[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: pre-shared key v RSA encryption or RSA signatureauthentication modes



At 3:22 PM -0500 3/25/02, Andrew Krywaniuk wrote:
> I'm glad you mentioned what I consider to be a significant downside
 of pre-shared secrets, although we come to very different
 conclusions.  It is not too hard to imagine an attack in which the
 initiator connects to the wrong address, e.g., via some form of DNS
 attack, and the fake responder collects the initiator's secret, then
 drops the connection. This seems like such a serious concern that it
 argues very strongly against pre-shared secrets vs. public keys. Note
 that using public keys. e.g., in self-signed certs, does not suffer
 from this problem.

Steve,


I don't understand your comment. Obviously, I'm only talking about IKE
pre-shared secrets, in which the bogus responder only collects an HMAC of
the shared secret and some session data. Now, which is harder: cracking an
RSA key or reversing an HMAC? Again, it depends on the key lengths involved,
but HMAC provides more security per bit. Your attack wouldn't work unless
the initiator was using a weak secret that could be cracked by brute force.

Andrew,


I assume that the shared secret does not have nearly as much entropy as an RSA key, which many folks agree is likely in the vast majority of instances. Thus the attack consists of testing guesses against the collected HMAC, since the rest of the HMAC inputs are known to the responder. This allows the attacker to carry out an offline guessing attack, which is less likely to arouse suspicion that online connection attempts with guesses shared secret values.

Steve