⭐ 欢迎来到虫虫下载站! | 📦 资源下载 📁 资源专辑 ℹ️ 关于我们
⭐ 虫虫下载站

📄 rfc3012.txt

📁 <VC++网络游戏建摸与实现>源代码
💻 TXT
📖 第 1 页 / 共 3 页
字号:
   with the same Challenge Value that was included in the Registration   Request.  The Foreign Agent MUST send the rejected Registration   message to the mobile node, and change the status in the Registration   Reply to the value MISSING_CHALLENGE (see section 10).   If the Foreign Agent does remove the Challenge extension and   applicable authentication from the Registration Request message, then   it SHOULD insert the Identification field from the Registration   Request message along with its record-keeping information about the   particular Mobile Node in order to protect against replays.Perkins & Calhoun           Standards Track                     [Page 6]RFC 3012             Mobile IPv4 Challenge/Response        November 20003.3. Foreign Agent Processing for Registration Replies   The Foreign Agent MAY include a new Challenge extension in any   Registration Reply, successful or not.  If the foreign agent includes   this extension in a successful Registration Reply, the extension   SHOULD precede a MN-FA authentication extension.   Suppose the Registration Reply includes a Challenge extension from   the Home Agent, and the foreign agent wishes to include another   Challenge extension with the Registration Reply for use by the mobile   node.  In that case, the foreign agent MUST delete the Challenge   extension from the Home Agent from the Registration Reply, along with   any FA-HA authentication extension, before appending the new   Challenge extension to the Registration Reply.3.4. Home Agent Processing for the Challenge Extensions   If the Home Agent receives a Registration Request with the MN-FA   Challenge extension, and recognizes the extension, the Home Agent   MUST include the Challenge extension in the Registration Reply.  The   Challenge Extension MUST be placed after the Mobile-Home   authentication extension, and the extension SHOULD be authenticated   by a Foreign-Home Authentication extension.   Since the extension type for the Challenge extension is within the   range 128-255, the Home Agent MUST process such a Registration   Request even if it does not recognize the Challenge extension [8].   In this case, the Home Agent will send a Registration Reply to the   Foreign Agent that does not include the Challenge extension.4. MN-FA Challenge Extension   This section specifies a new Mobile IP Registration extension that is   used to satisfy a Challenge in an Agent Advertisement.  The Challenge   extension to the Registration Request message is used to indicate the   challenge that the mobile node is attempting to satisfy.       0                   1                   2                   3       0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+      |     Type      |    Length     |         Challenge...      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+                Figure 2: The MN-FA Challenge Extension      Type        132 (skippable) (see [8])      Length      Length of the Challenge valuePerkins & Calhoun           Standards Track                     [Page 7]RFC 3012             Mobile IPv4 Challenge/Response        November 2000      Challenge   The Challenge field is copied from the Challenge field                  found in the Agent Advertisement Challenge extension                  (see section 2).5. Generalized Mobile IP Authentication Extension   Several new authentication extensions have been designed for various   control messages proposed for extensions to Mobile IP (see, for   example, [9]).  A new authentication extension is required for a   mobile node to present its credentials to any other entity other than   the ones already defined; the only entities defined in the base   Mobile IP specification [8] are the home agent and the foreign agent.   It is the purpose of the generalized authentication extension defined   here to collect together data for all such new authentication   applications into a single extension type with subtypes.       0                   1                   2                   3       0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+      |     Type      |    Subtype    |            Length             |      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+      |                              SPI                              |      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+      |                         Authenticator ...      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+       Figure 3: The Generalized Mobile IP Authentication Extension       Type            36 (not skippable) (see [8])       Subtype         a number assigned to identify the kind of                       endpoints or characteristics of the particular                       authentication strategy       Length          4 plus the number of bytes in the Authenticator;                       MUST be at least 20.       SPI             Security Parameters Index       Authenticator   The variable length Authenticator field   In this document, only one subtype is defined:       1               MN-AAA Authentication subtype (see section 6)Perkins & Calhoun           Standards Track                     [Page 8]RFC 3012             Mobile IPv4 Challenge/Response        November 20006. MN-AAA Authentication subtype   The Generalized Authentication extension with subtype 1 will be   referred to as a MN-AAA Authentication extension.  If the mobile node   does not include a Mobile-Foreign Authentication [8] extension, then   it MUST include the MN-AAA Authentication extension whenever the   Challenge extension is present.  If the MN-AAA Authentication   extension is present, then the Registration Message sent by the   mobile node MUST contain the Mobile-HA Authentication extension [8]   if it shares a security association with the Home Agent.  If present,   the Mobile-HA Authentication Extension MUST appear prior to the MN-   AAA Authentication extension.  The mobile node MAY include a MN-AAA   Authentication extension in any Registration Request.  The   corresponding response MUST include the MN-HA Authentication   Extension, and MUST NOT include the MN-AAA Authentication Extension.   The default algorithm for computation of the authenticator is HMAC-   MD5 [5] computed on the following data, in the order shown:      Preceding Mobile IP data || Type, Subtype, Length, SPI   where the Type, Length, Subtype, and SPI are as shown in section 5.   