[Search] [txt|pdf|bibtex] [Tracker] [Email] [Nits]

Versions: 00                                                            
Network Working Group                                        Craig Metz
Internet Draft                                            The Inner Net
draft-metz-spasv-00.txt                                January 15, 1998





                 Short Passive (SPASV) Command for FTP




Status of this Memo

     This  document  is  an Internet Draft.  Internet Drafts are working
   documents.

     Internet Drafts are draft  documents  valid  for  a  maximum  of  6
   months.   Internet  Drafts  may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by
   other documents at any time.  It is not appropriate to  use  Internet
   Drafts  as  reference material or to cite them other than as "work in
   progress".

Abstract

     RFC 1639[Pis94] documents experimental long port  (LPRT)  and  long
   passive  (LPSV)  commands  that many IP Version 6 implementations are
   using as the replacement for  the  PORT  and  PASV  commands  in  FTP
   [PR85].  The  author believes that this is the incorrect direction to
   be heading and that the replacement for PORT and  PASV  should  carry
   less information instead of more.

     The  passive command (SPASV) is a replacement for the PASV command.
   It only carries port numbers and does not carry addresses. This makes
   it  usable with IPv4 and IPv6. A benefit of not carrying addresses is
   that pure network address translators (NAT)  do  not  have  to  do  a
   search-and-replace   on   the  TCP  stream,  which  is  an  expensive
   operation.  This also eliminates three-way FTP,  which  is  a  rarely
   used  mode  of  operation  that leaves most existing FTP servers wide
   open to the FTP Bounce Attack [Hob95]. Because the FTP  PORT  command
   is  unfriendly  to  some kinds of firewall configurations [Bel94] and
   that unfriendliness is there to support three-way FTP,  there  is  no
   replacement  for the PORT command -- all transfers should use passive
   mode instead.

     The author's inet6-apps kit (available  on  ftp.ipv6.inner.net  and
   ftp.inner.net) includes a client and server that supports the current



Metz                       Expires in 6 months                  [Page 1]


Internet Draft         Short Port Commands for FTP      5 September 1997


   version of these commands. Those FTP servers implement this  command.

1. Introduction

     The  FTP protocol defines two commands that are used to control the
   addresses and ports used for data connections. The first is the  PORT
   command, with syntax of:

     PORT a1,a2,a3,a4,p1,p2<CRLF>

     And a success response of 200.

     The second is the PASV command, with a syntax of:

     PASV<CRLF>

     And a success response of:

     227 Entering Passive Mode. a1,a2,a3,a4,p1,p2<CRLF>

     These commands carry four bytes of address information to make a 32
   bit IPv4 address. To carry IPv6 addresses,  these  commands  must  be
   changed.  The  FOOBAR  approach is to use a long port command, with a
   syntax of:

     LPRT af,hal,h1,h2,h3,h4...,pal,p1,p2...<CRLF>

     And a success response of 200.

     FOOBAR also defines a long passive command, with a syntax of:

     LPSV<CRLF>

     And a success response of:

     228 Entering Long Passive Mode
         (af, hal, h1, h2, h3,..., pal, p1, p2...)

     The long port and long passive commands are a more flexible version
   of  the  original  PORT  and  PASV  commands  that  can handle longer
   addresses  and  port  numbers.  It  has  the  same   advantages   and
   disadvantages  as the original design.  The author's  opinion is that
   the replacements for PORT and  PASV  should  modify  this  design  to
   reflect current experiences and requirements.

     The  File  Transfer  Protocol was designed to support a "three-way"
   mode of operation in which a server can be directed to send a file to
   a  system  other  than  the  client. This feature is easily abused to



Metz                       Expires in 6 months                  [Page 2]


Internet Draft         Short Port Commands for FTP      5 September 1997


   create the FTP Bounce Attack.  In his paper on this  attack,  [Hob95]
   rather  bluntly  characterizes  the  attack:  "The  mechanism used is
   probably well-known, but to date interest in detailing or  fixing  it
   seems  low  to nonexistent. ... It is chosen in an effort to make the
   reader sit up and notice that there  are  some  really  ill-conceived
   aspects of the standard FTP protocol." The fix for this attack is for
   servers to verify that the address sent in the PORT  command  matches
   the  far  address on the TCP control connection. Because the server's
   TCP stack must maintain the control  connection  address  anyway  and
   must  check  that  the PORT argument matches, the address argument to
   the PORT command  is  redundant  and  only  serves  to  create  extra
   processing.

