[Anima] Re: Discussion on BRSKI/cBRSKI/BRSKI-PRM requirements on signing the PVR
Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Tue, 14 January 2025 20:00 UTC
Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@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 9F5B1C14F5E2 for <anima@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Jan 2025 12:00:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.103
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.103 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sandelman.ca
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EeP4jyqPj-Al for <anima@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Jan 2025 12:00:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C38BC14F698 for <anima@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Jan 2025 12:00:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 039B41800E; Tue, 14 Jan 2025 15:00:26 -0500 (EST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavis, port 10024) with LMTP id Yu9N_8KAdxvB; Tue, 14 Jan 2025 15:00:24 -0500 (EST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sandelman.ca; s=mail; t=1736884824; bh=P3KmHRf+IV5N9ukhXANaD8AqOlTkaRfdzOEEYd4QKKw=; h=From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=DxUmyZcAwbnDbseC4yRAa2lay4fZ6/KaWFbs4+YwoEjlVgbsoJRSgNFAV0ZdM8XTP D9b8fOhxUkvacDB7n4+Rkk5GDCS/wWHHfjM5TOftpACgMDQ6QzpoOL3Tvf5nRRIMSJ 1bvi2s9T9cnSGgS2zmIj16GUPmtZxVA91NzfgErt/3wwu4+kwgN5qGmaGDmM1yba7o AA5kEVvmK1fzo+Td3xOwGEkTnwuAGtVNcPF00jev8ZyuVeltc6uXgIzfVK8P6ZJDQB OSHyNaSia/fXp7jyOLixE67R9BUiuDJHEIJ7rwUdRcsltJ1jsV0hNAnPJi66YbCLVC KRJvrMNiDZqXA==
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2364B1800D; Tue, 14 Jan 2025 15:00:24 -0500 (EST)
Received: from obiwan.sandelman.ca (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E5EA137; Tue, 14 Jan 2025 15:00:24 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Esko Dijk <esko.dijk@iotconsultancy.nl>, "anima@ietf.org" <anima@ietf.org>, "Werner, Thomas" <thomas-werner@siemens.com>, "Fries, Steffen" <steffen.fries@siemens.com>
In-Reply-To: <DU0P190MB197881C7B003306108D9AE43FD182@DU0P190MB1978.EURP190.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
References: <DU0P190MB197881C7B003306108D9AE43FD182@DU0P190MB1978.EURP190.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.8+dev; GNU Emacs 28.2
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0;<'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2025 15:00:24 -0500
Message-ID: <10111.1736884824@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
Message-ID-Hash: P2ROIUKM6MBP6TIO2YLBSDD7ZZ5XA7BJ
X-Message-ID-Hash: P2ROIUKM6MBP6TIO2YLBSDD7ZZ5XA7BJ
X-MailFrom: mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-anima.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [Anima] Re: Discussion on BRSKI/cBRSKI/BRSKI-PRM requirements on signing the PVR
List-Id: Autonomic Networking Integrated Model and Approach <anima.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/anima/jU8OXpCRcPrSDXhT5eLGi9WFVyQ>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/anima>
List-Help: <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:anima-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:anima@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:anima-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:anima-leave@ietf.org>
Esko Dijk <esko.dijk@iotconsultancy.nl> wrote: > Now the target recipient of the PVR is the MASA. (Again for PRM this > may be different and include Registrar as well...? But not in BRSKI I > think.) So the requirement on the Pledge is it SHOULD include in the > PVR all the certificates needed for the MASA to build the complete > chain. Since the manufacturer created the IDevID for the pledge, I would think it (the MASA) has all the required subordinate certificates. The *Registrar*, however, might not have them all. It's a tussle. > The MASA is this solution needs to store all the cert-chains for all > the Pledges it supports – including their IDevID EE certificates -- an > extra burden on MASA, compared with BRSKI, but one which helps us > achieve the smaller size of PVR. So cBRSKI changes the “SHOULD” > requirement from 8995 to a SHOULD NOT in Section 9.2.2. I don't think it's a burden :-) > A registrar accepts or declines a request to join the domain, based > on the authenticated identity presented > It doesn’t say where the IDevID identity should come from – PVR or the > (D)TLS handshake supplied certificates. Having only one source should > be fine ... ? Yes. I prefer getting it from the PVR. That's much easier in a PRM situation. -- Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting ) Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
- [Anima] Discussion on BRSKI/cBRSKI/BRSKI-PRM requ… Esko Dijk
- [Anima] Re: Discussion on BRSKI/cBRSKI/BRSKI-PRM … Michael Richardson
- [Anima] Re: Discussion on BRSKI/cBRSKI/BRSKI-PRM … Esko Dijk
- [Anima] Re: Discussion on BRSKI/cBRSKI/BRSKI-PRM … Fries, Steffen
- [Anima] Re: Discussion on BRSKI/cBRSKI/BRSKI-PRM … Esko Dijk
- [Anima] Re: Discussion on BRSKI/cBRSKI/BRSKI-PRM … Fries, Steffen
- [Anima] Re: Discussion on BRSKI/cBRSKI/BRSKI-PRM … Esko Dijk
- [Anima] Re: Discussion on BRSKI/cBRSKI/BRSKI-PRM … Michael Richardson
- [Anima] Re: Discussion on BRSKI/cBRSKI/BRSKI-PRM … Esko Dijk
- [Anima] Re: Discussion on BRSKI/cBRSKI/BRSKI-PRM … Michael Richardson
- [Anima] Re: Discussion on BRSKI/cBRSKI/BRSKI-PRM … Esko Dijk