Opsec Workgroup RFCs

Browse Opsec Workgroup RFCs by Number

RFC4778 - Operational Security Current Practices in Internet Service Provider Environments: This document is a survey of the current practices used in today's large ISP operational networks to secure layer 2 and layer 3 infrastructure devices. The information listed here is the result of information gathered from people directly responsible for defining and implementing secure infrastructures in Internet Service Provider environments. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC5635 - Remote Triggered Black Hole Filtering with Unicast Reverse Path Forwarding (uRPF): Remote Triggered Black Hole (RTBH) filtering is a popular and effective technique for the mitigation of denial-of-service attacks. This document expands upon destination-based RTBH filtering by outlining a method to enable filtering by source address as well. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC6039 - Issues with Existing Cryptographic Protection Methods for Routing Protocols: Routing protocols have been extended over time to use cryptographic mechanisms to ensure that data received from a neighboring router has not been modified in transit and actually originated from an authorized neighboring router.; The cryptographic mechanisms defined to date and described in this document rely on a digest produced with a hash algorithm applied to the payload encapsulated in the routing protocol packet.; This document outlines some of the limitations of the current mechanism, problems with manual keying of these cryptographic algorithms, and possible vectors for the exploitation of these limitations. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
RFC6094 - Summary of Cryptographic Authentication Algorithm Implementation Requirements for Routing Protocols: The routing protocols Open Shortest Path First version 2 (OSPFv2), Intermediate System to Intermediate System (IS-IS), and Routing Information Protocol (RIP) currently define cleartext and MD5 (Message Digest 5) methods for authenticating protocol packets. Recently, effort has been made to add support for the SHA (Secure Hash Algorithm) family of hash functions for the purpose of authenticating routing protocol packets for RIP, IS-IS, and OSPF.; To encourage interoperability between disparate implementations, it is imperative that we specify the expected minimal set of algorithms, thereby ensuring that there is at least one algorithm that all implementations will have in common.; Similarly, RIP for IPv6 (RIPng) and OSPFv3 support IPsec algorithms for authenticating their protocol packets.; This document examines the current set of available algorithms, with interoperability and effective cryptographic authentication protection being the principal considerations. Cryptographic authentication of these routing protocols requires the availability of the same algorithms in disparate implementations. It is desirable that newly specified algorithms should be implemented and available in routing protocol implementations because they may be promoted to requirements at some future time. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
RFC6192 - Protecting the Router Control Plane: This memo provides a method for protecting a router's control plane from undesired or malicious traffic. In this approach, all legitimate router control plane traffic is identified. Once legitimate traffic has been identified, a filter is deployed in the router's forwarding plane. That filter prevents traffic not specifically identified as legitimate from reaching the router's control plane, or rate-limits such traffic to an acceptable level.; Note that the filters described in this memo are applied only to traffic that is destined for the router, and not to all traffic that is passing through the router. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
RFC6274 - Security Assessment of the Internet Protocol Version 4: This document contains a security assessment of the IETF specifications of the Internet Protocol version 4 and of a number of mechanisms and policies in use by popular IPv4 implementations. It is based on the results of a project carried out by the UK's Centre for the Protection of National Infrastructure (CPNI). This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
RFC7123 - Security Implications of IPv6 on IPv4 Networks: This document discusses the security implications of native IPv6 support and IPv6 transition/coexistence technologies on "IPv4-only" networks and describes possible mitigations for the aforementioned issues.
RFC7126 - Recommendations on Filtering of IPv4 Packets Containing IPv4 Options: This document provides advice on the filtering of IPv4 packets based on the IPv4 options they contain. Additionally, it discusses the operational and interoperability implications of dropping packets based on the IP options they contain.
RFC7359 - Layer 3 Virtual Private Network (VPN) Tunnel Traffic Leakages in Dual-Stack Hosts/Networks: The subtle way in which the IPv6 and IPv4 protocols coexist in typical networks, together with the lack of proper IPv6 support in popular Virtual Private Network (VPN) tunnel products, may inadvertently result in VPN tunnel traffic leakages. That is, traffic meant to be transferred over an encrypted and integrity- protected VPN tunnel may leak out of such a tunnel and be sent in the clear on the local network towards the final destination. This document discusses some scenarios in which such VPN tunnel traffic leakages may occur as a result of employing IPv6-unaware VPN software. Additionally, this document offers possible mitigations for this issue.
RFC7404 - Using Only Link-Local Addressing inside an IPv6 Network: In an IPv6 network, it is possible to use only link-local addresses on infrastructure links between routers. This document discusses the advantages and disadvantages of this approach to facilitate the decision process for a given network.
