Hi Michael!

I think you mix up two unrelated topics. One, how your name servers are 
connected together and how routing and High-Availability is managed in your 
(virtual) network. The second thing is which protocol to use for zone 
transfers. IMO they have nothing to do with each other.

For the network part, other mailing lists may be better suited,

For the DNS part, it depends on your policy, and what are the dangers you want 
to protect DNS zone transfers from. If you trust your internal network, and you 
are sure that the DNS never traverses public Internet (due to the VPN), then 
there is nothing the protect from and plain AXFR over TCP would be fine.

If you want to protect your zone transfers also internally where there is no 
VPN anymore, then you need some more:
- Protection from sniffing (e.g. your DNS data is not public, and has secrets 
inside): Then you need to use encryption on the application, i.e. XoT. Do not 
use XoT with ephemeral TLS as it is vulnerable to MITM.
- Protection from manipulation: Here you can use either TSIG (with our without 
TLS) or XoT with mutual TLS

TLS uses private and public keys for encryption and authentication, and either 
you use self-signed or public signed certificates.
TSIG uses a pre-shared key

Regards
Klaus

--
Klaus Darilion, Head of Operations
nic.at GmbH, Jakob-Haringer-Straße 8/V
5020 Salzburg, Austria

From: bind-users <bind-users-boun...@lists.isc.org> On Behalf Of Michael De 
Roover
Sent: Saturday, March 8, 2025 7:36 AM
To: bind-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: Some operational questions about TSIG / XoT


Hi all,


Currently I'm reading a couple of articles about TSIG and XoT, to better 
understand how XFR between networks can be done securely. For this, I am 
currently looking at these resources:


- https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc9103.html

- https://dnsprivacy.org/encrypted-zone-transfer/

- https://bind9.readthedocs.io/en/stable/chapter7.html#tsig


Not directly related:

- https://kb.isc.org/docs/aa-00851#example-3-adding-a-second-server

Perhaps the footnote "Further information on TSIG" could use a re-reference to 
Chapter 7.5? Nonetheless, this is how I found the TSIG documentation.


Currently, the network configuration would be three LANs that talk to each 
other over two VPNs (WireGuard). The primary LAN has 3 name servers, 1 primary 
and 2 secondaries. Only ns1 is expected to perform XFR, maybe ns2 if need be. 
Not sure how that affects operational availability vs. security.


The secondary LAN is a more fleshed out version of a road warrior setup, it is 
what I take with me for travel. This has one or two name servers at most. Each 
of these networks has a local zone, for which it is a local primary and 
secondary for the other.


The third network is just something internal to my laptop, so it can be a child 
of either of the previous networks, or whatever else that laptop connects to 
(via double NAT).


They each communicate with each other via a gateway / set of VRRP gateways, 
over the WireGuard tunnels. During XFR receipt, the receiving DNS server sees 
the XFR as if it's coming from that local gateway. This is.. not ideal.


So that's where TSIG or XoT would come into play. So far, it seems that TSIG is 
just a signed plaintext transfer, while XoT would encapsulate the whole thing 
in TLS. Both of them seem to have their merits, but would XoT be necessary if 
WireGuard is encrypting the "public" part of the connection anyway?


Another thing I noticed in VRRP in particular, is that by default it uses 
anycast and just passes on the secret itself in plain to all network members. 
So anyone with a packet sniffer can just.. well, sniff it and pull a "look at 
me, I am the gateway now". Unicast is possible but not default and seemingly 
only for keepalived. How's the situation here with TSIG? Are the transactions 
only given a signature, or the shared secret itself?


As far as XoT is concerned, I like that it adds another layer of encryption, 
but that would have to be self-signed. Also, how's that for troubleshooting? 
I'd rather not have to deal with the pain in the rear of TLS MiTM during such 
times. So far I think I'm more inclined towards just having WireGuard deal with 
that, and leave everything else transparent to me. But any amount of anycast or 
secrets exposure would be a dealbreaker here.


What are your thoughts on this?


N.B.: I liked this note in the views article: "DNS servers are social creatures 
and like to have company, so the operator of this network has decided to add a 
second DNS server."


Your work on the ARM is amazing Suzanne, and indeed we/they are :)

--

Met vriendelijke groet,

Michael De Roover


Mail: i...@nixmagic.com<mailto:i...@nixmagic.com>

Web: michael.de.roover.eu.org
-- 
Visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from 
this list

ISC funds the development of this software with paid support subscriptions. 
Contact us at https://www.isc.org/contact/ for more information.


bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users

Reply via email to