NAME

  I_RFC2408_5_4_2_3_P2_SA_3 - [Initiator Test] Check the proposal to confirm it is valid(ESP Authentication)


TARGET

  End-Node


SYNOPSIS

  I_RFC2408_5_4_2_3_P2_SA_3.seq [-tooloption ...] -pkt I_RFC2408_5_4_2_3_P2_SA_3.def -tooloption : v6eval tool option
  See also ike_common.def and ike_ipsec.def and ike_addr.def and ike_pkt_ph1_recv.def and ike_pkt_ph2_recv.def


INITIALIZATION


TEST PROCEDURE

  This test check is following.

* PHASE I
Either IDENTITY PROTECTION EXCHANGE or AGGRESSIVE EXCHANGE is performed as a pre sequence.

IDENTITY PROTECTION EXCHANGE
# Initiator(NUT) Direction Responder(TN) (1) HDR; SA ========>
(2) <======== HDR; SA
(3) HDR; KE; NONCE ========>
(4) <======== HDR; KE; NONCE
(5) HDR*; IDii; HASH_I ========>
(6) <======== HDR*; IDir; HASH_R
1. Receive the first message from NUT In the first message (1), the initiator generates a proposal it considers adequate to protect traffic for the given situation. The Security Association, Proposal, and Transform payloads are included in the Security Association payload (for notation purposes).
2. Send the second message from TN In the second message (2), the responder indicates the protection suite it has accepted with the Security Association, Proposal, and Transform payloads.
3. Receive the third message from NUT In the third (3) message, the initiator send keying material used to arrive at a common shared secret and random information which is used to guarantee liveness and protect against replay attacks.
4. Send the fourth message from TN In the fourth (4) message, the responder send keying material used to arrive at a common shared secret and random information which is used to guarantee liveness and protect against replay attacks.
5. Receive the fifth message from NUT In the fifth (5) message, the initiator send identification information and the results of the agreed upon authentication function(hash function).
6. Send the sixth message from TN In the sixth (6) message, the responder send identification information and the results of the agreed upon authentication function(hash function).

AGGRESSIVE EXCHANGE
# Initiator(NUT) Direction Responder(TN) NOTE (1) HDR; SA; KE; => Begin ISAKMP-SA or Proxy negotiation NONCE; IDii and Key Exchange
(2) <= HDR; SA; KE; NONCE; IDir; AUTH Initiator Identity Verified by Responder Key Generated Basic SA agreed upon
(3) HDR*; AUTH => Responder Identity Verified by Initiator SA established
1. Recieve the first message from NUT In the first message (1), the initiator generates a proposal it considers adequate to protect traffic for the given situation. The Security Association, Proposal, and Transform payloads are included in the Security Association payload (for notation purposes). There can be only one Proposal and one Transform offered (i.e. no choices) in order for the aggressive exchange to work. Keying material used to arrive at a common shared secret and random information which is used to guarantee liveness and protect against replay attacks are also transmitted. Random information provided by both parties SHOULD be used by the authentication mechanism to provide shared proof of participation in the exchange. Additionally, the initiator transmits identification information.
2. Send the second message from TN In the second message (2), the responder indicates the protection suite it has accepted with the Security Association, Proposal, and Transform payloads. Keying material used to arrive at a common shared secret and random information which is used to guarantee liveness and protect against replay attacks is also transmitted. Random information provided by both parties SHOULD be used by the authentication mechanism to provide shared proof of participation in the exchange. Additionally, the responder transmits identification information. All of this information is transmitted under the protection of the agreed upon authentication function. Local security policy dictates the action of the responder if no proposed protection suite is accepted. One possible action is the transmission of a Notify payload as part of an Informational Exchange.
3. Recieve the third message from NUT In the third (3) message, the initiator transmits the results of the agreed upon authentication function. This information is transmitted under the protection of the common shared secret. Local security policy dictates the action if an error occurs during these messages. One possible action is the transmission of a Notify payload as part of an Informational Exchange.

The test sequence is following.
* PHASE II
QUICK MODE
# Initiator(NUT) Direction Responder(TN) (1) HDR*, HASH(1), SA, Ni ========>
(2) <======== HDR*, HASH(2), SA, Nr <-----invalid proposal
(3-A)HDR*, HASH(3) ========> X <-----Must not transmit or (3-B)HDR*, HASH(1), N/D ========> Judgement
1. Receive the first message from NUT In the first message (1), the initiator generates a proposal it considers adequate to protect traffic for the given situation. The Security Association, Proposal, and Transform payloads are included in the Security Association payload (for notation purposes). And initiator send HASH(1) and Nonce. HASH(1) is the prf over the message id (M-ID) from the ISAKMP header concatenated with the entire message that follows the hash including all payload headers, but excluding any padding added for encryption. Nonce is random information which is used to guarantee liveness.
2. Send the second message from TN In the second message (2), the responder indicates the protection suite it has accepted with the Security Association, Proposal, and Transform payloads. And responder send HASH(2) and Nonce. HASH(2) is identical to HASH(1) except the initiator's nonce-- Ni, minus the payload header-- is added after M-ID but before the complete message. Nonce is random information which is used to guarantee liveness.
3. Receive the third message from NUT In the third message (3-B), the initiator indicates either an ISAKMP Notify Payload or an ISAKMP delete Payload.


JUDGEMENT

        In Phase I , messages must be exchanged correctly.
        In Phase II , the second message must not be accepted.
        And the third message(3-A) must not be returned
        (* or NO-PROPOSAL-CHOSEN message(3-B) is returned).
        *option : if you want to check the retruned Notify message.


TERMINATION

  Clean up SAD and SPD


REFERENCE

  RFC2408
  5.4 Security Association Payload Processing

(omit)
When a Security Association payload is received, the receiving entity (initiator or responder) MUST do the following:
1. Determine if the Domain of Interpretation (DOI) is supported. If the DOI determination fails, the message is discarded and the following actions are taken:
(a) The event, INVALID DOI, MAY be logged in the appropriate system audit file.
(b) An Informational Exchange with a Notification payload containing the DOI-NOT-SUPPORTED message type MAY be sent to the transmitting entity. This action is dictated by a system security policy.
2. Determine if the given situation can be protected. If the Situation determination fails, the message is discarded and the following actions are taken:
(a) The event, INVALID SITUATION, MAY be logged in the appropriate system audit file.
(b) An Informational Exchange with a Notification payload containing the SITUATION-NOT-SUPPORTED message type MAY be sent to the transmitting entity. This action is dictated by a system security policy.
3. Process the remaining payloads (i.e. Proposal, Transform) of the Security Association Payload. If the Security Association Proposal (as described in sections 5.5 and 5.6) is not accepted, then the following actions are taken:
(a) The event, INVALID PROPOSAL, MAY be logged in the appropriate system audit file.
(b) An Informational Exchange with a Notification payload containing the NO-PROPOSAL-CHOSEN message type MAY be sent to the transmitting entity. This action is dictated by a system security policy.
(omit)


SEE ALSO

  perldoc V6evalTool
  IKE.html IKE Test Common Utility