Re: [Cfrg] Call for participation: privacy-pass virtual IETF BoF
Alex Davidson <alex.davidson92@gmail.com> Wed, 25 March 2020 10:50 UTC
Return-Path: <alex.davidson92@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 546163A0D14
for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 Mar 2020 03:50:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.847
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.847 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,
FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001,
HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001,
URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
header.d=gmail.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 vRlXettF-ogo for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>;
Wed, 25 Mar 2020 03:50:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ua1-x92f.google.com (mail-ua1-x92f.google.com
[IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::92f])
(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 2549F3A0D20
for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Wed, 25 Mar 2020 03:50:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ua1-x92f.google.com with SMTP id f9so548039uaq.8
for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Wed, 25 Mar 2020 03:50:47 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to
:cc; bh=i4zUrcM0F0BVmcqR4USyGzrQLshZjDe8q/YLcr5okXg=;
b=jaFEZDVhXo1XpiqQGZBnRoCJOsnWIC6184UnVgFlhXOQe7uOWkIl+QQWo+FQ3i4BMJ
rRd7mb6LFyBwM1uHoLceUpgXwgn9UhiLN/UaxuhQq03uYN6E6m2cHDWiHwAoKVZzCUwT
cpjRrvV5xmqHpq9JM7iKQ7NPnWIRJ4GLgS/hXIF3NFAiikqwgvA6bTDzZ07QE2sxrbIU
qB0awpm2Lhq/1GPx1tiXc3Mk1peKzJQ73pNEnOeeFCS0T7I29h5rBnbT/zyXv303wsEk
Ms+GOI2VzZpnfxM3ryCPCxrdZhdTHDs0lbrJHQVZRY60Ga+EWp0Apdbsu2img1/oPfN7
tA7Q==
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=i4zUrcM0F0BVmcqR4USyGzrQLshZjDe8q/YLcr5okXg=;
b=eF2t2qDaaXp+Z2jr5xGylBxE33YGxlWw6gX/ex59nd1nUHyWKo4pq1TLQ5yp9lmRW+
cnTbf3fBuNOqpR3p+7+v1cuR/faWwnRfQJKXPxi3Q+krOweH9tF5fsf6xPuVXFJZmaWg
q1AL2M04Ckc8WwEn9z+3i9NXjZjvO4T9W/fAIMKr6BCJHoq9svU/1/4TU+k5oDVnmx/Q
+kle7UqyxepEYUfBw7xW4EAny1Wm0jcuLy4/+rJduSO09z9vAQMJXHBXJzBwc44OhF0o
KWCOESiOIZSp/khkSyAsiMhlalugCM2t8yZ4R25KvBd5yFJ1A0IOmY9UgwnAbNk7IcEG
bKDA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ1yPX/wxvvcL4BBA69prGek60e0LBLphuiOlMl21h+Mqo2qWtw0
P7d/PcrHJw2HDS1SkIilY2p4C/XB1XmXF/7QBg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vvQvTZBp68DnnPeFMwW3dnjUKzXsbphHwyRQK3DWM4M4+qg5GVFvNagG1kK36PLdpcAs9fAaS5Jy7PQ6WvXGGI=
X-Received: by 2002:ab0:424:: with SMTP id 33mr1886285uav.143.1585133446860;
Wed, 25 Mar 2020 03:50:46 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAD5V+fOND7wqzFBjP4ZG30zBvFTd5vaDp-fQwpKCqRT68-t_Wg@mail.gmail.com>
<AM0PR08MB371698AC1A74C0514E6674FFFACE0@AM0PR08MB3716.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <AM0PR08MB371698AC1A74C0514E6674FFFACE0@AM0PR08MB3716.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>
From: Alex Davidson <alex.davidson92@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2020 10:50:36 +0000
Message-ID: <CAD5V+fM=vsaRtxExmqh5ctOuMF2kA58Zp01p2hKC6JhJ_gtrGw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Hannes Tschofenig <Hannes.Tschofenig@arm.com>
Cc: "cfrg@irtf.org" <cfrg@irtf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000005940805a1aba454"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cfrg/0VZXSOcUIFRpmpx8-78YY7gXjdo>
Subject: Re: [Cfrg] Call for participation: privacy-pass virtual IETF BoF
X-BeenThere: cfrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Crypto Forum Research Group <cfrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/cfrg>,
<mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/cfrg/>
List-Post: <mailto:cfrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/cfrg>,
<mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2020 10:50:51 -0000
