Subject: Fwd: RA-Guard: Advice on the implementation (feedback requested)

From: Fernando Gont <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2012 21:49:41 -0300

FYI.

Please post your comments to the *v6ops* mailing-list <[email-masked]>,
and CC me if possible).

Thanks!

Best regards,
Fernando

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RA-Guard: Advice on the implementation  (feedback requested)
Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2012 21:44:29 -0300
From: Fernando Gont <[email-masked]>
Organization: SI6 Networks
To: IPv6 Operations <[email-masked]>

Folks,

We have just published a revision of our I-D "Implementation Advice for
IPv6 Router Advertisement Guard (RA-Guard)"
<http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-gont-v6ops-ra-guard-implementation-01.txt>.

In essence, this is the problem statement, and what this I-D is about:

* RA-Guard is essential to have feature parity with IPv4.

* Most (all?) existing RA-Guard implementations can be trivially evaded:
if the attacker includes extension headers in his packets, the RA-Guard
devices fail to identify the Router Advertisement messages. -- For
instance, THC's "IPv6 attack suite" (<http://www.thc.org/thc-ipv6/>)
contains tools that can evade RA-Guard as indicated.

* The I-D discusses this problem, and provides advice on how to
implement RA-Guard, such that the aforementioned vulnerabilities are
eliminated, we have an effective RA-Guard device, and hence
feature-parity with IPv4.

We'd like feedback on this I-D, including high-level comments on whether
you support the proposal in this I-D.

Thanks!

Best regards,
-- 
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: [email-masked]
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492