Re: [tor-dev] Proposition: Applying an AONT to Prop224 addresses?

[Alec Muffett <alec.muffett@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 3 April 2017 at 13:04, George Kadianakis <desnacked@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I'm calling it weird because I'm not sure how an

attacker can profit from being able to provide two addresses that
correspond to the same key, but I can probably come up with a few
scenarios if I think about it.

Hi George!

I'll agree it's a weird edge case :-)

I think the reason my spider-sense is tingling is because years of cleaning up after intrusions has taught me that sysadmins and human beings are very bad at non-canonical address formats, especially where they combine them with either blacklisting, or else case-statements-with-default-conditions.

If one creates scope for saying "the address is <foo>.onion but you can actually use <foo'>.onion or <foo''>.onion which are equivalent" - then someone will somehow leverage that either a) for hackery, or b) for social engineering.

Compare:

* http://017700000001 

* http://2130706433 

* http://0177.0.0.1  <- this one tends to surprise people

* http://127.0.0.1 

…and the sort of fun shenanigans that can be done with those "equivalent forms"

People who've been trained not to type [X] into their browser, might be convinced to type [X']

It's a lot easier for people to cope with there being one-and-only-one viable form for any given hostname or address-representation.

    -a

 -- 

http://dropsafe.crypticide.com/aboutalecm

_______________________________________________
tor-dev mailing list
tor-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev