/
>
> It may be used but should be augmented with additional obfuscation or
> encryption.  If you need the cleartext value of the secret to
> authenticate, you'll need to use a reversable encryption or obfuscation
> mechanism.  It's worth noting that a really lame obfuscation mechanism
> meets the letter of the policy, but directly storing the sensitive value
> does not.
>
> It's also worth noting that there is much existing practice which
> doesn't meet this standard, but there are also new mechanisms available
> that weren't there when much of that prior art landed in Solaris.

If that is a requirement, we will use an existing reversible
encryption on the plain text before it is stored.

> In particular, the cryptographic framework also provides mechanisms for
> storing sensitive values which have substantially improved security on
> systems which include hardware keystores.  (and it's worth noting that
> CRAM-MD5 is (just barely) a cryptographic protocol).

The CRAM-MD5 hash is an over-the-wire authentication token, generated
at runtime using a randomly generated, per connection challenge key
and the plain text password.  CRAM-MD5 is defined in the NDMP protocol
specification (i.e. we have no other choice: the options are plaintext
or CRAM-MD5) and is never stored.

Alan


Reply via email to