Re: Let's Deprecate the SECURITY_UDP_DHALGO Configuration Property

2020-03-04 Thread Kirk Lund
+1 to deprecating and removing SECURITY_UDP_DHALGO. The current implementation is a non-thread-safe hack that would require extensive work to "fix". It fails EVERY time we run mass test run. I'd prefer to see us embrace DTLS as a standard. On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 11:43 AM Bill Burcham wrote: > I

Re: Let's Deprecate the SECURITY_UDP_DHALGO Configuration Property

2020-03-03 Thread Dan Smith
> > @Dan, are you thinking that secured intra-cluster communication needs to > be deprecated as a whole? > > Exactly. We shouldn't be left with "partially secure" intra-cluster communication, where some stuff goes over TLS and some is plain text. Setting ssl-enabled-components=cluster without setti

Re: Let's Deprecate the SECURITY_UDP_DHALGO Configuration Property

2020-03-02 Thread Aaron Lindsey
+1 to deprecating this feature in 1.12 As to whether we should remove this feature in a minor release, I think that, as Alexander pointed out, it hinges on the question of whether we perceive there to be some security issue in the feature’s implementation. This statement from the proposal shoul

Re: Let's Deprecate the SECURITY_UDP_DHALGO Configuration Property

2020-03-02 Thread Alexander Murmann
I am not sure I am following the argument for removal in a minor version. Let's expand the argument and make sure we are all basing this on the same assumptions: Java has removed insecure encryption algorithms in patch releases. This was presumably done because it's really fixing a vulnerability,

Re: Let's Deprecate the SECURITY_UDP_DHALGO Configuration Property

2020-03-02 Thread Udo Kohlmeyer
I'm back tracking on my suggestion... Got stuck on the "removal" part. +1 -> for deprecation for said feature in 1.12 -1 -> for removal until alternative/equivalent replacement has been added (or major version release -- which ever comes first) @Dan, are you thinking that secured intra-cluste

Re: Let's Deprecate the SECURITY_UDP_DHALGO Configuration Property

2020-03-02 Thread Anthony Baker
I don’t think regressed is the right word. There was an effort to harden our udp p2p traffic using encryption based on a DH key exchange. I’m not clear on how much that approach actually improved the security of data in motion. And I don’t believe it saw much if any use in practice. Anthony

Re: Let's Deprecate the SECURITY_UDP_DHALGO Configuration Property

2020-03-02 Thread Udo Kohlmeyer
I think that if TCP connections are secured and UDP connections are not, then we've regressed in our security. Is there a way that we could use DTLS? --Udo On 3/2/20 10:21 AM, Dan Smith wrote: Should we deprecate cluster ssl as well? Cluster ssl without udp encryption means that not all P2P t

Re: Let's Deprecate the SECURITY_UDP_DHALGO Configuration Property

2020-03-02 Thread Dan Smith
Should we deprecate cluster ssl as well? Cluster ssl without udp encryption means that not all P2P traffic will be encrypted. If we don't want to support P2P encryption, it seems like we should deprecate both? -Dan On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 1:40 PM Udo Kohlmeyer wrote: > Yes, the proposal was dep

Re: Let's Deprecate the SECURITY_UDP_DHALGO Configuration Property

2020-02-28 Thread Udo Kohlmeyer
Yes, the proposal was deprecation notice in 1.12 and remove in 1.13.. That does not leave users much time to react. So if we remove in 1.14, then users have at least 2 release cycles before we do it. --Udo On 2/28/20 1:11 PM, Owen Nichols wrote: Udo, are you proposing to deprecate in 1.12 an

Re: Let's Deprecate the SECURITY_UDP_DHALGO Configuration Property

2020-02-28 Thread Owen Nichols
Udo, are you proposing to deprecate in 1.12 and remove in 1.14? > On Feb 28, 2020, at 1:03 PM, Udo Kohlmeyer wrote: > > +1 to adding the deprecation. But I would prefer that we give users more > notice than 3 months. > > maybe we deprecate it in 1.14 > > --Udo > > On 2/28/20 1:00 PM, Ernest

Re: Let's Deprecate the SECURITY_UDP_DHALGO Configuration Property

2020-02-28 Thread Udo Kohlmeyer
+1 to adding the deprecation. But I would prefer that we give users more notice than 3 months. maybe we deprecate it in 1.14 --Udo On 2/28/20 1:00 PM, Ernest Burghardt wrote: +1 seems reasonable to do this for 1.12 and be ahead of the game, @Owen would you please spawn that as a separate rel

Re: Let's Deprecate the SECURITY_UDP_DHALGO Configuration Property

2020-02-28 Thread Bruce Schuchardt
+1 On 2/28/20, 11:43 AM, "Bill Burcham" wrote: I propose we deprecate Geode’s proprietary UDP message privacy algorithm based on the Diffie-Hellman key exchange protocol. This would deprecate: ConfigurationProperties.SECURITY_UDP_DHALGO String DistributionConfig.getSec

Re: Let's Deprecate the SECURITY_UDP_DHALGO Configuration Property

2020-02-28 Thread Ernest Burghardt
+1 seems reasonable to do this for 1.12 and be ahead of the game, @Owen would you please spawn that as a separate release 1.12 thread? thanks, eB On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 11:56 AM Owen Nichols wrote: > +1 > > We should have done this as soon as SSL/TLS was ready. Better late than > never! > > W

Re: Let's Deprecate the SECURITY_UDP_DHALGO Configuration Property

2020-02-28 Thread Owen Nichols
+1 We should have done this as soon as SSL/TLS was ready. Better late than never! While we normally wait until a major release to remove deprecated stuff, there is some precedent for removing insecure encryption algorithms sooner (Java has done this even in patch releases). We should consider