I am working on a mesh cloud with wep encryption on wireless channel, olsr and openvpn to have a tunnel with gateway.
Batman has a tunnel with gateway but is it possible to secure it? In first step only clients with proper credentials can start tunnel and in second step tunnel is crypted.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Stefano Scipioni schrieb:
I am working on a mesh cloud with wep encryption on wireless channel, olsr and openvpn to have a tunnel with gateway.
Batman has a tunnel with gateway but is it possible to secure it? In first step only clients with proper credentials can start tunnel and in second step tunnel is crypted.
As the tunnel connects 2 nodes inside the mesh, ipsec transport (not tunnel) could secure communication. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPsec#Transport_mode
This would require less changes then implementing an additional tunnel for encryption.
Gruss, Alex
Hi,
Batman has a tunnel with gateway but is it possible to secure it? In first step only clients with proper credentials can start tunnel and in second step tunnel is crypted.
I agree that this would be a good idea. Using the batman tunnels would be much easier to set up than IPSec as everything is integrated. Besides that a lightweight encryption could be implemented which even runs on weaker machines.
That feature is planned and a concept already exists. Nevertheless, the batman developer team has a divided opinion about this idea. Some of us (inlucing me) think that it a good opportunity to help spreading internet gateways throughout a city wide mesh. The others fear that this could be the beginning of the end of free mesh networks if we implement such control mechanisms. What do you think ? Why do you want this feature ?
Btw: Does your vis server compile now ?
Regards, Marek
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Marek Lindner schrieb:
Hi,
Batman has a tunnel with gateway but is it possible to secure it? In first step only clients with proper credentials can start tunnel and in second step tunnel is crypted.
I agree that this would be a good idea. Using the batman tunnels would be much easier to set up than IPSec as everything is integrated. Besides that a lightweight encryption could be implemented which even runs on weaker machines.
What is lightweight encryption? Does lightweight means insecure? Is it easier, because you are not familiar with IPSEC?
building unsecure crypto ist worse then having no crypto, it would be a "sicherheitsimulation". building strong crypto is not easy, so many failed to develop and implement it with more and better cryptospecialists the the batman team has.
That feature is planned and a concept already exists. Nevertheless, the batman developer team has a divided opinion about this idea. Some of us (inlucing me) think that it a good opportunity to help spreading internet gateways throughout a city wide mesh. The others fear that this could be the beginning of the end of free mesh networks if we implement such control mechanisms. What do you think ? Why do you want this feature ?
Some batman developer once told me, that implementing/supporting service discovery inside batman is a bad idea, as they want to have batman as slim as possible. how does integrating cryptotunnels in a routingprotocol does get conform to that?
Btw: Does your vis server compile now ?
Regards, Marek
Greets, Alex
Hi,
What is lightweight encryption? Does lightweight means insecure?
No. I don't know how much you know about encryption technologies but let me tell you that there is technologly which works better on embedded devices than other technologly. Simply because it was optimized for that purpose. Using a CPU intense encryption does not make the communication more or less insecure. The key is the overall security concept. Since the focus of batman are embedded devices it seems obvious that we should choose that direction.
Is it easier, because you are not familiar with IPSEC?
You misunderstand. It is not a question of you and me. There are people in this world who would like to use batman / mesh technology without being an IT expert. That applies to most of our users ...
building unsecure crypto ist worse then having no crypto, it would be a "sicherheitsimulation". building strong crypto is not easy, so many failed to develop and implement it with more and better cryptospecialists the the batman team has.
I totally agree. I never proposed to reinvent the wheel by building our own encryption technology. I'm well aware of the many issues which arise once you choose that path.
Some batman developer once told me, that implementing/supporting service discovery inside batman is a bad idea, as they want to have batman as slim as possible. how does integrating cryptotunnels in a routingprotocol does get conform to that?
I don't see the connection between your example and the current context. Batman already builds that tunnel. Why should we not extend that existing feature ? Sure, you could create another tunnel in the tunnel. The question is whether we give the ordinary user a tool at hand which enables him to control the access of his internet gateway. What do you think ?
Regards, Marek
b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org
-
Alexander Morlang -
Marek Lindner -
Stefano Scipioni