Embed
Email

IPSec Implementation

Document Sample

Shared by: yaoyufang
Categories
Tags
Stats
views:
0
posted:
12/7/2011
language:
pages:
23
IPSec Implementation



Kevin Fleming

Department of Pathology

University of Washington

Outline

 What is IPSec?

 Why do we want to use it?

 How does IPSec work?

 Case study – UW Pathology’s

implementation

What is IPSec?

 IP Security is a set of protocols and

standards to support the securing of data at

the IP layer. IPSec is a framework, not an

implementation.

 Supports authentication and encryption of

traffic.

– Certifies the originator of the packet.

– Protects the data from interception and

tampering while in transit.

Why do we want to use IPSec?

 Secure our network

 Transparent operation

– IPSec allows us to secure any IP based protocol

transparent to the application.

– Support for legacy software which is inherently

insecure (telnet,ftp,SMB).

– An alternative mechanism to implementing

application level security such as using SSL.

 Widest industry support e.g. Cisco, Microsoft,

Network Associates, CheckPoint Software, Bay

Networks, etc.

 IETF standard – Will be mandatory in IPv6

Why not use IPSec?

 Processor overhead to encrypt & verify

each packet can be great.

 Added complexity in network design.

IPSec Modes

 Transport – Secures the payload part of the

IP packet, leaves the IP header unsecured.

Commonly use for securing traffic on a

LAN.

 Tunnel – Secures the entire IP packet and

encapsulates it within a new IP packet.

Commonly used for creating a VPN.

IPSec protocols – AH protocol

 AH - Authentication Header

– Defined in RFC 1826

– Integrity: Yes, including IP header

– Authentication: Yes

– Non-repudiation: Depends on cryptography algorithm.

– Encryption: No

– Replay Protection: Yes

Transport Packet layout

IP Header AH Header Payload (TCP, UDP, etc)

Tunnel Packet layout

IP Header AH Header IP Header Payload (TCP. UDP,etc)

IPSec protocols – ESP protocol

 ESP – Encapsulating Security Payload

– Defined in RFC 1827

– Integrity: Yes

– Authentication: Depends on cryptography algorithm.

– Non-repudiation: No

– Encryption: Yes

– Replay Protection: Yes

Transport Packet layout

IP Header ESP Header Payload (TCP, UDP, etc)

Tunnel Packet layout

IP Header ESP Header IP Header Payload (TCP. UDP,etc)



Unencrypted Encrypted

What protocol to use?

 Differences between AH and ESP:

– ESP provides encryption, AH does not.

– AH provides integrity of the IP header, ESP does not.

– AH can provide non-repudiation. ESP does not.

 However, we don’t have to choose since both

protocols can be used in together.

 Why have two protocols?

– Some countries have strict laws on encryption. If you

can’t use encryption in those countries, AH still

provides good security mechanisms. Two protocols

ensures wide acceptance of IPSec on the Internet.

Security Associations

 One of the most important concepts in IPSec is called a

Security Association (SA). Defined in RFC 1825.

 SAs are the combination of a given Security Parameter

Index (SPI) and Destination Address.

 SAs are one way. A minimum of two SAs are required for

a single IPSec connection.

 SAs contain parameters including:

– Authentication algorithm and algorithm mode

– Encryption algorithm and algorithm mode

– Key(s) used with the authentication/encryption algorithm(s)

– Lifetime of the key

– Lifetime of the SA

– Source Address(es) of the SA

– Sensitivity level (ie Secret or Unclassified)

How IPSec works: Phase 1

 Internet Key Exchange (IKE) is used to setup IPSec.

 IKE Phase 1:

– Establishes a secure, authenticated channel between the two computers

– Authenticates and protects the identities of the peers

– Negotiates what SA policy to use

– Performs an authenticated shared secret keys exchange

– Sets up a secure tunnel for phase 2

– Two modes: Main mode or Aggressive mode

 Main Mode IKE

1. Negotiate algorithms & hashes.

2. Generate shared secret keys using a Diffie-Hillman exchange.

3. Verification of Identities.

 Aggressive Mode IKE

– Squeezes all negotiation, key exchange, etc. into less packets.

– Advantage: Less network traffic & faster than main mode.

– Disadvantage: Information exchanged before a secure channel is

created. Vulnerable to sniffing.

How IPSec works: Phase 2

– An AH or ESP packet is then sent using the agreed

upon “main” SA during the IKE phase 1.

