Podcast
Root Causes 327: What Is Multi-perspective Domain Validation? (MPIC)
Hosted by
Jason Soroko
Fellow
Original broadcast date
August 18, 2023
In this episode we explain Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) attacks and how multi-perspective domain validation (MPDV, also known as multi-vantage point domain validation - MPIC) can defeat them.
Podcast transcript
Lightly edited for flow and brevity.
TCTim CallanToday, we want to define what is multi-perspective domain validation. So this is a new thing that is picking up steam but maybe before we get there, why don't we start with why multi-perspective domain validation even is a discussion we're having, which is to say let's start with what is a BGP attack?
So Jason, BGP, which stands for Border Gateway Protocol, what is BGP attack?
So Jason, BGP, which stands for Border Gateway Protocol, what is BGP attack?
TCTim CallanFind some server somewhere in the world that physically exists somewhere, finds the right server and gets the right stuff. It's mind blowing. It always has been to me.
Well, don't forget, the internet is decentralized. And so the off ramps, the analogy to the off ramps on the internet to get to your location as you're traveling down the intertubes, well, those exit signs are decentralized, and there is no state authority to be able to determine exit here in order to get to this particular IP address, as an example. And so BGP is the routing protocol that provides the directions. We could get into real technical mumbo jumbo here, but part of the reasoning that you need BGP is because of the scalability of the internet. If you think of the analogy of the highway, well, not too many new highways are built on a daily basis, but think about how many new routes on the internet are created on a daily basis? A ton.
So BGP is a way to be able to quickly create signage. I'll stick with that analogy. Quickly be able to create that signage so that the intention is to allow the Internet to grow and to change and be very dynamic, so that all the routings can be figured out and announced to one another in nearly real time, which is an incredible achievement of human intellect that I think we should all be very proud of. The internet really is an amazing invention. However, however, think like a bad guy for a moment.
TCTim CallanYou used the word announced there. I think that's important.
TCTim CallanNow, because these are rogue announcements though, Jason - correct me if I'm wrong - they are non-ubiquitous. So I can start to announce a false announcement and there will be, for want of a better word, I'll say a local zone of internet traffic will be tricked into my bad road signs but other people in other zones will not be. Correct?
TCTim CallanSo it's kind of a checkered result.
TCTim CallanAnd this is very important.
TCTim CallanSo, I as the CA, if I am subject to a BGP attack, then these rogue announcements caused me to look at the wrong place and so you come in as a certificate requester requesting a certificate for a domain you don't actually own. You use a BGP attack. So I send you a secret, you put the shared secret in HTTP on the wrong address, and you use a BGP attack to misdirect me to that place. I see the shared secret and now the whole process is complete. And I say, ah-ha. I have established indeed your ownership of that domain, because you had the shared secret, therefore, I can issue you a certificate. So now I've given you a certificate for a domain name that you don't actually control. And this is the worry?
TCTim CallanHere’s a shared secret. Hang it on your doorstep.
TCTim CallanI'll drive by and see if it's there.
TCTim CallanI drive to the wrong street in the wrong neighborhood. I see the secret hanging on your doorstep where you've told me it's going to be and I say, ok. This is legit.
TCTim CallanAnd so some interesting academic work has been done on this in the last year or two, showing that this is actually really viable. I'm not sure we're seeing these attacks in the wild much but definitely researchers have demonstrated unambiguously that this is a viable thing that could really be done.
TCTim CallanAnd that's all in the word, isn't it? Multi-perspective domain validation. So the general idea is simple. What's the basic idea, Jason?
TCTim CallanAnd sometimes they call it multi-vantage point domain validation. Which gives you - also kind of indicates the same thing. It's coming from different vantage points. And so that gets around it. So what you do is you launch a bunch of these different, I don’t know what you want to kind of say. You go and look for multi different vantage points, which can be easily achieved. You can connect to a service or operate a service that's just geographically remote or in some other way, virtually disconnected. And in so doing, you can actually get a different BGP landscape and it's not really practical to change all the signs to go to your earlier analogy.
TCTim CallanAnd this also has been validated by researchers. We also have seen academic researchers who have set up BGP style attacks within somewhere they can control it and in an ethical way, have then turned around and used multidomain DCV to see what happens and indeed, it really does defeat the attack, because you can't change all the signs.
TCTim CallanIt's great. Let's talk about where this stands. This is pretty new thinking in general in the grand scheme of things. First of all, there is not a widespread prevalent spate of real world BGP certificate CA attacks today. So it's not like this as a bleeding wound kind of problem, as you’ve said.
It also is not really as yet built into any of our real standards. So there's no requirement from CA/Browser forum, or ETSI, or any of the major root programs that DCV be conducted this way. If public CAs are doing DCV, multi-vantage DCV or not, they are doing it without talking about it. So we can't say the degree to which this is actually used in the real world today, but my money is mostly not used if I had had to make a prediction.
And so one of the other things that we've seen as this has started to show up as a topic of conversation and again, we're not at the point where there's a ballot looming or anything like that, but we're seeing this being discussed in places like those standards bodies. We're seeing it being discussed on places like MSDP. We're seeing it being discussed by people like root programs and public CAs and so I feel like this is the direction the wind is blowing, and I predict that we're going to hear more about this topic and that somewhere down the road, this is going to become first an accepted standard and then eventually a hard requirement. And I do think that's the direction that these things are going.
It also is not really as yet built into any of our real standards. So there's no requirement from CA/Browser forum, or ETSI, or any of the major root programs that DCV be conducted this way. If public CAs are doing DCV, multi-vantage DCV or not, they are doing it without talking about it. So we can't say the degree to which this is actually used in the real world today, but my money is mostly not used if I had had to make a prediction.
And so one of the other things that we've seen as this has started to show up as a topic of conversation and again, we're not at the point where there's a ballot looming or anything like that, but we're seeing this being discussed in places like those standards bodies. We're seeing it being discussed on places like MSDP. We're seeing it being discussed by people like root programs and public CAs and so I feel like this is the direction the wind is blowing, and I predict that we're going to hear more about this topic and that somewhere down the road, this is going to become first an accepted standard and then eventually a hard requirement. And I do think that's the direction that these things are going.
TCTim CallanIt’s an engineering project. I mean, it's not like you don't just snap your fingers, and it's done. So part of it, of course, is all of these things need to be figured out and tested and vetted and implemented, and then you implement it, and it doesn't do what you expect, and you find the bug. And so it's not like, there is work to get there for sure, but I do feel this is the direction we are going.
TCTim CallanIt’s gonna be on the CA side. I predict that the average subscriber is not going to perceive any difference.
TCTim CallanYep. Exactly. So we'll keep our eyes on this. If in the future, this gets more legs or if it gets a CA/Browser Forum ballot or things along those lines, we’ll definitely return to it. For now, it's an industry trend. It's something that's probably coming and you ought to know about it. So there you go.