Paul Lambert <paul@marvell.com> Thu, 29 September 2016 01:25 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@marvell.com>
X-Original-To: cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D63412B042 for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Sep 2016 18:25:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.601
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8N-1ocqa5x8Y for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Sep 2016 18:25:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0b-0016f401.pphosted.com (mx0b-0016f401.pphosted.com []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D5FAD12B03C for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Wed, 28 Sep 2016 18:25:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0045851.ppops.net []) by mx0b-0016f401.pphosted.com ( with SMTP id u8T1Ohv5026735 for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Wed, 28 Sep 2016 18:25:27 -0700
Received: from sc-exch03.marvell.com ([]) by mx0b-0016f401.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 25rq6h97wa-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Wed, 28 Sep 2016 18:25:27 -0700
Received: from SC-EXCH03.marvell.com ( by SC-EXCH03.marvell.com ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Wed, 28 Sep 2016 18:25:26 -0700
Received: from SC-EXCH03.marvell.com ([fe80::6cb0:4dfa:f3f3:b8b6]) by SC-EXCH03.marvell.com ([fe80::6cb0:4dfa:f3f3:b8b6%21]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.000; Wed, 28 Sep 2016 18:25:26 -0700
From: Paul Lambert <paul@marvell.com>
To: "cfrg@irtf.org" <cfrg@irtf.org>
Thread-Topic: SPAKE2+mbDH a PAKE+PKA
Thread-Index: AQHSGfBbeJIBs4ds2U2ef/ktt+6StA==
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 01:25:26 +0000
Message-ID: <D411B584.A2445%paul@marvell.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <268B9F44A076824EBA7C759C4B163180@marvell.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2016-09-28_14:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1609020000 definitions=main-1609290022
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cfrg/7lUYILDI1_9LNIZhFen78R1alG0>
Subject: [Cfrg] SPAKE2+mbDH a PAKE+PKA
X-BeenThere: cfrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 01:25:30 -0000

The PKEX protocol ( https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-harkins-pkex-00 )
provides PAKE functionality (with SPAKE2) and adds public key
authentication (PAKE+PKA).

In looking at alternatives to PKEX, combining an existing and evaluated
authenticated public key exchange with a PAKE seems like an interesting
design path. To this end, the SPAKE2 protocol (
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-irtf-cfrg-spake2-03 ) combines nicely
with mutually blinded Diffie-Hellman (mbDH). Blinded DH (bDH) is described
in https://www.emvco.com/specifications.aspx?id=285

A brief description of the resulting SPAKE2+mbDH protocol is contained in
slides 13 to 18 of:


Comments would be appreciated.

If this protocol seems useful an RFC could be developed.