From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Mon Jul 1 11:12:58 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id LAA11360 for ; Mon, 1 Jul 2002 11:12:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 18151 invoked by uid 605); 1 Jul 2002 15:13:07 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: (qmail 17344 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2002 15:12:14 -0000 Received: from mail19.messagelabs.com (193.109.254.3) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 1 Jul 2002 15:12:14 -0000 X-VirusChecked: Checked Received: (qmail 17589 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2002 15:06:06 -0000 Received: from osint-gbmail.conchango.com (194.129.216.125) by server-20.tower-19.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 1 Jul 2002 15:06:06 -0000 Received: from conchango.com (msurtani-redhat.conchango.com [192.168.10.163]) by osint-gbmail.conchango.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id NFNAQFRT; Mon, 1 Jul 2002 16:03:35 +0100 Message-ID: <3D206F50.80308@conchango.com> Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 16:03:44 +0100 From: Manik Surtani User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.1a) Gecko/20020610 X-Accept-Language: en-gb, en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Subject: Newbie: help with DH key exchange Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello, all. First, I apologise if this is the wrong place for such a posting - I just didnt know where I could get help on this. I am new to ssh internals, although I have been using it as an end user for quite a while now. I have started an ambitious little project to write an open source ssh client API in Java - just a chance to learn more about the ssh internals. I have successfully implemented the initial handshaking, and am stuck on the DH key exchange at the moment. I have sent a KEXDH_INIT package, and have received the KEXDH_REPLY, and have computed f and H. What I do not completely understand is how I could verify H using the signature s received from the server. This is using diffie-hellman-group1-sha1, so I'd assume that the SHA1 hashing algo has been used? How do I verify the signature though? Help is much appreciated! Cheers, -- Manik Surtani Conchango 'Innovative Change in Business' T 44 (0) 1784 221829 M 44 (0) 7786 702 706 E manik.surtani@conchango.com http://www.conchango.com The information contained in this message is confidential and is intended for the addressee only. If you have received this message in error, please notify us as soon as possible. The unauthorised use, disclosure, copying or alteration of this message is forbidden. _____________________________________________________________________ This message has been checked for all known viruses by the MessageLabs Virus Control Centre. From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Mon Jul 1 19:35:07 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id TAA09675 for ; Mon, 1 Jul 2002 19:35:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 8613 invoked by uid 605); 1 Jul 2002 23:35:49 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Message-ID: <20020701233549.8612.qmail@mail.netbsd.org> Received: (qmail 8606 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2002 23:35:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO batman.fmg.com) (216.177.92.45) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 1 Jul 2002 23:35:49 -0000 Received: from STEVE ([192.168.0.229]) by batman.fmg.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id M64JTT4D; Mon, 1 Jul 2002 16:39:38 -0700 To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org From: "inFORM Decisions" Subject: A New Age - A Timely Solution! Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 16:40:56 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 (produced by the IP*Works! MIME Component - www.nsoftware.com) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Take those projects off the shelve, be more efficient and save money. inFORM Decisions's iDocs software automatically converts pre-printed forms and/or checks into electronic documents AND delivers via laser printer, email and/or fax. Free 30 day trial www.inFORMDecisions.com/index.asp?ad=4 Let's discuss your requirements today! 800-858-5544 From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Tue Jul 2 05:37:59 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id FAA29592 for ; Tue, 2 Jul 2002 05:37:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 11034 invoked by uid 605); 2 Jul 2002 09:38:42 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: (qmail 11027 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2002 09:38:41 -0000 Received: from mail19.messagelabs.com (193.109.254.3) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 2 Jul 2002 09:38:41 -0000 X-VirusChecked: Checked Received: (qmail 19571 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2002 09:38:36 -0000 Received: from osint-gbmail.conchango.com (194.129.216.125) by server-4.tower-19.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 2 Jul 2002 09:38:36 -0000 Received: from conchango.com (msurtani-redhat.conchango.com [192.168.10.163]) by osint-gbmail.conchango.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id NFNAQHHJ; Tue, 2 Jul 2002 10:36:05 +0100 Message-ID: <3D21740F.5080901@conchango.com> Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 10:36:15 +0100 From: Manik Surtani User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.1a) Gecko/20020610 X-Accept-Language: en-gb, en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Subject: Help with DH key exchange on SSHv2.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hey all. Apologies if this is the wrong place to post this question. I'm developing an open source Java SSH (v2) client API, and need a bit of help. 1) After receiving the KEXDH_RESPONSE packet, reading SSH Transport Layer Protocol (March 2002), Section 5.2, Output from Key Exchange: do I assume that, in HASH (K || H || "A" || session_id), H is a mpint? The spec states that K is a mpint but doesnt specify for H. 2) Also, how do I communicate my public key to the server? From the spec, I gather that the next packet to send is a SSH_MSG_NEWKEYS with no data following ... am I wrong? Help is very much appreciated... -- Manik Surtani Conchango 'Innovative Change in Business' T 44 (0) 1784 221829 M 44 (0) 7786 702 706 E manik.surtani@conchango.com http://www.conchango.com The information contained in this message is confidential and is intended for the addressee only. If you have received this message in error, please notify us as soon as possible. The unauthorised use, disclosure, copying or alteration of this message is forbidden. _____________________________________________________________________ This message has been checked for all known viruses by the MessageLabs Virus Control Centre. From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Tue Jul 2 05:43:24 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id FAA29712 for ; Tue, 2 Jul 2002 05:43:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 14341 invoked by uid 605); 2 Jul 2002 09:44:07 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: (qmail 14332 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2002 09:44:06 -0000 Received: from faui02.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (131.188.30.102) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 2 Jul 2002 09:44:06 -0000 Received: (from msfriedl@localhost) by faui02.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (8.9.1/8.1.16-FAU) id LAA07369; Tue, 2 Jul 2002 11:44:04 +0200 (MEST) Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 11:44:04 +0200 From: Markus Friedl To: Manik Surtani Cc: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Subject: Re: Help with DH key exchange on SSHv2.0 Message-ID: <20020702094404.GA179@faui02> References: <3D21740F.5080901@conchango.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3D21740F.5080901@conchango.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list On Tue, Jul 02, 2002 at 10:36:15AM +0100, Manik Surtani wrote: > Hey all. > > Apologies if this is the wrong place to post this question. > > I'm developing an open source Java SSH (v2) client API, and need a bit > of help. > > 1) After receiving the KEXDH_RESPONSE packet, reading SSH Transport > Layer Protocol (March 2002), Section 5.2, Output from Key Exchange: do > I assume that, in HASH (K || H || "A" || session_id), H is a mpint? The > spec states that K is a mpint but doesnt specify for H. check draft-ietf-secsh-transport-XX, and search for The hash H is computed as the HASH hash of the concatenation of the following: ... H is a hash, it's the raw output of sha1, in the "diffie-hellman-group1-sha1" key exchange. > 2) Also, how do I communicate my public key to the server? From the > spec, I gather that the next packet to send is a SSH_MSG_NEWKEYS with no > data following ... am I wrong? check draft-ietf-secsh-transport-XX, and search for First, the client sends the following: byte SSH_MSG_KEXDH_INIT mpint e -m From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Tue Jul 2 07:13:11 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id HAA03300 for ; Tue, 2 Jul 2002 07:13:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 27847 invoked by uid 605); 2 Jul 2002 11:13:54 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: (qmail 27837 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2002 11:13:53 -0000 Received: from mail19.messagelabs.com (193.109.254.3) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 2 Jul 2002 11:13:53 -0000 X-VirusChecked: Checked Received: (qmail 15847 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2002 11:13:50 -0000 Received: from osint-gbmail.conchango.com (194.129.216.125) by server-11.tower-19.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 2 Jul 2002 11:13:50 -0000 Received: from conchango.com (msurtani-redhat.conchango.com [192.168.10.163]) by osint-gbmail.conchango.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id NFNAQHR3; Tue, 2 Jul 2002 12:11:18 +0100 Message-ID: <3D218A61.1080302@conchango.com> Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 12:11:29 +0100 From: Manik Surtani User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.1a) Gecko/20020610 X-Accept-Language: en-gb, en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Markus Friedl CC: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Subject: Re: Help with DH key exchange on SSHv2.0 References: <3D21740F.5080901@conchango.com> <20020702094404.GA179@faui02> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, Marcus. Markus Friedl wrote: > On Tue, Jul 02, 2002 at 10:36:15AM +0100, Manik Surtani wrote: > >>Hey all. >> >>Apologies if this is the wrong place to post this question. >> >>I'm developing an open source Java SSH (v2) client API, and need a bit >>of help. >> >>1) After receiving the KEXDH_RESPONSE packet, reading SSH Transport >>Layer Protocol (March 2002), Section 5.2, Output from Key Exchange: do >>I assume that, in HASH (K || H || "A" || session_id), H is a mpint? The >>spec states that K is a mpint but doesnt specify for H. > > > check draft-ietf-secsh-transport-XX, and search for > The hash H is computed as the HASH hash of the concatenation of the > following: ... > > H is a hash, it's the raw output of sha1, in the > "diffie-hellman-group1-sha1" key exchange. Yes, I have already computed H - and have it as a byte[]. But does it need to be encoded as a mpint, or a string, or just raw bytes for the HASH (K || H || "A" || session_id) operation? >>2) Also, how do I communicate my public key to the server? From the >>spec, I gather that the next packet to send is a SSH_MSG_NEWKEYS with no >>data following ... am I wrong? > > > check draft-ietf-secsh-transport-XX, and search for > > First, the client sends the following: > > byte SSH_MSG_KEXDH_INIT > mpint e I have already done SSH_MSG_KEXDH_INIT and have received SSH_MSG_KEXDH_REPLY. Is the next step just SSH_MSG_NEWKEYS, then? Also, 3) The keys generated using HASH(K || H || "A" || session_id) - which key do I use for the SSH-AUTH procedures? Is it Initial IV client to server? Thanks ... Manik > -m > > _____________________________________________________________________ > This message has been checked for all known viruses by the MessageLabs Virus Control Centre. -- Manik Surtani Conchango 'Innovative Change in Business' T 44 (0) 1784 221829 M 44 (0) 7786 702 706 E manik.surtani@conchango.com http://www.conchango.com The information contained in this message is confidential and is intended for the addressee only. If you have received this message in error, please notify us as soon as possible. The unauthorised use, disclosure, copying or alteration of this message is forbidden. _____________________________________________________________________ This message has been checked for all known viruses by the MessageLabs Virus Control Centre. From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Tue Jul 2 07:18:56 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id HAA03398 for ; Tue, 2 Jul 2002 07:18:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 1196 invoked by uid 605); 2 Jul 2002 11:19:40 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: (qmail 1189 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2002 11:19:39 -0000 Received: from faui02.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (131.188.30.102) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 2 Jul 2002 11:19:39 -0000 Received: (from msfriedl@localhost) by faui02.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (8.9.1/8.1.16-FAU) id NAA18440; Tue, 2 Jul 2002 13:19:37 +0200 (MEST) Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 13:19:37 +0200 From: Markus Friedl To: Manik Surtani Cc: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Subject: Re: Help with DH key exchange on SSHv2.0 Message-ID: <20020702111937.GC179@faui02> References: <3D21740F.5080901@conchango.com> <20020702094404.GA179@faui02> <3D218A61.1080302@conchango.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3D218A61.1080302@conchango.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list On Tue, Jul 02, 2002 at 12:11:29PM +0100, Manik Surtani wrote: > Yes, I have already computed H - and have it as a byte[]. But does it > need to be encoded as a mpint, or a string, or just raw bytes for the > HASH (K || H || "A" || session_id) operation? just raw bytes. > I have already done SSH_MSG_KEXDH_INIT and have received > SSH_MSG_KEXDH_REPLY. Is the next step just SSH_MSG_NEWKEYS, then? yes. > 3) The keys generated using HASH(K || H || "A" || session_id) - which > key do I use for the SSH-AUTH procedures? Is it Initial IV client to > server? for the public key authentication you need the hash H (aka the session id). From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Tue Jul 2 11:02:10 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id LAA16388 for ; Tue, 2 Jul 2002 11:02:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 21018 invoked by uid 605); 2 Jul 2002 15:02:53 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: (qmail 21011 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2002 15:02:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO tparelay.telradnetworks.co.il) (62.90.58.229) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 2 Jul 2002 15:02:52 -0000 Received: from tparelay.telradnetworks.co.il (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tparelay.telradnetworks.co.il (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA26288 for ; Tue, 2 Jul 2002 18:02:16 +0300 (IDT) Received: from tpa-mail1.telradnetworks.co.il ([141.226.76.57]) by tparelay.telradnetworks.co.il (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA26284 for ; Tue, 2 Jul 2002 18:02:14 +0300 (IDT) Received: by tpa-mail1.telradnetworks.co.il with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2654.89) id <3B4RXYRV>; Tue, 2 Jul 2002 18:02:05 +0200 Message-ID: From: Dan Davidson To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Subject: Timers and Timeouts in the SSH Transport Protocol Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 18:01:57 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2654.89) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-8" Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list Hi, I was wandering what should be the behavior of a SSH server in the following situation: - A TCP/IP connection on port 22 was setup. - The server sent the identification string "SSH-protoversion-softwareversion" but didn't receive such a message/string from the remote side. Should there be a re-transmission ? Should the connection be disconnected after a T timeout - What is the timer length ? Others ? More generally, is there any timers definition for the SSH Transport Protocol ? Best Regards, Dan From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Tue Jul 2 12:27:20 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id MAA28964 for ; Tue, 2 Jul 2002 12:27:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 13128 invoked by uid 605); 2 Jul 2002 16:28:03 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: (qmail 13017 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2002 16:28:02 -0000 Received: from ixion.tartarus.org (195.149.39.210) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 2 Jul 2002 16:28:02 -0000 Received: from simon by ixion.tartarus.org with local (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 17PPhK-0005IG-00; Tue, 02 Jul 2002 16:36:10 +0100 X-Mailer: Jed/Timber v0.2 From: Simon Tatham To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: Timers and Timeouts in the SSH Transport Protocol Message-Id: Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 16:36:10 +0100 Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list Dan Davidson wrote: > - A TCP/IP connection on port 22 was setup. > - The server sent the identification string > "SSH-protoversion-softwareversion" but didn't > receive such a message/string from the remote side. > > Should there be a re-transmission ? > Should the connection be disconnected after a T timeout > - What is the timer length ? There certainly shouldn't be a retransmission! That's what TCP is for - it will retransmit it _anyway_ until it either gets an ACK from the client's TCP layer, and if the client fails to see it after that then no more retransmissions are likely to help. The server probably should disconnect after a while, because if it doesn't then a DoS attack becomes possible. I wouldn't have thought it was necessary to specify that timeout precisely in the protocol definition, though; it's up to individual server maintainers. If you find you're getting a lot of hanging connections, reduce the timeout; if you find a lot of users are complaining that your server cuts them off before they can send anything, increase it. -- Simon Tatham "Selfless? I'm so selfless I don't even know who I am." From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Wed Jul 3 03:23:54 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id DAA00507 for ; Wed, 3 Jul 2002 03:23:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 5368 invoked by uid 605); 3 Jul 2002 07:24:39 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: (qmail 5361 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2002 07:24:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO tparelay.telradnetworks.co.il) (62.90.58.229) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 3 Jul 2002 07:24:38 -0000 Received: from tparelay.telradnetworks.co.il (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tparelay.telradnetworks.co.il (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA26242 for ; Wed, 3 Jul 2002 10:23:58 +0300 (IDT) Received: from tpa-mail1.telradnetworks.co.il ([141.226.76.57]) by tparelay.telradnetworks.co.il (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA26237 for ; Wed, 3 Jul 2002 10:23:57 +0300 (IDT) Received: by tpa-mail1.telradnetworks.co.il with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2654.89) id <3B4RX0RY>; Wed, 3 Jul 2002 10:23:48 +0200 Message-ID: From: Dan Davidson To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Subject: RE: Timers and Timeouts in the SSH Transport Protocol Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 10:23:42 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2654.89) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-8" Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list Thanks for your reply. Based on your experience, what do you think the default timeout should be. Moreover, I do agree with your remark about the retransmission and TCP/IP. However, please notice that in numerous telecommunications protocol messages are retransmitted although a reliable transport level is used. Example: H.323/H.225. The H.225 uses a TCP connection, however, several messages (e.g. SETUP) are retransmitted after a timer T expires, regardless of the TCP protocol. Cheers, Dan -----Original Message----- From: Simon Tatham [mailto:anakin@pobox.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2002 5:36 PM To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Subject: Re: Timers and Timeouts in the SSH Transport Protocol Dan Davidson wrote: > - A TCP/IP connection on port 22 was setup. > - The server sent the identification string > "SSH-protoversion-softwareversion" but didn't > receive such a message/string from the remote side. > > Should there be a re-transmission ? > Should the connection be disconnected after a T timeout > - What is the timer length ? There certainly shouldn't be a retransmission! That's what TCP is for - it will retransmit it _anyway_ until it either gets an ACK from the client's TCP layer, and if the client fails to see it after that then no more retransmissions are likely to help. The server probably should disconnect after a while, because if it doesn't then a DoS attack becomes possible. I wouldn't have thought it was necessary to specify that timeout precisely in the protocol definition, though; it's up to individual server maintainers. If you find you're getting a lot of hanging connections, reduce the timeout; if you find a lot of users are complaining that your server cuts them off before they can send anything, increase it. -- Simon Tatham "Selfless? I'm so selfless I don't even know who I am." From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Wed Jul 3 04:29:08 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id EAA01601 for ; Wed, 3 Jul 2002 04:29:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 7190 invoked by uid 605); 3 Jul 2002 08:29:51 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: (qmail 7183 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2002 08:29:50 -0000 Received: from mail.lysator.liu.se (130.236.254.3) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 3 Jul 2002 08:29:50 -0000 Received: from fafner.lysator.liu.se (fafner.lysator.liu.se [130.236.254.31]) by mail.lysator.liu.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BCC182F47B; Wed, 3 Jul 2002 10:29:49 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from nisse@localhost) by fafner.lysator.liu.se (8.9.3/8.8.7) id KAA01637; Wed, 3 Jul 2002 10:29:49 +0200 (MEST) X-Authentication-Warning: fafner.lysator.liu.se: nisse set sender to nisse@lysator.liu.se using -f To: Dan Davidson Cc: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Subject: Re: Timers and Timeouts in the SSH Transport Protocol References: Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit From: nisse@lysator.liu.se (Niels =?iso-8859-1?q?M=F6ller?