     The  address  argument  to  the  PORT command creates headaches for
   implementors of  Network  Address  Translators  (NATs)  because  that
   address  information  must  be translated along with the addresses on
   packets. However, unlike other addresses on packets, the PORT command
   arguments  are  at  the application layer, above the telnet protocol,
   which is in turn above TCP. NATs have to re-assemble the  TCP  stream
   and  then  decode  the telnet protocol looking for the PORT command's
   arguments. Once found, these boxen have to synthesize a  new  stream.
   Changing  the  TCP  stream, and possibly the length of the string, in
   transit is a very expensive operation. Two alternatives to doing this
   are:

     1. To implement the search-and-replace in a faster but less correct
        manner making certain assumptions (the path many existing NAT
        implementors chose to take, and a dangerous one), which means
        that some commands can be missed.
     2. To not put the address information in the PORT commands.

     The  short  passive  command  makes  life  much  easier  for  those
   implementing NATs because there is no address  to  be  translated  in
   those  commands.  Also,  by removing the address information from the
   PORT commands, IPv4 and IPv6 addresses and  other  stream  transports
   are naturally supported. Note that a form of NAT being considered for
   use in the transition to IPv6, the  IPv6  to  IPv4  translator,  also
   benefits from the short port commands.

     There  is only a short passive command and not a short port command
   because the short port command's operation is somewhat odd  in  order
   to  support three-way FTP, which is eliminated in the short commands.
   Most Internet protocols work by having a  client  open  one  or  more
   connections  to a server, which then returns data. FTP using the PORT
   command stands out as one of the few protocols that doesn't work this
   way;  the  client  opens one connection to the server, and the server
   opens one or more connections back to the client. [Bel94] says  about
   this,  "this  connection  is  set  up  by an active open from the FTP



Metz                       Expires in 6 months                  [Page 3]


Internet Draft         Short Port Commands for FTP      5 September 1997


   server to the FTP client. However, this scheme  does  not  work  well
   with  packet  filter-based  firewalls, which in general cannot permit
   incoming calls to random port numbers."

2. Syntax

     The short passive command's syntax is:

     SPASV<CRLF>

     The success response to this command is:

     229 Entering Passive Mode. <service><CRLF>

     Where <service> is a printable service name  in  numeric  form,  as
   would  be  returned by the IPv6 BSD API's getnameinfo() function with
   the NI_NUMERICSERV flag set and suitable for  passing  to  the  POSIX
   p1003.1g  getaddrinfo()  function. Note that for IP versions 4 and 6,
   this will be the string representation of a  decimal  number  between
   one and 65535.

     The  failure responses to this command are the same as for the PASV
   command in FTP.

3. Security Considerations

     This document describes a  protocol  extension  that,  among  other
   things,  designs  away  a  security  hole in the current FTP protocol
   known as the FTP Bounce Attack and is more friendly to some kinds  of
   firewall configurations.  This extension is believed by the author to
   otherwise have the same security properties as the protocol  commands
   (PORT and PASV) it replaces.

Acknowledgments

     This  work  was  done  at  the  Center  for High Assurance Computer
   Systems  at  the  U.S.  Naval  Research  Laboratory.  This  work  was
   sponsored  by the Information Security Program Office (PMW-161), U.S.
   Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command (SPAWAR)  and  the  Computing
   Systems  Technology Office, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
   (DARPA/CSTO). The author and his co-workers really appreciates  their
   sponsorship  of  NRL's  network  security efforts and their continued
   support of IPsec development. Without that  support,  this  document,
   among many others, would not exist.

     Mike  Allman  suggested  replacing the FTP-style decimal ports that
   were used in an earlier version of this draft with a  more  protocol-
   independent value.



Metz                       Expires in 6 months                  [Page 4]


Internet Draft         Short Port Commands for FTP      5 September 1997


     D.  J.  Bernstein  pointed  out that only passive mode is needed if
   three-way FTP is eliminated.

References

   [Bel94]  S. Bellovin, "Firewall-Friendly FTP", RFC 1579, February
            1994.

   [Hob95]  "*Hobbit*", "The FTP Bounce Attack", July 1995.
            (ftp.avian.org:/random/ftp-attack)

   [Pis94]  D. Piscitello, "FTP Operation Over Big Address Records
            (FOOBAR)", RFC 1639, June 1994.

   [PR85]   J. Postel and J. Reynolds, "File Transfer Protocol (FTP)",
            RFC 959, October 1985.

Disclaimer

     The views and specification here are those of the  author  and  are
   not  necessarily  those  of his employer. His employer has not passed
   judgment on the merits, if any, of this  work.  The  author  and  his
   employer   specifically  disclaim  responsibility  for  any  problems
   arising from correct or  incorrect  implementation  or  use  of  this
   specification.

Author's Address

              Craig Metz
              The Inner Net
              Box 10314-1933
              Blacksburg, VA 24062-0314
              Phone:  (DSN) 354-8590
              E-mail: cmetz@inner.net

















Metz                       Expires in 6 months                  [Page 5]