The resulting function call, as described in [5], would be:      hmac_md5(data, datalen, Key, KeyLength, authenticator);   Each mobile node MUST support the ability to produce the   authenticator by using HMAC-MD5 as shown.  Just as with Mobile IP,   this default algorithm MUST be able to be configured for selection at   any arbitrary 32-bit SPI outside of the SPIs in the reserved range   0-255.7. Reserved SPIs for Mobile IP   Mobile IP defines several authentication extensions for use in   Registration Requests and Replies.  Each authentication extension   carries a Security Parameters Index (SPI) which should be used to   index a table of security associations.  Values in the range 0 - 255   are reserved for special use.  A list of reserved SPI numbers is to   be maintained by IANA at the following URL:      http://www.iana.org/numbers.htmlPerkins & Calhoun           Standards Track                     [Page 9]RFC 3012             Mobile IPv4 Challenge/Response        November 20008. SPI For RADIUS AAA Servers   Some AAA servers only admit a single security association, and thus   do not use the SPI numbers for Mobile IP authentication extensions   for use when determining the security association that would be   necessary for verifying the authentication information included with   the Authentication extension.   SPI number CHAP_SPI (see section 9) is reserved (see section 7) for   indicating the following procedure for computing authentication data   (called the "authenticator"), which is used by many RADIUS servers   [10] today.   To compute the authenticator, apply MD5 [11] computed on the   following data, in the order shown:      High-order byte from Challenge || Key ||      MD5(Preceding Mobile IP data ||      Type, Subtype (if present), Length, SPI) ||      Least-order 237 bytes from Challenge   where the Type, Length, SPI, and possibly Subtype, are the fields of   the authentication extension in use.  For instance, all four of these   fields would be in use when SPI == CHAP_SPI is used with the   Generalized Authentication extension.  Since the RADIUS protocol   cannot carry attributes greater than 253 in size, the preceding   Mobile IP data, type, subtype (if present), length and SPI are hashed   using MD5.  Finally, the least significant 237 bytes of the challenge   are concatenated.9. Configurable Parameters   Every Mobile IP agent supporting the extensions defined in this   document SHOULD be able to configure each parameter in the following   table.  Each table entry contains the name of the parameter, the   default value, and the section of the document in which the parameter   first appears.      Parameter Name     Default Value   Section(s) of Document      --------------     -------------   ----------------------      CHALLENGE_WINDOW   2               3.2      CHAP_SPI           2               810. Error Values   Each entry in the following table contains the name of Code [8] to be   returned in a Registration Reply, the value for the Code, and the   section in which the error is first mentioned in this specification.Perkins & Calhoun           Standards Track                    [Page 10]RFC 3012             Mobile IPv4 Challenge/Response        November 2000      Error Name               Value   Section of Document      ----------------------   -----   -------------------      UNKNOWN_CHALLENGE        104     3.2      BAD_AUTHENTICATION       67      3.2 - also see [8]      MISSING_CHALLENGE        105     3.1,3.2      STALE_CHALLENGE          106     3.211. IANA Considerations   The Generalized Mobile IP Authentication extension defined in Section   5 is a Mobile IP registration extension as defined in RFC 2002 [8]   and extended in RFC 2356 [7].  IANA should assign a value of 36 for   this extension.   A new number space is to be created for enumerating subtypes of the   Generalized Authentication extension (see section 5).  New subtypes   of the Generalized Authentication extension, other than the number   (1) for the MN-AAA authentication extension specified in section 6,   must be specified and approved by a designated expert.   The MN-FA Challenge Extension defined in Section 4 is a router   advertisement extension as defined in RFC 1256 [3] and extended in   RFC 2002 [8].  IANA should assign a value of 132 for this purpose.   The Code values defined in Section 10 are error codes as defined in   RFC 2002 [8] and extended in RFC 2344 [6] and RFC 2356 [7].  They   correspond to error values conventionally associated with rejection   by the foreign agent (i.e., values from the range 64-127).  The Code   value 67 is a pre-existing value which is to be used in some cases   with the extension defined in this specification.  IANA should record   the values as defined in Section 10.   A new section for enumerating algorithms identified by specific SPIs   within the range 0-255 is to be added to      http://www.isi.edu/in-notes/iana/assignments/mobileip-numbers.   The CHAP_SPI number (2) discussed in section 8 is to be assigned from   this range of reserved SPI numbers.  New assignments from this   reserved range must be specified and approved by the Mobile IP   working group.  SPI number 1 should not be assigned unless in the   future the Mobile IP working group decides that SKIP is not important   for enumeration in the list of reserved numbers.  SPI number 0 should   not be assigned.Perkins & Calhoun           Standards Track                    [Page 11]RFC 3012             Mobile IPv4 Challenge/Response        November 200012. Security Considerations   In the event that a malicious mobile node attempts to replay the   authenticator for an old MN-FA Challenge, the Foreign Agent would   detect it since the agent always checks whether it has recently   advertised the Challenge (see section 3.2).  Allowing mobile nodes   with different IP addresses or NAIs to use the same Challenge value   does not represent a security vulnerability, because the   authentication data provided by the mobile node will be computed over   data that is different (at least by the bytes of the mobile nodes' IP   addresses).   Whenever a Foreign Agent updates a field of the Registration Reply   (as suggested in section 3.2), it invalidates the authentication data   supplied by the Home Agent in the MN-HA Authentication extension to   the Registration Reply.  Thus, this opens up a security exposure

⌨️ 快捷键说明

复制代码 Ctrl + C
搜索代码 Ctrl + F
全屏模式 F11
切换主题 Ctrl + Shift + D
显示快捷键 ?
增大字号 Ctrl + =
减小字号 Ctrl + -