Adding upstream version 252.22.upstream/252.22upstream

Signed-off-by: Daniel Baumann <daniel.baumann@progress-linux.org>

1 files changed, 268 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/docs/RESOLVED-VPNS.md b/docs/RESOLVED-VPNS.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..dbf43f9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docs/RESOLVED-VPNS.md
@@ -0,0 +1,268 @@
+---
+title: systemd-resolved and VPNs
+category: Networking
+layout: default
+SPDX-License-Identifier: LGPL-2.1-or-later
+---
+
+# `systemd-resolved.service` and VPNs
+
+`systemd-resolved.service` supports routing lookups for specific domains to specific
+interfaces. This is useful for hooking up VPN software with systemd-resolved
+and making sure the exact right lookups end up on the VPN and on the other
+interfaces.
+
+For a verbose explanation of `systemd-resolved.service`'s domain routing logic,
+see its [man
+page](https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/systemd-resolved.service.html). This
+document is supposed to provide examples to use the concepts for the specific
+purpose of managing VPN DNS configuration.
+
+Let's first define two distinct VPN use-cases:
+
+1. *Corporate* VPNs, i.e. VPNs that open access to a specific set of additional
+   hosts. Only specific domains should be resolved via the VPN's DNS servers,
+   and everything that is not related to the company's domain names should go
+   to regular, non-VPN DNS instead.
+
+2. *Privacy* VPNs, i.e. VPNs that should be used for basically all DNS traffic,
+   once they are up. If this type of VPN is used, any regular, non-VPN DNS
+   servers should not get any traffic anymore.
+
+Then, let's briefly introduce three DNS routing concepts that software managing
+a network interface may configure.
+
+1. Search domains: these are traditional DNS configuration parameters and are
+   used to suffix non-qualified domain names (i.e. single-label ones), to turn
+   them into fully qualified domain names. Traditionally (before
+   `systemd-resolved.service`), search domain names are attached to a system's
+   IP configuration as a whole, in `systemd-resolved.service` they are
+   associated to individual interfaces instead, since they are typically
+   acquired through some network associated concept, such as a DHCP, IPv6RA or
+   PPP lease. Most importantly though: in `systemd-resolved.service` they are
+   not just used to suffix single-label domain names, but also for routing
+   domain name lookups: if a network interface has a search domain `foo.com`
+   configured on it, then any lookups for names ending in `.foo.com` (or for
+   `foo.com` itself) are preferably routed to the DNS servers configured on the
+   same network interface.
+
+2. Routing domains: these are very similar to search domains, but are purely
+   about DNS domain name lookup routing — they are not used for qualifying
+   single-label domain names. When it comes to routing, assigning a routing
+   domain to a network interface is identical to assigning a search domain to
+   it.
+
+   Why the need to have both concepts, i.e. search *and* routing domains?
+   Mostly because in many cases the qualifying of single-label names is not
+   desirable (as it has security implications), but needs to be supported for
+   specific use-cases. Routing domains are a concept `systemd-resolved.service`
+   introduced, while search domains are traditionally available and are part of
+   DHCP/IPv6RA/PPP leases and thus universally supported. In many cases routing
+   domains are probably the more appropriate concept, but not easily available,
+   since they are not part of DHCP/IPv6RA/PPP.
+
+   Routing domains for `systemd-resolved.service` are usually presented along
+   with search domains in mostly the same way, but prefixed with `~` to
+   differentiate them. i.e. `~foo.com` is a configured routing domain, while
+   `foo.com` would be a configured search domain.
+
+   One routing domain is particularly interesting: `~.` — the catch-all routing
+   domain. (The *dot* domain `.` is how DNS denotes the "root" domain, i.e. the
+   parent domain of all domains, but itself.) When used on an interface any DNS
+   traffic is preferably routed to its DNS servers. (A search domain – i.e. `.`
+   instead of `~.` — would have the same effect, but given that it's mostly
+   pointless to suffix an unqualified domain with `.`, we generally declare it
+   as a routing domain, not a search domain).
+
+   Routing domains also have particular relevance when it comes to the reverse
+   lookup DNS domains `.in-addr.arpa` and `.ip6.arpa`. An interface that has
+   these (or sub-domains thereof) defined as routing domains, will be preferably
+   used for doing reverse IP to domain name lookups. e.g. declaring
+   `~168.192.in-addr.arpa` on an interface means that all lookups to find the
+   domain names for IPv4 addresses 192.168.x.y are preferably routed to it.
