[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: DDOS and TRP Error Handling Spec Draft
I think that Chris F. could split the difference with David B by saying: 1. When the error destination is "slowly changing" put it in the TPA and protect it. 2. If you need a dynamic error destination (to aid in tracking state, for example) use an optional header field (but if you are worried about the Ferris DDOS attack, don't reuse it etc.). Dale -----Original Message----- From: Christopher Ferris [mailto:chris.ferris@east.sun.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 06, 2000 12:16 PM To: ebXML Transport (E-mail) Subject: Re: DDOS and TRP Error Handling Spec Draft Dale, I don't disagree that having a location for reporting errors is a good thing, I just don't believe that it belongs in the message headers. It belongs in the TPA since it is NOT likely to change on a per-message instance basis. It is more likely to remain static over an extended period. Hence, it is: - a waste of bandwidth to retransmit the same information with EACH message - a potential DDoS attack exploitation Cheers, Chris "Moberg, Dale" wrote: > > I think that if lessening the chances of a DDOS are within the scope > of TRP, it is certainly an issue for the security focused sub group. > > The adversary currently is assumed to have acquired the destination URLs > for many ebXML speakers and then proceeds to go on to submit > bad data, directing error responses to some unfortunate other victim. > > The intended victim's destination URL for errors is also presumed static > and known by the adversary. > > While I think in general that there are far too many other ways to launch > a DDOS, I suppose it is worth thinking about what can be done to block > the adversary's approach. > > 1. The destination URLs can be made hard to find. This means a problem > for the Registry; the TPA template access needs to be defined. > > 2. The URL for an error reply can be made per message specific and > dynamically > generated so that every error gets a non-reused URL for any errors. So > even if the adversary manages to snoop out one error destination URL, > all the error responses after the first get a 404 or similar refusal. > In other words, don't reuse the error destination URL when > the DDOS threat is regarded as significant. > > 3. There are surely other mechanisms that will lessen the threat, including > screening submissions for HTTP authentication from ebXML request messages, > checking SSL certificates during session setup, and so on. But clearly > all these things should be addressed as part of the overall security > TRP sub workgroup. There will be a lot of opportunities potentially for > man in the middle style malaciousness as well as more standard DDOS. > > I don't think that the security environment for the messaging is well enough > defined that we can throw out useful messaging constructs based on the > alleged defects of the non-defined security apparatus. -- _/_/_/_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ Christopher Ferris - Enterprise Architect _/ _/ _/ _/_/ _/ Phone: 781-442-3063 or x23063 _/_/_/_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ Email: chris.ferris@East.Sun.COM _/ _/ _/ _/ _/_/ Sun Microsystems, Mailstop: UBUR03-313 _/_/_/_/ _/_/_/ _/ _/ 1 Network Drive Burlington, MA 01803-0903
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC