📄 draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-protocol-07.txt
字号:
to generate positive responses to queries other than the name for which the original answer was first received. 2. NSEC RRs received to prove the non-existence of a name could be reused by a security aware resolver to prove the non-existence of any name in the name range it spans. In theory, a resolver could use wildcards or NSEC RRs to generate positive and negative responses (respectively) until the TTL or signatures on the records in question expire. However, it seems prudent for resolvers to avoid blocking new authoritative data or synthesizing new data on their own. Resolvers which follow this recommendation will have a more consistent view of the namespace.Arends, et al. Expires January 13, 2005 [Page 21]Internet-Draft DNSSEC Protocol Modifications July 20044.6 Handling of the CD and AD bits A security-aware resolver MAY set a query's CD bit in order to indicate that the resolver takes responsibility for performing whatever authentication its local policy requires on the RRsets in the response. See Section 3.2 for the effect this bit has on the behavior of security-aware recursive name servers. A security-aware resolver MUST clear the AD bit when composing query messages to protect against buggy name servers which blindly copy header bits which they do not understand from the query message to the response message. A resolver MUST disregard the meaning of the CD and AD bits in a response unless the response was obtained using a secure channel or the resolver was specifically configured to regard the message header bits without using a secure channel.4.7 Caching BAD Data While many validation errors will be transient, some are likely to be more persistent, such as those caused by administrative error (failure to re-sign a zone, clock skew, and so forth). Since requerying will not help in these cases, validating resolvers might generate a significant amount of unnecessary DNS traffic as a result of repeated queries for RRsets with persistent validation failures. To prevent such unnecessary DNS traffic, security-aware resolvers MAY cache data with invalid signatures, with some restrictions. Conceptually, caching such data is similar to negative caching [RFC2308], except that instead of caching a valid negative response, the resolver is caching the fact that a particular answer failed to validate. This document refers to a cache of data with invalid signatures as a "BAD cache". Resolvers which implement a BAD cache MUST take steps to prevent the cache from being useful as a denial-of-service attack amplifier. In particular: o Since RRsets which fail to validate do not have trustworthy TTLs, the implementation MUST assign a TTL. This TTL SHOULD be small, in order to mitigate the effect of caching the results of an attack. o In order to prevent caching of a transient validation failure (which might be the result of an attack), resolvers SHOULD track queries that result in validation failures, and SHOULD only answer from the BAD cache after the number of times that responses to queries for that particular <QNAME, QTYPE, QCLASS> have failed to validate exceeds a threshold value.Arends, et al. Expires January 13, 2005 [Page 22]Internet-Draft DNSSEC Protocol Modifications July 2004 Resolvers MUST NOT return RRsets from the BAD cache unless the resolver is not required to validate the signatures of the RRsets in question under the rules given in Section 4.2 of this document. See Section 3.2.2 for discussion of how the responses returned by a security-aware recursive name server interact with a BAD cache.4.8 Synthesized CNAMEs A validating security-aware resolver MUST treat the signature of a valid signed DNAME RR as also covering unsigned CNAME RRs which could have been synthesized from the DNAME RR as described in [RFC2672], at least to the extent of not rejecting a response message solely because it contains such CNAME RRs. The resolver MAY retain such CNAME RRs in its cache or in the answers it hands back, but is not required to do so.4.9 Stub resolvers A security-aware stub resolver MUST support the DNSSEC RR types, at least to the extent of not mishandling responses just because they contain DNSSEC RRs.4.9.1 Handling of the DO Bit A non-validating security-aware stub resolver MAY include the DNSSEC RRs returned by a security-aware recursive name server as part of the data that the stub resolver hands back to the application which invoked it but is not required to do so. A non-validating stub resolver that wishes to do this will need to set the DO bit in receive DNSSEC RRs from the recursive name server. A validating security-aware stub resolver MUST set the DO bit, since otherwise it will not receive the DNSSEC RRs it needs to perform signature validation.4.9.2 Handling of the CD Bit A non-validating security-aware stub resolver SHOULD NOT set the CD bit when sending queries unless requested by the application layer, since by definition, a non-validating stub resolver depends on the security-aware recursive name server to perform validation on its behalf. A validating security-aware stub resolver SHOULD set the CD bit, since otherwise the security-aware recursive name server will answer the query using the name server's local policy, which may prevent the stub resolver from receiving data which would be acceptable to the stub resolver's local policy.Arends, et al. Expires January 13, 2005 [Page 23]Internet-Draft DNSSEC Protocol Modifications July 20044.9.3 Handling of the AD Bit A non-validating security-aware stub resolver MAY chose to examine the setting of the AD bit in response messages that it receives in order to determine whether the security-aware recursive name server which sent the response claims to