IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Acme] ACME signature mechanics

Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com> Thu, 18 December 2014 14:46 UTC

Return-Path: <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.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 4945F1A8A44 for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 06:46:56 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FREEMAIL_REPLY=1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 A2X9va2IIBse for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 06:46:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wi0-x232.google.com (mail-wi0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::232]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A2DA41A8A43 for <acme@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 06:46:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wi0-f178.google.com with SMTP id em10so2066985wid.5 for <acme@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 06:46:53 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=N+ZUKM7kwcapExrdJOxytZ1XRICLEWODY5+OayDCas0=; b=fiiZnZ/K1cglZcVISYsrM9BNqdO66D42NgwAwwDmAhx37owwEGxjDVk3uDQYhrLHdi BpOuslaATMZhVkmA6acU16wpvE6kNCWrKbkqSjAYEyNM+oFOBmkLQcpQhMt1G6jpqo+J A+KNZFaSkdqOpJG/RAjS1hz1D/2KcQ56KsrhSoTZQ8QsSu34MfO0SDphrKkUyeVCABA9 oJ0AyLTAj5A3h6ElKt2fD4uyY4anQZHk2/uKKEZc3rE/8UDA9eSOMwWiGsoFxEVeMOTr LkuQQYV+kmcDPC3KxBPWtR0+pC6nfZp9cX7NgX4BVE/bLxLeu8xRIulvmQK5OpR0QrIr WK1Q==
X-Received: by 10.194.89.3 with SMTP id bk3mr5331633wjb.92.1418914013297; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 06:46:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.79] (52.16.14.81.rev.sfr.net. [81.14.16.52]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id u13sm6360197wjr.26.2014.12.18.06.46.52 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 18 Dec 2014 06:46:52 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <5492E8D5.1020103@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 15:46:45 +0100
From: Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com>, Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net>
References: <548FF9E3.1020703@gmail.com> <CAL02cgT9iYqtX2Ui5XQYnj=yeF_QnSkKn-jE0D5d56WMzB5bBg@mail.gmail.com> <CAMm+LwjwG0dPTkByu5WZ_ev3xNxAMwunoc-A_VK4sKPSZXRYDw@mail.gmail.com> <006c01d01a33$2b086890$811939b0$@icloud.com> <CABkgnnWGQarDzpx-3f488OF2w3eyTV1iUr4GWyND+_avRHNZ6w@mail.gmail.com> <004901d01a94$55e9ebe0$01bdc3a0$@icloud.com> <54928827.9030009@gmail.com> <CAMm+Lwifqgt9e_i=froACzGW3bsY05KBiJJFBRJrqJcZrEqN8A@mail.gmail.com> <5492CF1B.7010508@gmx.net> <CAMm+LwgL0j-FjsUv4NSonvHcjJLpSB8JUbNNGmRvyqi37B+K7g@mail.gmail.com> <5492D548.4010709@gmx.net> <CAMm+LwiN9Q8wiP=uLXRtq=f12C=VGwRa_K94u+dcGf+BHxAkfg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAMm+LwiN9Q8wiP=uLXRtq=f12C=VGwRa_K94u+dcGf+BHxAkfg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/acme/gNd23xsalAzBD1q4vQKtxKxEjOw
Cc: Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx>, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, "acme@ietf.org" <acme@ietf.org>, Trevor Freeman <trevor.freeman99@icloud.com>
Subject: Re: [Acme] ACME signature mechanics
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: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 14:46:56 -0000

On 2014-12-18 15:11, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 8:23 AM, Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net <mailto:hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net>> wrote:
>
>     Hi Phillip,
>
>     we already have a mechanism for issuing certificates to embedded
>     devices, namely OMA Lightweight M2M. It is already used today.
>     That specification is a version of the OMA device management protocol
>     (which is also widely used) but uses different protocols that are more
>     suitable for the embedded side, such as CoAP and JSON.
>
>     Hence, I doubt that this work is something the IoT community is asking for.
>
>
> Is there a pointer to the spec that is publicly accessible?
>
> In the short term that might be the case. But in the longer term IoT is not going to be a special case of the Internet, it is going to be the Internet.
>
> I think you are making a case for looking at the OMA protocol and deciding if we can use it.

I think the key-word here is "managed".  ACME is not a management protocol.

Just to add more confusion, there is another large class of devices which (IMO...)
isn't served by ACME or OMA-DM and that are privately owned mobile computing devices
(phones tablets).  This is what SKS/KeyGen2 is targeting.

So (in principle) we may need three protocols which I guess will leave us with 10 or so :-)

Anders
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.webpki.mobile.android

>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email