=) Date: 03 Jul 2002 10:29:48 +0200 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Lines: 23 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Dan Davidson writes: > Based on your experience, what do you think the default > timeout should be. I don't think you need a specialized timeout for just the version string exchange. I think it is reasonable to apply a timeout to the entire initial handshake. E.g. set a timer at 5-15 minutes when you accept a connection, cancel the timer when userauthentication is completed, and disconnect if the timer fires. > Moreover, I do agree with your remark about the > retransmission and TCP/IP. However, please notice that in > numerous telecommunications protocol messages are retransmitted > although a reliable transport level is used. > Example: H.323/H.225. I've heard that is true also of the IETF SIP protocol, with a motivation like "messages might have been forwarded over an un-reliable mechanism like udp somewhere along the path.". Sounds real ugly. /Niels From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Wed Jul 3 05:10:35 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id FAA02114 for ; Wed, 3 Jul 2002 05:10:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 23443 invoked by uid 605); 3 Jul 2002 09:11:19 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: (qmail 23436 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2002 09:11:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO tparelay.telradnetworks.co.il) (62.90.58.229) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 3 Jul 2002 09:11:17 -0000 Received: from tparelay.telradnetworks.co.il (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tparelay.telradnetworks.co.il (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA08737 for ; Wed, 3 Jul 2002 12:10:39 +0300 (IDT) Received: from tpa-mail1.telradnetworks.co.il ([141.226.76.57]) by tparelay.telradnetworks.co.il (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA08728 for ; Wed, 3 Jul 2002 12:10:38 +0300 (IDT) Received: by tpa-mail1.telradnetworks.co.il with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2654.89) id <3B4RYB1D>; Wed, 3 Jul 2002 12:10:29 +0200 Message-ID: From: Dan Davidson To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Subject: RE: Timers and Timeouts in the SSH Transport Protocol Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 12:10:24 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2654.89) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list Also more complicated, I personally tend to prefer the multiple timer approach. I see this approach more user friendly as the user won't have to wait for long periods of time when the error occurred at the beginning of a connection setup. An intermediate approach may also be considered: dividing the connection setup into major stages, and timing these parts only (and not per message). Dan -----Original Message----- From: nisse@lysator.liu.se [mailto:nisse@lysator.liu.se] Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2002 10:30 AM To: Dan Davidson Cc: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Subject: Re: Timers and Timeouts in the SSH Transport Protocol Dan Davidson writes: > Based on your experience, what do you think the default > timeout should be. I don't think you need a specialized timeout for just the version string exchange. I think it is reasonable to apply a timeout to the entire initial handshake. E.g. set a timer at 5-15 minutes when you accept a connection, cancel the timer when userauthentication is completed, and disconnect if the timer fires. > Moreover, I do agree with your remark about the > retransmission and TCP/IP. However, please notice that in > numerous telecommunications protocol messages are retransmitted > although a reliable transport level is used. > Example: H.323/H.225. I've heard that is true also of the IETF SIP protocol, with a motivation like "messages might have been forwarded over an un-reliable mechanism like udp somewhere along the path.". Sounds real ugly. /Niels From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Wed Jul 3 13:53:01 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id NAA23958 for ; Wed, 3 Jul 2002 13:53:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 21219 invoked by uid 605); 3 Jul 2002 16:49:44 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: (qmail 21212 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2002 16:49:42 -0000 Received: from mail19.messagelabs.com (193.109.254.3) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 3 Jul 2002 16:49:42 -0000 X-VirusChecked: Checked Received: (qmail 8092 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2002 16:49:40 -0000 Received: from osint-gbmail.conchango.com (194.129.216.125) by server-10.tower-19.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 3 Jul 2002 16:49:40 -0000 Received: from conchango.com (msurtani-redhat.conchango.com [192.168.10.163]) by osint-gbmail.conchango.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id NFNAQL2F; Wed, 3 Jul 2002 17:47:06 +0100 Message-ID: <3D232A94.4000508@conchango.com> Date: Wed, 03 Jul 2002 17:47:16 +0100 From: Manik Surtani User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.1a) Gecko/20020610 X-Accept-Language: en-gb, en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: JSIG-Discuss@yahoogroups.com, ietf-ssh@netbsd.org, openssh-unix-dev@mindrot.org Subject: Java, JCE and OpenSSH Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello, all. Firstly, sorry for the cross-posting... Has anyone out there tried to use JCE (1.2.1, with JDK1.3.1) to create a Diffie Hellman key using the group1 prime modulus and base generator, and then pass on the public key to an OpenSSH (v3.1) server as a part of the diffie-hellman-group1-sha1 key exchange? For some reason, the ssh server rejects the key saying it is invalid ... I have successfully MANUALLY implemented this (by using the prime modulus p, the base generator g, and a large random number r, using the DH algorithm specified in the SSH 2.0 IETF paper), and the public key I generate here is accepted by the SSH server. Why is it then, that the JCE implementation of the DH keygen algorithm, produces keys that are not accepted? Has anyone else experienced this? Am I doing something stupid? Help is much appreciated! Thanks in advance, -- Manik Surtani Conchango 'Innovative Change in Business' T 44 (0) 1784 221829 M 44 (0) 7786 702 706 E manik.surtani@conchango.com http://www.conchango.com The information contained in this message is confidential and is intended for the addressee only. If you have received this message in error, please notify us as soon as possible. The unauthorised use, disclosure, copying or alteration of this message is forbidden. _____________________________________________________________________ This message has been checked for all known viruses by the MessageLabs Virus Control Centre. From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Wed Jul 3 14:12:14 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id OAA25221 for ; Wed, 3 Jul 2002 14:12:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 15345 invoked by uid 605); 3 Jul 2002 18:12:59 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: (qmail 15338 invoked from network); 3 Jul 2002 18:12:58 -0000 Received: from ce-nfs-1.cisco.com (171.68.227.69) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 3 Jul 2002 18:12:58 -0000 Received: from REMAKERW2K (dhcp-171-69-103-27.cisco.com [171.69.103.27]) by ce-nfs-1.cisco.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with SMTP id LAA25929; Wed, 3 Jul 2002 11:12:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <04fe01c222bd$3f33fc10$1b6745ab@amer.cisco.com> From: "Phillip Remaker" To: "Dan Davidson" , References: Subject: Re: Timers and Timeouts in the SSH Transport Protocol Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 11:12:51 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > However, please notice that in > numerous telecommunications protocol messages are retransmitted > although a reliable transport level is used. > Example: H.323/H.225. This is really an unfair comparison, and probably a glaring exception. The issue with H.323/H.225 is that the protocol is frequently gatewayed to an alternate network, and the end-to-end retransmission is required because of errors possible after the end of the TCP tunnel/stack. H.225/H.323 tries to emulate telephony network protocols in a TCP universe, and since it may not be TCP end-to-end, the retransmissions are required. For communcations that are directly stack-to-stack, TCP should be relied upon for retransmission. The retransmitting behavior of H.323 is an artifact of the legacy of the protocol. No natively TCP based communication should retransmit at the application layer. It seems a bug that the identification string was not received. The SSHD should be able to rely on the TCP stack for reliable delivery. I can't think of any other examples of protocols that retransmit over TCP. From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Wed Jul 3 21:07:55 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id VAA17409 for ; Wed, 3 Jul 2002 21:07:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 20028 invoked by uid 605); 4 Jul 2002 01:06:54 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: (qmail 19748 invoked from network); 4 Jul 2002 01:06:44 -0000 Received: from patan.sun.com (192.18.98.43) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 4 Jul 2002 01:06:44 -0000 Received: from eastmail2.East.Sun.COM ([129.148.1.241]) by patan.sun.com (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA09194 for ; Wed, 3 Jul 2002 19:06:43 -0600 (MDT) Received: from thunk.east.sun.com (thunk.East.Sun.COM [129.148.174.66]) by eastmail2.East.Sun.COM (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3/ENSMAIL,v2.1p1) with ESMTP id VAA07528 for ; Wed, 3 Jul 2002 21:06:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from thunk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by thunk.east.sun.com (8.12.3+Sun/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g6416gZs000080 for ; Wed, 3 Jul 2002 21:06:42 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200207040106.g6416gZs000080@thunk.east.sun.com> From: Bill Sommerfeld To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Subject: Secure Shell WG: send me agenda items. Reply-to: sommerfeld@sun.com Date: Wed, 03 Jul 2002 21:06:42 -0400 Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list I'd like to apologize in advance for being somewhat scarce lately due to my day job. I'll give a status update to the WG soon. As anyone who's looked at the IETF meeting's agent recently might have seen, we will be meeting in Yokohama. Please send proposed agenda items for the meeting to me. - Bill From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Thu Jul 4 09:56:45 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id JAA17421 for ; Thu, 4 Jul 2002 09:56:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 12897 invoked by uid 605); 4 Jul 2002 13:57:31 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: (qmail 12890 invoked from network); 4 Jul 2002 13:57:30 -0000 Received: from mail19.messagelabs.com (193.109.254.3) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 4 Jul 2002 13:57:30 -0000 X-VirusChecked: Checked Received: (qmail 31039 invoked from network); 4 Jul 2002 13:57:28 -0000 Received: from osint-gbmail.conchango.com (194.129.216.125) by server-7.tower-19.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 4 Jul 2002 13:57:28 -0000 Received: from conchango.com (msurtani-redhat.conchango.com [192.168.10.163]) by osint-gbmail.conchango.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id NFNAQNK3; Thu, 4 Jul 2002 14:54:52 +0100 Message-ID: <3D2453B8.1080708@conchango.com> Date: Thu, 04 Jul 2002 14:55:04 +0100 From: Manik Surtani User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.1a) Gecko/20020610 X-Accept-Language: en-gb, en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: openssh-unix-dev@mindrot.org, ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Subject: DH keys exchanged - encoding? