8 PPTP is known to be a faulty protocol. The designers of the protocol,
9 Microsoft, recommend not to use it due to the inherent risks. Lots of
10 people use PPTP anyway due to ease of use, but that doesn't mean it is
11 any less hazardous. The maintainers of PPTP Client and Poptop
12 recommend using OpenVPN (SSL based) or IPSec instead.
14 (Posted on [1]2005-08-10 to the [2]mailing list)
15 _________________________________________________________________
21 The point to point tunneling protocol (PPTP) is not secure enough for
22 some information security policies.
24 It's the nature of the MSCHAP V2 authentication, how it can be broken
25 trivially by capture of the datastream, and how MPPE depends on the
26 MSCHAP tokens for cryptographic keys. MPPE is also only 128-bit,
27 reasonably straightforward to attack, and the keys used at each end
28 are the same, which lowers the effort required to succeed. The obvious
29 lack of two-factor authentication, instead relying on a single
30 username and password, is also a risk. The increasing use of domestic
31 wireless systems makes information capture more likely.
33 However, that doesn't mean people don't accept the risks. There are
34 many corporations and individuals using PPTP with full knowledge of
35 these risks. Some use mitigating controls, and some don't.
37 Many people seem to judge the security of a protocol by the
38 availability of the implementation, the ease of installation, or the
39 level of documentation on our web site. Improving the documentation is
40 the purpose of this web site, and we aren't doing that in order to say
41 anything about the risks of the software! Any judgement of security
42 should be rigorously applied to the design and implementation alone.
44 PPTP on Linux, and Microsoft's PPTP, both implement fixes for
45 vulnerabilities that were detected years ago in Microsoft's PPTP. But
46 there remain the design vulnerabilities that cannot be fixed without
47 changing the design. The changes needed would break interoperability.
48 We can't change the Linux PPTP design, because it would stop working
49 with Microsoft PPTP. They can't change their design, because it would
50 stop working with all the other components out there, such as Nortel
51 and Cisco, embedded routers, ADSL modems and their own Windows
54 The only option then is to deprecate the product and promote the
55 replacement. Microsoft promote something else. Our choice for Open
56 Source systems is OpenVPN or IPsec.
58 Level of acceptance isn't a good indicator of risk either. Some have
59 said that the shipping of MSCHAP V2, MPPE and PPTP in Linux
60 distributions is an indication of design security, but that's not the
61 reason. It's for interoperability. As an example, see how Linux
62 distributions still ship telnet, ftp, and rsh, even though these
63 components are insecure because they reveal the password in cleartext
64 in the network packets. The same can be said of many other components
67 Our recommendations are;
69 1. do not implement PPTP between open source systems, because there's
70 no justification, better security can be had from OpenVPN or
73 2. do not implement PPTP servers unless the justification is that the
74 clients must not have to install anything to get going (Microsoft
75 PPTP is included already), and be aware of the risks of
76 information interception,
78 3. do not implement PPTP clients unless the justification is that the
79 server only provides PPTP, and there's nothing better that can be
80 used, and again be aware of the risks of information interception.
82 (Posted on [3]2005-08-10 to the [2]mailing list)
86 1. http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=poptop-server&m=112369621702624&w=2
87 2. http://pptpclient.sourceforge.net/contact.phtml#list
88 3. http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=poptop-server&m=112365342910897&w=2