Bitcoins Will Buy BGP Security? Come On…
Here’s another interesting talk from RIPE77: Routing Attacks in Cryptocurrencies explaining how BGP hijacks can impact cryptocurrencies.
TL&DR: Bitcoin is not nearly decentralized enough to be resistant to simple and relatively easy BGP manipulations.
Is that a BGP problem? Obviously not – it’s just that what people think they know about bitcoin has no basis in reality. According to the talk all you have to do to disrupt bitcoin global infrastructure is to take ten prefixes offline. Oh, and then there’s the small matter of “bitcoin messages being propagated unencrypted and without any integrity guarantees.” Looks like the whole thing really was a proof-of-concept that escaped from the lab.
On a totally unrelated note, that talk follows the great recipe a friend of mine working in academia his whole life described decades ago when looking for the topic of his PhD thesis: “Take two unrelated research areas, and find a way to mix them together. You’re almost guaranteed to have something unique and publishable.”
Not unexpected, some people quickly latched onto this unique combination, resulting in articles like Real Money Can’t Buy Routing Security… But BitCoin Might. Unfortunately that’s just wishful thinking.
BGP routing security is a business problem, and there’s orders of magnitude more money made on the Internet the traditional way… yet none of those players are willing to pay the ISPs to build a secure infrastructure and use non-public infrastructure for mission-critical communication. Bitcoin miners might just find it easier to go down that same path.
Route leaking and hijacking is solvable without any new technology (solutions described in RFC 7454 are good enough), if only there would be interest and commercial motivation in solving it. Right now it seems like nobody is willing to foot the bill.
And how do you think RPKI will change things? It's just another database that needs to be kept up-to-date, and if nobody is punished for not keeping the data current, nothing will ever change.
Why? PGP solved a long time ago this problem using the Web of Trust concept, users validate themselves
> If it would be enforced and you don't participate, your public subnets become unreachable through invalidation
I think that's a trade off between security and usability, and from people with experience using IPSEC and suffering all the weird failures and strange problems, they don't want their sessions failing because of this
I tried to mean that if you use PGP to do the updates to IRR http://www.radb.net/support/authentication1.php it's reasonably secure, and nobody can add malicious data.
Then, if you use filters based in the IRR data and you are not updating the data, you have the results that you are proposing
>If it would be enforced and you don't participate, your public subnets become unreachable through invalidation. I bet you then quickly move your fat fingers to come back online.
By the way, PGP keyservers are handling more than 5M keys nowadays https://sks-keyservers.net/status/key_development.php ;)