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, Could anyone pls help by telling me how the DH pubkey from the server (f) is encoded when it is sent back to me? I understand that it comes across as an mpint, but after I decode the mpint into the bytes that make up the number, what does this number represent? Is it a X509 encoded key? Or is it something else? The reason for my question: I am trying to write a ssh client in Java, using JCE for the crypto. When I get the server key, and use the raw bytes to create an X509EncodedKeySpec, I get errors relating to invalid data ... Help appreciated. Cheers, -- Manik Surtani Conchango 'Innovative Change in Business' T 44 (0) 1784 221829 M 44 (0) 7786 702 706 E manik.surtani@conchango.com http://www.conchango.com The information contained in this message is confidential and is intended for the addressee only. If you have received this message in error, please notify us as soon as possible. The unauthorised use, disclosure, copying or alteration of this message is forbidden. _____________________________________________________________________ This message has been checked for all known viruses by the MessageLabs Virus Control Centre. From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Thu Jul 4 10:04:08 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id KAA17571 for ; Thu, 4 Jul 2002 10:04:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 17743 invoked by uid 605); 4 Jul 2002 14:04:54 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: (qmail 17732 invoked from network); 4 Jul 2002 14:04:52 -0000 Received: from faui02.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (131.188.30.102) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 4 Jul 2002 14:04:52 -0000 Received: (from msfriedl@localhost) by faui02.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (8.9.1/8.1.16-FAU) id QAA11674; Thu, 4 Jul 2002 16:04:42 +0200 (MEST) Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2002 16:04:42 +0200 From: Markus Friedl To: Manik Surtani Cc: openssh-unix-dev@mindrot.org, ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Subject: Re: DH keys exchanged - encoding? Message-ID: <20020704140442.GB7703@faui02> References: <3D2453B8.1080708@conchango.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3D2453B8.1080708@conchango.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list On Thu, Jul 04, 2002 at 02:55:04PM +0100, Manik Surtani wrote: > Hi, > > Could anyone pls help by telling me how the DH pubkey from the server > (f) is encoded when it is sent back to me? I understand that it comes > across as an mpint, but after I decode the mpint into the bytes that > make up the number, what does this number represent? Is it a X509 > encoded key? Or is it something else? how is this related to x.509? it's just a multiple precision integers in two's complement format check draft-ietf-secsh-architecture-XX again: mpint Represents multiple precision integers in two's complement format, stored as a string, 8 bits per byte, MSB first. Negative numbers have the value 1 as the most significant bit of the first byte of the data partition. If the most significant bit would be set for a positive number, the number MUST be preceded by a zero byte. Unnecessary leading bytes with the value 0 or 255 MUST NOT be included. The value zero MUST be stored as a string with zero bytes of data. By convention, a number that is used in modular computations in Z_n SHOULD be represented in the range 0 <= x < n. Examples: value (hex) representation (hex) --------------------------------------------------------------- 0 00 00 00 00 9a378f9b2e332a7 00 00 00 08 09 a3 78 f9 b2 e3 32 a7 80 00 00 00 02 00 80 -1234 00 00 00 02 ed cc -deadbeef 00 00 00 05 ff 21 52 41 11 From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Thu Jul 4 10:09:56 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id KAA17716 for ; Thu, 4 Jul 2002 10:09:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 23028 invoked by uid 605); 4 Jul 2002 14:10:36 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: (qmail 22860 invoked from network); 4 Jul 2002 14:10:33 -0000 Received: from mail19.messagelabs.com (193.109.254.3) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 4 Jul 2002 14:10:33 -0000 X-VirusChecked: Checked Received: (qmail 16890 invoked from network); 4 Jul 2002 14:10:30 -0000 Received: from osint-gbmail.conchango.com (194.129.216.125) by server-16.tower-19.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 4 Jul 2002 14:10:30 -0000 Received: from conchango.com (msurtani-redhat.conchango.com [192.168.10.163]) by osint-gbmail.conchango.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id NFNAQNMB; Thu, 4 Jul 2002 15:07:54 +0100 Message-ID: <3D2456C5.5060401@conchango.com> Date: Thu, 04 Jul 2002 15:08:05 +0100 From: Manik Surtani User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.1a) Gecko/20020610 X-Accept-Language: en-gb, en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Markus Friedl CC: openssh-unix-dev@mindrot.org, ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Subject: Re: DH keys exchanged - encoding? References: <3D2453B8.1080708@conchango.com> <20020704140442.GB7703@faui02> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Its just that when I try and construct a PublicKey object using the JCE libraries, it expects the bytes in a X509 encoding. When I do this manually (i.e., using the DH algos directly and NOT using JCE), everything works well. But I'd prefer to use JCE and all the crypto libraries provided, rather than to rewrite it all. Perhaps what is needed then is for me to write an X509 encoder/decoder so that I could use JCE with this? Markus Friedl wrote: > On Thu, Jul 04, 2002 at 02:55:04PM +0100, Manik Surtani wrote: > >>Hi, >> >>Could anyone pls help by telling me how the DH pubkey from the server >>(f) is encoded when it is sent back to me? I understand that it comes >>across as an mpint, but after I decode the mpint into the bytes that >>make up the number, what does this number represent? Is it a X509 >>encoded key? Or is it something else? > > > > how is this related to x.509? it's just a > > multiple precision integers in two's complement format > > check draft-ietf-secsh-architecture-XX again: > > mpint > > Represents multiple precision integers in two's complement format, > stored as a string, 8 bits per byte, MSB first. Negative numbers > have the value 1 as the most significant bit of the first byte of > the data partition. If the most significant bit would be set for > a positive number, the number MUST be preceded by a zero byte. > Unnecessary leading bytes with the value 0 or 255 MUST NOT be > included. The value zero MUST be stored as a string with zero > bytes of data. > > By convention, a number that is used in modular computations in > Z_n SHOULD be represented in the range 0 <= x < n. > > Examples: > value (hex) representation (hex) > --------------------------------------------------------------- > 0 00 00 00 00 > 9a378f9b2e332a7 00 00 00 08 09 a3 78 f9 b2 e3 32 a7 > 80 00 00 00 02 00 80 > -1234 00 00 00 02 ed cc > -deadbeef 00 00 00 05 ff 21 52 41 11 > > _____________________________________________________________________ > This message has been checked for all known viruses by the MessageLabs Virus Control Centre. -- Manik Surtani Conchango 'Innovative Change in Business' T 44 (0) 1784 221829 M 44 (0) 7786 702 706 E manik.surtani@conchango.com http://www.conchango.com The information contained in this message is confidential and is intended for the addressee only. If you have received this message in error, please notify us as soon as possible. The unauthorised use, disclosure, copying or alteration of this message is forbidden. _____________________________________________________________________ This message has been checked for all known viruses by the MessageLabs Virus Control Centre. From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Sun Jul 7 05:45:16 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id FAA18320 for ; Sun, 7 Jul 2002 05:45:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 10184 invoked by uid 605); 7 Jul 2002 09:46:04 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: (qmail 10176 invoked from network); 7 Jul 2002 09:46:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO tparelay.telradnetworks.co.il) (62.90.58.229) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 7 Jul 2002 09:46:02 -0000 Received: from tparelay.telradnetworks.co.il (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tparelay.telradnetworks.co.il (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA08243 for ; Sun, 7 Jul 2002 12:45:21 +0300 (IDT) Received: from tpa-mail1.telradnetworks.co.il ([141.226.76.57]) by tparelay.telradnetworks.co.il (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA08239 for ; Sun, 7 Jul 2002 12:45:20 +0300 (IDT) Received: by tpa-mail1.telradnetworks.co.il with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2654.89) id <3B4RZC20>; Sun, 7 Jul 2002 12:45:15 +0200 Message-ID: From: Dan Davidson To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Subject: Clarification : Implicit server authentication Date: Sun, 7 Jul 2002 12:45:11 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2654.89) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list Hi, Apologies for the following, maybe trivial, question, however I would appreciate some help in understanding the following point in the SSH Transport Protocol. The draft mentions: "Server authentication in the key exchange MAY be implicit" What is do the authors mean by "implicit server authentication" ? How does this reflect on the behavior of the server and the client ? Thanks for the help and best regards, Dan From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Mon Jul 8 13:23:42 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id NAA26404 for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 13:23:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 9505 invoked by uid 605); 8 Jul 2002 17:24:28 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: (qmail 9458 invoked from network); 8 Jul 2002 17:24:26 -0000 Received: from nwkea-mail-2.sun.com (192.18.42.14) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 8 Jul 2002 17:24:26 -0000 Received: from eastmail1.East.Sun.COM ([129.148.1.240]) by nwkea-mail-2.sun.com (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA02419; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 10:24:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from thunk.east.sun.com (thunk.East.Sun.COM [129.148.174.66]) by eastmail1.East.Sun.COM (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3/ENSMAIL,v2.1p1) with ESMTP id NAA20386; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 13:24:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from thunk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by thunk.east.sun.com (8.12.3+Sun/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g68HO9Zs012080; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 13:24:09 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200207081724.g68HO9Zs012080@thunk.east.sun.com> From: Bill Sommerfeld To: Dan Davidson cc: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Subject: Re: Clarification : Implicit server authentication In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 07 Jul 2002 12:45:11 +0200." Reply-to: sommerfeld@east.sun.com Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2002 13:24:09 -0400 Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list > What is do the authors mean by "implicit server authentication" ? > How does this reflect on the behavior of the server and the client ? I believe this is a hedge to allow for protocols like Kerberos or meta-protocols like GSSAPI to be involved in the key exchange stage. - Bill From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Tue Jul 9 00:19:29 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id AAA01937 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2002 00:19:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 27213 invoked by uid 605); 9 Jul 2002 04:20:18 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: (qmail 27206 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2002 04:20:17 -0000 Received: from nwkea-mail-1.sun.com (192.18.42.13) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 9 Jul 2002 04:20:17 -0000 Received: from eastmail2.East.Sun.COM ([129.148.1.241]) by nwkea-mail-1.sun.com (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA13289 for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 21:20:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from thunk.east.sun.com (thunk.East.Sun.COM [129.148.174.66]) by eastmail2.East.Sun.COM (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3/ENSMAIL,v2.1p1) with ESMTP id