|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: iSCSI Inband authentication (SRP/CHAP) - proposed resolutionDavid, The problem I am having with the proposal is, that I think we are mandating customer actions not just implementation. We are saying that if Chap passwords are used then they must do or must not do something else which is legal with IPsec. Since the IPsec process is really disjoint from the iSCSI Login, there is no real way that we can tell what the customer did with IPsec, and IKE. So some how I think the wordage needs to be adjusted to reflect this implementation vrs customer interaction, since I think the only thing we can do is document on the packaging/directions, what should or should not be done. . . . John L. Hufferd Senior Technical Staff Member (STSM) IBM/SSG San Jose Ca Main Office (408) 256-0403, Tie: 276-0403, eFax: (408) 904-4688 Home Office (408) 997-6136, Cell: (408) 499-9702 Internet address: hufferd@us.ibm.com Black_David@emc.com@ece.cmu.edu on 05/21/2002 02:49:39 PM Sent by: owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu To: ips@ece.cmu.edu cc: Subject: iSCSI Inband authentication (SRP/CHAP) - proposed resolution Since DH-CHAP has been excluded from iSCSI, I can now function as a WG co-chair on this security topic. On a conference call today that included both IPS WG co-chairs, our Area Director (Allison Mankin), the authors of both the iSCSI and IPS Security drafts, along with additional security experts and contributors, the group came up with the following proposed resolution to the open iSCSI requirements issues in inband authentication: - CHAP MUST be implemented. Support for strong machine-generated CHAP secrets (96+ bits of cryptographic randomness) MUST be implemented, and CHAP secrets of at least that strength SHOULD be used. Generation of secrets MAY be external to the iSCSI implementation. - If weaker CHAP secrets (e.g., passwords, hashes of passwords) are used, ESP encryption (and integrity) MUST be used to protect them, and group pre-shared keys MUST NOT be used for IKE authentication (pairwise pre-shared keys MAY be used). - Pick up some text from the DH-CHAP draft that helps prevent reflection attacks on CHAP in iSCSI (with credit/thanks to Paul Koning). - SRP remains in the iSCSI draft as a MAY implement mechanism. The overall rationale behind this is to strongly encourage (SHOULD) use of strong secrets with CHAP (first bullet) and to put in place serious requirements (MUST) for use of IPsec (ESP) to protect CHAP if weaker secrets are used (second bullet) to encourage those who need such encouragement. This is not the best possible solution, but it's a pragmatic approach that solves the problems at hand and should get the iSCSI draft into WG Last Call in the very near future. The proposed text with the details and specific requirements (for the iSCSI and IPS drafts) follows. Comments to the list by noon Eastern Daylight Time (US) this Friday (May 24), please. After that time, the text will go into the iSCSI and IPS Security drafts, and there will be further opportunity to comment during WG Last Call for these drafts. Thanks, --David Proposed text: CHAP MUST be implemented for iSCSI login authentication. In order to provide protection against offline dictionary attacks, the CHAP shared secret SHOULD represent a cryptographically random quantity with at least 96 bits of randomness. Implementations MUST support use of such random CHAP secrets including the means to generate secrets and to accept input of secrets of up to 128 bits generated externally (e.g., by other implementations). An implementation MAY meet the generation requirement by supplying a program that runs on some other system to create CHAP secrets that are then entered into the implementation via a configuration interface. Hexadecimal format MUST be supported for output of generated CHAP secrets (e.g., for use in other implementations) and input of CHAP secrets generated externally. If the CHAP shared secret is weaker than 96 bits of cryptographic randomness (e.g., the secret is a password or is derived from a password), then IPsec ESP with non-null transform (e.g., 3DES, 128 bit AES) MUST be used to protect the iSCSI login authentication, and IKE authentication with group pre-shared keys MUST NOT be used. In addition, DES SHOULD NOT be used as the ESP transform. Group pre-shared keys MUST NOT be used in this situation because they enable any member of the group to masquerade as any other and collect CHAP exchanges as raw material for an off-line dictionary attack on the CHAP shared secret(s). Pairwise pre-shared keys MAY be used. These requirements for IPsec usage to protect weak CHAP secrets (e.g., passwords) are intended to be severe. The off-line dictionary attack makes CHAP fundamentally insecure when used with passwords or similarly weak secrets; cryptographic randomness sufficient to thwart a brute-force attack is necessary to provide sufficient security. In order to provide mutual authentication and protect against rogue Targets, CHAP authentication SHOULD be done in both directions. Although this is not equivalent to a single, interlocked mutual authentication, an appropriate level of security can be obtained by observing the following requirements: (1) A Responder MUST NOT send its CHAP response if the Initiator has not successfully authenticated. For example, the following exchange: I->R CHAP_A(A1,A2,...) R->I CHAP_A, CHAP_C, CHAP_I I->R CHAP_A, CHAP_C, CHAP_I MUST result in the Responder (Target) closing the iSCSI TCP connection because the Initiator has failed to authenticate (there is no CHAP_R in the third message). (2) Initiators MUST NOT reuse the CHAP challenge sent by the Responder for the other direction of a bi-directional authentication. Responders MUST check for this condition and close the iSCSI TCP connection if it occurs. These requirements prevent reflection attacks in which the Initiator uses the same CHAP challenge as the Target and reflects the Target's response back to the Target, thereby authenticating the Initiator without requiring the Initiator to know the CHAP secret. NOTE: Credit to Paul Koning for the example and contributions to the text on this topic. --------------------------------------------------- David L. Black, Senior Technologist EMC Corporation, 42 South St., Hopkinton, MA 01748 +1 (508) 249-6449 *NEW* FAX: +1 (508) 497-8500 black_david@emc.com Cell: +1 (978) 394-7754 ---------------------------------------------------
Home Last updated: Wed May 22 17:18:35 2002 10216 messages in chronological order |