netdev - Re: IPsec replay sequence number overflow behavior? (RFC4303 section 3.3.3)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <200712190636.lBJ6ae2a024167@faith.austin.ibm.com>
Date:	Wed, 19 Dec 2007 00:36:40 -0600
From:	Joy Latten <latten@...tin.ibm.com>
To:	paul.moore@...com
Cc:	herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, kaber@...sh.net, latten@...ibm.com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: IPsec replay sequence number overflow behavior? (RFC4303 section 3.3.3)

>Rereading the thread it's unclear to me which solution was deemed "correct".  
>I'm not a big fan of fiddling/forcing SA lifetimes unless we have no other 
>option; if someone is foolish enough to use manual keying with replay 
>protection and no mechanism to catch rollover then they most likely have 
>larger problems.  It's the whole "we'll provide you with the gun, but you 
>have to shoot yourself" argument as applied to SA lifetimes.

Also, the ipsec rfc require auotmated SA management when 
using anti-replay service and that the option be disabled 
when SAs are manually setup.

It may not stop anyone, but we can always point to rfc. :-)

Joy

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html