[6tisch] comments on draft-piro-6tisch-security-issues

[Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>]

I found this document to be a useful overview of 802.15.4 physical/layer-2
security options.

I don't agree with your title! I don't see how this is a "security
framework". It is something much more useful and important.
The analysis in section 3 is very useful.

I am not sure that I understand section 4.

Thank you for giving the network definitions in section 5.0.
It would be worth making it clear in the definition of fully secure that all
broadcasts are encrypted, including the beacon.

The _Hybrid Secured network_ is likely the most common, and not because nodes
are not capable of encryption, but because they don't have the key (yet!!).

The Setting-up Phase seems to assume a provisioning process to distribute
this MasterKey.  It could be that the MasterKey comes from something like
1x/PANA?

I like that the document uses 6top API to set things up.
My understanding is that 6.3 describes a way to get fresh per-cluster keying.
It appears that this is done over a layer-2 protocol.  Why not MLE?


Some editorial nits:
in section 6.1.1 the word "exploit"(ed) is technically correct, but perhaps
   an unfortunate choice for many non-english/french speakers.
   "exploiter" en francois is perhaps best translated as "leverage"
   In IT circles, many understand an "exploit" to be a security flaw..

--
Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-