IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Anima] a multiplicity of pinned certificates

Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ca> Sun, 02 December 2018 15:36 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr@sandelman.ca>
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 2A785130EDF for <anima@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 2 Dec 2018 07:36:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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 WX_6h54N2wjD for <anima@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 2 Dec 2018 07:36:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from relay.sandelman.ca (relay.cooperix.net [176.58.120.209]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2AB8F130EDE for <anima@ietf.org>; Sun, 2 Dec 2018 07:36:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dooku.sandelman.ca (unknown [90.207.60.186]) by relay.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8AE071F8BE; Sun, 2 Dec 2018 15:36:34 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by dooku.sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 179) id 49CC51964; Sun, 2 Dec 2018 10:36:00 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ca>
cc: Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net>
to: "anima@ietf.org" <anima@ietf.org>
In-reply-to: <E79F03FA-E4D7-4ED1-9552-F00300C6DD9D@juniper.net>
References: <153826253306.18743.9250084704876465818@ietfa.amsl.com> <153874289877.989.15433226866680411112@ietfa.amsl.com> <24358.1543530974@dooku.sandelman.ca> <480.1543543174@dooku.sandelman.ca> <E79F03FA-E4D7-4ED1-9552-F00300C6DD9D@juniper.net>
Comments: In-reply-to Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net> message dated "Fri, 30 Nov 2018 17:37:09 -0000."
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.6; GNU Emacs 24.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2018 15:36:00 -0000
Message-ID: <3750.1543764960@dooku.sandelman.ca>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/anima/T5-MhL4XYkWHg_Oelg_4m8-TX3k>
Subject: [Anima] a multiplicity of pinned certificates
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: Sun, 02 Dec 2018 15:36:39 -0000

Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net> wrote:
    > Separately, as long as we're raising issues with RFC 8366, I strongly
    > believe that the pinned-domain-certificate should've be a list of
    > certificates.  Or, in crypto-types [1] terms, a trust-anchor-cert-cms,
    > not a trust-anchor-cert-x509.  To enable the pinned-domain-certificate
    > for an intermediate CA to be a chain that includes the root self-signed
    > certificate, thus supporting tooling unable to validate partial-chains.

I believe that a future version could make this change relatively easily,
particularly if we do it quickly. Destinguishing between arrays of 1-element
and single-items isn't that difficult in the serializations we have.

--
]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh networks [
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        | network architect  [
]     mcr@sandelman.ca  http://www.sandelman.ca/        |   ruby on rails    [

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email