CS 259 IKEv 2 extension MOBIKE Faisal Memon

CS 259 IKEv 2 extension: MOBIKE Faisal Memon Erik Weathers

MOBIKE u. IKEv 2 Mobility and Multihoming Protocol • As defined in draft-ietf-mobike-protocol-07. txt • Main purpose – For roaming devices (devices which move and hence have changing IP addresses), that want to keep the existing IKE and IPsec SAs in place despite the IP address changing, and without requiring a full rekey. • Secondary purpose – Multihomed (multiple interface) device which decides to change its IKE endpoint IP. Could be a result of link failure or other conditions.

MOBIKE Init and AUTH Exchanges HDR, KEi, Ni I HDR, KEr, Nr HDR, {IDi, AUTH, MOBIKE}KIR HDR, {IDr, AUTH, MOBIKE}KIR Typical IKEv 2 init exchange, with notify declaring support for MOBIKE. R

MOBIKE Address Change Exchange HDR, {Update. SA_Address}KIR I 2 HDR, {ACK}KIR HDR, {Cookie}KIR Initiator IP address changed to I 2. Cookie exchange is for optional return routability verification. R

IKEv 2 General Attacks • Replay Attack • Prevented by nonces and also by message IDs in the cryptographically protected IKE header (HDR) • MITM Attack • Prevented by AUTH payload in IKE_AUTH exchange • Do. S • Very difficult to handle, but an optional cookie exchange prior to DH exponentiation is included in IKEv 2 to prevent spoof attacks from forcing expensive exponentiation.

IKEv 2 Exchanges I {HDR, {Payload}KIR-E}KIR-A • All IKEv 2 requests are ACKed. • After the IKE_INIT exchange, all messages are encrypted and MACed. R

IKEv 2 MITM Attack HDR, KEi, Ni I HDR, KEa, Nr HDR, KEa, Ni A HDR, KEr, Nr Typical IKEv 2 init exchange, with attacker A attempting MITM attack by substituing his own DH values. R

IKEv 2 MITM Attack Prevention HDR, IDI, {AUTH}KIA I HDR, IDA, {AUTH}KAR A HDR, IDR, {AUTH}KAR R Typical IKEv 2 AUTH exchange, thwarting A’s MITM attack when AUTH payload is checked by responder. The AUTH payload is an integrity checksum defined as 1 of: • AUTH = MAC({1 st msg we sent, ID’, Nonce of partner}, key derived from shared secret) • AUTH = SIG({1 st msg we sent, ID’, Nonce of partner}, our private key)

MOBIKE Possible Attacks • IKEv 2 general attacks are still prevented by same mechanisms. • Traffic Redirection and Do. S of 3 rd parties • NATs are permitted (general case) • Layer 3 & 4 headers are unprotected and unauthenticated (so NATs can work) • Thus allowing Do. S is allowed • IPSec SAs are switched to the source IP in UPDATE_SA_ADDRESS request • Seems attacker can just replace source IP with arbitrary one • 2 mechanisms help limit attacks to simple Do. Ses • Return routability exchange • attacker cannot generate reply unless he knows the IKE session keys. • IKEv 2 request ACKing • if the UPDATE_SA_ADDRESS request isn’t ACKed, the client will resend it.

MOBIKE Possible Attacks • When NATs are not allowed (e. g. site-tosite situation with controlled path) the overwriting of source IP by an attacker is detected by inclusion of the new address in the protected portion of the UPDATE_SA_ADDRESS request.

Return Routability Prevents Attack NAT I 1 UPDATE_SA_ADDRESS ACK I 2 UPDATE_SA_ADDRESS NAT ACK A R COOKIE 2 Attacker cannot send COOKIE 2 reply since he doesn’t know session key

MOBIKE Modeling • Modeled in Murφ • 4 agents involved • Initiator-prime (post address change) • Responder • Intruder controls network • Acts as sink for network messages, forwarding them out to all possible recipients from all possible sources. • Cannot modify protected portions of IKE messages.

MOBIKE Modeling • Modeled as state machine with 8 states • 8 messages types • IP addresses are modeled with agent IDs • ID payloads are modeled with the corresponding agent ID • Nonces are random numbers • Cookies are random numbers • AUTH payload is made up of shared secret known only to the initiator and the responder. • IKE HDR is modeled as a message id (one field in the actual IKE HDR).

MOBIKE Modeling cont. • Message is a union of all 8 IKE messages. Not all fields will be used in all messages. • SA’s and TS’s (traffic selector) are not modeled. • NAT detection is not modeled. • Invariants • Check that both the responder and initiator correctly authenticate with each other and complete the state machine. • Message correctness • Verify the AUTH payload • Verify the ID is equal to the source. • Verify the cookie for the return routability test.