Re: [Anima] constrained voucher examples updated --- voucher looks wrong
<ietf@augustcellars.com> Fri, 14 June 2019 18:35 UTC
Return-Path: <ietf@augustcellars.com>
X-Original-To: anima@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: anima@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2CFB120431 for <anima@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 11:35:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 jvhB9FM23x10 for <anima@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 11:35:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail2.augustcellars.com (augustcellars.com [50.45.239.150]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C3DE12011C for <anima@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 11:35:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Jude (73.180.8.170) by mail2.augustcellars.com (192.168.0.56) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1395.4; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 11:35:06 -0700
From: ietf@augustcellars.com
To: 'Michael Richardson' <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>, 'Thomas Werner' <thomas-werner@siemens.com>, 'consultancy' <consultancy@vanderstok.org>, anima@ietf.org
References: <28559.1558924665@localhost>
In-Reply-To: <28559.1558924665@localhost>
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2019 11:35:04 -0700
Message-ID: <007101d522df$e41217a0$ac3646e0$@augustcellars.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Content-Language: en-us
Thread-Index: AQI6C3zosouMnyM+R/zZmAatMjR9kqXRqA9g
X-Originating-IP: [73.180.8.170]
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/anima/43e9jow3syiFbHPPt85twhYzfbk>
Subject: Re: [Anima] constrained voucher examples updated --- voucher looks wrong
X-BeenThere: anima@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Autonomic Networking Integrated Model and Approach <anima.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/anima>, <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/anima/>
List-Post: <mailto:anima@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima>, <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2019 18:35:15 -0000
So for kicks I did a quick run through the CMS side of things Looking at the example in A.3.1 - there does not appear to be any content in the message. It has a content type of 'data', but the content itself is detached. Is this intended? Jim -----Original Message----- From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Sent: Sunday, May 26, 2019 7:38 PM To: Thomas Werner <thomas-werner@siemens.com>; consultancy <consultancy@vanderstok.org>; anima@ietf.org Cc: Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com> Subject: constrained voucher examples updated --- voucher looks wrong I have updated the appendix to draft-ietf-anima-constrained-voucher, which contains the COSE signed CBOR vouchers. I have included base64 of the binary, as well as CBOR diagnostic format. Please see: https://github.com/anima-wg/constrained-voucher/blob/master/constrained-vouc her.txt#L2218 I am including the private (EC) keys in PKCS1 form ("BEGIN EC PRIVATE KEY"), perhaps I should use PKCS8/RFC5208 format ("BEGIN PRIVATE KEY") instead? Thomas, and Jim, would you take a crack at validating the voucher-request and parboiled (Registrar signed) voucher requests from these files? The raw binary files are at: https://github.com/anima-wg/constrained-voucher/tree/master/examples along with the public keys. It's just COSE signatures. In doing this, I've discovered a bug in my code, and I believe it needs to be fixed. Specifically, it appears at line: https://github.com/anima-wg/constrained-voucher/blob/master/constrained-vouc her.txt#L2478 You'll notice: "00-D0-E5-F2-00-02", 11: "rIe_64PzENXdd32FApWcMQ", 12: "MII B5TCCAWugAwIBAgIBATAKBggqhkjOPQQDAjBzMRIwEAYKCZImiZPyLGQBGRY that is, I've pinned the *base64* encoding of the registrar's DER encoded certificate, rather than the DER encoding itself. This is clearly wrong, but I do it consistently and tolerantly so I don't notice. I will be fixing this. However, the signature on the resulting object should be correct, even if the contents are semantically wrong. -- Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-