Re: [Acme] kinds of proof

Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> Sat, 29 November 2014 14:08 UTC

Return-Path: <randy@psg.com>
X-Original-To: acme@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: acme@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B12961A1A37 for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 29 Nov 2014 06:08:56 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 T2x7ZAIDWdru for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 29 Nov 2014 06:08:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:8006::18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C3D5F1A1A33 for <acme@ietf.org>; Sat, 29 Nov 2014 06:08:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.psg.com.psg.com) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <randy@psg.com>) id 1Xuihh-0000j3-Lp; Sat, 29 Nov 2014 14:08:53 +0000
Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2014 09:08:52 -0500
Message-ID: <m24mti14ln.wl%randy@psg.com>
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
In-Reply-To: <97EF4983-0A20-4030-9958-087FC93677A1@vpnc.org>
References: <CAL02cgTgpjQffow2XuaNuT7BtqYVttXdVUgyqBFbsAbN4g0VzQ@mail.gmail.com> <DEC7A8A8-563D-41B3-94AC-71DC7219D3F8@cisco.com> <m27fyg4yzg.wl%randy@psg.com> <547754C0.9050306@cs.tcd.ie> <20141127211348.GE25114@mournblade.imrryr.org> <54784C61.2080508@cs.tcd.ie> <20141128170917.GC285@mournblade.imrryr.org> <88B49E1D-1601-4B86-8D93-14CF71501DFC@vpnc.org> <20141128213724.GG285@mournblade.imrryr.org> <7261AA75-5912-4514-A393-94F602C941C2@vpnc.org> <20141128223122.GF3200@localhost> <97EF4983-0A20-4030-9958-087FC93677A1@vpnc.org>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/22.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/acme/TZ7j5tZAbjf5nON7PPcfBxH-wNc
Cc: acme <acme@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Acme] kinds of proof
X-BeenThere: acme@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Automated Certificate Management Environment <acme.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/acme>, <mailto:acme-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/acme/>
List-Post: <mailto:acme@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:acme-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme>, <mailto:acme-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2014 14:08:57 -0000

>> The user should be able to represent all services on that host just by
>> having a shell on it?  
> Sure. That's the way it is today for many CAs.

is that a feature or a bug?

is it clear what is being certified and what is not are rigorously
defined?  and, if so, what proofs of possession are appropriate for
each?

randy