[Cfrg] Another PAKE question

Yoav Nir <ynir@checkpoint.com> Thu, 09 January 2014 06:09 UTC

Return-Path: <ynir@checkpoint.com>
X-Original-To: cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 858651ADBC9 for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Jan 2014 22:09:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.439
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.439 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.538, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 WnWHi6sZmoEK for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Jan 2014 22:09:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp.checkpoint.com (smtp.checkpoint.com [194.29.34.68]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0B0B1AD948 for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Wed, 8 Jan 2014 22:09:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from IL-EX10.ad.checkpoint.com ([194.29.34.147]) by smtp.checkpoint.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s0969W4A015066; Thu, 9 Jan 2014 08:09:32 +0200
X-CheckPoint: {52CE37DA-5-1B221DC2-1FFFF}
Received: from DAG-EX10.ad.checkpoint.com ([169.254.3.110]) by IL-EX10.ad.checkpoint.com ([169.254.2.120]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Thu, 9 Jan 2014 08:09:32 +0200
From: Yoav Nir <ynir@checkpoint.com>
To: "cfrg@irtf.org" <cfrg@irtf.org>
Thread-Topic: Another PAKE question
Thread-Index: AQHPDQFcMPcnbhPjVUeB5uP0j163gA==
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2014 06:09:32 +0000
Message-ID: <B17D6E18-898E-44EF-94EF-A4419BDE908A@checkpoint.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [172.31.21.3]
x-kse-antivirus-interceptor-info: protection disabled
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <21AF046E2FF27B4F99A0424F05E287CA@ad.checkpoint.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: [Cfrg] Another PAKE question
X-BeenThere: cfrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Crypto Forum Research Group <cfrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/cfrg>, <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/cfrg/>
List-Post: <mailto:cfrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/cfrg>, <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2014 06:09:50 -0000

Hi

I almost feel like I'm asking for trouble after the roast that Dan went through, but some on this list might want to consider another PAKE going through an IETF working group.

HTTP-Auth is making experimental authentication mechanisms for the HTTP layer. One of those is a PAKE. If people here on the CFRG list would like to comment on it, that would be great. We can have some discussion here, but ultimately, comments criticisms and suggestions should go to the HTTP-auth list (details below).

The draft in question is called "Mutual Authentication Protocol for HTTP".

Link: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpauth-mutual-01

Yoav
co-chair of HTTP-Auth

Mailing list details:
 * http-auth List Information: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/http-auth
 * http-auth List Archives: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/http-auth/current/maillist.html
 * http-auth Posting Address (requires registration): http-auth@ietf.org