AAA21067 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2002 00:20:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from thunk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by thunk.east.sun.com (8.12.3+Sun/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g694KFZs019223 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2002 00:20:15 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200207090420.g694KFZs019223@thunk.east.sun.com> From: Bill Sommerfeld To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Subject: Current WG status. Reply-to: sommerfeld@east.sun.com Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2002 00:20:15 -0400 Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list So, your working group chair wound up being way too busy with his day job and let things slide a bit much. During IETF-wide last call for the core documents, there was a comment from the IANA that they needed more guidance on the initial state of the SSH-related registries that they will need to maintain (the info is spread thinly throughout the core drafts and it would be error-prone for someone not familiar with the protocols to extract it). To this end, the new draft: draft-ietf-secsh-assignednumbers-00.txt was written and published. Please review it for accuracy. I have received one private comment so far, which I'll forward in a separate message. Other items: - we need to get cracking on fixing the CBC problem. See in particular, this message from Tadayoshi Kohno sent a couple weeks ago: From: "Tadayoshi Kohno" Reply-To: tkohno@cs.ucsd.edu cc: tkohno@cs.ucsd.edu To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Subject: Paper on SSH Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 18:56:56 -0700 As Wei Dai recently pointed out, the current SSH protocol is insecure (because of problems with way CBC mode is used). In the paper http://eprint.iacr.org/2002/078/ Mihir Bellare, Chanathip Namprempre, and I show how to provably fix the SSH protocol. We have placed a summary of our recommendations at http://www-cse.ucsd.edu/users/tkohno/papers/SSH/sshadvice.html We hope that our provable security results will be of use to the IETF SSH Working Group. There are two recommendations -- in addition to modifying the encryption mode, they recommend forcing a rekey before reaching 2**32 packets. I think it's time for a strawman draft with a proposal so we can start arguing about specifics. Anyone want to volunteer? - I'll start shipping extension drafts to the IESG once the assignednumbers draft goes through. - Bill From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Tue Jul 9 00:32:34 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id AAA02187 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2002 00:32:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 2210 invoked by uid 605); 9 Jul 2002 04:33:23 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: (qmail 2203 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2002 04:33:22 -0000 Received: from patan.sun.com (192.18.98.43) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 9 Jul 2002 04:33:22 -0000 Received: from eastmail2.East.Sun.COM ([129.148.1.241]) by patan.sun.com (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA20311 for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 22:33:22 -0600 (MDT) Received: from thunk.east.sun.com (thunk.East.Sun.COM [129.148.174.66]) by eastmail2.East.Sun.COM (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3/ENSMAIL,v2.1p1) with ESMTP id AAA22634 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2002 00:33:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from thunk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by thunk.east.sun.com (8.12.3+Sun/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g694XLZs019340 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2002 00:33:21 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200207090433.g694XLZs019340@thunk.east.sun.com> From: Bill Sommerfeld To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Subject: proposal: adding des-cbc to secsh-assignednumbers as HISTORIC Reply-to: sommerfeld@east.sun.com Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2002 00:33:21 -0400 Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list Since it was published, I've received one private comment. repeat here. As has been discussed in the past, it was suggested that the historic use of des-cbc by some implementations of the sshv2 protocol should be documented. Based on this comment and some other previous discussion, I'm going to propose that we add: des-cbc [FIPS-46-3]. HISTORIC; see also page 4 of FIPS 46-3 to the encryption algorithms list, and [FIPS-46-3] U.S. Dept. of Commerce, "Data Encryption Standard (DES)". FIPS PUB 46-3, October 1999 to the references section. (If someone has a better cite, let us know). --- Note in particular that section 12 on page 4 of 46-3 says: With this modification of the FIPS 46-2 standard: 1. Triple DES (i.e., TDEA), as specified in ANSI X9.52 will be recognized as a FIPS approved algorithm. 2. Triple DES will be the FIPS approved symmetric encryption algorithm of choice. 3. Single DES (i.e., DES) will be permitted for legacy systems only. New procurements to support legacy systems should, where feasible, use Triple DES products running in the single DES configuration. (As I understand it, FIPS ("Federal Information Processing Standard") specs have a role in determining what sorts of information processing systems certain parts of the U.S. federal goverment may purchase, hence the reference to "procurements" above). The official definition of HISTORIC in RFC2026 is: 4.2.4 Historic A specification that has been superseded by a more recent specification or is for any other reason considered to be obsolete is assigned to the "Historic" level. - Bill From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Tue Jul 9 14:30:41 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id OAA06524 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2002 14:30:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 29793 invoked by uid 605); 9 Jul 2002 18:31:19 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: (qmail 29786 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2002 18:31:19 -0000 Received: from nwkea-mail-1.sun.com (192.18.42.13) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 9 Jul 2002 18:31:19 -0000 Received: from jurassic.eng.sun.com ([129.146.17.55]) by nwkea-mail-1.sun.com (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA05158 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2002 11:31:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from quirm (vpn-129-149-241-190.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.149.241.190]) by jurassic.eng.sun.com (8.12.4+Sun/8.12.4) with SMTP id g69IVGMM948778; Tue, 9 Jul 2002 11:31:18 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200207091831.g69IVGMM948778@jurassic.eng.sun.com> Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2002 11:29:56 -0700 (PDT) From: Darren Moffat Reply-To: Darren Moffat Subject: Re: proposal: adding des-cbc to secsh-assignednumbers as HISTORIC To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org, sommerfeld@east.sun.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-MD5: 8/7mhkT0ExKgwOq9RApFmQ== X-Mailer: dtmail 1.3.0 @(#)CDE Version 1.5 SunOS 5.9 sun4u sparc Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list >As has been discussed in the past, it was suggested that the historic >use of des-cbc by some implementations of the sshv2 protocol should be >documented. > >Based on this comment and some other previous discussion, I'm going to >propose that we add: > > des-cbc [FIPS-46-3]. HISTORIC; see also page 4 > of FIPS 46-3 I support this. -- Darren J Moffat From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Tue Jul 9 14:53:49 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id OAA07356 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2002 14:53:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 9332 invoked by uid 605); 9 Jul 2002 18:54:37 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: (qmail 9324 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2002 18:54:36 -0000 Received: from patan.sun.com (192.18.98.43) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 9 Jul 2002 18:54:36 -0000 Received: from eastmail1.East.Sun.COM ([129.148.1.240]) by patan.sun.com (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA17887; Tue, 9 Jul 2002 12:54:35 -0600 (MDT) Received: from thunk.east.sun.com (thunk.East.Sun.COM [129.148.174.66]) by eastmail1.East.Sun.COM (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3/ENSMAIL,v2.1p1) with ESMTP id OAA05974; Tue, 9 Jul 2002 14:54:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from thunk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by thunk.east.sun.com (8.12.3+Sun/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g69IsYZs027031; Tue, 9 Jul 2002 14:54:34 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200207091854.g69IsYZs027031@thunk.east.sun.com> From: Bill Sommerfeld To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org cc: Bill Fenner Subject: Bill Fenner: Re: Last Call: SSH Protocol Architecture to Proposed Standard Reply-to: sommerfeld@east.sun.com Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2002 14:54:34 -0400 Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list More feedback from on high. my response will follow shortly. ------- Forwarded Message From: Bill Fenner Received: (from fenner@localhost) by windsor.research.att.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.5) id CAA09963; Tue, 9 Jul 2002 02:40:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200207090940.CAA09963@windsor.research.att.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII To: sommerfeld@east.sun.com Subject: Re: Last Call: SSH Protocol Architecture to Proposed Standard Cc: iana@iana.org, iesg@ietf.org, Darren.Moffat@sun.com Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2002 02:40:44 -0700 Versions: dmail (solaris) 2.4c/makemail 2.9d Content-Length: 2227 Bill, Section 1 says: 60 to 79 User authentication method specific (numbers can be reused for different authentication methods) I think that means that each authentication method needs its own sub-registry for this range. For example, what user authentication method is SSH_MSG_USERAUTH_PK_OK 60 [SSH-USERAUTH] specific to? Similarly with 30-49. Here's my suggestion, if I'm understanding these ranges properly: Message ID Value Reference ----------- ----- --------- SSH_MSG_NEWKEYS 21 [SSH-TRANS] - see key exchange method table 30-49 SSH_MSG_USERAUTH_REQUEST 50 [SSH-USERAUTH] SSH_MSG_USERAUTH_FAILURE 51 [SSH-USERAUTH] SSH_MSG_USERAUTH_SUCCESS 52 [SSH-USERAUTH] SSH_MSG_USERAUTH_BANNER 53 [SSH-USERAUTH] - see auth type method table 60-79 SSH_MSG_GLOBAL_REQUEST 80 [SSH-CONNECT] 1.1 Message Numbers for "diffie-hellman-group1-sha1" Key Exchange Message ID Value Reference ----------- ----- --------- SSH_MSG_KEXDH_INIT 30 [SSH-TRANS] SSH_MSG_KEXDH_REPLY 31 [SSH-TRANS] 1.2 Message Numbers for "publickey" Authentication Type Message ID Value Reference ----------- ----- --------- SSH_MSG_USERAUTH_PK_OK 60 [SSH-USERAUTH] That way, in the future a new sub-registry can be created: Message Numbers for "frobnitz" Authentication Type Message ID Value Reference ----------- ----- --------- SSH_MSG_USERAUTH_FROBNITZ_OK 60 [SSH-FROBNITZ] when a new authentication type comes along that reuses numbers in these ranges. Although it's a little confusing to have the sub-ranges split out when there are not multiple assignments yet, I think it's better to handle this now than to try to figure out what to do when it happens. Bill ------- End of Forwarded Message From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Tue Jul 9 14:53:57 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id OAA07369 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2002 14:53:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 9574 invoked by uid 605); 9 Jul 2002 18:54:43 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: (qmail 9558 