Subject: [PWE3] PW Security an the Vancouver PWE3 Session

From: Sasha Vainshtein <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 09:12:28 +0200

Yaakov (and all),
It is somewhat difficult to discuss the subject (PW Security) in the absence
of both a posted draft and any discussion at the Vancouver PWE3 session.
However, I'd like to present some considerations based on the presentation
which is publicly available at
http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/05nov/slides/pwe3-6.ppt
<http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/05nov/slides/pwe3-6.ppt> .

1.	A detailed study of PW-specific security vulnerabilities (as opposed
to common IP- or MPLS-related security issues) is indeed required. 
2.	In such a study we should clearly distinguish between:

*	PW control plane vs. PW  data plane security vulnerabilities

*	The former already has some built-in security mechanisms (MD5 in
LDP) which may or may not be adequate
*	The latter seem to be more exposed to certain types of attack, e.g.,
injection of spoofed PW packets (as described in the presentation)

*	Vulnerability to DoS attacks vs. vulnerability to attacks on privacy
(a.k.a. eavesdropping)

*	IMHO, the former definitely has some PW-specific aspects while the
latter looks more like common to all MPLS networks (but I am not a security
expert and can be quite wrong about it!)
*	To he best of my knowledge, these types of vulnerability also
require different types of solution (e.g., authentication vs.encryption)

3.	The PWE3 WG is the preferred place for such a study, and the
analysis of the examples in the presentation could be a good start for this
work

*	I am not sure if an appropriate work item could be added to the WG
Charter at this stage of its update process (Stewart/Danny?)
*	My gut feeling is that the IESG would hardly oppose adding it at a
short notice if the WG asks for it, so I am not really worried (Mark?)

4.	Sorry for re-stating something so obvious, but we should only start
looking for the PW-specific security solutions after we reach good
understanding of PW-specific security vulnerabilities. E.g., the question of
what should be encrypted (if at all) in the PW packets looks premature at
the moment.

Hopefully these notes clarify my position on the subject. I would be also
interested in active participation in this work.
 
Regards,
                                        Sasha
_______________________________________________
pwe3 mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3

---

From: Stewart Bryant <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 09:07:04 +0000

>       analysis of the examples in the presentation could be a good start
>       for this work
>           * I am not sure if an appropriate work item could be added to
>             the WG Charter at this stage of its update process
>             (Stewart/Danny?)
>           * My gut feeling is that the IESG would hardly oppose adding
>             it at a short notice if the WG asks for it, so I am not
>             really worried (Mark?)

Provided that we restrict ourselves to the PW security requirements
of our currently chartered work, and the application of existing
IETF security techniques to the problem, I am sure was are on firm
ground.

What would be out of scope would be the design and specification of
new security techniques, because that would be outside both our
charter and our expertise.

- Stewart