have cryptographically verified the data in the Answer and Authority sections of the response message. Note, however, that the responses received by a security-aware stub resolver are heavily dependent on the local policy of the security-aware recursive name server, so as a practical matter there may be little practical value to checking the status of the AD bit except perhaps as a debugging aid. In any case, a security-aware stub resolver MUST NOT place any reliance on signature validation allegedly performed on its behalf except when the security-aware stub resolver obtained the data in question from a trusted security-aware recursive name server via a secure channel. A validating security-aware stub resolver SHOULD NOT examine the setting of the AD bit in response messages, since, by definition, the stub resolver performs its own signature validation regardless of the setting of the AD bit.Arends, et al. Expires January 13, 2005 [Page 24]Internet-Draft DNSSEC Protocol Modifications July 20045. Authenticating DNS Responses In order to use DNSSEC RRs for authentication, a security-aware resolver requires configured knowledge of at least one authenticated DNSKEY or DS RR. The process for obtaining and authenticating this initial trust anchors is achieved via some external mechanism. For example, a resolver could use some off-line authenticated exchange to obtain a zone's DNSKEY RR or obtain a DS RR that identifies and authenticates a zone's DNSKEY RR. The remainder of this section assumes that the resolver has somehow obtained an initial set of trust anchors. An initial DNSKEY RR can be used to authenticate a zone's apex DNSKEY RRset. To authenticate an apex DNSKEY RRset using an initial key, the resolver MUST: 1. Verify that the initial DNSKEY RR appears in the apex DNSKEY RRset, and verify that the DNSKEY RR MUST have the Zone Key Flag (DNSKEY RDATA bit 7) set. 2. Verify that there is some RRSIG RR that covers the apex DNSKEY RRset, and that the combination of the RRSIG RR and the initial DNSKEY RR authenticates the DNSKEY RRset. The process for using an RRSIG RR to authenticate an RRset is described in Section 5.3. Once the resolver has authenticated the apex DNSKEY RRset using an initial DNSKEY RR, delegations from that zone can be authenticated using DS RRs. This allows a resolver to start from an initial key, and use DS RRsets to proceed recursively down the DNS tree obtaining other apex DNSKEY RRsets. If the resolver were configured with a root DNSKEY RR, and if every delegation had a DS RR associated with it, then the resolver could obtain and validate any apex DNSKEY RRset. The process of using DS RRs to authenticate referrals is described in Section 5.2. Once the resolver has authenticated a zone's apex DNSKEY RRset, Section 5.3 shows how the resolver can use DNSKEY RRs in the apex DNSKEY RRset and RRSIG RRs from the zone to authenticate any other RRsets in the zone. Section 5.4 shows how the resolver can use authenticated NSEC RRsets from the zone to prove that an RRset is not present in the zone. When a resolver indicates support for DNSSEC (by setting the DO bit), a security-aware name server should attempt to provide the necessary DNSKEY, RRSIG, NSEC, and DS RRsets in a response (see Section 3). However, a security-aware resolver may still receive a response that that lacks the appropriate DNSSEC RRs, whether due to configuration issues such as an upstream security-oblivious recursive name server that accidentally interferes with DNSSEC RRs or due to a deliberate attack in which an adversary forges a response, strips DNSSEC RRsArends, et al. Expires January 13, 2005 [Page 25]Internet-Draft DNSSEC Protocol Modifications July 2004 from a response, or modifies a query so that DNSSEC RRs appear not to be requested. The absence of DNSSEC data in a response MUST NOT by itself be taken as an indication that no authentication information exists. A resolver SHOULD expect authentication information from signed zones. A resolver SHOULD believe that a zone is signed if the resolver has been configured with public key information for the zone, or if the zone's parent is signed and the delegation from the parent contains a DS RRset.5.1 Special Considerations for Islands of Security Islands of security (see [I-D.ietf-dnsext-dnssec-intro]) are signed zones for which it is not possible to construct an authentication chain to the zone from its parent. Validating signatures within an island of security requires the validator to have some other means of obtaining an initial authenticated zone key for the island. If a validator cannot obtain such a key, it SHOULD switch to operating as if the zones in the island of security are unsigned. All the normal processes for validating responses apply to islands of security. The only difference between normal validation and validation within an island of security is in how the validator obtains a trust anchor for the authentication chain.5.2 Authenticating Referrals Once the apex DNSKEY RRset for a signed parent zone has been authenticated, DS RRsets can be used to authenticate the delegation to a signed child zone. A DS RR identifies a DNSKEY RR in the child zone's apex DNSKEY RRset, and contains a cryptographic digest of the child zone's DNSKEY RR. A strong cryptographic digest algorithm ensures that an adversary can not easily generate a DNSKEY RR that matches the digest. Thus, authenticating the digest allows a resolver to authenticate the matching DNSKEY RR. The resolver can then use this child DNSKEY RR to authenticate the entire child apex DNSKEY RRset. Given a DS RR for a delegation, the child zone's apex DNSKEY RRset can be authenticated if all of the following hold: o The DS RR has be
⌨️ 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 + -