Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.debian.security > #5791

Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released

From Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@elstel.org>
Newsgroups linux.debian.security
Subject Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released
Date 2020-04-02 21:40 +0200
Message-ID <zRdQZ-2eP-9@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References (12 earlier) <zOxCy-7nF-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <zOxCy-7nF-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <zQPYl-4rn-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <zQVr3-7CB-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <zRdeh-1Me-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


Am 02.04.20 um 20:50 schrieb Lee:
> On 4/1/20, Paul Wise  wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 6:01 PM vince@ wrote:
>>
>>> Did the discussion of continuing support for DANE end??
>>
>> In case I mislead anyone, a clarification:
>>
>> Debian itself isn't going to actively work on removing support for
>> DANE from anything nor removing our DANE/DNSSEC records.
>>
>> Support for DANE is never going to happen for the web (given the
>> opinions of the major browser makers)
> 
> Can you share a reference for that?
> 
> I can see browsers not trusting the client DNS since they can't tell
> if the client resolver is using DNSSEC or not  (ie. they can't tell if
> the DANE answer is valid).  But now that DOH is supported it seems
> like browsers could trust DOH servers that [promise to] do DNSSEC, so
> now they could trust DANE?
> 
> eg - the firefox DOH server seems to have DNSSEC enabled:
> 
> $ curl -H 'accept: application/dns-json' \
>      'https://mozilla.cloudflare-dns.com/dns-query?name=servfail.sidnlabs.nl&type=a'
> {"Status": 2,"TC": false,"RD": true, "RA": true, "AD": false,"CD":
> false,"Question":[{"name": "servfail.sidnlabs.nl.", "type":
> 1}],"Comment": "DNSSEC validation failure. Please check
> http://dnsviz.net/d/servfail.sidnlabs.nl/dnssec/"}
> 
> so maybe the tlsa answer can be trusted?
> 
> $ curl -H 'accept: application/dns-json' \
>    'https://mozilla.cloudflare-dns.com/dns-query?name=_443._tcp.debian.org&type=tlsa'
> {"Status": 0,"TC": false,"RD": true, "RA": true, "AD": true,"CD":
> false,"Question":[{"name": "_443._tcp.debian.org.", "type":
> 52}],"Answer":[{"name": "_443._tcp.debian.org.", "type": 52, "TTL":
> 600, "data": "3 1 1
> 5F33491E2B2D267F7BFF096AD0DCB4AE5A22C0BE19DB0AB6728BED942F0719FC"}]}
> 
> Thanks,
> Lee
>
   There are a few reasons why I believe that DANE / TLSA DNS RR answers 
are quite trustworthy:

* DNS responses are much faster than establishing a TCP connection 
(1.5RTT), usually only about 40ms also because DNS servers tend to be 
near the user if not provided by the ISP while the server you wanna 
contact is usually in another country or another federal state. As we 
know from the Snowden Revelations spoofing connections only works if the 
spoofed response is faster than the original response. My idea about it 
is that the NSA and related intelligence simply do not have an 
infrastructure to spoof DNS responses.

* There is a public/private key signing infrastructure for DANE as well 
but I consider that more secure than a gpg private key used on a system 
with emailing or web browsing. I believe it is much more hard to get 
into a server than is to get into a client.

   Finally DANE has been invented for the reason to restore trust in the 
internet - as it was there initially when there was no operation Quantum 
insert or similar operations. I´d believe the DANE system has been 
designed secure as to serve its purpose. Finally my own practical 
experience with DANE is very positive. It appeared to be the only way to 
prevent site spoofing:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-security/2020/01/threads.html
https://lists.debian.org/debian-security/2020/02/threads.html
https://lists.debian.org/debian-security/2020/03/threads.html

   The reason why browser developers have not adopted DANE yet is that 
they side with intelligence (secret services) as the following bug 
report shows me:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1606802

   I had also linked this report in my previous discussion at 
debian-security.

