Re: [Int-area] New version of WPADNG

Lots of good info here.



Bernard said:

   - In RFC 5505, the IAB took on this question, separating basic IP
   configuration (which has in practice proved difficult to secure) from
   application-layer configuration (which can be postponed until later in the
   boot process when security facilities are available to secure it).



Through the lens of RFC5505, that leads towards DNSSD.  Is DNSSD considered
safer than DHCP?



Paul said:

   - It's necessary for edge devices to securely learn the security
   policies of a network, for example a proxy if any and the cert or will
   offer if so. We're working around DoH policy signaling using the DNS server
   itself but it's slow going.



I read the Mozilla support pages for DNS over HTTPS (DoH):

Are you involved with this Mozilla work?



https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/configuring-networks-disable-dns-over-https

https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/canary-domain-use-application-dnsnet



The solution to detect when not to use DoH is a canary domain:
use-application-dns.net.  Can you shed light on this choice vs DHCP or
DNSSD?



Paul said:

   - I'd like to be able to verifiably inform each connecting device about
   the network owner's policy demands so that the device can decide whether to
   accept those terms or remain offline.



Tommy Pauly said:

   - I do think there is room for network-discovered proxies, and I’d like
   to continue to explore how to do that safely in the realm of the PvD-based
   discovery.  I think the cases are going to be more limited there — cases of
   the network saying “I have this proxy I suggest using because it is
   well-optimized for my network, if it’s on your trusted list of proxies,
   then please use it"…


From what I've read of PVD a network's preference for DoH could be
expressed in a PVD.



A network's PVD could be discovered by either DHCP or DNSSD

On Thu, Jul 18, 2024 at 9:29 AM Josh Cohen <joshco@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 11:00 PM Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jul 17, 2024, 7:36 PM Josh Cohen <joshco@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > You lost me with the nuclear submarine reference.  I'm guessing instead
>> of a terminal room, the IETF now has a navy?
>>
>> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Jimmy_Carter She wasn't made for
>> sitting around.
>>
>> >
>> > The coffee shop gives you your IP address, default route to the
>> Internet, DNS servers and other DHCP options. It often has a captive
>> portal, which may also have a transparent proxy that filters, can eavesdrop
>> or otherwise abuse you. It is *their* network after all, you are just a
>> guest.  That's aside from chai latte sipping wifi snoopers and the general
>> jungle of public wifi.
>>
>> So what's WPAD doing here? It's just another way to get that traffic
>> to the wrong place. Again, the Internet threat model has the network
>> be untrusted. That might be bad news for the vendors of devices that
>> don't work that way, but that's what the RFC and design says. And
>> indeed the coffee shop router shouldn't be trusted.
>>
>> I am having dejavu.  We had a similar debate 25 years ago.  Proxy servers
> in general weren't exactly popular because they violate the end-to-end
> ethos.  With respect to the network being untrusted, enterprises will push
> back on that.  They will do things that seem draconian.
>
>> >
>> >
>> > I'm definitely getting the "WPAD suxorz" vibe, but what's missing are
>> answers to how scenarios WPAD currently addresses will be addressed without
>> it.
>> >
>> > At work, your computer uses your enterprise's proxy.  When you arrive
>> at the coffeeshop, will you go into your computer's settings and turn off
>> the proxy?  When you go back to work the next day, will you go back into
>> your settings and turn it on again?
>>
>>
>> I think this scenario is due to some fundamental confusion. What is
>> the enterprise proxy doing? Why is it safe to turn off that function
>> at the coffeeshop or entrust it to some random person given the
>> computer will be back on the network the next day? And if the
>> enterprise network needs to administer hosts, it can do that through
>> much better ways.
>>
>> I was assuming a situation where the enterprise proxy is not accessible
> from outside of the enterprise network.
>
>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 7:50 PM Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> One adversary is willing to devote an entire nuclear submarine to the
>> >> task. They are more than willing to use existing vulnerabilities in
>> >> ways that you never hear about because they are good at their jobs.
>> >>
>> >> If you use network links to configure your device, and the device goes
>> >> to the coffeeshop, that coffeeshop gets to configure the device.
>> >> That's just inherently a bad idea, and always has been.
>> >>
>> >> Sincerely,
>> >> Watson Ladd
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Astra mortemque praestare gradatim
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> >
>> > ---
>> > Josh Cohen
>>
>
>
> --
>
> ---
> *Josh Co*hen
>
>

-- 

---
*Josh Co*hen