threat_analysis_min_security.html

SLP协议在linux下的实现。此版本为1.2.1版。官方网站为www.openslp.org

DA and receive service URLs that point to rogue services,  receive
attributes that disrupt normal operation, or  not receive any service
location information at all</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td>Unauthorized Service Agent</td>

<td>An unauthorized service agent could be installed on the network with
the intention of duplicating a registrations made by authorized SAs.&nbsp;
In environments involving DAs, unauthorized SA would cause the unauthorized
registration, deregistration, and registration problems described below.&nbsp;&nbsp;
In a multicast environments an unauthorized SA could&nbsp; cause duplicate
replies to be sent to service, attribute and service type requests.&nbsp;&nbsp;
Duplicate replies may cause problems when several differing attributes
lists are returned for the same service URL.&nbsp;&nbsp; UAs would be unable
to tell which attributes are really valid.</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td>Unauthorized Registrations with DA</td>

<td>Contacting the DA to register many bogus services of the same service-type
as a valid service.&nbsp; Even SLP enabled applications that rely on service
specific security protocols (SSL, etc) would take a long time to connect
to a valid service as&nbsp; it would probably have to iterate through a&nbsp;
lot of bogus services before it found a valid one.</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td>Unauthorized Deregistration with DA</td>

<td>Contacting the DA to de-registering valid registrations so that they
can not be found by UAs.</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td>Unauthorized Reregistration with DA</td>

<td>Contacting the DA to replacing an existing registration with a new
registration with modified attributes.&nbsp;</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td>Man-in-the-middle Modification&nbsp;</td>

<td>Contacting the DA to register many bogus services of the same service-type
as a valid service.&nbsp; Even SLP enabled applications that rely on service
specific security protocols (SSL, etc) would take a long time to connect
to a valid service as&nbsp; it would probably have to iterate through a&nbsp;
lot of bogus services before it found a valid one.</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td>Man-in-the-middle Replay</td>

<td>"transport-time" retransmission of SLP registration, or reply messages
that were previously "sniffed" from the network.</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td>Man-in-the-middle Scrambling</td>

<td>Blind "transport-time" modification of messages that makes them invalid
so that they will be rejected by the valid SLP implementations.</td>
</tr>
</table>

<h3>
Preventing Disruption Attacks</h3>
&nbsp;
<p>&nbsp;
<br>&nbsp;
<p>There are several approaches to solving security problems.&nbsp; The
first approach is to use SLPv2 security as specified by RFC 2608 and deal
with the associated manual configuration and management overhead.&nbsp;
The second approach is to use custom security extensions to the SLPv2 protocol&nbsp;
which may or may not be interoperable with other SLP software.&nbsp; The
third approach would be to not use any SLP security enhancements at all.
<br>&nbsp;
<br>&nbsp;
<p>Though provisions for security have been designed into the SLPv2 protocol,
security is not a mandatory feature.&nbsp;&nbsp; The following table presents
the vulnerability of SLPv2 to attack:
<br>&nbsp;
<table BORDER WIDTH="100%" NOSAVE >
<tr>
<td><b>Attack</b></td>

<td><b>SLPv2 with RFC2608 security</b></td>

<td><b>SLPv2 with SSRTI-SLPv2</b></td>

<td><b>SLPv2 with out security</b></td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td>Unauthorized Directory Agent</td>

<td><b><font color="#33CC00">PREVENTABLE</font></b></td>

<td><b><font color="#FFFF00">DETECTABLE</font></b></td>

<td><b><font color="#FFFF00">DETECTABLE</font></b></td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td>Unauthorized Service Agent</td>

<td><b><font color="#33CC00">PREVENTABLE</font></b></td>

<td><b><font color="#FFFF00">DETECTABLE</font></b></td>

<td><b><font color="#FFFF00">DETECTABLE</font></b></td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td>Unauthorized Registrations with DA</td>

<td><b><font color="#33CC00">PREVENTABLE</font></b></td>

<td><b><font color="#33CC00">PREVENTABLE</font></b></td>

<td><b><font color="#FFFF00">DETECTABLE</font></b></td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td>Unauthorized Deregistration with DA</td>

<td><b><font color="#33CC00">PREVENTABLE</font></b></td>

<td><b><font color="#33CC00">PREVENTABLE</font></b></td>

<td><b><font color="#CC0000">VULNERABLE</font></b></td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td>Unauthorized Reregistration with DA</td>

<td><b><font color="#33CC00">PREVENTABLE</font></b></td>

<td><b><font color="#33CC00">PREVENTABLE</font></b></td>

<td><b><font color="#CC0000">VULNERABLE</font></b></td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td>Man-in-the-middle Modification</td>

<td><b><font color="#33CC00">PREVENTABLE</font></b></td>

<td><b><font color="#CC0000">VULNERABLE</font></b></td>

<td><b><font color="#CC0000">VULNERABLE</font></b></td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td>Man-in-the-middle Replay</td>

<td><b><font color="#FF9900">DETERRABLE</font></b></td>

<td><b><font color="#33CC00">PREVENTABLE</font></b></td>

<td><b><font color="#CC0000">VULNERABLE</font></b></td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td>Man-in-the-middle Scrambling</td>

<td><b><font color="#CC0000">VULNERABLE</font></b></td>

<td><b><font color="#CC0000">VULNERABLE</font></b></td>

<td><b><font color="#CC0000">VULNERABLE</font></b></td>
</tr>
</table>

<p><b><font color="#33CC00">PREVENTABLE </font></b><font color="#000000">-
Attack can be prevented entirely.</font>
<br><b><font color="#FFFF00">DETECTABLE</font></b><font color="#000000">
- Attack can not be prevented, but can be detected by appropriately written
SLP software</font>
<br><b><font color="#FF9900">DETERRABLE</font></b><font color="#000000">
- Attack can not be detected or entirely prevented, but it can be deterred</font>
<br><b><font color="#CC0000">VULNERABLE</font></b><font color="#000000">
- Attack can not be prevented, deterred or detected</font>
<br>&nbsp;
<br>&nbsp;
<br>&nbsp;
</body>
</html>