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2002 18:54:42 -0000 Received: from nwkea-mail-1.sun.com (192.18.42.13) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 9 Jul 2002 18:54:42 -0000 Received: from eastmail1.East.Sun.COM ([129.148.1.240]) by nwkea-mail-1.sun.com (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA17504; Tue, 9 Jul 2002 11:54:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from thunk.east.sun.com (thunk.East.Sun.COM [129.148.174.66]) by eastmail1.East.Sun.COM (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3/ENSMAIL,v2.1p1) with ESMTP id OAA06004; Tue, 9 Jul 2002 14:54:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from thunk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by thunk.east.sun.com (8.12.3+Sun/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g69IscZs027038; Tue, 9 Jul 2002 14:54:38 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200207091854.g69IscZs027038@thunk.east.sun.com> From: Bill Sommerfeld To: Bill Fenner cc: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org, Darren.Moffat@sun.com Subject: Re: Last Call: SSH Protocol Architecture to Proposed Standard In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 09 Jul 2002 02:40:44 PDT." <200207090940.CAA09963@windsor.research.att.com> Reply-to: sommerfeld@east.sun.com Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2002 14:54:38 -0400 Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list So, as I understand it, the 30-49 and 60-79 subranges are specifically for use by whatever key exchange or auth method gets negotiated. A protocol change which would add a new message number would almost certainly require a new key exchange or authentication exchange identifier string -- we might just want to codify that, and have the the registry describe the ranges as as "For use by the negotiated {key exchange, auth} method" and leave it as that. This would result in less work for IANA, of course.. - Bill From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Tue Jul 9 15:34:40 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id PAA14355 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2002 15:34:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 27079 invoked by uid 605); 9 Jul 2002 19:35:27 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: (qmail 27069 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2002 19:35:26 -0000 Received: from gnat.inet.org (63.108.254.91) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 9 Jul 2002 19:35:26 -0000 Received: from mosquito.inet.org (unknown [10.30.20.242]) by gnat.inet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 936DA67108; Tue, 9 Jul 2002 16:13:43 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2002 15:34:46 -0400 Subject: Re: Last Call: SSH Protocol Architecture to Proposed Standard Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v482) Cc: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org To: sommerfeld@east.sun.com From: RJ Atkinson In-Reply-To: <200207091854.g69IscZs027038@thunk.east.sun.com> Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.482) Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Tuesday, July 9, 2002, at 02:54 PM, Bill Sommerfeld wrote: > This would result in less work for IANA, of course.. > > - Bill It seems generally prudent and polite to make it easy for IANA to do the correct thing. Ran rja@extremenetworks.com From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Wed Jul 10 09:44:52 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id JAA02342 for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2002 09:44:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 27486 invoked by uid 605); 10 Jul 2002 13:45:41 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: (qmail 27478 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2002 13:45:39 -0000 Received: from faui02.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (131.188.30.102) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 10 Jul 2002 13:45:39 -0000 Received: from folly.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (root@faui02.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [131.188.30.102]) by faui02.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (8.9.1/8.1.16-FAU) with ESMTP id PAA26055; Wed, 10 Jul 2002 15:45:33 +0200 (MEST) Received: by folly.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix, from userid 31451) id 6B93C44BE; Wed, 10 Jul 2002 15:45:04 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2002 15:45:04 +0200 From: Markus Friedl To: Bill Sommerfeld Cc: Bill Fenner , ietf-ssh@netbsd.org, Darren.Moffat@sun.com Subject: Re: Last Call: SSH Protocol Architecture to Proposed Standard Message-ID: <20020710134504.GB492@folly> References: <200207090940.CAA09963@windsor.research.att.com> <200207091854.g69IscZs027038@thunk.east.sun.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200207091854.g69IscZs027038@thunk.east.sun.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 02:54:38PM -0400, Bill Sommerfeld wrote: > So, as I understand it, the 30-49 and 60-79 subranges are specifically > for use by whatever key exchange or auth method gets negotiated. yes. the meaning depends on the negotiated method. for example, both diffie-hellman-group1-sha1 and diffie-hellman-group-exchange-sha1 use message id 30 and 31. > A > protocol change which would add a new message number would almost > certainly require a new key exchange or authentication exchange > identifier string -- we might just want to codify that, and have the > the registry describe the ranges as as "For use by the negotiated {key > exchange, auth} method" and leave it as that. yes, that makes sense. From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Thu Jul 11 04:38:40 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id EAA13298 for ; Thu, 11 Jul 2002 04:38:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 15088 invoked by uid 605); 11 Jul 2002 08:39:28 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: (qmail 15080 invoked from network); 11 Jul 2002 08:39:27 -0000 Received: from brmx1.fl.icn.siemens.com (12.147.96.32) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 11 Jul 2002 08:39:27 -0000 Received: from boca210a.boca.ssc.siemens.com (boca210a.boca.ssc.siemens.com [165.218.12.110]) by brmx1.fl.icn.siemens.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id EAA20546 for ; Thu, 11 Jul 2002 04:39:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: by boca210a.boca.ssc.siemens.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <311PR5Q3>; Thu, 11 Jul 2002 04:39:26 -0400 Message-ID: From: "Vaidya, Maulik" To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Subject: Newbie question Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 04:39:24 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list Hello list, I am not sure if this is the right place to ask the question, but i am gonna test my luck anyways... I recently installed ssh v2 on my solaris 2.6 sparc station. Due to the vulnerabilities posed by telnet/ftp/rsh etc, i disabled all of the above mentioned protocols and only kept ssh active! But in doing so, caused a problem for me. I have a network application which uses telnet to communicate with my server, and upon closing the telnet port, the application refuses to start anymore!! There is no way in the application that i can change the settings to switch to some other protocol for connection! So i was thinking that is it possible to route the traffic on port 23(telnet) on my sparc station to port 22(ssh) of the same sparc machine, in such a way that the user can |telnet| into the machine, but in actuality the traffic is encrypted because it is re-routed to the ssh port?? Your help is truly appreciated Regards Maulik Vaidya From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Fri Jul 12 07:44:05 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id HAA17856 for ; Fri, 12 Jul 2002 07:44:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 10373 invoked by uid 605); 12 Jul 2002 11:44:55 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: (qmail 10366 invoked from network); 12 Jul 2002 11:44:54 -0000 Received: from domino.comser.ro (HELO MAIL.COMSER.RO) (194.176.174.2) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 12 Jul 2002 11:44:54 -0000 Received: from keysys.ro ([194.176.174.38]) by MAIL.COMSER.RO with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.4905); Fri, 12 Jul 2002 14:43:19 +0300 From: "ADRIAN POPOVICIU" To: Subject: H E L L O ! Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2002 14:45:33 +0300 Reply-To: "ADRIAN POPOVICIU" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Jul 2002 11:43:19.0669 (UTC) FILETIME=[51AAFA50:01C22999] Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Dipl. eng. POPOVICIU ADRIAN R O M A N I A July 12, 2002 Dear Sir, I learn recently about you from Internet network. My name is POPOVICIU ADRIAN. I graduated engineering at the electronic and electrotechnic faculty, speciality radioelectronics, in Europe (Bucharest). I have more 10 years work experience like tehnical support for instrumentation, computers, office devices and general electronic & electrical equipments. I looking to get a new job. You will find my CV (with photo and other abilities)at the address: http://a.popoviciu.tripod.com/index.html If you have a job opportunity please send an email at my address: apopovici@keysys.ro I can submit (if it is necessary) very good recommendations. With best greetings Yours sincerely Adrian Popoviciu From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Wed Jul 17 01:44:39 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id BAA12897 for ; Wed, 17 Jul 2002 01:44:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 15715 invoked by uid 605); 17 Jul 2002 05:45:31 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: (qmail 15708 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2002 05:45:30 -0000 Received: from patan.sun.com (192.18.98.43) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 17 Jul 2002 05:45:30 -0000 Received: from eastmail2.East.Sun.COM ([129.148.1.241]) by patan.sun.com (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA09321 for ; Tue, 16 Jul 2002 23:45:30 -0600 (MDT) Received: from thunk.east.sun.com (thunk.East.Sun.COM [129.148.174.66]) by eastmail2.East.Sun.COM (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3/ENSMAIL,v2.1p1) with ESMTP id BAA01578 for ; Wed, 17 Jul 2002 01:45:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from thunk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by thunk.east.sun.com (8.12.3+Sun/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g6H5jTZs007689 for ; Wed, 17 Jul 2002 01:45:29 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200207170545.g6H5jTZs007689@thunk.east.sun.com> From: Bill Sommerfeld To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Subject: minutes/wg status Reply-to: sommerfeld@east.sun.com Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 01:45:28 -0400 Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list The Secure Shell (secsh) WG met on Monday, July 15th at the 54th IETF meeting in Yokohama, Japan. There was very little business; the bulk of the time was spent on status updates; we wrapped up in about 20 minutes. The core drafts went through IETF-wide last call. One issue was raised by IANA (regarding initial state of SSH registries); this will be dealt with by adding a fifth "assigned numbers" draft, which will be revised and then last-called shortly. The core documents are now under discussion in the IESG (along with, at last report, 50-odd other documents from other working groups -- they're busy folks). Three more documents went through WG last call and are ready to go to IETF-wide last call: - Keyboard-interactive - DH Group exchange - Public key file format Unfortunately, the PK file format draft has expired and will need to be re-cycled. The SSH fingerprint format draft appears to be uncontroversial and thus ready for WG last call The following documents are "real close"; expect a WG last call once the next rev comes out: SSH Protocol Assigned Numbers (intended to resolve