– IKE Phase 2

• Negotiates IPSec SA parameters

• Establishes IPSec security associations for specific connections

(like FTP, telnet, etc)

• Renegotiates IPSec SAs periodically

• Optionally performs an additional Diffie-Hellman exchange

How IPSec works: Communication

 Once Phase 2 has established an SA for a

particular connection, all traffic on that connection

is communicated using the SA.

 IKE Phase 1 exchange uses UDP Port 500.

 AH uses IP protocol 51.

 ESP uses IP protocol 50.

Case Study: UW Pathology

 A network with 200 workstations, 100 thin clients and 30

servers used by 500+ users.

 Spans Health Sciences Building, UWMC, Harborview, and

Roosevelt clinics.

 Network is a Windows 2000 Active Directory domain

running on top of an IP based Ethernet infrastructure.

 Network spans over 30 different IP subnets.

 A variety of networking infrastructure including 10Mbps

shared, 100Mbps switched, and 1Gbps switched.

Case Study: Goals

 Goals:

– Initially secure VNC, MS SQL traffic, and MS

NetBIOS (SMB) traffic.

– Provide this security transparently. Could not do

application level security (e.g. SSL) with these services.

– Provide another layer of protection for workstations.

– Integrate seamlessly into existing environment.

 Technologies used:

– UW Pathology runs a Windows 2000 Active Directory

infrastructure. Therefore Microsoft Windows IPSec

implementation was chosen.

Case Study: Design Concepts

 Make workstation rules as simple as possible for

ease of implementation and to ensure transparent

migration to IPSec on the network.

 Make server rules control what traffic should be

secured. This allows a one server at a time

migration to IPSec.

 Don’t try to protect everything. Use IPSec as a

tool to protect certain services.

 Authenticate systems against the AD domain.

 Centralized deployment by Group Policy.

Case Study: General Design

 When using IPSec security:

– Use ESP with 3DES and SHA-1.

– Use Kerberos authentication against AD.

– Accept unsecured communication, but always

reply with IPSec.

– Generate new keys ever 100MB or 60 mins.

 Permit unencrypted traffic to WINS &

Domain Controller servers.

Case Study: Workstation Policy

 Enable a Default IPSec response rule that allows

negotiation of policies with the servers.

 Secure VNC &

NetBIOS traffic.

Case Study: Server Policy

 Enable Default response.

 Define different policies based upon services that

require protection.

Case Study: IPSec Helpful hints

 Do not enable IPSec for the entire system (Microsoft’s

built-in “Secure Server” policy). This is a bad idea

because the system will not be able to access any systems

not running IPSec such as DNS and Web.

 Every system on the AD domain must be able to logon via

the network to other systems otherwise Kerberos

authentication fails.

 Remember to always add the “Default Response” to

computers, otherwise you will have to explicitly setup

every type of IPSec policy it should respond to.

 Remember to open up UDP Port 88 & 500, TCP Port 88,

and IP protocols 50 & 51 through any firewalls.

 Do not use IPSec on Domain Controllers. Only setup

Domain Controllers to have the “Default Response”.

Case Study: IPSec Windows Tools

 Netdiag on the W2K resource kit shows a lot of

information about IPSec policies on the system.

Run: netdiag /test:ipsec /debug

 IPSecmon.exe on W2K shows active SAs.

 On WinXP, use the MMC “IP Security Monitor”

 Enable Debug logging:

– HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\System\CurrentControlSet\Services\IPSEC\DiagnosticMode=DWORD:1

– HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\PolicyAgent\Oakley\EnableLogging=DW

ORD:1

Case Study: Conclusions

 IPSec successfully protected Pathology systems

from RPC DCOM attacks.

 No noticeable slowdowns although system

processor usage increased. NIC cards that offload

encryption tasks greatly help.

 Microsoft’s IPSec implementation is buggy.

– SA synchronization issue (?). Systems do not negotiate

for appx. 30 minutes.

References:

 http://www.forsitesolutions.com/Techstuff/freeswan/ipsec_overview.html

 http://www.informit.com/content/index.asp?product_id=%7BC7E9CB3C%2D2995%2D

4EC6%2D9CCF%2DE0D8823516AA%7D

 Microsoft Help files & White papers

 RFCs 1825,1826,1827



Related docs
Other docs by yaoyufang
Installing_NLB_For_A_Server_Switch
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
Graduate programmes _Task Force 2_
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
Moral Dilemmas
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
“Swiss Army PDA” Web site
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
I98v2p566
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
Euromat 2011 Symposium G11 Questionnaire
Views: 3  |  Downloads: 0
thesis proposal
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
re44gm
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
By registering with docstoc.com you agree to our
privacy policy

You are almost ready to download!

You are almost ready to download!