[dns-operations] [dnsext] BlackHat Presentation on DNSSEC Downgrade attack
ietf-dane at dukhovni.org
Fri Aug 12 02:19:26 UTC 2022
On Thu, Aug 11, 2022 at 06:41:23PM -0400, Donald Eastlake wrote:
> So say a zone is signed by the zone owner with both BK and a strong
> algorithm denoted STRONG. As long as a resolver only trusts STRONG
> signatures I don't see how the status of what NSECs say is signed can cause
> forged data to be trusted.
The issue is arguable lack of clarity in the validator requirements of
4035 when the server returns only RRSIGs with algorithms none of which
are supported by the validator.
When only unsupported algorithms appear in DS, the zone is "insecure"
and all's well. But otherwise, when only unsupported algorithms (or
none at all) appear in an authoritative RRset's set of RRSIGs, the
response is "bogus" not "insecure".
The question of which algorithm is stronger or weaker does not arise
here, MiTM can in fact "downgrade" a multi-signed zone to its weakest
signing algorithm, by stripping the other RRSIGs. Don't use broken
algorithms, by switching away from deprecated algorithms in a timely
fashion. This has largely been accomplished for algorithms 5 and 7,
which are down to ~7% of their peak deployment counts.
DNSSEC algorithm agility is serving its intended purpose just fine.
Resolver implementations had an apparently somewhat common bug, which
most should have addressed by now (that the issue is public).
More information about the dns-operations