Re: [Ace] MQTT, OSCORE, DTLS profiles - recommendation on RS - AS communication

Daniel Migault <mglt.ietf@gmail.com> Mon, 08 March 2021 12:51 UTC

Return-Path: <mglt.ietf@gmail.com>
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 474003A29AD for <ace@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Mar 2021 04:51:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
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: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 O4rTbEA_V0tV for <ace@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Mar 2021 04:51:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ua1-x936.google.com (mail-ua1-x936.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::936]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 085BC3A0E6B for <ace@ietf.org>; Mon, 8 Mar 2021 04:51:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ua1-x936.google.com with SMTP id w5so3289126uap.0 for <ace@ietf.org>; Mon, 08 Mar 2021 04:51:18 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=oFAkq3lLacYgL+CHbjxgHv4cUHuel93PDhtPu0HM/lc=; b=k9bihN+1fX6oEFFFZ1jlXcq30p9gIKbhMEoig4X49HQKCHEuTibub0LBE/G8FUrbBC XFllt99Rt+36Z9Xeac7BLSXFNxH7FOWfJn/IreXlhT4pQqjyLtgJdfpRoeriE8wwPFiD 1VuQFB8AHKEFoFo1bzRbCp9nSnV86MeKXfcomPeiWIvLw/3Aa3ClRUvw4UiTnT+yK15A kmC8iqzg9Lr0T/O8l/Av2DDeuoIxflfItObLFcHHKntojXrjyE0ZLz0cN3sKlKFk0Zl0 05oH5CuoySZVEGsxo+U9X8npKI6efvl0mztiCAksMcUueHZjgJPILQdE4BqE3KEaCeH7 A2Ug==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=oFAkq3lLacYgL+CHbjxgHv4cUHuel93PDhtPu0HM/lc=; b=Px0Ii/CYbiFHOz4TQBtINhUEtmEUYrzIw7ougO2hzvnwqscOVrN1cYWm18pOzcKo0L 321kJTYPeouSmRBG/zfUff84rOPq99YsQgXY2xH9gHOjZiGgwxhZxv2ZGgjTF/54Lfw/ 4XUWEEvMZoi+3nPSntWu/ihXvf9Wj3v9+w6E4dtR5cbEJrQyLlWnpjH1edTAnPJldldP oNQjLNHzZHkL7f0R7sx9mHgxwsyDf3JpsCcMwT075I6+ePb2zw1dSKwvO3kCG4+zZTfm +mYmRBTGDjEvbKnP63smr9LyZH1PO51Fx/FG42RDbvJ85pGH7RbA7NPsB82YUa6vVtjM Kl9g==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531vtIdUbTeXoL1D+QgDSjamXW4UQBqxw5U9cjPe1FSKZTAuV9Kh 1U8Nl1o8lM1d7YbrNnn/WBItX+V5qs2M9eaALghM+cM3
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxOqTMSCfxNqn5nsmMjdt1IIpyRK6/sbzkgsGdelISzK89rUV0Ybm6Xuk32nSSlw5GksNfg/EqovIEogrMcbgc=
X-Received: by 2002:a9f:230c:: with SMTP id 12mr12187475uae.0.1615207876451; Mon, 08 Mar 2021 04:51:16 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <54D2748E-00B4-48B3-BE43-A80F0E791BF2@ericsson.com>
In-Reply-To: <54D2748E-00B4-48B3-BE43-A80F0E791BF2@ericsson.com>
From: Daniel Migault <mglt.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2021 07:51:04 -0500
Message-ID: <CADZyTkmiv7Agjv_RHGZukc135JZ2b793JF772zpSGZKBi9LDLw@mail.gmail.com>
To: =?UTF-8?Q?G=C3=B6ran_Selander?= <goran.selander=40ericsson.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Cc: Daniel Migault <daniel.migault=40ericsson.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, "ace@ietf.org" <ace@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000b6e21e05bd05e39b"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ace/u_aaLxY0TTh7OhB9fsRI07KjRtw>
Subject: Re: [Ace] MQTT, OSCORE, DTLS profiles - recommendation on RS - AS communication
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: Mon, 08 Mar 2021 12:51:56 -0000

Thanks for the clarification. I am more concerned by having the profiles
coherent with the framework than having the profiles providing the same
capabilities. I am fine with the dtls profile making the introspection out
of scope and leave it to the WG or co-author if they are willing to change
it at that stage. Unless I am hearing a willingness to move into this
direction I propose we move these documents as they are.

Yours,
Daniel




On Mon, Mar 8, 2021 at 2:58 AM Göran Selander <goran.selander=
40ericsson.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:

> Hi Daniel,
>
> draft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile-16 does recommend a security protocol to be
> used between RS and AS, see Section 5:
>
>  "As specified in the ACE framework (section 5.9 of
>    [I-D.ietf-ace-oauth-authz]), the requesting entity (RS and/or client)
>    and the AS communicates via the introspection or token endpoint.  The
>    use of CoAP and OSCORE ([RFC8613]) for this communication is
>    RECOMMENDED in this profile; other protocols fulfilling the security
>    requirements defined in section 5 of [I-D.ietf-ace-oauth-authz] (such
>    as HTTP and DTLS or TLS) MAY be used instead."
>
> For draft-ietf-ace-dtls-authorize-15: "The use of introspection is out of
> scope for this specification."
>
> So it seems your concern is already resolved in these drafts.
>
> We might ask ourselves why introspection is included in one or not the
> other. It is not heavily used in draft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile-16, only in
> Section 4.2:
>
>  "The RS may make an introspection request (see Section 5.9.1
>    of [I-D.ietf-ace-oauth-authz]) to validate the token before
>    responding to the POST request to the authz-info endpoint."
>
> A similar sentence could have been included in
> draft-ietf-ace-dtls-authorize as well (together with a recommendation to
> use DTLS).
>
> Is this something we want to change at this stage?
>
>
> Göran
>
>
>
>
> On 2021-03-05, 22:11, "Ace on behalf of Daniel Migault" <
> ace-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of daniel.migault=
> 40ericsson.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>
>     Hi,
>
>     Now that the authz document is being consolidated, I do have some
> minor concerns regarding the recommendations mentioned in the profile
> documents, that might require an additional update.
>
>     The update to the authz document indicates more more clearly than
> before that profiles need to provide some recommendations for the RS – AS
> communication.
>
>     “””
>     Profiles MUST  specify for introspection a communication security
> protocol RECOMMENDED to be used between RS and AS that provides the
> features required above. “””
>
>     It seems to me the MQTT profile text makes it pretty clear that TLS is
> recommended for all communications but I am wondering if additional
> clarification would be beneficial – see below. That said I agree this is a
> very minor point in this case that could be handled by the RFC editor.
>     For the OSCORE or DTLS profiles, unless I am missing the RS – AS
> recommendations in the documents , it seems to me it has been omitted and
> needs to be added -- see below.
>
>
>     Yours,
>     Daniel
>
>     ## MQTT - draft-ietf-ace-mqtt-tls-profile-10
>
>     “””
>        To provide communication confidentiality and RS authentication, TLS
>        is used, and TLS 1.3 [RFC8446] is RECOMMENDED.  This document makes
>        the same assumptions as Section 4 of the ACE framework
>        [I-D.ietf-ace-oauth-authz] regarding Client and RS registration with
>        the AS and setting up keying material.  While the Client-Broker
>        exchanges are only over MQTT, the required Client-AS and RS-AS
>        interactions are described for HTTPS-based communication [RFC7230],
>        using 'application/ace+json' content type, and unless otherwise
>        specified, using JSON encoding.
>     “””
>
>     I am wondering if that would not be more appropriated to specify in
> the first line RS and AS authentication or simply authentication.
>
>
>
>
>
>     * OSCORE draft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile-16
>
>     “””
>     This
>        profile RECOMMENDS the use of OSCORE between client and AS, to
> reduce
>        the number of libraries the client has to support, but other
>        protocols fulfilling the security requirements defined in section 5
>        of [I-D.ietf-ace-oauth-authz] (such as TLS or DTLS) MAY be used as
>        well.
>     “””
>
>
>
>     * DTLS draft-ietf-ace-dtls-authorize-15
>
>
>     “””
>     It is RECOMMENDED that the client
>        uses DTLS with the same keying material to secure the communication
>        with the authorization server, proving possession of the key as part
>        of the token request.  Other mechanisms for proving possession of
> the
>        key may be defined in the future.
>     “””
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ace mailing list
> Ace@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace
>


-- 
Daniel Migault
Ericsson