| Re: Ordered delivery of EAP messages | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
|
From: Glen Zorn (gwz) (gwz |
|
| Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2007 19:08:52 -0800 (PST) | |
Yoshihiro Ohba <mailto:yohba [at] tari.toshiba.com> allegedly scribbled on Wednesday, March 07, 2007 1:05 PM: ... >> But you didn't answer the first part -- which is the key part. If >> you had unordered delivery of packets, could an unAuthenticatble >> user be authenticated? > > I have been thinking about this, and so far I have not found an > example case of unauthenticatble user be authenticated when > misordering happens. The answer is "I don't know." > >> >> If the answer to this question is NO, then EAP does not require in >> order delivery of packets and RFC 3748 has an error. > > I am not sure what makes you conclude like this. I don't want my > authentication attempt to fail just because IP packets are arriving > out of order. Just to be clear, we're talking about EAP packets here, not IP packets. > > Yoshihiro Ohba > > >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Yoshihiro Ohba [mailto:yohba [at] tari.toshiba.com] >> Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2007 2:43 PM >> To: Avi Lior >> Cc: Bernard Aboba; gwz [at] cisco.com; alper.yegin [at] yegin.org; >> Pasi.Eronen [at] nokia.com; eap [at] frascone.com; radiusext [at] >> ops.ietf.org >> Subject: Re: [eap] Ordered delivery of EAP messages >> >> On Wed, Mar 07, 2007 at 11:40:39AM -0500, Avi Lior wrote: >>> Bernard, >>> >>> You said: >>> >>> "So overall, I don't think that the majority of EAP methods deployed >>> today are capable of handling arbitrary reordering." >>> >>> Okay, but what is the result when this occurs, would this result in >>> an >> >>> Unauthenticateable user to be Authenticated? >>> >>> If NOT, then EAP Methods do not require in order delivery by the >>> underlying transport(s) to give results that are secure. >>> >>> In order delivery is desirable for optimal performance -- an >>> Authenticateble user getting authenticated without having to retry >>> the >> >>> method. >> >> Orderly delivery is required for authenticable user to be >> authenticated. Without orderly delivery, authentication for >> authenticable user can fail even if (i) EAP and lower layer are >> doing their jobs correctly as specified in their specifications, >> (ii) valid credentials are being used and (iii) there is no >> attacking. From operational perspective, this is something that >> should not happen, IMO. >> >> Yoshihiro Ohba >> >> >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Bernard Aboba [mailto:bernard_aboba [at] hotmail.com] >>> Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2007 11:43 PM >>> To: Avi Lior; gwz [at] cisco.com; alper.yegin [at] yegin.org; >>> Pasi.Eronen [at] nokia.com; eap [at] frascone.com >>> Cc: radiusext [at] ops.ietf.org >>> Subject: RE: [eap] Ordered delivery of EAP messages >>> >>> Avi Lior said: >>> >>> "If an EAP method designer designed their method assuming the in >>> order >> >>> delivery of packets then this would be a bad thing I think. >>> >>> A hacker could then exploit this assumption by re-order the packets. >>> Surely EAP methods are not susceptible to this type of attack. >>> Right?" >>> >>> Certainly, it is a good thing for an EAP method to protect itself >>> against replay. Using the mechanism provided in RFC 3579, an EAP >>> method could discard replayed packets and ask the NAS to send >>> another >> one. >>> >>> On the other hand, there are EAP methods that are not protected >>> against replay (e.g. Identity, Notification, etc.). There are also >>> situations in which EAP packets can be fragmented, and if >>> reassembled in the wrong order, this could cause failure of the MIC >>> which can be a >> >>> terminal error (e.g. in TLS-based methods). >>> >>> So overall, I don't think that the majority of EAP methods deployed >>> today are capable of handling arbitrary reordering. >>> >>> >>> _________________________________________________________________ >>> To unsubscribe or modify your subscription options, please visit: >>> http://lists.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/eap >>> >>> Arhives: http://lists.frascone.com/pipermail/eap
- Re: Ordered delivery of EAP messages, (continued)
- Re: Ordered delivery of EAP messages Yoshihiro Ohba, March 7 2007
- Re: Ordered delivery of EAP messages Avi Lior, March 7 2007
- Re: Ordered delivery of EAP messages Yoshihiro Ohba, March 7 2007
- Re: Ordered delivery of EAP messages Avi Lior, March 7 2007
- Re: Ordered delivery of EAP messages Glen Zorn (gwz), March 7 2007
- Re: Ordered delivery of EAP messages Avi Lior, March 7 2007
- Issues & Fixes: Ordered delivery of EAP messages Bernard Aboba, March 6 2007
- Re: Issues & Fixes: Ordered delivery of EAP messages Glen Zorn (gwz), March 6 2007
- Re: Issues & Fixes: Ordered delivery of EAP messages Bernard Aboba, March 7 2007
Results generated by Tiger Technologies using MHonArc.