My apologues, I forgot to cc the mailing list, here is my reply to Tom:
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Carlo Fusco <fusco.carlo(a)gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 2:37 PM
Subject: Re: Change in IPSec roadwarrior configuration for MacOSX 10.12
To: Tom Rymes <trymes(a)rymes.com>
On Thu, Apr 4, 2019 at 8:09 PM Tom Rymes <trymes(a)rymes.com> wrote:
>
> Carlo,
>
> Just to confirm, have you put this text into the ipsec.user.conf file
> and restarted IPSec?
Yes, I followed your tutorial to the letter. By the way, thank you so
much for writing it. It has been extremely useful for me
> conn CONNECTION_NAME
> leftsendcert=always
> leftallowany=yes
> rightdns=10.100.2.1
> rekey=no
> reauth=no
>
> Specifically, the rekey and reauth portions.
About that, I did not have the time to research the issue, so this is
just an hypothesis. I assume that the rekey=no in that configuration
file will prevent the server to initiate a rekey negotiation with the
client, not the other way around.
According to the apple developer response to the bug report I
referenced in my previous message, the issue is that strongswan
defaults to use perfect forward secrecy when the DH group is specified
for ESP while the Mac OS implementation, if set in the GUI, defaults
to no DH group. This leads the server to reject the rekey request and
dropping the communication. This happens every 480 seconds, the time
set by Apple to initiate a rekey. Therefore there are two solutions to
the problem:
1) The first is what I tested and reported in the wiki is to not set
the DH group for ESP. This works very well, but I guess is not the
best option from a security point of view;
2) the second is to change the default setting of macos and enable PFS
key, but this cannot be done from the gui and requires messing with
the xml configuration profiles of MacOS.
I do not know yet how to pursue the second strategy (yet), therefore I
did not mention it in the wiki, but I left the reference to the
original bug report that explains all this.
What would be your suggestion? Should we leave the text I introduced
in the wiki? Move it somewhere else? Send it only to the forum? Or any
other solution? I welcome any guidance on this issue.
Before I end the mail, I would like to thank you again Tom for your
work in the wiki. As I said it was really helpful. The same goes for
any other author of the text of the wiki, which for such a small
project is really remarkable in terms of quality.
Cheers,
--
Carlo Fusco
--
Carlo Fusco