IANA issues) GSSAPI (author just missed the publication deadline for this IETF) Two more still require work: Agent forwarding (insufficient detail to implement) File Transfer (expired, needs to be resurrected) ---- Current discussion of the assigned-numbers document turned up two issues: - Per-sub-protocol ranges (key exchange and user auth) are mechanism-specific, so there is no need for IANA to manage subranges - des-cbc should be added as a (deprecated) encryption algorithm since a few folks have implemented it, to document the use of the string. ---- Crypto revisions: There was a message from Tadayoshi Kohno, regarding an analysis he and others did of the SSH protocol. In addition to the cbc cipher chaining issues, there is a counter that can overflow and leaves you vulnerable to a replay attack after 2^32 messages. Kohno has offered to write an I-D describing how to fix the problem. He also proposed four different CBC Attack fixes: - Stateful counter mode (no more cost, no padding needed) - Explicit IV (more bandwidth (+2 blocks per packet), more crypto) - Counter-mode IV (more crypto) - IV is encryption of last block (more crypto) Kohno will likely pick one of these four options as the recommended new mode.. ---- The meeting concluded with a reminder to the WG of a few extenstions for which interest has appeared on the list but no draft has surfaced. We are getting very close to "done" with the current set of drafts, and thus going inactive until we're ready for draft standard status.. Here's the list: - X.509/PKIX support (Steve Hanna seems to have volunteered) (RL "Bob" Morgan (U Washington) pointed out that there's a reference to a x509v3-sign-{rsa,dsa} key/cert formats in the transport draft without any definition of what exactly it is). - Round-trip count reduction - Depreciate implementation-name-based-workarounds. - Port forwarding of arbitrary port - UDP forwarding - Line mode - Console server options - Performance analysis I fully expect that we won't do all, or even most, of these, but there have been strong advocates for many of these.. Thanks to Ken Hornstein for his continued service as notes-taker. From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Wed Jul 17 03:56:37 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id DAA09095 for ; Wed, 17 Jul 2002 03:56:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 16806 invoked by uid 605); 17 Jul 2002 07:57:24 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: (qmail 16799 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2002 07:57:23 -0000 Received: from pianosa.catch22.org (64.81.48.19) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 17 Jul 2002 07:57:23 -0000 Received: by pianosa.catch22.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 84A1E38F; Wed, 17 Jul 2002 00:57:22 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 00:57:22 -0700 From: David Terrell To: Bill Sommerfeld Cc: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Subject: Re: minutes/wg status Message-ID: <20020717075722.GA24988@pianosa.catch22.org> Reply-To: David Terrell References: <200207170545.g6H5jTZs007689@thunk.east.sun.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200207170545.g6H5jTZs007689@thunk.east.sun.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-vi: Version 1.79 (10/23/96) The CSRG, University of California, Berkeley. X-Nethack: You feel like someone is making a pointless Nethack reference.--More-- X-Uptime: 12:54AM up 9 days, 47 mins, 40 users, load averages: 0.22, 0.25, 0.25 Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list On Wed, Jul 17, 2002 at 01:45:28AM -0400, Bill Sommerfeld wrote: > The meeting concluded with a reminder to the WG of a few extenstions > for which interest has appeared on the list but no draft has surfaced. > We are getting very close to "done" with the current set of drafts, > and thus going inactive until we're ready for draft standard status.. > > Here's the list: > > - X.509/PKIX support (Steve Hanna seems to have volunteered) > (RL "Bob" Morgan (U Washington) pointed out that there's a reference > to a x509v3-sign-{rsa,dsa} key/cert formats in the transport draft > without any definition of what exactly it is). A variant here: Keys in DNS when a new mechanism is deployed in DNS for non-DNSSEC keys ('KEY' subtypes other than DNSSEC are deprecated, various alternate mechanisms are being debated....). It was discussed and I believe a draft and/or implementation (mod to openssh) were produced. -- David Terrell | "Let it be known that i think of Ashcroft as a dbt@meat.net | power-hungry Conserv-a-monkey who wouldn't know the Nebcorp Prime Minister | Constitution if he tore it up and used it for http://wwn.nebcorp.com | toilet paper." - Sean Willis From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Wed Jul 17 04:04:06 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id EAA09276 for ; Wed, 17 Jul 2002 04:04:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 21036 invoked by uid 605); 17 Jul 2002 08:04:59 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: (qmail 21006 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2002 08:04:58 -0000 Received: from nwkea-mail-2.sun.com (192.18.42.14) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 17 Jul 2002 08:04:58 -0000 Received: from eastmail1.East.Sun.COM ([129.148.1.240]) by nwkea-mail-2.sun.com (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA13712; Wed, 17 Jul 2002 01:04:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from thunk.east.sun.com (thunk.East.Sun.COM [129.148.174.66]) by eastmail1.East.Sun.COM (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3/ENSMAIL,v2.1p1) with ESMTP id EAA19159; Wed, 17 Jul 2002 04:04:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from thunk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by thunk.east.sun.com (8.12.3+Sun/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g6H84tZs008691; Wed, 17 Jul 2002 04:04:55 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200207170804.g6H84tZs008691@thunk.east.sun.com> From: Bill Sommerfeld To: David Terrell cc: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Subject: Re: minutes/wg status In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 17 Jul 2002 00:57:22 PDT." <20020717075722.GA24988@pianosa.catch22.org> Reply-to: sommerfeld@east.sun.com Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 04:04:55 -0400 Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list > A variant here: Keys in DNS when a new mechanism is deployed in > DNS for non-DNSSEC keys ('KEY' subtypes other than DNSSEC are > deprecated, various alternate mechanisms are being debated....). > It was discussed and I believe a draft and/or implementation (mod > to openssh) were produced. This work was in the WG for a while, but the advocates for it withdrew the work and held their own BOF (siked). As far as I'm concerned, they're welcome to come back.. - Bill From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Wed Jul 17 06:31:32 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id GAA11782 for ; Wed, 17 Jul 2002 06:31:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 8322 invoked by uid 605); 17 Jul 2002 10:32:19 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: (qmail 8315 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2002 10:32:19 -0000 Received: from nic.crt.se (193.12.107.10) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 17 Jul 2002 10:32:19 -0000 Received: from mail.crt.se (postiljon.crt.se [172.16.1.14]) by nic.crt.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B83552AC; Wed, 17 Jul 2002 12:32:13 +0200 (MEST) Received: from crt.se (stargate.crt.se [172.16.0.11]) by mail.crt.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65E061DE9; Wed, 17 Jul 2002 12:32:09 +0200 (MEST) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 19:32:09 +0900 (JST) From: Jakob Schlyter To: David Terrell Cc: Bill Sommerfeld , Subject: Re: minutes/wg status In-Reply-To: <20020717075722.GA24988@pianosa.catch22.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list On Wed, 17 Jul 2002, David Terrell wrote: > A variant here: Keys in DNS when a new mechanism is deployed in DNS for > non-DNSSEC keys ('KEY' subtypes other than DNSSEC are deprecated, > various alternate mechanisms are being debated....). It was discussed > and I believe a draft and/or implementation (mod to openssh) were > produced. wes griffin and I are working on updating the draft and writing a new implementation for openssh. the new draft will be based on some other RR type that KEY, probably a brand new one. we will report back to the wg as soon as we have something usable - please stay tuned. jakob From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Fri Jul 19 16:42:21 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id QAA17275 for ; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 16:42:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 24887 invoked by uid 605); 19 Jul 2002 20:43:15 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: (qmail 24879 invoked from network); 19 Jul 2002 20:43:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO col1smx03.USE.AD.DLA.MIL) (131.74.110.83) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 19 Jul 2002 20:43:14 -0000 Received: from avenger.dsdc.dla.mil (avenger.dsio.dla.mil [131.74.246.20]) by col1smx03.USE.AD.DLA.MIL with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id PFQ11PDX; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 16:42:58 -0400 Received: by avenger.dsio.dla.mil with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 16:41:48 -0400 Message-ID: <21517B66105AD211BE7C00A0C9E580EE0355C63F@avenger.dsio.dla.mil> From: "Habash, Jim \(DISOC\)" To: "'ietf-ssh@netbsd.org'" Subject: Static binaries Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 16:41:47 -0400 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list static binaries questions I have. SSH Secure Shell 3.1.0 hppa1.1-hp-hpux11.00 running on HP 9000/809 I could not enable-static in configure to build static binaries. I issued the configure command with these options. configure -enable-static and configure -enable-static=yes James Habash DISOC-CII Operating Systems Support PHONE: DSN 850-9422 EMAIL: jhabash@dsdc.dla.mil From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Mon Jul 22 10:48:17 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id KAA05971 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2002 10:48:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 29946 invoked by uid 605); 22 Jul 2002 14:42:17 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: (qmail 29939 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2002 14:42:16 -0000 Received: from brmx1.fl.icn.siemens.com (12.147.96.32) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 22 Jul 2002 14:42:16 -0000 Received: from boca210a.boca.ssc.siemens.com (boca210a.boca.ssc.siemens.com [165.218.12.110]) by brmx1.fl.icn.siemens.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA27534 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2002 10:41:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: by boca210a.boca.ssc.siemens.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Mon, 22 Jul 2002 10:41:17 -0400 Message-ID: From: "Vaidya, Maulik" To: "'ietf-ssh@netbsd.org'" Subject: SSH (latest version) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 10:41:16 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list Hello all, Thanks for you replies to a previous posting of mine. I installed the latest version for SSH on my solaris sparc 2.6 server, and upon running "sshd start", i could start sshd but an error is displayed that "compression could not enabled on this platform".. Any ideas what this is and why is it happening?? Regards Maulik Vaidya Siemens ICM Tel (561) 923-6053 Mobile (561) 809-0293 Fax (561) 923-6402 Maulik.Vaidya@icm.siemens.com From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Wed Jul 24 08:09:58 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id IAA02972 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2002 08:09:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 23123 invoked by uid 605); 24 Jul 2002 12:10:56 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: (qmail 23115 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2002 12:10:55 -0000 Received: from odin.ietf.org (HELO ietf.org) (132.151.1.176) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 24 Jul 2002 12:10:55 -0000 Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA02799; Wed, 24 Jul 2002 08:09:34 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200207241209.IAA02799@ietf.