Re: IS DoS security solution is IPSEC?

From: Walter Roberson (roberson_at_ibd.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca)
Date: 05/01/05

  • Next message: madman91_at_gmail.com: "Re: NTFS Problem"
    Date: 1 May 2005 15:51:46 GMT
    
    

    In article <1114957894.603133.254980@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
     <cranium.2003@gmail.com> wrote:
    : Why DoS,DDoS,Man in middle attacks are there still in a Internet
    :world besides WE got a better protocol IPSEC? Does that mean IPSec is
    :not used by all Internet? Why? or IPSec is having weakness?
    :what is that?

    Yes, IPSec has a very large weakness.

    In order for IPSec to work, the endpoint devices have to be
    able to establish to their satisfaction that they are
    communicating with the remote device that they think they are
    communicating with. That requires that the two device
    owners have found some secure "out of band" method of exchanging
    cryptographic information (look up "key distribution"); or else
    that the devices have registered with a trusted third party
    who is prepared to certify that the devices are who they say
    they are.

    How do you prove to that trusted third party that you
    are who you say you are? You have to either prove it to them
    directly, or else you have to prove it to someone that the
    third party trusts (or to someone trusted by the party trusted
    by the third party...) Ultimately though, you end up having
    to prove your identity to -someone-. Now, how are you going to
    *prove* your identity short of having your DNA sequenced?
    Even leaving out identical twins, that doesn't prove you are
    who you say you are: at best it establishes a unique identifier
    that may be associated with you, whatever name you are going under
    at the moment. Passports, driver's license, government ID cards --
    those can all be forged with various degrees of ease, or one
    can save the trouble of forging them by simply bribing [or being]
    an appropriate official authorized to issue such documents.
    {Check out the Corruption Perception Index, at http://www.icgg.org }

    So in other words you can't effectively *prove* you are who you
    say you are, because you might not *be* who you say you are
    [and you might not even know it, if you were adopted at a young age.]
    And imagine the cost of doing DNA sequence analysis on 5 billion
    people around the Earth. Imagine even just the cost of doing a
    microscopic government ID forgery check for a mere 100 million or
    so people in wired "western" countries such as the USA, Canada,
    Japan, UK, Germany...

    In other words, there is no PRACTICAL way of having large numbers
    of people [and devices] prove their identity to a level sufficient
    to prevent "man in the middle" attacks.

    You might ask, "But how about credit cards? People prove their
    identity with credit cards every day!". The answer to this is that
    stolen credit card numbers is big business, and that a level of
    theft of goods and identity is a risk built in to the credit card
    system, financed in part by the ~3% charge that credit card companies
    ding the merchants for on every purchase. Credit cards are in fact
    a good example of the many ways that lax identification measures
    can go seriously wrong -- so to prevent man in the middle attacks
    you have to do much better than what is done with credit cards.

    Besides, think about it: What good would IPSec do against a DDoS?
    Ten thousand systems all try to connect to you. You go through a
    negotiation procedure and discover that they aren't who they say they
    are, so you drop the connection. But in the meantime you've had to
    go through the negotiation process, which is much more expensive than just
    dropping the connection. In other words, you don't gain any useful
    DDoS protection until the vast majority of systems (including home
    systems) are under firm-enough identity control as to prevent them
    from being "owned" by others.

    And so what? -- if a virus-infested system half way around the world
    manages to securely prove to you that it is who it claims it is, then
    you get infested with the virus just as much as if they had done so
    anonymously. Thus, to really crack down on viruses and trojans, it
    would be necessary for IPSec to not just go down to the
    device-to-device level, but rather for IPSec to be implemented at the
    per-connection level, with the user continually being required to
    securely prove his or her identity for EVERY connection requested [and
    doing so in a method that was somehow fool-proof against electronic
    sniffing... a secure token exchange or something like that.]

    How much per person do you estimate that it would cost -you-
    to prove solidly that a number of people were who they said they
    were? Who would you employ to do the work, and how much would
    you pay them? If they are paid anywhere even -close- to minimum
    wage, and have little or no job security, then they have no strong
    incentive to refuse bribes. Say 10 minutes of the time of someone
    paid $US6 per hour... that's the equivilent of $US1 that would be
    earned for processing any one person. If someone comes in and
    offers $US100 or $US500, do you think that your workers are going
    to say, "No! No! No! The $1 I'm being paid for this has earned
    my integrity completely!" ? Would you not agree, then, that you
    would effectively have to pay professional-level wages, say $US40000
    per year or more? So the processing is probably going to cost you
    a *mininum* of $US10... now multiply that by 10 million or more
    "wired" households in the US alone... Where are you going to find
    the $US100 million necessary for the project?

    -- 
    Ceci, ce n'est pas une idée.
    

  • Next message: madman91_at_gmail.com: "Re: NTFS Problem"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: IPsec Policy to allow web browsing
      ... I think you really need logging, something IPsec under Win2000 doesn't do at ... I recommend using a third party firewall software such as www.sygate.com ...
      (microsoft.public.win2000.security)
    • IPSec VPN client for Win 98?
      ... Does Win 98/ME support IPSec as a VPN client or do I need a third party ... I'd prefer IPSec rather than PPTP. ...
      (comp.security.firewalls)
    • IPSec VPN client for Win 98?
      ... Does Win 98/ME support IPSec as a VPN client or do I need a third party ... I'd prefer IPSec rather than PPTP. ...
      (comp.security.firewalls)