50 likes | 171 Vues
This document, presented at IETF 67 in November 2006, explores the implications of IPv6 on network scanning techniques. With the significantly increased host address space in IPv6, attackers may utilize new methods to locate vulnerable nodes. The draft discusses traditional scanning challenges in IPv4 and suggests strategies for administrators to mitigate these risks. Key topics include ICMP filtering, DNS disclosure issues, and the law of diminishing returns. The draft also assesses potential next steps and invites further comments for refinement before publication.
E N D
IPv6 Implications for Network Scanning Tim Chown tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk IETF 67, November 6th, 2006 San Diego, CA
Status • This is a revised -01 WG draft • Previously three personal draft instances • Each revised with WG feedback • Referenced in two mature v6ops drafts • NAP • draft-ietf-v6ops-nap-04 • ICMP filtering • draft-ietf-v6ops-icmpv6-filtering-recs-02
Goals of the document • Note the properties of the vastly increased host address space in an IPv6 subnet (/64) or site (/48) • With respect to traditional network scanning probes or worms as seen today for IPv4 networks • Describe new methods that attackers may use to locate nodes for further exploitation • Given the target host address space is so large • Make suggestions to administrators to mitigate against the new attack methods • Publish as Informational
Changes since -00 • Emphasis on Informational nature • Discussed ‘law of diminishing returns’ and where ‘address hiding’ fits into the security model • Added Bellovin’s worm paper reference • Suggested avoiding any repeated host numbering patterns, not just sequential • Added note on two-faced DNS • Added note on reverse DNS disclosure • Added note on Embedded-RP/RFC3306 disclosure • Added note on application-specific addresses
Next steps? • Have addressed comments in -01 • Now had one revision/update as a WG item • Is there any more to add to the document? • Is it worth publishing? • If not, what to do with the two referring mature drafts? • If so, is it ready for a last call on the -01? • Comments?