[CFRG] Fwd: MIMI WG requests CFRG review of MIMI franking mechanism

Rohan Mahy <rohan.ietf@gmail.com> Tue, 04 March 2025 14:55 UTC

Return-Path: <rohan.mahy@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: cfrg@mail2.ietf.org
Delivered-To: cfrg@mail2.ietf.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2DD472ACB2 for <cfrg@mail2.ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Mar 2025 06:55:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ietf.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 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_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_SBL_A=0.1] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: mail2.ietf.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail2.ietf.org ([166.84.6.31]) by localhost (mail2.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VqahwqjLsBB2 for <cfrg@mail2.ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Mar 2025 06:55:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ej1-x62f.google.com (mail-ej1-x62f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::62f]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BEC6E72ACAB for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Tue, 4 Mar 2025 06:55:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ej1-x62f.google.com with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-ac0cc83e9adso384360166b.0 for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Tue, 04 Mar 2025 06:55:11 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1741100109; x=1741704909; darn=irtf.org; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=XCq4vGSJpa85bB04Sskuh/usERtVG0wOeoIwOrWTuvU=; b=B2s0EdAvw6jBvYU+vIGjVyRGVmNv+H/eVMUFm6QMXccBUTfCj82LWzxzrsRv06BGo2 NHR+DesPTnzxb96KEbdYRvRIoVgIaBYL6wX8bl1EIjRyvEfhFo6F8oQW1U9TEAr6c37D 7aV8jV4e7BSlHtthU6K2Oz6G0TuOYgqm2utldVdlTC87TZ6s8RinFo2f5eefNENQskZS Mo4nZMoEMXwK1wAYHbU9jinZEyipRyVQsFOM2MHSZge/I4N5jAeBwyhsfdx6yIJrMPPE vm/o5LGudYuN549jVg+PvQVDdPMP9u8kqKOM2b7R5eBc2+6Bp7s7copCpNDDE4WLTBWJ nsLQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1741100109; x=1741704909; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=XCq4vGSJpa85bB04Sskuh/usERtVG0wOeoIwOrWTuvU=; b=duVRWqzdXB7miGeQodu4HqbMolKj8scl3r/LTlZ6eK4Ctt2z5T4cj9WcawAVhRhm7c V3naJFwkC4T+UKMCRECVasrvY16+Wzb1KuxM7KE2x9vFZcY3qfV507tgZJ0EqD/jKlMU VOFhZdAD+hjFowqTuJGiAMNOqlx0v7f8PbnX7p1Y0wLo3TfQ7+o5R2V0artqStv/YUZC y9NDu6T19dLFXouT1FmZMUGDwEGWV7dEbPKyXL4D2YoVoj41t7Mjv55XHvOmvToj6Vqe DzWQsc3ctskgInqymfzOafu7YpSqorDeLiZS04Gkqglac+CCnIu/pHD8LYID9X47N0OO CUEw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxmAo14F46I32hI7ZM7CYO8ABeuGGew4b0PK8Qhfw6C6Q1htiNP dHdXCZyVaSa5tStANZBKmo9IJRh7uVHpVDhN0JCz+R/+FcL6rw/7s8zt/6PBTfwUhgZkWL3QAM5 n7xg5LrE7OTbJdX50yKlpzbZVoni+DO5UMOk=
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncsBc5C01CpDI99oVrq5KK6cXUw967sMaInMALM/s1ZX66lnLkvWvecsedt/xEw LFbOxI6gx4LsNl1/9jDQAOooIJYowHmULxJnS2jGogRdFxx61NXViYML7/lbvJdRKBLgaQCmdL0 Zi1CMtx81yf6eV7phGCGLqX1UTjQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHmp8ZMdrhThYs0GCTMETvHJ/lV7rfmQ62ldgXioDRXlVgTe/hSt4t/Y/nPy5MqNXMHiZSDbmR7PMPDATO6rZs=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:3e92:b0:abf:427f:7216 with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-ac1f0e6e95cmr309144766b.1.1741100109254; Tue, 04 Mar 2025 06:55:09 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAKoiRuYMenuVnzWT-XgGNB1ZxzXfn-2Z6RNUqJ27etV1PbX2+g@mail.gmail.com> <CAKoiRuY+2ae+AdiHcZ+VTaSNLpqawdiswfZG_x+xGPMrSDaUrg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAKoiRuY+2ae+AdiHcZ+VTaSNLpqawdiswfZG_x+xGPMrSDaUrg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Rohan Mahy <rohan.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2025 15:54:58 +0100
X-Gm-Features: AQ5f1JqVPvFdJL1MY-uOA3sjShrpiLATJEa6L4AB-d-sGx5htYVxgMeUbPyZylo
Message-ID: <CAKoiRuZUyyZuWNoSWt5+41hukmTTQe4BBStHwROKTm8-aNwsdQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: CFRG <cfrg@irtf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000087db1e062f857574"
Message-ID-Hash: D3NMXFR2RPVYNPGRNOJMJ2Y6T36KURNM
X-Message-ID-Hash: D3NMXFR2RPVYNPGRNOJMJ2Y6T36KURNM
X-MailFrom: rohan.mahy@gmail.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-cfrg.irtf.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: [CFRG] Fwd: MIMI WG requests CFRG review of MIMI franking mechanism
List-Id: Crypto Forum Research Group <cfrg.irtf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cfrg/fn13hh9GfWlA9nKcKssgRG5zkOE>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/cfrg>
List-Help: <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:cfrg-owner@irtf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:cfrg@irtf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cfrg-join@irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cfrg-leave@irtf.org>

Hello All,
I am writing a third time to request review by the CFRG community of the
MIMI franking mechanism. This is documented in
draft-ietf-mimi-protocol in Section
5.4.1
<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-mimi-protocol-03.html#name-message-franking>
.
I requested a few minutes of agenda time on this topic in Bangkok.

Thank,
-rohan

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Rohan Mahy <rohan.mahy@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:25 PM
Subject: Re: MIMI WG requests CFRG review of MIMI franking mechanism
To: CFRG <cfrg@irtf.org>
Cc: mimi <mimi@ietf.org>


Hi,
This is a reminder of the request from the MIMI working group for review of
its current franking mechanism.
Thanks,
-rohan

On Mon, Dec 23, 2024 at 9:01 PM Rohan Mahy <rohan.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> The MIMI WG is about interoperability among federated Instant Messaging
> providers whose clients use MLS for end-to-end security. MIMI is producing
> a mimi-protocol document which contains a mechanism to "frank" MIMI content
> messages received by the "Hub", so that a receiver can later allege abuse
> and the Hub can verify if it indeed saw the same message.
>
> As mentioned in mimi-protocol the mechanism is very similar to the
> Facebook franking scheme, but as a federated architecture there are
> "follower" providers which should not see the sender of a message and might
> maliciously try to modify the data added by the Hub (its timestamp and
> frank).
>
> On behalf of the MIMI WG, I would like to request a formal review by CFRG
> of the franking mechanism as detailed in mimi-protocol (below). The
> relevant documents are:
>
> MIMI Protocol (link points to the start of the franking section)
>
> https://ietf-wg-mimi.github.io/mimi-protocol/draft-ietf-mimi-protocol.html#name-message-franking
>
> MIMI Architecture (If you want to get the big picture)
> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-mimi-arch-01.html
>
> MIMI Content - includes a per-message salt used in the franking
> construction.
> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-mimi-content-05.html
>
> Many thanks and happy holidays,
> -rohan
>
>
>
>