The Reality of Algorithm Agility:Studying the DNSSEC Algorithm Life-Cycle

The DNS Security Extensions (DNSSEC) add data origin authentication and data integrity to the Domain Name System (DNS), the naming system of the Internet. With DNSSEC, signatures are added to the information provided in the DNS using public key cryptography. Advances in both cryptography and cryptanalysis make it necessary to deploy new algorithms in DNSSEC, as well as deprecate those with weakened security. If this process is easy, then the protocol has achieved what the IETF terms "algorithm agility". In this paper, we study the lifetime of algorithms for DNSSEC. This includes: (i) standardizing the algorithm, (ii) implementing support in DNS software, (iii) deploying new algorithms at domains and recursive resolvers, and (iv) replacing deprecated algorithms. Using data from more than 6.7 million signed domains and over 10,000 vantage points in the DNS, combined with qualitative studies, we show that DNSSEC has only partially achieved algorithm agility. Standardizing new algorithms and deprecating insecure ones can take years. We highlight the main barriers for getting new algorithms deployed, but also discuss success factors. This study provides key insights to take into account when new algorithms are introduced, for example when the Internet must transition to quantum-safe public key cryptography

How to Catch when Proxies Lie: Verifying the Physical Locations of Network Proxies with Active Geolocation

Internet users worldwide rely on commercial network proxies both to conceal their true location and identity, and to control their apparent location. Their reasons range from mundane to security-critical. Proxy operators offer no proof that their advertised server locations are accurate. IP-to-location databases tend to agree with the advertised locations, but there have been many reports of serious errors in such databases. In this study we estimate the locations of 2269 proxy servers from ping-time measurements to hosts in known locations, combined with AS and network information. These servers are operated by seven proxy services, and, according to the operators, spread over 222 countries and territories. Our measurements show that one-third of them are definitely not located in the advertised countries, and another third might not be. Instead, they are concentrated in countries where server hosting is cheap and reliable (e.g. Czech Republic, Germany, Netherlands, UK, USA). In the process, we address a number of technical challenges with applying active geolocation to proxy servers, which may not be directly pingable, and may restrict the types of packets that can be sent through them, e.g. forbidding traceroute. We also test three geolocation algorithms from previous literature, plus two variations of our own design, at the scale of the whole world