Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

MITM Amplification Attacks #2

Open
emanjon opened this issue Jan 17, 2023 · 0 comments
Open

MITM Amplification Attacks #2

emanjon opened this issue Jan 17, 2023 · 0 comments

Comments

@emanjon
Copy link
Collaborator

emanjon commented Jan 17, 2023

Achim Kraus @boaks commented on on Nov 9, 2022:
EricssonResearch/coap-actuators#22

Please add, that the other attacks could be applied "proactive" by an attacker.

But the attacks, changing the source address of a valid DTLS CID record, are passive attacks. The attacker must wait for such messages. That makes such attack in my opinion much less attractive.

A difference between (D)TLS and OSCORE is that in DTLS the updated address is used for all future records, while in OSCORE a new address is only used for responses to a specific request.

That depends on the roles.
A coap-server will usually also only send back the response to the last/current source address.
In my deployments, clients usually don't update the server's address using CID at all.
There is a difference in a description of a protocol, which offers symmetric function and is not coupled to other layers. And a real system, which can easily use such a coupling. Sure, someone may try a different approach, therefore draft-ietf-tls-dtls-rrc is on the way.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant