Hi Ben,

I have seen lot's of attacks anchored on zombi processes installed  on
internal infra by hackers (bots, worms etc ...)  So no - nothing to do with
VPNs. The attackers (including DDoS) encrypt their packets and tunnel it
(transparently) between those anchors.

TOR is another one but I did not mention it here as I have not seen (yet)
auto installed TOR nodes attacking from the inside.

Again I am not against protecting underlay in a more fine way. But let's
not forget about bigger picture and "holistic" view.

Many thx,
R.



On Thu, May 5, 2022 at 4:22 PM Ben Schwartz <[email protected]> wrote:

> Could you expand on this?  What is "overlay" in your terminology?
>
> Are you thinking of attacks that make use of a consumer VPN service?  Or
> perhaps an anonymizing proxy like Tor or Apple Private Relay?
>
> On Thu, May 5, 2022 at 9:15 AM Robert Raszuk <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I would like to make an observation that lots of attacks these days have
>> moved to overlay and are being transported using legitimate addresses/ports
>> in the underlay.
>>
>> So while I appreciate efforts to make underlay more strict and to enhance
>> current methods of source address spoofing detection, let's keep in mind
>> that it is trivial to bypass it. It is therefore highly recommended to make
>> cost vs benefit judgement before we embark to go on with changes or
>> extensions to lot's of routing protocols.
>>
>> Best,
>> Robert.
>>
>>
>> Charter for SAVNET Working Group:
>>>
>>> Source address validation (SAV) is important to mitigate source address
>>> spoofing attacks. To improve the effectiveness, SAV mechanisms should be
>>> applied as close to the source as possible. Therefore, it is desired to
>>> deploy SAV in both intra-domain and inter-domain networks. However,
>>> existing SAV mechanisms like uRPF-related technologies may improperly
>>> permit spoofed traffic or improperly block legitimate traffic.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The “Source Address Validation in Intra-domain and Inter-domain Networks
>>> (SAVNET)” working group will define a protocol-independent architecture and
>>> procedures to overcome the limitations of existing SAV mechanisms.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Specifically, the SAVNET WG will define procedures that allow nodes to
>>> accurately determine valid incoming ports for specific source prefixes
>>> taking into account information not currently included in routing protocols.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The scope of the SAVNET WG includes the SAV function in both
>>> intra-domain and inter-domain networks, and the validation of both IPv4 and
>>> IPv6 addresses. The WG is expected to address intra-domain solutions first.
>>> SAVNET should avoid packet modification in the data plane. Where possible,
>>> existing control and management plane protocols must be used within
>>> existing architectures to implement the SAV function. Any modification of
>>> or extension to existing architectures, or control or management plane
>>> protocols, must be done in coordination with the working groups responsible
>>> for the architecture, or control or management plane protocol.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The SAVNET WG is chartered for the following list of items:
>>>
>>>    1) Description of problem statement and use cases for SAVNET,
>>> including the requirements that need to be taken into account by the SAVNET
>>> architecture.
>>>
>>>    2) Definition of SAVNET architecture and new procedures. This
>>> includes both intra-domain and inter-domain networks.
>>>
>>>    3) Definition of operation and management mechanisms needed to
>>> operate and manage SAV-related configurations.
>>>
>>> 4) Solutions to implementing SAVNET architecture by defining extensions
>>> of existing routing protocols. These will be done in coordination with the
>>> WGs supervising those protocols.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The SAVNET WG will coordinate and collaborate with other WGs as needed.
>>> Specific expected interactions include (but may not be limited to): lsr and
>>> idr.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Dan Li [mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>]
>>>
>>> *Sent:* Monday, May 2, 2022 11:30 PM
>>> *To:* [email protected]
>>> *Cc:* Lizhenbin <[email protected]>; [email protected]
>>> *Subject:* RE: [savnet] SAVNET WG charter
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thank Robin for the remind. I am sending this email to colleagues in the
>>> RTGWG to introduce the SAVNET work.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> In IETF 113, we held the SAVNET BOF in the INT Area , with a focus on
>>> intra-domain and inter-domain source address validation (SAV) technologies.
>>> The basic motivation is to overcome the problem of improper block or
>>> improper permit in uRPF-based SAV mechanisms. A control-plane solution was
>>> presented in the BoF. The basic idea is: 1) each node notifies its attached
>>> source prefixes along the real forwarding path, and the routers along the
>>> path accordingly build the correct SAV table; 2) the notification messages
>>> are processed in the control-plane via a hop-by-hop manner, and various
>>> methods are used to reduce the message overhead; 3) following the routing
>>> architecture, the notification is divided into an intra-domain part and an
>>> inter-domain part. Given that this solution is highly related to routing
>>> architecture, after the BoF it was suggested to apply for a WG in the
>>> Routing Area.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> More materials of the BOF can be found from
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/113/materials/agenda-113-savnet-01.
>>> Enclosed please find the drafted WG charter, which will be improved based
>>> on the feedback we get from the community.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I also hope that RTGWG colleagues who have interest in this topic can
>>> join the SAVNET mailing list (
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/savnet), which will be the main
>>> channel for future discussions.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Dan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *发件人:* Lizhenbin <[email protected]>
>>> *发送时间:* 2022年5月2日 17:34
>>> *收件人:* Dan Li <[email protected]>; [email protected]
>>> *主题:* RE: [savnet] SAVNET WG charter
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Dan,
>>>
>>> Since the BOF was held in the INT area, maybe not all of the experts
>>> from the RTG area register the mailing list of SAVNET and they are not
>>> aware of the work.
>>>
>>> I suggest you could forward it to the mailing list of RTGWG and briefly
>>> introduce the design concept and progress of the SAVNET work.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Best Regards,
>>>
>>> Zhenbin (Robin)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* savnet [mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>]
>>> *On Behalf Of *Dan Li
>>> *Sent:* Thursday, April 28, 2022 4:50 PM
>>> *To:* [email protected]
>>> *Subject:* [savnet] SAVNET WG charter
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Dear colleagues,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> One month has passed since the SAVNET BOF in IETF 113. In the IESG/IAB
>>> meeting, it was concluded that the problem is well-defined and was
>>> suggested that SAVNET be moved to the Routing Area.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> After discussing with the ADs in the Routing Area, we decide to apply
>>> for forming a WG with a relatively narrower scope. Specifically, the
>>> potential WG will focus on intra-domain and inter-domain SAV mechanisms by
>>> extending existing routing protocols.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Enclosed please find the drafted WG charter. We would like to get the
>>> feedback from our community.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Dan
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> rtgwg mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
>>>
>> --
>> savnet mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/savnet
>>
>
_______________________________________________
rtgwg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg

Reply via email to