3 ms·

Just have a bunch of fuzzers running 24/7 to keep all implementations honest.

• clankyclanker 3y ago
  That’s what Google used to do (though not for BGP), back in their engineering days. That’s what gave us AFL.
  • tialaramex 3y ago
    And indeed GREASE the TLS feature where you just propose nonsense because every other party should go "Er, no I don't speak nonsense?" to prevent ossification also comes from Google engineers. GREASE means that when you build your "advanced" security device which "protects" customers by treating everything different as hostile, it won't work, so you'll need to tweak it to at least just ignore such differences as irrelevant, which is enough that we can come back later and intentionally improve things. Previously, without GREASE, we'd have to guess what oversights we could exploit to avoid this "protection" to deliver protocol improvements, if we guessed wrong nothing works, or everybody's security is broken, sometimes both. e.g. for TLS 1.2 the oversight we found is, if you're resuming an existing session the "security" products just wave that through because otherwise they break people's real workflows. So in TLS 1.3 protocol as actually spoken essentially an initial connection goes like this: Client: Hi some.dns.name.example I'm a TLS 1.2 Client, I'd like to resume our previous conversation #randomNonsense. Also, completely unrelated, I happen to speak FlyCasualThisIsReallyTLSv1.3 and so I have these TLSv1.3KeyAgreementParameters. then either: TLS 1.3 Server: Hi Client, of course, let's continue from there. [ whereupon everything further is encrypted because this is actually TLS 1.3, but to a dumb middlebox it makes sense that they're just resuming a prior encrypted conversation #randomNonsense which it doesn't remember ] OR TLS 1.2 Server: Er, no I don't remember any such conversation and I don't know FlyCasualThisIsReallyTLSv1.3 so let's start a fresh conversation as normal.
• hinkley 3y ago
  I think you’ve discovered the secret to getting people to exercise more.
  • salawat 3y ago
    More like the secret to getting ignored/blackholed/sued into the ground the moment your fuzzer hits on a combo that actually does damage to someone else's system, since the implication here is you're not doing it on your own stuff. If you are, good on ya. Continue doing $deity's/Bob's work.
    • pixl97 3y ago
      More like the secret is to buy up some routing equipment and run these tests on your own network, sell the exploits you find to nefarious actors for big bucks, and have a bunker to survive the crash of the internet in. If your system is on the internet it is now a potential piece in a potential global war.
      • salawat 3y ago
        Always has been, even since it's inception. The only thing that'd kept it safe and unutilized in that regard had been a grassroots efforts to not facilitate that transformation. That only lasted so long as the main population of Ops/devs/netizens were in agreement. We've blasted past that age at this point, do everybody gets to don their robe and wizard hat, pick up the staff, and yeet patches, routing rules, and packets betwixt one another.