+
+3. The `default-route` boolean. This is a simple boolean value that may be set
+   on an interface. If true (the default), any DNS lookups for which no
+   matching routing or search domains are defined are routed to interfaces
+   marked like this. If false then the DNS servers on this interface are not
+   considered for routing lookups to except for the ones listed in the
+   search/routing domain list. An interface that has no search/routing domain
+   associated and also has this boolean off is not considered for *any*
+   lookups.
+
+One more thing to mention: in `systemd-resolved.service` if lookups match the
+search/routing domains of multiple interfaces at once, then they are sent to
+all of them in parallel, and the first positive reply used. If all lookups fail
+the last negative reply is used. This means the DNS zones on the relevant
+interfaces are "merged": domains existing on one but not the other will "just
+work" and vice versa.
+
+And one more note: the domain routing logic implemented is a tiny bit more
+complex that what described above: if there two interfaces have search domains
+that are suffix of each other, and a name is looked up that matches both, the
+interface with the longer match will win and get the lookup routed to is DNS
+servers. Only if the match has the same length, then both will be used in
+parallel. Example: one interface has `~foo.example.com` as routing domain, and
+another one `example.com` has search domain. A lookup for
+`waldo.foo.example.com` is the exclusively routed to the first interface's DNS
+server, since it matches by three suffix labels instead of just two. The fact
+that the matching length is taken into consideration for the routing decision
+is particularly relevant if you have one interface with the `~.` routing domain
+and another one with `~corp.company.example` — both suffixes match a lookup for
+`foo.corp.company.example`, but the latter interface wins, since the match is
+for four labels, while the other is for zero labels.
+
+## Putting it Together
+
+Let's discuss how the three DNS routing concepts above are best used for a
+reasonably complex scenario consisting of:
+
+1. One VPN interface of the *corporate* kind, maybe called `company0`. It makes
+   available a bunch of servers, all in the domain `corp.company.example`.
+
+2. One VPN interface of the *privacy* kind, maybe called `privacy0`. When it is
+   up all DNS traffic shall preferably routed to its DNS servers.
+
+3. One regular WiFi interface, maybe called `wifi0`. It has a regular DNS
+   server on it.
+
+Here's how to best configure this for `systemd-resolved.service`:
+
+1. `company0` should get a routing domain `~corp.company.example`
+   configured. (A search domain `corp.company.example` would work too, if
+   qualifying of single-label names is desired or the VPN lease information
+   does not provide for the concept of routing domains, but does support search
+   domains.) This interface should also set `default-route` to false, to ensure
+   that really only the DNS lookups for the company's servers are routed there
+   and nothing else. Finally, it might make sense to also configure a routing
+   domain `~2.0.192.in-addr.arpa` on the interface, ensuring that all IPv4
+   addresses from the 192.0.2.x range are preferably resolved via the DNS
+   server on this interface (assuming that that's the IPv4 address range the
+   company uses internally).
+
+2. `privacy0` should get a routing domain `~.` configured. The setting of
+   `default-route` for this interface is then irrelevant. This means: once the
+   interface is up, all DNS traffic is preferably routed there.
+
+3. `wifi0` should not get any special settings, except possibly whatever the
+   local WiFi router considers suitable as search domain, for example
+   `fritz.box`. The default `true` setting for `default-route` is good too.
+
+With this configuration if only `wifi0` is up, all DNS traffic goes to its DNS
+server, since there are no other interfaces with better matching DNS
+configuration. If `privacy0` is then upped, all DNS traffic will exclusively go
+to this interface now — with the exception of names below the `fritz.box`
+domain, which will continue to go directly to `wifi0`, as the search domain
+there says so. Now, if `company0` is also upped, it will receive DNS traffic
+for the company's internal domain and internal IP subnet range, but nothing
+else.  If `privacy0` is then downed again, `wifi0` will get the regular DNS
+traffic again, and `company0` will still get the company's internal domain and
+IP subnet traffic and nothing else. Everything hence works as intended.
+
+## How to Implement this in Your VPN Software
+
+Most likely you want to expose a boolean in some way that declares whether a
+specific VPN is of the *corporate* or the *privacy* kind:
+
+1. If managing a *corporate* VPN, you configure any search domains the user or
+   the VPN contact point provided. And you set `default-route` to false. If you
+   have IP subnet information for the VPN, it might make sense to insert
+   `~….in-addr.arpa` and `~….ip6.arpa` reverse lookup routing domains for it.
+
+2. If managing a *privacy* VPN, you include `~.` in the routing domains, the
+   value for `default-route` is actually irrelevant, but I'd set it to true. No
+   need to configure any reverse lookup routing domains for it.
+
+(If you also manage regular WiFi/Ethernet devices, just configure them as
+traditional, i.e. with any search domains as acquired, do not set `~.` though,
+and do not disable `default-route`.)
