TLS 1.3 Impact on Network-Based Security
draft-camwinget-tls-use-cases-02

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2018-07-02
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text pdf html bibtex
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
Network Working Group                                       F. Andreasen
Internet-Draft                                             N. Cam-Winget
Intended status: Informational                                   E. Wang
Expires: January 3, 2019                                   Cisco Systems
                                                           July 02, 2018

                TLS 1.3 Impact on Network-Based Security
                    draft-camwinget-tls-use-cases-02

Abstract

   Network-based security solutions are used by enterprises, public
   sector, and cloud service providers today in order to both complement
   and augment host-based security solutions.  TLS 1.3 introduces
   several changes to TLS 1.2 with a goal to improve the overall
   security and privacy provided by TLS.  However some of these changes
   have a negative impact on network-based security solutions.  While
   this may be viewed as a feature, there are several real-life use case
   scenarios that are not easily solved without such network-based
   security solutions.  In this document, we identify the TLS 1.3
   changes that may impact network-based security solutions and provide
   a set of use case scenarios that are not easily solved without such
   solutions.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on January 3, 2019.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

Andreasen, et al.        Expires January 3, 2019                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft                     I-D                         July 2018

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

1.  Introduction

   Enterprises, public sector, and cloud service providers need to
   defend their information systems from attacks originating from both
   inside and outside their networks.  Protection and detection are
   typically done both on end hosts and in the network.  Host agents
   have deep visibility on the devices where they are installed, whereas
   the network has broader visibility and provides homogenous security
   controls across heterogenous endpoints, covering devices for which no
   host monitoring is available (which is common today and is
   increasingly so in the Internet of Things).  This helps protect
   against unauthorized devices installed by insiders, and provides a
   fallback in case the infection of a host disables its security agent.
   Because of these advantages, network-based security mechanisms are
   widely used.  In fact, regulatory standards such as NERC CIP
   [NERCCIP] place strong requirements about network perimeter security
   and its ability to have visibility to provide security information to
   the security management and control systems.  At the same time, the
   privacy of employees, customers, and other users must be respected by
   minimizing the collection of personal data and controlling access to
   what data is collected.  These imperatives hold for both end host and
   network based security monitoring.

   Network-based security solutions such as Firewalls (FW) and Intrusion
   Prevention Systems (IPS) rely on network traffic inspection to
   implement perimeter-based security policies.  Depending on the
   security functions required, these middleboxes can either be deployed
   as traffic monitoring devices or active in-line devices.  A traffic
   monitoring middlebox may for example perform vulnerability detection,
   intrusion detection, crypto audit, compliance monitoring, etc.  An
   active in-line middlebox may for example prevent malware download,
   block known malicious URLs, enforce use of strong ciphers, stop data
   exfiltration, etc.  A significant portion of such security policies
   require clear-text traffic inspection above Layer 4, which becomes
Show full document text