RFC7454 - BGP Operations and Security: The Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) is the protocol almost exclusively used in the Internet to exchange routing information between network domains. Due to this central nature, it is important to understand the security measures that can and should be deployed to prevent accidental or intentional routing disturbances.; This document describes measures to protect the BGP sessions itself such as Time to Live (TTL), the TCP Authentication Option (TCP-AO), and control-plane filtering. It also describes measures to better control the flow of routing information, using prefix filtering and automation of prefix filters, max-prefix filtering, Autonomous System (AS) path filtering, route flap dampening, and BGP community scrubbing.
RFC7610 - DHCPv6-Shield: Protecting against Rogue DHCPv6 Servers: This document specifies a mechanism for protecting hosts connected to a switched network against rogue DHCPv6 servers. It is based on DHCPv6 packet filtering at the layer 2 device at which the packets are received. A similar mechanism has been widely deployed in IPv4 networks ('DHCP snooping'); hence, it is desirable that similar functionality be provided for IPv6 networks. This document specifies a Best Current Practice for the implementation of DHCPv6-Shield.
RFC7707 - Network Reconnaissance in IPv6 Networks: IPv6 offers a much larger address space than that of its IPv4 counterpart. An IPv6 subnet of size /64 can (in theory) accommodate approximately 1.844 * 10^19 hosts, thus resulting in a much lower host density (#hosts/#addresses) than is typical in IPv4 networks, where a site typically has 65,000 or fewer unique addresses. As a result, it is widely assumed that it would take a tremendous effort to perform address-scanning attacks against IPv6 networks; therefore, IPv6 address-scanning attacks have been considered unfeasible. This document formally obsoletes RFC 5157, which first discussed this assumption, by providing further analysis on how traditional address-scanning techniques apply to IPv6 networks and exploring some additional techniques that can be employed for IPv6 network reconnaissance.
RFC8704 - Enhanced Feasible-Path Unicast Reverse Path Forwarding: This document identifies a need for and proposes improvement of the unicast Reverse Path Forwarding (uRPF) techniques (see RFC 3704) for detection and mitigation of source address spoofing (see BCP 38). Strict uRPF is inflexible about directionality, the loose uRPF is oblivious to directionality, and the current feasible-path uRPF attempts to strike a balance between the two (see RFC 3704). However, as shown in this document, the existing feasible-path uRPF still has shortcomings. This document describes enhanced feasible-path uRPF (EFP-uRPF) techniques that are more flexible (in a meaningful way) about directionality than the feasible-path uRPF (RFC 3704). The proposed EFP-uRPF methods aim to significantly reduce false positives regarding invalid detection in source address validation (SAV). Hence, they can potentially alleviate ISPs' concerns about the possibility of disrupting service for their customers and encourage greater deployment of uRPF techniques. This document updates RFC 3704.
RFC9099 - Operational Security Considerations for IPv6 Networks: Knowledge and experience on how to operate IPv4 networks securely is available, whether the operator is an Internet Service Provider (ISP) or an enterprise internal network. However, IPv6 presents some new security challenges. RFC 4942 describes security issues in the protocol, but network managers also need a more practical, operations-minded document to enumerate advantages and/or disadvantages of certain choices.; This document analyzes the operational security issues associated with several types of networks and proposes technical and procedural mitigation techniques. This document is only applicable to managed networks, such as enterprise networks, service provider networks, or managed residential networks.
RFC9288 - Recommendations on the Filtering of IPv6 Packets Containing IPv6 Extension Headers at Transit Routers: This document analyzes the security implications of IPv6 Extension Headers and associated IPv6 options. Additionally, it discusses the operational and interoperability implications of discarding packets based on the IPv6 Extension Headers and IPv6 options they contain. Finally, it provides advice on the filtering of such IPv6 packets at transit routers for traffic not directed to them, for those cases where such filtering is deemed as necessary.
RFC9424 - Indicators of Compromise (IoCs) and Their Role in Attack Defence: Cyber defenders frequently rely on Indicators of Compromise (IoCs) to identify, trace, and block malicious activity in networks or on endpoints. This document reviews the fundamentals, opportunities, operational limitations, and recommendations for IoC use. It highlights the need for IoCs to be detectable in implementations of Internet protocols, tools, and technologies -- both for the IoCs' initial discovery and their use in detection -- and provides a foundation for approaches to operational challenges in network security.
RFC9511 - Attribution of Internet Probes: Active measurements over the public Internet can target either collaborating parties or non-collaborating ones. Sometimes these measurements, also called "probes", are viewed as unwelcome or aggressive.; This document suggests some simple techniques for a source to identify its probes. This allows any party or organization to understand what an unsolicited probe packet is, what its purpose is, and, most importantly, who to contact. The technique relies on offline analysis of the probe; therefore, it does not require any change in the data or control plane. It has been designed mainly for layer 3 measurements.