Re: [jdev] s2s lookup cascades

2006-07-11 Thread Peter Saint-Andre
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Jefferson Ogata wrote:
 On 07/06/2006 06:21 PM, Tomasz Sterna wrote:
 On 7/4/06, Norman Rasmussen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Most jabber servers seem to give up and _not_ do the dns cascade, but
 Wildfire seems to do the cascade DNS, generating lots of 'Failed to
 lookup .de', or 'Failed to lookup .org' records in the log files.
 So you say if I'm hosting your parent domain I could take-over and
 spoof your non-functioning (DDoS'ed) XMPP server? Sending SPIM,
 harvesting password. Possibilities are endless.  Great, just great.
 
 Given jabber clients' genearlly poor support of SSL/TLS certificate
 verification (kudos to Psi for doing it right), resistance to DNS-based
 attacks seems like a definite non-priority for the jabber community.

RFC 3920 says how to properly handle certificates. Unfortunately, server
certificates are not widespread yet (let alone client certificates). But
I'm working to change that...

Peter

- --
Peter Saint-Andre
Jabber Software Foundation
http://www.jabber.org/people/stpeter.shtml

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFErZAONF1RSzyt3NURAglYAJ9UzRal8Ey7k3x94RxleuZbRhmqsgCeOwLO
hNQvEBC8kdbxl+Ll4RVx+Qo=
=EHub
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature


[jdev] M2M

2006-07-11 Thread 5264277-ew5264277
Hi,

I am new to jabber, so be gentle :)

Not wanting to re-invent the wheel, has anybody out there any experience that
they can share in writing clients for machine to machine messaging ?

I know that's pretty vague but I need to understand what is available and the
issues I'm likely to face.

Many thanks,
Andrew 

= From Web Mail 

Andrew Holt, Managing Director, 
4A Solutions

Office : +44(0)1257 268351
Mobile: +44(0)7841 340 608
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

veritas vos liberabit -- The truth will set you free




Re: [jdev] M2M

2006-07-11 Thread Joel Selvadurai
Hi Andrew,

I run messagr.com which makes intensive use of jabber. Jabber is a convenient platform for machine to machine messaging for any purpose. What is the context you wish to use jabber in. I see you're based in the 
UK. I live in London. Let me know in more detail what you actually require advice with?

Regards,
Joel.
+447986522517

On 7/11/06, 5264277-ew5264277 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,I am new to jabber, so be gentle :)Not wanting to re-invent the wheel, has anybody out there any experience that
they can share in writing clients for machine to machine messaging ?I know that's pretty vague but I need to understand what is available and theissues I'm likely to face.Many thanks,Andrew
= From Web Mail Andrew Holt, Managing Director,4A SolutionsOffice : +44(0)1257 268351Mobile: +44(0)7841 340 608email: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]veritas vos liberabit -- The truth will set you free


Re: [jdev] s2s lookup cascades

2006-07-11 Thread Jefferson Ogata
On 2006-07-06 22:34, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
 Jefferson Ogata wrote:
 On 07/06/2006 06:21 PM, Tomasz Sterna wrote:
 On 7/4/06, Norman Rasmussen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Most jabber servers seem to give up and _not_ do the dns cascade, but
 Wildfire seems to do the cascade DNS, generating lots of 'Failed to
 lookup .de', or 'Failed to lookup .org' records in the log files.
 So you say if I'm hosting your parent domain I could take-over and
 spoof your non-functioning (DDoS'ed) XMPP server? Sending SPIM,
 harvesting password. Possibilities are endless.  Great, just great.
 Given jabber clients' genearlly poor support of SSL/TLS certificate
 verification (kudos to Psi for doing it right), resistance to DNS-based
 attacks seems like a definite non-priority for the jabber community.
 
 RFC 3920 says how to properly handle certificates. Unfortunately, server
 certificates are not widespread yet (let alone client certificates). But
 I'm working to change that...

Indeed I think the RFC is pretty much on target in its SSL/TLS
specification. My criticism above is that clients have failed to follow
the RFC.

There are in fact many servers using self-signed certificates but that
accomplishes very little when clients don't even bother to warn users
about bad certificate chains. In a way, the current focus on getting
server certificates signed by a CA is a red herring; it doesn't matter
so much if they're self-signed AS LONG AS the client WARNS the user that
the cert can't be verified. After all, the user can import a self-signed
certificate into his or her local trust database at first use and at
least be alerted when the certificate CHANGES, indicating an attack
either now or at the time of import. This is not an uncommon
protocol--just look at SSH host key handling.

I do have a concern about the RFC, in the details of cn matching
performed when SRV records are involved. While clearly you do the right
thing in ignoring the hostname returned in an SRV record for purposes of
cn matching, the defined approach imposes a problematic constraint on
servers: if I want to offer a certificate for users @example.com, I must
use a certificate for example.com. Because the cn of this certificate
is the domain root, if stolen it could be used to spoof other services
for the domain root itself. Meanwhile, since jabber servers are a new
breed, there remains a great deal of unaudited server code. The prospect
of having a certificate for my domain root running in an unaudited piece
of server software exposed to the world is one I do not relish.

An alternative might have been to match the cn against the same name
used in the successful SRV query (the query, not the result). So if for
example the successful SRV query was for _xmpp-server._tcp.example.com,
the certificate cn could have that same name, in addition to
example.com. This would allow use of server certs that don't have as
much value to an attacker if compromised.

I'm not certain exactly what the best approach would be, but the status
quo is not ideal in my view.

-- 
Jefferson Ogata [EMAIL PROTECTED]
NOAA Computer Incident Response Team (N-CIRT) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Never try to retrieve anything from a bear.--National Park Service


Re: [jdev] M2M

2006-07-11 Thread amit agarwal
hi right now i'm working in jabber tech.for making client u must read this document..might this help u..if u need any assitance then u can ask to me.http://camaya.net/api/gloox/classgloox_1_1Client.htmlbyeee  5264277-ew5264277 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Hi,I am new to jabber, so be gentle :)Not wanting to re-invent the wheel, has anybody out there any experience thatthey can share in writing clients for machine to machine messaging ?I know that's pretty vague but I need to understand
 what is available and theissues I'm likely to face.Many thanks,Andrew = From Web Mail Andrew Holt, Managing Director, 4A SolutionsOffice : +44(0)1257 268351Mobile: +44(0)7841 340 608email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]veritas vos liberabit -- The truth will set you free 
	

	
		 
Find out what India is talking about on  Yahoo! Answers India. 
So, whatÂ’s NEW about the NEW Yahoo! Messenger? Find out.