IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ace] draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz-35 - unauthorized AS address, DoS, and privacy

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Wed, 16 September 2020 15:26 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 636523A0962 for <ace@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 08:26:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6idv2NXKPkO2 for <ace@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 08:26:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7FE5C3A011D for <ace@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 08:26:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1B3B389B9; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 11:04:45 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id Pzfc1iqxzaCo; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 11:04:42 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.21]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A6F7389B8; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 11:04:41 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 636094F5; Wed, 16 Sep 2020 11:25:58 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
cc: "ace@ietf.org" <ace@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <20200916012814.GA89563@kduck.mit.edu>
References: <8CF8DD8C-895F-489D-8D21-FE2048B550EA@ericsson.com> <21607.1599763603@localhost> <20200916012814.GA89563@kduck.mit.edu>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 26.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2020 11:25:58 -0400
Message-ID: <19289.1600269958@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ace/EgM-WTeF_cYLchPPEZ19x1vM8iw>
Subject: Re: [Ace] draft-ietf-ace-oauth-authz-35 - unauthorized AS address, DoS, and privacy
X-BeenThere: ace@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments \(ace\)" <ace.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ace>, <mailto:ace-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ace/>
List-Post: <mailto:ace@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ace-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace>, <mailto:ace-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2020 15:26:06 -0000

Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu> wrote:
    >> > The requirement "the client MUST be able to determine whether an AS has
    >> > the authority to issue access tokens for a certain RS. This can for
    >> > example be done through pre-configured lists, or through an online
    >> > lookup mechanism that in turn also must be secured." indicates that C
    >> > is required to have another mechanism to determine the AS for a
    >> > specific RS and that the unauthorized AS address is completely
    >> > redundant.
    >>
    >> This is a hard problem.
    >> Q: "Who are you?"
    >> A: "Depends upon who is asking! Who are you?"
    >> A: "Depends upon who is asking! Who are you?"
    >> ...
    >>
    >> The DNS-SD WG produced rfc8882, but as I understand it,
    >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-dnssd-privacy-05
    >> was abandonned because the WG did not see implementation/energy.
    >> I can't seem to find the thread discussing that state.

    > Interestingly, the corresponding requirements document was just published
    > recently as RFC 8882.

    > "A problem with no solution is a hard problem"...

I thought Christian Huitema's solution, which I think is three or four years
old, was reasonable.  The WG just couldn't get reviews or people interested
in implementing.  Maybe ACE cares enough now.

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email