Re: [Acme] WG last call for draft-ietf-acme-email-smime-06

Ben Schwartz <bemasc@google.com> Thu, 12 March 2020 20:42 UTC

Return-Path: <bemasc@google.com>
X-Original-To: acme@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: acme@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1DD43A08F8 for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 13:42:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -17.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-17.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, ENV_AND_HDR_SPF_MATCH=-0.5, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.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 Pjn0ewFgqh08 for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 13:42:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wr1-x430.google.com (mail-wr1-x430.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::430]) (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 2D2BC3A08FA for <acme@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 13:42:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wr1-x430.google.com with SMTP id m9so9242050wro.12 for <acme@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 13:42:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=j4EzTQV6X5lIKhx3uP5k5UQh4z+89tb8skFe8Aa7AU4=; b=eEUmhyrb1YvK94DC1h0n4THo8dPyuX1seGeMv0SgwfAxehN+hGMW3H6owjN8xSIEZ8 JDt5eU3SYvj5TiZdgW5drOjLBa4E/R3WRa48bOxstmgaldT4BBUbhGW+AYTnfSmYHJkJ Z32J9PLa/wliN1P6B9yae9lnH5ctnkaR5g8yyzuDN2Vh8ifCPUNUxJl7PXifz+nfBpLD PDLfEn1ntQ6PyNr2L4GEj02NgebbwXL5R3tGnV8Qf7QxkX1SmeP2kkL2Qw9tfobt92in PZJtc7UqC4k0Wb4Tnz8FwrYEXTixq1X8y+3CdljmK0SAn2Wf6Pyx3BA/j8M0GysCEY7F dj0Q==
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=j4EzTQV6X5lIKhx3uP5k5UQh4z+89tb8skFe8Aa7AU4=; b=eWUw0h0Y50qsU2waUk/voLeJRr+lCr+w3YGZ5W0ZMz+a9iWeovxHNU7bu2DNDAJu95 SrXvxDuqRIhSling9pmmN90rK9h2NsEGsy/JFfrBZchSFW5uZ4rM/DHv97zO11sSIbr3 NXxDDJ/K07DliWUnIRVjiUbwyuCD2z7zoDCKP8oQ7lJucaw+2FIgrfdg7rSRBcoD8bkq afOWxXr3TvvZ7nz3hJVHBIPc+w6zpwGFHQt1KlEVTpiX0/1QfCcVxHh+9oSMob0jNzNp /pVtx0UxSh5UBcaEBqIXP8DUtVfszCo+UzswhMSXocQuvEMrcIQy6FV/ysLSXJz3SZnr USiQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ3pgur8BSChdguGXZTU1I+cgHIfzLqKQNf65xMu5IJs4uussd2z jtEBEOe4SeoVW++Z/nSlpAv+AWohm0EJfhAOX/zPi54Wml8=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: =?utf-8?q?ADFU+vsimSOApDIrKCEDb0I5m5h5iiq7JfL7dHwVJTEP?= =?utf-8?q?vAYGNx2aYS1LninI5Ua9gCUHjxkkYK3j1waYQN4iyi26sZY=3D?=
X-Received: by 2002:adf:92c2:: with SMTP id 60mr12996209wrn.177.1584045734071; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 13:42:14 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <3703708B-4454-4AC9-87AF-961C73B1F331@akamai.com>
In-Reply-To: <3703708B-4454-4AC9-87AF-961C73B1F331@akamai.com>
From: Ben Schwartz <bemasc@google.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 16:42:02 -0400
Message-ID: <CAHbrMsDco31pxyBMBSdbgh5aMnttyC1G_tDTg1tz-aAzto=5dw@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz=40akamai.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Cc: "acme@ietf.org" <acme@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha-256; boundary="00000000000054277305a0ae63b2"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/acme/uHvp9WHT1MkMPacNiebhj0WZGTI>
Subject: Re: [Acme] WG last call for draft-ietf-acme-email-smime-06
X-BeenThere: acme@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 12 Mar 2020 20:42:19 -0000

Section 3 says token-part1 "contains at least 64 bit of entropy", but
Section 3.1 says token-part1 "MUST be at least 64 octet long after
decoding".  Is this difference deliberate?  Also 64 octets of entropy is a
_lot_.  RFC 8555 says "the token is required to contain at least 128 bits
of entropy".

The draft seems to be oriented entirely toward use with e-mail clients that
have a built-in ACME-S/MIME client.  I'm a bit disappointed that the draft
doesn't accommodate users with "naive" email clients very well, e.g. by
allowing customized subject lines.  I assume this is deliberate, perhaps
because of a desire to use short-TTL S/MIME certificates that would be
impractical to provision manually, but the draft doesn't mention a
rationale.

On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 2:52 PM Salz, Rich <rsalz=
40akamai.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:

> This mail begins a one-week working group last call on
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-acme-email-smime/?include_text=1
>
>
>
> If you have comments or issues, please post here.
>
>
>
> If anyone wants to be a document shepherd, please contact the chairs.
>
>
>
>                 /r$
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Acme mailing list
> Acme@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
>