Re: [Ace] OSCORE Profile status update and way forward

Daniel Migault <> Tue, 13 October 2020 13:10 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFBFD3A0FBD; Tue, 13 Oct 2020 06:10:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cePj5RdUX_VT; Tue, 13 Oct 2020 06:10:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::92f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0DE213A0FA6; Tue, 13 Oct 2020 06:10:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id x26so6442938uan.11; Tue, 13 Oct 2020 06:10:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=cEHX+fBdlPpg3iVhJulD3uk8brvHID6oHbcWqAN3HCg=; b=l0C3Lb0v6iW3Va+gY7kb/NfnQQh1W0j7n7VXoh7CvLd6mQD5UHsSbFCI4KNerZtsqu ObbH84KTOOkqoS3gPEoMC4gWZK/zm6hUpCv5Uc/1mmvg7qEhIVBd6ezQay5+rxb/Q7XU B0zoOdaz/wFMGpu7AI9Bc6UfDfq0eOudKAOsSCxIOCtjzxpRAirpXkPTgctvmoH/vSFh iWuLYAl/JxeR/mB/33YeUvGbY1C5YFbISjvusFIN1t+PTQa5++84Y+ycjJ0AFJILkqDp EitQfa+352ab0CEeCeQPw+IrRb9Vpm+eGJMdziZm8nxeSFSVNrKGnQNT0yAI2PPxjacx B/DQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=cEHX+fBdlPpg3iVhJulD3uk8brvHID6oHbcWqAN3HCg=; b=JKHTmhbdbSzLSkNXzHqNWVOSTFpdGv1crxJF21TOwZ9sZk3NmSr4VBneop3V46Z8Ja /iwA0D5Fyknx1mU7OASbGN5gqWH+f1lApxMAAY04FG/Jz3cKXRt0fIqk5bU2p2H7vMHH XHJZqkDYKJuERp3dU6ET+hBaLMOACJAsS0206DI00obp8g7+p3hAEQWBFB2MM3rpKyaP s33fA++MbG99UMlkTfJttAkacTFV4EUofD9fRhjbvnF6hzEmHFCVbPdZ9CC0nO9xYU4t XI5fsGnaU7viTfd71zJ8WX0EkglYg+3McWxydHwqftlwp54ne1aPQ3Yo205TRmhXjP04 WAOg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532th4yIPygo7lG7i+oA3SctaOP2NmUQNrq7gItxUM+MbuRC8LqF mTLbLLO4es5cGhqBd9++T7K9pqM2RrUVqGQvpDF9w+xgCjE=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxNJSi8ELARmn+u0N93g58qyvEzXw7oGFyp2Ijb0p6uF1PFJ7/sSszYmGpZ7Au8tk0RwzQKPVVN9hjqwmtk4Wk=
X-Received: by 2002:a9f:3f4f:: with SMTP id i15mr2077131uaj.7.1602594651900; Tue, 13 Oct 2020 06:10:51 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: Daniel Migault <>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2020 09:10:41 -0400
Message-ID: <>
To: =?UTF-8?Q?Christian_Ams=C3=BCss?= <>
Cc: Francesca Palombini <>, "" <>, Ace Wg <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000f20f1305b18d24cb"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Ace] OSCORE Profile status update and way forward
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments \(ace\)" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2020 13:10:56 -0000

Dear WG,

If I attempt to balance the different 3 proposals, my perception is we may
address a specific scenario into the core profile with no additional
complexity versus via extensions. This leaves working on a profile v2
(option 2) or updating the to-become soon profile v1 (option 3). I prefer
to avoid specifications being deprecated before they are even published and
would prefer to consider updating the current version.

I suspect that multiple versions of a profile can co-exist and that the
problem of having a profile v2 that interoperate with a profile v1 - which
does not seem mandatory.

In order to move forward, I propose that by October 20:
* A)  WG member state their opinion regarding that we revise the oscore
profile document
* B) Francesca refines the proposed changes, so the document is ready for
* C) WG member state whether they volunteer to review the updated document.
I would like to avoid the document re-opened once considered updated.

With A, B and C I will be able to discuss with Ben how to move forward the
document. I am happy to get your feed backs or suggestions.


On Fri, Oct 9, 2020 at 11:45 AM Christian Amsüss <>

> Hello Francesca, hello ACE group,
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 01:48:33PM +0000, Francesca Palombini wrote:
> > - clarified that Appendix B.2 of OSCORE can be used with this profile,
> > and what implementers need to think about if they do.
> I understand B.2 to be something that the involved parties need to agree
> on beforehand; after all, the ID context may be something the server
> relies on (at least for the initial attempt) to find the right key,
> especially when multiple AS are involved. (For example, the RS could
> have an agreement that the AS may issue any KID as long as they use a
> particular ID context). If the server expects B.2 to happen (which, as
> it is put now, it can as long as it supports it in general), it needs to
> shard its KID space for the ASs it uses. (Generally, B.2 is mutually
> exclusive with ID contexts's use of namespacing KIDs).
> Is the expectation that clients that do not anticipate B.2 by the time
> they are configured with their AS just don't offer B.2 to their peers?
> Given B.2 is in its current form client-initiated only (AFAIR we had
> versions where ID1 could be empty in draft versions, but currently it
> reads as client-initialized), does B.2 have any benefits for ACE-OSCORE
> clients? After all, they could just as well post the token with a new
> nonce1 to the same effect.
> Kind Regards
> Christian
> --
> To use raw power is to make yourself infinitely vulnerable to greater
> powers.
>   -- Bene Gesserit axiom
> _______________________________________________
> Ace mailing list

Daniel Migault