+
+## The APIs
+
+Now we determined how we want to configure things, but how do you actually get
+the configuration to `systemd-resolved.service`? There are three relevant
+interfaces:
+
+1. Ideally, you use D-Bus and talk to [`systemd-resolved.service`'s D-Bus
+   API](https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/org.freedesktop.resolve1.html)
+   directly. Use `SetLinkDomains()` to set the per-interface search and routing
+   domains on the interfaces you manage, and `SetLinkDefaultRoute()` to manage
+   the `default-route` boolean, all on the `org.freedesktop.resolve1.Manager`
+   interface of the `/org/freedesktop/resolve1` object.
+
+2. If that's not in the cards, you may shell out to
+   [`resolvectl`](https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/resolvectl.html),
+   which is a thin wrapper around the D-Bus interface mentioned above. Use
+   `resolvectl domain <iface> …` to set the search/routing domains and
+   `resolvectl default-route <iface> …` to set the `default-route` boolean.
+
+   Example use from a shell callout of your VPN software for a *corporate* VPN:
+
+        resolvectl domain corporate0 '~corp-company.example' '~2.0.192.in-addr.arpa'
+        resolvectl default-route corporate0 false
+        resolvectl dns corporate0 192.0.2.1
+
+   Example use from a shell callout of your VPN software for a *privacy* VPN:
+
+        resolvectl domain privacy0 '~.'
+        resolvectl default-route privacy0 true
+        resolvectl dns privacy0 8.8.8.8
+
+3. If you don't want to use any `systemd-resolved` commands, you may use the
+   `resolvconf` wrapper we provide. `resolvectl` is actually a multi-call
+   binary and may be symlinked to `resolvconf`, and when invoked like that
+   behaves in a way that is largely compatible with FreeBSD's and
+   Ubuntu's/Debian's
+   [`resolvconf(8)`](https://manpages.ubuntu.com/manpages/trusty/man8/resolvconf.8.html)
+   tool. When the `-x` switch is specified, the `~.` routing domain is
+   automatically appended to the domain list configured, as appropriate for a
+   *privacy* VPN. Note that the `resolvconf` interface only covers *privacy*
+   VPNs and regular network interfaces (such as WiFi or Ethernet) well. The
+   *corporate* kind of VPN is not well covered, since the interface cannot
+   propagate the `default-route` boolean, nor can be used to configure the
+   `~….in-addr.arpa` or `~.ip6.arpa` routing domains.
+
+## Ordering
+
+When configuring per-interface DNS configuration settings it is wise to
+configure everything *before* actually upping the interface. Once the interface
+is up `systemd-resolved.service` might start using it, and hence it's important
+to have everything configured properly (this is particularly relevant when
+LLMNR or MulticastDNS is enabled, since that works without any explicitly
+configured DNS configuration). It is also wise to configure search/routing
+domains and the `default-route` boolean *before* configuring the DNS servers,
+as the former without the latter has no effect, but the latter without the
+former will result in DNS traffic possibly being generated, in a non-desirable
+way given that the routing information is not set yet.
+
+## Downgrading Search Domains to Routing Domains
+
+Many VPN implementations provide a way how VPN servers can inform VPN clients
+about search domains to use. In some cases it might make sense to install those
+as routing domains instead of search domains. Unqualified domain names usually
+imply a context of locality: the same unqualified name typically is expected to
+resolve to one system in one local network, and to another one in a different
+network.  Search domains thus generally come with security implications: they
+might cause that unqualified domains are resolved in a different (possibly
+remote) context, contradicting user expectations. Thus it might be wise to
+downgrade *search domains* provided by VPN servers to *routing domains*, so
+that local unqualified name resolution remains untouched and strictly maintains
+its local focus — in particular in the aforementioned less trusted *corporate*
+VPN scenario.
+
+To illustrate this further, here's an example for an attack scenario using
+search domains: a user assumes the printer system they daily contact under the
+unqualified name "printer" is the network printer in their basement (with the
+fully qualified domain name "printer.home"). Sometimes the user joins the
+corporate VPN of their employer, which comes with a search domain
+"foocorp.example", so that the user's confidential documents (maybe a job
+application to a competing company) might end up being printed on
+"printer.foocorp.example" instead of "printer.home". If the local VPN software
+had downgraded the VPN's search domain to a routing domain "~foocorp.example",
+this mismapping would not have happened.
+
+When connecting to untrusted WiFi networks it might be wise to go one step
+further even: suppress installation of search/routing domains by the network
+entirely, to ensure that the local DNS information is only used for name
+resolution of qualified names and only when no better DNS configuration is
+available.