eap Mailing List: Re: Re: Issue 352: Channel Binding Issue

[Yoshihiro Ohba (yohba]

On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 03:18:20PM -0700, Salowey, Joe wrote:
>  
> 
> > As noted in [RFC3748] Section 7.15, this vulnerability can be
> > addressed by EAP methods that support a protected exchange of channel
> > properties such as endpoint identifiers, including (but not limited
> > to): Called-Station-Id [RFC2865][RFC3580], Calling-Station-Id
> > [RFC2865][RFC3580], NAS-Identifier [RFC2865], NAS-IP-Address
> > [RFC2865], and NAS-IPv6-Address [RFC3162].
> > "
> > 
> > I'd mention that Channel Binding description in RFC3748 is somewhat
> > obsolete according to the recent discussion on the AAA server's
> > requirement on pre-configurating Channel Binding parameters.  Do we
> > need this paragraph?  Or instead we may have some explicit text here
> > to obsolete Channel Binding description in RFC3748.
> > 
> [Joe] I don't see how this text is obsolete.  Channel binding is not
> just an EAP-keying concept. 

I'd say the Channel Binding problem description in RFC3748 is valid,
but the solution described in RFC 3748 would be a bit obsolete.

> 
> > 
> > "
> > Using such a protected exchange, it is possible to match the channel
> > properties provided by the authenticator via out-of-band mechanisms
> > against those exchanged within the EAP method.  For example, see the
> > discussion in Section 1.4 as well as [I-D.arkko-eap-service-identity-
> > auth].
> > "
> > 
> > According to the the AAA server's requirement on pre-configurating
> > Channel Binding parameters, I don't see the usefulness of
> > [I-D.arkko-eap-service-identity-auth].  Do we really need this
> > paragraph?
> > 
> [Joe] It still seems useful to me. 

Can you elaborate on how it is useful?

Regards,
Yoshihiro Ohba


> 
> 
> > 
> > "
> > The main difference between these approaches is that Channel Binding
> > support within an EAP method may require upgrading or changing the
> > EAP method, impacting both the peer and the server.   Where Channel
> > Bindings are implemented in AAA,  the peer, authenticator and the
> > backend server need to be upgraded, but the EAP method need not be
> > modified.
> > "
> > 
> > If we have only one Channel Binding method, we don't need this
> > comparison.
> 
> [Joe] I don't think this is the place to define one method.
> 
> 
> > Best regards,
> > Yoshihiro Ohba
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > To unsubscribe or modify your subscription options, please visit:
> > http://lists.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/eap
> > 
> > Arhives: http://lists.frascone.com/pipermail/eap
> > 
> 
>