Hi Hannes, On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 7:41 AM Hannes Tschofenig <Hannes.Tschofenig@arm.com> wrote: > Hi Alex, > > > > Do you have a problem statement document/write-up somewhere as well? > We don't have an explicit problem statement write-up, but we cover this in the introduction of the protocol draft ( https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-davidson-pp-protocol-00). I'll try and have this covered more broadly on the website. > I would like to get to understand whether this is something I should pay > attention to. Why is there a problem? What is the prior work and why is it > insufficient to solve the problem? > We're particularly targeting the case of providing privacy-preserving propagation of trust attestation across the Internet. This is something that is important for platforms that need to check whether clients are non-fraudulent actors before processing their requests. The platforms may want to provide some sort of credential/token to the client so that the client does not have to re-prove their honesty each time they interact with the server. Typically, this sort of thing can be done with cookies. However, if the platform acts as a gatekeeper for multiple disparate services (such as a CDN or ad-space platform), then this approach fails to provide utility to clients that try to access multiple services. The alternative (challenging every request) is impractical for clients, and also infeasible in cases Privacy Pass solves this problem by providing clients with tokens that can be used for multiple disparate transactions. The tokens themselves are both unforgeable and unlinkable from each other, and the transaction in which they were issued. > Who needs to be involved to make this successful? What are the incentives > (or disincentives) of the parties in the ecosystem? > In term of applications, the Cloudflare CDN allows clients (with an open-source browser extension installed [1]) to redeem tokens to bypass challenges that are used to protect Cloudflare websites. There is also an API being developed to embed the Privacy Pass exchange directly into browsers, that Chromium intends to implement [2]. There are also some other use-cases for variants of the Privacy Pass protocol as an anonymous mechanism for receiving currency in the Brave browser [3], and for providing anonymous receipts for proof-of-purchase [4,5]. Given that there are a number of applications already, the standardisation effort is focused on establishing a protocol that fits with each of the different use-cases. It is also concerned with the discussion of the ecosystem at large, and how multiple service providers that support Privacy Pass operate within the same environment. Each ecosystem itself demands a strict analysis as it determines the privacy budget of the clients within it. The ecosystem should also be robust to attempts from malicious servers to try and subvert client privacy. This discussion is covered in more detail in the architecture document [6]. Finally, in terms of making this a success, we're looking for as many parties as possible who would be interested in implementing/developing the standard to be involved. We have support from the vendors that I have listed above (amongst others) but we're still in the process of developing all the possible use-cases for the protocol. In particular, the protocol is currently targeted at the Internet setting, but there may also be applications to other frameworks. So if there is anything here that you think may be interesting, then it would be really useful to have your input. Happy to answer more questions should anything remain unclear. Best, Alex [1]: https://github.com/privacypass/challenge-bypass-extension/ [2]: https://github.com/WICG/trust-token-api [3]: https://github.com/brave/brave-browser/wiki/Security-and-privacy-model-for-ad-confirmations [4]: https://medium.com/least-authority/the-path-from-s4-to-privatestorage-ae9d4a10b2ae [5]: https://openprivacy.ca/assets/towards-anonymous-prepaid-services.pdf [6]: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-davidson-pp-architecture-00 >
- [Cfrg] Call for participation: privacy-pass virtu… Alex Davidson
- Re: [Cfrg] Call for participation: privacy-pass v… Hannes Tschofenig
- Re: [Cfrg] Call for participation: privacy-pass v… Alex Davidson
- Re: [Cfrg] Call for participation: privacy-pass v… Jeff Burdges