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" To: IETF-Announce: ; Cc: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Reply-to: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-secsh-gsskeyex-04.txt Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 08:09:34 -0400 Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Secure Shell Working Group of the IETF. Title : GSSAPI Authentication and Key Exchange for the Secure Shell Protocol Author(s) : J. Hutzelman, J. Salowey, J. Galbraith, V. Welch Filename : draft-ietf-secsh-gsskeyex-04.txt Pages : 24 Date : 23-Jul-02 The Secure Shell protocol (SSH) is a protocol for secure remote login and other secure network services over an insecure network. The Generic Security Service Application Program Interface (GSS-API) [2] provides security services to callers in a mechanism-independent fashion. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-secsh-gsskeyex-04.txt To remove yourself from the IETF Announcement list, send a message to ietf-announce-request with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-secsh-gsskeyex-04.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-secsh-gsskeyex-04.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <20020723145815.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-secsh-gsskeyex-04.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-secsh-gsskeyex-04.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <20020723145815.I-D@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Wed Jul 24 12:09:51 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id MAA22516 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2002 12:09:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 2050 invoked by uid 605); 24 Jul 2002 16:10:49 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Message-ID: <20020724161049.2049.qmail@mail.netbsd.org> Received: (qmail 2042 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2002 16:10:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO 61.155.69.147) (210.19.194.70) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 24 Jul 2002 16:10:47 -0000 Received: from [6.135.221.168] by rly-xl05.mx.aol.com with asmtp; Jul, 24 2002 12:02:37 PM +0400 Received: from 82.60.152.190 ([82.60.152.190]) by smtp4.cyberec.com with QMQP; Jul, 24 2002 11:07:41 AM +1200 Received: from 87.15.78.89 ([87.15.78.89]) by pet.vosn.net with local; Jul, 24 2002 10:05:20 AM -0100 From: mlwlinux4oems To: Industrial@netbsd.org, Linux@netbsd.org, User@netbsd.org Subject: ISA Article on Embedded Real-Time Linux Automation Applications . bbvhh Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 12:27:52 -0400 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Build 10.0.2627 Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list Industrial LINUX News: The June issue of the ISA's InTech Magazine has an interesting article on how truly open Linux applications can lower development cost and increase the performance and reliability of industrial automation. A copy of the the article can be found at: http://www.sixnet-io.com/html_files/web_articles/linux_article_info.htm This Linux news update brought to you by: www.Linux4oems.info ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ If you don't want to receive future Linux news updates, please reply to this e-mail with the subject "unsubscribe". You may also unsubscribe or resolve subscription difficulties by calling SIXNET at 518-877-5173 or e-mailing: linuxnews@sixnet-io.com . hspwhcqobtumshtoajvixfhk From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Fri Jul 26 15:54:26 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id PAA06300 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 2002 15:54:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 2904 invoked by uid 605); 26 Jul 2002 19:55:25 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: (qmail 2897 invoked from network); 26 Jul 2002 19:55:24 -0000 Received: from kathmandu.sun.com (192.18.98.36) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 26 Jul 2002 19:55:24 -0000 Received: from eastmail2.East.Sun.COM ([129.148.1.241]) by kathmandu.sun.com (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA04857 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 2002 13:55:24 -0600 (MDT) Received: from thunk.east.sun.com (thunk.East.Sun.COM [129.148.174.66]) by eastmail2.East.Sun.COM (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3/ENSMAIL,v2.1p1) with ESMTP id PAA04514 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 2002 15:55:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from thunk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by thunk.east.sun.com (8.12.3+Sun/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g6QJtNZs004655 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 2002 15:55:23 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200207261955.g6QJtNZs004655@thunk.east.sun.com> From: Bill Sommerfeld To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Subject: Steve Bellovin: ssh2 mitm attack? Reply-to: sommerfeld@east.sun.com Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 15:55:23 -0400 Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list [before anyone panics, this is a variant on the "hijack the connection and substitute a different host key". The problem described here is that at least some implementations effectively maintain separate host key databases per (host key algorithm, major protocol revision) pair, so that you get the non-scary "no host key known" user prompt rather than the scary "host key has changed" when a man-in-the-middle attacker does an upgrade/downgrade/host key algorithm change. - Bill] ------- Forwarded Message X-Mailer: exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 From: Steve Bellovin To: sommerfeld@eng.sun.com Subject: ssh2 mitm attack? Cc: jis@mit.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 07:48:54 -0400 Message-Id: <20020725114855.358CD7B4D@berkshire.research.att.com> Content-Length: 363 Bill, have a look at http://www.phrack.org/show.php?p=59&a=11http://www.phrack.org/show.php?p=59&a=11 and in particular at the ssh2-only attack. Are any changes to the drafts necessary? (I haven't had a chance to read them in light of this advisory.) --Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb (me) http://www.wilyhacker.com ("Firewalls" book) ------- End of Forwarded Message From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Wed Jul 31 13:36:27 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id NAA09094 for ; Wed, 31 Jul 2002 13:36:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 10117 invoked by uid 605); 31 Jul 2002 17:37:16 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: (qmail 10095 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2002 17:37:15 -0000 Received: from ihemail1.lucent.com (HELO ihemail1.firewall.lucent.com) (192.11.222.161) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 31 Jul 2002 17:37:15 -0000 Received: from ihmail.ih.lucent.com (h135-1-218-70.lucent.com [135.1.218.70]) by ihemail1.firewall.lucent.com (Switch-2.2.2/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id g6VHbDP24329; Wed, 31 Jul 2002 13:37:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from dynamic.ih.lucent.com (dynamic.ih.lucent.com [135.185.161.165]) by ihmail.ih.lucent.com (8.8.8+Sun/EMS-1.5 sol2) id MAA12193; Wed, 31 Jul 2002 12:37:11 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from dwd@localhost) by dynamic.ih.lucent.com (8.9.1b+Sun/8.9.3) id MAA14088; Wed, 31 Jul 2002 12:37:06 -0500 (CDT) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 12:37:06 -0500 From: Dave Dykstra To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Cc: smb@research.att.com Subject: Re: Steve Bellovin: ssh2 mitm attack? Message-ID: <20020731173706.GA13988@lucent.com> Mail-Followup-To: Dave Dykstra , ietf-ssh@netbsd.org, smb@research.att.com References: <200207261955.g6QJtNZs004655@thunk.east.sun.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200207261955.g6QJtNZs004655@thunk.east.sun.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.27i Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list I pointed this out on the openssh-unix-dev mailing list in January http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=openssh-unix-dev&m=101069187914700&w=2 and there was some discussion but Marcus didn't seem to think it was worth worrying about. - Dave Dykstra On Fri, Jul 26, 2002 at 03:55:23PM -0400, Bill Sommerfeld wrote: > [before anyone panics, this is a variant on the "hijack the connection > and substitute a different host key". > > The problem described here is that at least some implementations > effectively maintain separate host key databases per (host key > algorithm, major protocol revision) pair, so that you get the > non-scary "no host key known" user prompt rather than the scary "host > key has changed" when a man-in-the-middle attacker does an > upgrade/downgrade/host key algorithm change. > > - Bill] > > ------- Forwarded Message > > X-Mailer: exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 > From: Steve Bellovin > To: sommerfeld@eng.sun.com > Subject: ssh2 mitm attack? > Cc: jis@mit.edu > Mime-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 07:48:54 -0400 > Message-Id: <20020725114855.358CD7B4D@berkshire.research.att.com> > Content-Length: 363 > > Bill, have a look at http://www.phrack.org/show.php?p=59&a=11http://www.phrack.org/show.php?p=59&a=11 > and in particular at the ssh2-only attack. Are any changes to the > drafts necessary? (I haven't had a chance to read them in light of > this advisory.) > > --Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb (me) > http://www.wilyhacker.com ("Firewalls" book) > > > > ------- End of Forwarded Message From ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@netbsd.org Wed Jul 31 13:42:42 2002 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [155.53.1.253]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id NAA09391 for ; Wed, 31 Jul 2002 13:42:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 13497 invoked by uid 605); 31 Jul 2002 17:43:41 -0000 Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: (qmail 13191 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2002 17:43:30 -0000 Received: from faui02.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (131.188.30.102) by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 31 Jul 2002 17:43:30 -0000 Received: (from msfriedl@localhost) by faui02.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (8.9.1/8.1.16-FAU) id TAA18833; Wed, 31 Jul 2002 19:43:25 +0200 (MEST) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 19:43:25 +0200 From: Markus Friedl To: Dave Dykstra , ietf-ssh@netbsd.org, smb@research.att.com Subject: Re: Steve Bellovin: ssh2 mitm attack? Message-ID: <20020731174325.GB18205@faui02> References: <200207261955.g6QJtNZs004655@thunk.east.sun.com> <20020731173706.GA13988@lucent.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20020731173706.GA13988@lucent.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@netbsd.org Precedence: list On Wed, Jul 31, 2002 at 12:37:06PM -0500, Dave Dykstra wrote: > I pointed this out on the openssh-unix-dev mailing list in January > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=openssh-unix-dev&m=101069187914700&w=2 > and there was some discussion but Marcus didn't seem to think it was > worth worrying about. Well, Markus, and I said that the client should print out the other keys. I never finished my initial patch (until recently) because it was not considered critical (every new hostkey allows MITM) and you can't do anything in the protocol.