Back to linux.debian.security | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Have I caught a firmware attack in the act? Or am I just paranoid? "Rebecca N. Palmer" <rebecca_palmer@zoho.com> - 2019-08-13 09:40 +0200
  Re: Have I caught a firmware attack in the act? Or am I just paranoid? Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> - 2019-08-14 07:10 +0200
  Re: Have I caught a firmware attack in the act? Or am I just  paranoid? Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@gmail.com> - 2019-08-14 17:40 +0200
    Re: Have I caught a firmware attack in the act? Or am I just  paranoid? "Rebecca N. Palmer" <rebecca_palmer@zoho.com> - 2019-08-15 23:20 +0200
      Re: Have I caught a firmware attack in the act? Or am I just  paranoid? Davide Prina <davide.prina@gmail.com> - 2019-08-16 10:40 +0200
        Re: Have I caught a firmware attack in the act? Or am I just  paranoid? CMH <chouck@binghamton.edu> - 2019-08-16 14:20 +0200
        Re: Have I caught a firmware attack in the act? Or am I just paranoid? Andrei Grosu <andrei_grosu@fastmail.net> - 2019-08-16 19:20 +0200
        Re: Have I caught a firmware attack in the act? Or am I just  paranoid? Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@gmail.com> - 2019-08-16 19:20 +0200
      Re: Have I caught a firmware attack in the act? Or am I just  paranoid? Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@gmail.com> - 2019-08-16 19:10 +0200
      Re: Have I caught a firmware attack in the act? Or am I just  paranoid? Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@gmail.com> - 2019-08-16 19:30 +0200
      Re: Have I caught a firmware attack in the act? Or am I just  paranoid? Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@gmail.com> - 2019-08-16 21:20 +0200
        Re: Have I caught a firmware attack in the act? Or am I just  paranoid? "Rebecca N. Palmer" <rebecca_palmer@zoho.com> - 2019-08-17 11:50 +0200
          Re: Have I caught a firmware attack in the act? Or am I just  paranoid? Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@gmail.com> - 2019-08-17 13:20 +0200
            Re: Have I caught a firmware attack in the act? Or am I just  paranoid? "Rebecca N. Palmer" <rebecca_palmer@zoho.com> - 2019-08-23 09:30 +0200
              Re: Have I caught a firmware attack in the act? Or am I just  paranoid? Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@gmail.com> - 2019-08-23 21:00 +0200
                debcheckroot v2.0 released Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@gmail.com> - 2019-11-15 17:20 +0100
                Verified Boot, Secure Boot, dm-verity, debcheckroot Patrick Schleizer <adrelanos@riseup.net> - 2019-11-16 14:00 +0100
                Re: Verified Boot, Secure Boot, dm-verity, debcheckroot Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@gmail.com> - 2019-11-16 15:30 +0100
                Re: Verified Boot, Secure Boot, dm-verity, debcheckroot Sylvain Beucler <beuc@beuc.net> - 2019-11-16 15:40 +0100
                Re: Verified Boot, Secure Boot, dm-verity, debcheckroot Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@gmail.com> - 2019-11-16 15:40 +0100
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released Patrick Schleizer <adrelanos@riseup.net> - 2019-11-19 13:40 +0100
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@gmail.com> - 2019-11-20 12:30 +0100
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released Patrick Schleizer <adrelanos@riseup.net> - 2019-11-25 12:40 +0100
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@gmail.com> - 2019-11-25 18:00 +0100
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@gmail.com> - 2019-12-10 17:40 +0100
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@gmail.com> - 2019-11-27 12:10 +0100
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released Cindy Sue Causey <butterflybytes@gmail.com> - 2020-01-17 14:40 +0100
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@gmail.com> - 2020-01-17 17:00 +0100
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@gmail.com> - 2020-01-17 17:20 +0100
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@gmail.com> - 2020-03-04 20:20 +0100
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@gmail.com> - 2020-03-04 20:50 +0100
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@gmail.com> - 2020-03-04 21:00 +0100
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@gmail.com> - 2020-03-04 21:00 +0100
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@gmail.com> - 2020-03-23 17:10 +0100
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> - 2020-03-24 04:40 +0100
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> - 2020-03-24 11:20 +0100
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@elstel.org> - 2020-03-24 15:50 +0100
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> - 2020-03-25 03:00 +0100
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@elstel.org> - 2020-03-25 11:30 +0100
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@elstel.org> - 2020-03-26 11:10 +0100
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released "vince@vheuser.com" <vince@vheuser.com> - 2020-04-01 20:10 +0200
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> - 2020-04-02 02:00 +0200
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released Lewis Yarema <lewisyarema91@gmail.com> - 2020-04-02 11:20 +0200
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@elstel.org> - 2020-04-02 17:00 +0200
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@elstel.org> - 2020-04-03 13:40 +0200
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@elstel.org> - 2020-04-02 16:50 +0200
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@elstel.org> - 2020-04-04 09:50 +0200
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released William Gagnebé <william.gagnebe@gmail.com> - 2020-04-05 12:20 +0200
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released l0f4r0@tuta.io - 2020-04-05 12:30 +0200
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@elstel.org> - 2020-04-07 17:50 +0200
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released "Niall O'Reilly" <Niall.oReilly+lists@no8.be> - 2020-04-02 18:30 +0200
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released Lee <ler762@gmail.com> - 2020-04-02 21:00 +0200
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@elstel.org> - 2020-04-02 21:40 +0200
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@elstel.org> - 2020-04-03 13:50 +0200
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released Lee <ler762@gmail.com> - 2020-04-04 00:50 +0200
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@elstel.org> - 2020-04-04 09:40 +0200
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released Bjørn Mork <bjorn@mork.no> - 2020-04-14 09:30 +0200
                arbitrary code execution on unformatted usb stick Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@elstel.org> - 2020-04-25 15:40 +0200
                Re: arbitrary code execution on unformatted usb stick Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@elstel.org> - 2020-04-25 15:50 +0200
                Re: arbitrary code execution on unformatted usb stick Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@elstel.org> - 2020-05-02 17:00 +0200
                Re: arbitrary code execution on unformatted usb stick Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@elstel.org> - 2020-05-02 17:10 +0200
                Fwd: Re: arbitrary code execution on unformatted usb stick estellnb@elstel.org - 2020-05-02 20:50 +0200
                Re: debcheckroot v2.0 released Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb@gmail.com> - 2020-03-21 17:40 +0100
      Probably a false alarm Re: Have I caught a firmware attack in the  act? Or am I just paranoid? "Rebecca N. Palmer" <rebecca_palmer@zoho.com> - 2019-08-24 18:50 +0200

csiph-web